Hostname: page-component-669899f699-ggqkh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T13:48:28.873Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Asymmetric memory recall of positive and negative events in social interactions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2025

King King Li
King King Li*
Affiliation:
School of Economics, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics, and The Key Laboratory of Mathematical Economics (SUFE), Ministry of Education, Shanghai 200433, China
*
e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Previous studies have suggested that negative emotion can enhance memory accuracy. However, they were not conducted in the context of social interactions using the methodology of experimental economics. Based on the present study, we find that in such a context, individuals’ memory recall accuracy depends on the kindness of acts and who performed them, and negative emotion may lower memory accuracy. A victim of an unkind act is more likely to forget than someone who benefited from a kind act. This result supports the hypothesis that individuals may strategically manipulate their memory by forgetting an unpleasant experience. We also find that individuals who committed an unkind act tend to perceive it as less unkind as time moves on. They also tend to believe that a higher percentage of players have also committed the unkind act. Overall, the results support the hypothesis that individuals strategically manipulate their memory and beliefs to maintain self-esteem or feel less guilty.

Keywords

Memory recall biasPerception biasStability of perceptions across timeStability of social preference across time
Type
Original Paper
Information
Experimental Economics , Volume 16 , Issue 3 , September 2013 , pp. 248 - 262
Copyright
Copyright © 2012 Economic Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

Electronic Supplementary Material The online version of this article (doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-012-9325-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

I thank Chew Soo Hong, Daniel Zizzo, Robert Sugden, Anthony Ziegelmeyer, and especially Toru Suzuki and Robert Wyer for helpful comments and discussions. I also thank the Max Planck Society for financial support.

References

Bénabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2002). Self-confidence and personal motivation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(3), 871–915. 10.1162/003355302760193913CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., & McCabe, K. (1995). Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games and Economic Behavior, 10(1), 122–142. 10.1006/game.1995.1027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bower, G. H., & Forgas, J. P. (2001). Mood and social memory. Handbook of affect and social cognition, 95–120.Google Scholar
Burger, J. M., Horita, M., Kinoshita, L., Roberts, K., & Vera, C. (1997). Effects on time on the norm of reciprocity. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 19(1), 91–100.Google Scholar
Camerer, C. (2003). Behavioral game theory: experiments in strategic interaction, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Compte, O., & Postlewaite, A. (2004). Confidence-enhanced performance. American Economic Review, 94(5), 1536–1557. 10.1257/0002828043052204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fehr, E., Schmidt, K. M. Kolm, S. C., & Ythier, J. M. (2006). The economics of fairness, reciprocity and altruism—experimental evidence and new theories. Handbook of the economics of giving, altruism and reciprocity, Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Greenwald, A. G. (1980). The totalitarian ego: Fabrication and revision of personal history. American Psychologist, 35(7), 603–618. 10.1037/0003-066X.35.7.603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. (1986). Fairness as a constraint on profit seeking: entitlements in the market. American Economic Review, 76(4), 728–741.Google Scholar
Kensinger, E. A., Garoff-Eaton, R. J., & Schacter, D. L. (2006). Memory for specific visual details can be enhanced by negative arousing content. Journal of Memory and Language, 54(1), 99–112. 10.1016/j.jml.2005.05.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levine, L., & Bluck, S. (2004). Painting with broad strokes: happiness and the malleability of event memory. Cognition and Emotion, 18(4), 559–574. 10.1080/02699930341000446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levine, L. J., Pizarro, D. A. Uttl, B., Ohta, N., & Siegenthaler, A. L. (2006). Emotional valence, discrete emotions, and memory. Memory and emotion: Interdisciplinary perspectives, Oxford: Blackwell Sci 37–58. 10.1002/9780470756232.ch3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loftus, E. F. (1980). Memory, Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Mitchell, T. R., Thompson, L., Peterson, E., & Cronk, R. (1997). Temporal adjustments in the evaluation of events: The “rosy view”. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33(4), 421–448. 10.1006/jesp.1997.1333CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morris, W. N. Kahneman, D., Diener, E., & Schwarts, E. (1999). The mood system. The foundations of hedonic psychology, New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Rummel, J., Hepp, J., Klein, S. A., & Silberleitner, N. (2012). Affective state and event-based prospective memory. Cognition and Emotion, 26(2), 351–361. 10.1080/02699931.2011.574873CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, S. E., Crocker, J. Higgins, E. T., Herman, C., & Zanna, M. (1981). Schematic bases of social information processing. Social cognition: The Ontario Symposium, Hillsdale: Erlbaum 89–134.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Li supplementary material

Li supplementary material
Download Li supplementary material(File)
File 86.5 KB