Memory and judgment: availability versus explanation-based accounts.

Abstract

Two theories about the relationship between memory and decisions are examined. In an explanation-based model, the organization in memory of decision-relevant information determines decisions. In an availability model, the amount of information sampled from memory that supports competing decisions is crucial. In Experiment 1, subjects read evidence from a legal trial, made decisions, and provided free-recall data. Evidence presentation order was manipulated to produce differences in evidence coherence. When the prosecution evidence order was coherent, the subjects were more likely to choose guilty verdicts, and recall of prosecution evidence, relative to defense evidence, was greater. Thus, both evidence coherence and availability of information in memory could account for the basic findings. In Experiment 2, recall differences were eliminated as a function of evidence order. The results show that verdict effects favoring the more coherent prosecution evidence are obtained even when the relative amounts of prosecution and defense recall are equated across conditions.