Write a decision journal entry before choosing, then add a separate review after the result. Its value is the preserved record of what you knew, expected, and considered at the time—not a perfect explanation written afterward.
Farnam Street's account of decision journaling emphasizes recording reasoning before acting and revisiting it without hindsight rewriting the story. The record below is an original, simplified format for an everyday choice, rather than a copy of its template.
Fictional entry • written before choosing
Should the sketch gathering be outdoors?
- Choice being made
- Use the courtyard or the community room for a casual sketch gathering.
- What matters
- Enough light to draw, a usable table, and a location invitees can reach. Outdoor scenery is appealing but secondary.
- Known now
- The room coordinator has confirmed access and tables. The courtyard is open to visitors, but I have not checked whether its seating fits our drawing materials.
- Assumption to check
- I assumed the courtyard would be quieter. I have only visited in the morning; the gathering is in the afternoon.
- Alternatives considered
- Courtyard: interesting views, uncertain seating and noise. Community room: confirmed facilities, less varied subject matter. A short outdoor sketch followed by indoor work would require another transition.
- Choice and reason
- Use the room. Confirmed tables and access matter more to this gathering than the outdoor view.
- Expectation and review
- I expect the setup to support drawing, but cannot know whether people will enjoy the session. Review after the gathering, using setup notes and any feedback people choose to give.
The record reveals an uncertainty without pretending it has been resolved. If outdoor scenery had been essential to the purpose, an afternoon visit to the courtyard might have been worth doing before choosing. Here, the writer chose the option that already met the stated requirements.
Fictional review • appended after the gathering
The result was disappointing. Was the reasoning?
“The room had usable tables and good light, but a maintenance problem prevented us from entering at the agreed time. The gathering started late and felt rushed. The coordinator had not known about the problem when confirming access.”
Process review: “The entry shows that I checked facilities and access. It does not show a fallback for a locked room. I should ask how to contact someone on arrival, while recognizing that another contact would not necessarily have fixed the maintenance problem.”
Keep separate: the poor experience, the reasonable checks already made, and the missing contingency. Do not replace the original entry with “I knew the room would be unreliable.”
Read the outcome and the process on separate axes
| What happened? | Reasoning was adequately checked | Important checks were skipped |
|---|---|---|
| Desired result | Which parts of the process are worth repeating? | What worked despite an avoidable uncertainty? |
| Undesired result | Was there useful information available that the record missed? | Which omission can be corrected before a similar choice? |
“Adequately checked” depends on the stakes and information available; it is not a score the table assigns. In another fictional case, someone chooses an unfamiliar venue without checking access and finds the door conveniently open. That favorable outcome does not turn the missing check into a reliable process.
When values compete, record the cost and condition
Before choosing, replace a broad label with the considerations you actually endorse. In this separate fictional example, a reader called “independent” in a numerology report wants a quiet afternoon, wants time with friends and has already promised food for a picnic. The report cannot settle that conflict.
- Join the whole outing: keep the shared time and food commitment; accept losing the quiet afternoon.
- Attend the picnic, then leave: keep some shared time; confirm a separate ride and tell the group beforehand.
- Decline and arrange food delivery: preserve the afternoon and address the promise; accept missing the gathering.
The middle option is not automatically best: a shared car could make it impractical. A reviewable entry reads, “I will attend the picnic and leave afterward if I can arrange my own ride. I will miss the later activity. I will confirm the ride before others rely on this plan.” This preserves a choice, its cost and its condition. A later review can check those details without trying to prove an identity label.
A short entry you can reuse
Copy these labels into your own notes: “Date written; choice and alternatives; what matters; confirmed information; assumptions and unknowns; selected option and reason; expectation; review point.” Leave space below for “What happened; what I could have known beforehand; what I learned afterward; one check to change next time.” Append the review without editing the first record.
Make your next entry reviewable
Name a real choice and its plausible alternatives. Write the considerations that could change the choice, then label what is confirmed, assumed, or unknown. Record the selected option and why it fits those considerations. “It felt right” can be a reaction to record, but it leaves the reasons invisible.
Describe a concrete expectation rather than “everything will work out.” Choose a review point when relevant results should be observable; if they are still unresolved, record that and return later. You do not need to invent a numerical probability when you have no basis for one.
At review, preserve the original text and append what happened. Distinguish information available before the choice from information discovered afterward. Across several entries, look for recurring omissions before changing your process. A single disappointing result does not establish that your judgment is poor, and a single success does not establish that your method is sound.
For ongoing notes about personal experience, use the LUVIRE reflection journal. A decision entry adds a specific choice and a review point; it does not need a number label to work.
Browse the LUVIRE Guides library for calculations, methods and reflection exercises.