New designs for research in delay discounting

The two most influential models in delay discounting research have been the exponential (E) and hyperbolic (H) models. We develop a new methodology to design binary choice questions such that exponential and hyperbolic discount rates can be purposefully manipulated to make their rate parameters orthogonal (Pearson's R = 0), negatively correlated (R = --1), positively correlated (R = +1), or to hold one rate constant while allowing the other to vary. Then we extend the method to similarly contrast different versions of the hyperboloid model. The arithmetic discounting model (A), which is based on differences between present and future rewards rather than their ratios, may easily be made orthogonal to any other pair of models. Our procedure makes it possible to design choice stimuli that precisely vary the relationship between different discount rates. However, the additional control over the correlation between different discount rate parameters may require the researcher to either restrict the range that those rate parameters can take, or to expand the range of times the participant must wait for future rewards.

[1]  J. E. Mazur An adjusting procedure for studying delayed reinforcement. , 1987 .

[2]  Sierra Manzano Jm,et al.  [Time is money]. , 1990, Atencion primaria.

[3]  D. Cross,et al.  Subjective probability and delay. , 1991, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[4]  L. Green,et al.  Discounting of Delayed Rewards: A Life-Span Comparison , 1994 .

[5]  L. Green,et al.  Discounting of delayed rewards: Models of individual choice. , 1995, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[6]  K. Kirby,et al.  Delay-discounting probabilistic rewards: Rates decrease as amounts increase , 1996, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[7]  L. Green,et al.  Rate of temporal discounting decreases with amount of reward , 1997, Memory & cognition.

[8]  W. Bickel,et al.  Heroin addicts have higher discount rates for delayed rewards than non-drug-using controls. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[9]  W. Bickel,et al.  Heroin addicts have higher discount rates for delayed rewards than non-drug-using controls. , 1999 .

[10]  Mark A. Pitt,et al.  Global Model Analysis by Landscaping , 2003 .

[11]  M. Rubinstein. Great Moments in Financial Economics: I. Present Value , 2004 .

[12]  Jay I. Myung,et al.  Assessing the distinguishability of models and the informativeness of data , 2004, Cognitive Psychology.

[13]  H. Rachlin Notes on discounting. , 2006, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[14]  A. Glöckner,et al.  Do People Make Decisions Under Risk Based on Ignorance? An Empirical Test of the Priority Heuristic Against Cumulative Prospect Theory , 2008 .

[15]  Xiuping Li The Effects of Appetitive Stimuli on Out-of-Domain Consumption Impatience , 2008 .

[16]  P. Killeen An additive-utility model of delay discounting. , 2009, Psychological review.

[17]  J. Doyle,et al.  Time is Money: Arithmetic Discounting Outperforms Hyperbolic and Exponential Discounting , 2010 .

[18]  Andreas Glöckner,et al.  Editorial: Methodology in judgment and decision making research , 2011, Judgment and Decision Making.

[19]  J. Doyle,et al.  Survey of Time Preference, Delay Discounting Models , 2012, Judgment and Decision Making.