Using Fuzzy-trace Theory to Understand and Improve Health Judgments, Decisions, and Behaviors: A Literature Review
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Objective: Fuzzy-trace theory is a dual-process model of memory, reasoning, judgment, and decision making that contrasts with traditional expectancy-value approaches. We review the literature applying fuzzy-trace theory to health with 3 aims: evaluating whether the theory's basic distinctions have been validated empirically in the domain of health; determining whether these distinctions are useful in assessing, explaining, and predicting health-related psychological processes; and determining whether the theory can be used to improve health judgments, decisions, or behaviors, especially compared to other approaches.
Method: We conducted a literature review using PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science to identify empirical peer-reviewed papers that applied fuzzy-trace theory, or central constructs of the theory, to investigate health judgments, decisions, or behaviors.
Results: Seventy nine studies (updated total is 94 studies; see Supplemental materials) were identified, over half published since 2012, spanning a wide variety of conditions and populations. Study findings supported the prediction that verbatim and gist representations are distinct constructs that can be retrieved independently using different cues. Although gist-based reasoning was usually associated with improved judgment and decision making, 4 sources of bias that can impair gist reasoning were identified. Finally, promising findings were reported from intervention studies that used fuzzy-trace theory to improve decision making and decrease unhealthy risk taking.
Conclusions: Despite large gaps in the literature, most studies supported all 3 aims. By focusing on basic psychological processes that underlie judgment and decision making, fuzzy-trace theory provides insights into how individuals make decisions involving health risks and suggests innovative intervention approaches to improve health outcomes. (PsycINFO Database Record
Kuo H, Chen S J Med Internet Res. 2025; 27:e65631.
PMID: 39847418 PMC: 11803327. DOI: 10.2196/65631.
Proneness to false memory generation predicts pseudoscientific belief endorsement.
Martinez N, Barberia I, Rodriguez-Ferreiro J Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2024; 9(1):39.
PMID: 38902418 PMC: 11190135. DOI: 10.1186/s41235-024-00568-4.
Harrell A, Kueppers G, Vanderpool R, Dean Jr D, Rohde J Am J Mens Health. 2024; 18(3):15579883241252524.
PMID: 38767052 PMC: 11107372. DOI: 10.1177/15579883241252524.
Cognitive factors impacting patient understanding of laboratory test information.
Klatt E J Pathol Inform. 2023; 15:100349.
PMID: 38075016 PMC: 10698654. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpi.2023.100349.
Brief lifestyle advice in cardiac care: an experimental study on message source and framing.
IJzerman R, van der Vaart R, Breeman L, van den Broek I, Keesman M, Kraaijenhagen R Neth Heart J. 2023; 32(1):38-44.
PMID: 37945935 PMC: 10781907. DOI: 10.1007/s12471-023-01827-7.