Duration neglect
Duration neglect is a cognitive bias where the duration of an emotional experience has little impact on the overall retrospective evaluation of the event. Instead, the evaluation is disproportionately influenced by the peak (most extreme moment) and the end (final moment) of the experience.
How it works
Humans tend to simplify the complex nature of their memories by focusing on key emotional moments rather than the entire experience. This bias emerges because cognitive resources are limited, making it easier to summarize experiences based on notable peaks and conclusions rather than the full duration.
Examples
- A vacation may be remembered fondly despite long periods of travel delay if it ended on a high note, such as a wonderful farewell dinner.
- A painful medical procedure might be evaluated less negatively if it starts painfully but ends gently and without discomfort, regardless of the overall length of the pain experienced.
Consequences
Duration neglect can lead to inaccurate assessments of past events, potentially influencing future decision-making. For example, individuals might choose shorter but more intense positive experiences over longer, more subtly enjoyable ones.
Counteracting
To counteract duration neglect, individuals can practice mindfulness and actively reflect on the entire experience rather than just its highlights. Furthermore, recording emotions and thoughts at multiple stages during an event can aid in creating a more balanced memory.
Critiques
Some researchers argue that the importance of the length of an experience can vary significantly across different event types and individuals, suggesting that duration neglect may not always hold universally. Others highlight the need for further empirical evidence to understand its boundary conditions.
Fields of Impact
Also known as
Relevant Research
Time and the self: How the experiences of the temporally extended self impact cognition
Fredrickson, B. & Kahneman, D. (1993)
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Remembered happiness as a built-in episodic feature of emotional memory
Redelmeier, D. & Kahneman, D. (1996)
Journal of Experimental Psychology
Recommended Books
Case Studies
Real-world examples showing how Duration neglect manifests in practice
Context
A mid-sized regional hospital relies heavily on post-discharge patient satisfaction surveys to guide budget and staffing decisions. Leaders use average satisfaction scores to allocate funding across departments and to report quality metrics to payers and local authorities.
Situation
After a successful knee replacement campaign, the orthopedics unit received consistently high patient satisfaction scores (average 4.6/5) on standard post-discharge surveys. The hospital interpreted those scores as confirmation that the care pathway was efficient and patient-centered, and considered shifting resources away from recovery nursing and outpatient pain services.
The Bias in Action
Many patients experienced a long, uncomfortable recovery period at home with days of uncontrolled pain and limited mobility, but the hospital's survey asked patients to rate overall satisfaction once, a week after discharge. Respondents disproportionately recalled two moments: the peak emotional moment (the relief when physiotherapy during the final inpatient day achieved a major mobility milestone) and the end (a particularly empathetic discharge nurse who reviewed home-care instructions). Because these peak and end moments were positive, patients reported high overall satisfaction despite several days of severe discomfort and avoidable complications after discharge. Administrators, seeing the high scores, concluded that recovery support was adequate. The hospital inadvertently ignored the prolonged negative stretches of the patient's experience that did not shape the single retrospective rating.
Outcome
Budget was reallocated away from extended recovery home visits and a pilot outpatient pain-management clinic was shelved. Over the next six months clinicians reported increased calls from discharged patients struggling with pain control and mobility, and readmission rates for avoidable complications rose. Patient surveys continued to look favorable in aggregate, obscuring the growing burden on front-line staff and on patients living through longer distressing periods.