Individual laboratory-measured discount rates predict field behavior

  • Christopher F. ChabrisEmail author
  • David Laibson
  • Carrie L. Morris
  • Jonathon P. Schuldt
  • Dmitry Taubinsky


We estimate discount rates of 555 subjects using a laboratory task and find that these individual discount rates predict inter-individual variation in field behaviors (e.g., exercise, BMI, smoking). The correlation between the discount rate and each field behavior is small: none exceeds 0.28 and many are near 0. However, the discount rate has at least as much predictive power as any variable in our dataset (e.g., sex, age, education). The correlation between the discount rate and field behavior rises when field behaviors are aggregated: these correlations range from 0.09–0.38. We present a model that explains why specific intertemporal choice behaviors are only weakly correlated with discount rates, even though discount rates robustly predict aggregates of intertemporal decisions.


Intertemporal discounting Intertemporal choice Impulsiveness Health Investment 

JEL Classifications



We thank Kirill Babikov, Ananya Chakravarti, Lee Chung, Alison H. Delargy, Margaret E. Gerbasi, J. Richard Hackman, Jill M. Hooley, Steven E. Hyman, Thomas Jerde, Stephen M. Kosslyn, Melissa A. Liebert, Sarah Murphy, Jacob Sattelmair, Aerfen Whittle, and Anita W. Woolley for their advice, assistance, and support of this research. We acknowledge financial support by a NARSAD Young Investigator Award and DCI Postdoctoral Fellowship awarded to Christopher F. Chabris, an NSF ROLE grant to J. Richard Hackman and Stephen M. Kosslyn, and NIA (P01 AG005842, R01 AG021650) and NSF (0527516) grants to David I. Laibson.


  1. Ainslie, G. (1992). Picoeconomics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Barsky, B., Juster, F. T., Kimball, M., & Shapiro, M. (1997). Preference parameters and behavioral heterogeneity: An experimental approach in the health and retirement study. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2), 537–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996). Manual for the Beck Depression Inventory (2nd ed.). San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
  4. Benjamin, D. J., Brown, S. A., & Shapiro, J. M. (2006). Who is ‘Behavioral’? Cognitive ability and anomalous preferences. Harvard University mimeo, May.Google Scholar
  5. Bickel, W. K., Odum A. L., & Madden, G. J. (1999). Impulsivity and cigarette smoking: Delay discounting in current, never, and ex-smokers. Psychopharmacology, 146, 447–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boecker, H., Sprenger, T., Spilker, M. E., Henriksen, G., Koppenhoefer, M., Wagner, K. J., et al. (2008). The Runner’s high: Opioidergic mechanisms in the human brain. Cerebral Cortex, doi:10.1093/cercor/bhn013.
  7. Bors, D.A., & Stokes, T.L. (1998). Raven’s advanced progressive matrices: Norms for first-year university students and the development of a short form. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58, 382–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burks, S. V., Carpenter, J. P., Götte, L., & Rustichini, A. (2008). Cognitive skills explain economic preferences, strategic behavior, and job attachment. Institute for the Study of Labor Discussion Paper No. 3609.Google Scholar
  9. Bush, G., Shin, L. M., Holmes, J., Rosen, B. R., & Vogt, B. A. (2003). The multi-source interference task: Validation study with fMRI in individual subjects. Molecular Psychiatry, 8, 60–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chabris, C. F. (2007). Cognitive and neurobiological mechanisms of the Law of General Intelligence. In M. J. Roberts (Ed.), Integrating the mind: Domain specific versus domain general processes in higher cognition (pp. 449–491). Hove: Psychology.Google Scholar
  11. Chabris, C. F., et al. (1998). Does IQ matter? Commentary, 106(5), 13–23.Google Scholar
  12. Chabris, C. F., Gerbasi, M. E., Liebert, M. A., Nakayama, K., & Duchaine, B. C. (2007). Face recognition as a special cognitive ability: An individual differences study. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Society, New York, 5–8 May.Google Scholar
  13. Chabris, C. F., Laibson, D. I., & Schuldt, J. P. (2008). Intertemporal choice. In S. N. Durlauf & L .E. Blume (Eds.), The new Palgrave dictionary of economics (2nd ed.). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  14. Cohen, J. D., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., & Provost, M. (1993). PsyScope: A new graphic interactive environment for designing psychology experiments. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 25, 257–271.Google Scholar
  15. Cutler, D. M., & Glaeser, E. L. (2005). What explains differences in smoking, drinking and other health-related behaviors? American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 95(2), 238–242.Google Scholar
  16. de Wit, H., Flory, J. D., Acheson, A., McCloskey, M., & Manuck, S. B. (2007). IQ and nonplanning impulsivity are independently associated with delay discounting in middle-aged adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(1), 111–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Distefan, J. M., Gilpin, E. A., Sargent, J. D., & Pierce, J. P. (1999). Do movie stars encourage adolescents to start smoking? Evidence from California. Preventive Medicine, 28, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Distefan, J. M., Pierce J. P., & Gilpin, E. A. (2004). Do favorite movie stars influence adolescent smoking initiation? American Journal of Public Health, 94(7), 1239–1244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dixon, M. R., Jacobs, E. A., Sanders, S., Guercio, J. M., Soldner, J., Parker-Singler, S., et al. (2005). Impulsivity, self-control, and delay discounting in persons with acquired brain injury. Behavioral Interventions, 20, 101–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dixon, M. R., Marley, J., & Jacobs, E. A. (2003). Delay discounting by pathological gamblers. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 449–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gray, J. R., Chabris, C. F., & Braver, T. S. (2003). Neural mechanisms of general fluid intelligence. Nature Neuroscience, 6(3), 316–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Green, L., Fry, A. F., & Myerson, J. (1994). Discounting of delayed rewards: A life-span comparison. Psychological Science, 5, 33–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Grossman, M. (1972). On the concept of health capital and the demand for health. Journal of Political Economy, 80(2), 223–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hellige, J. B., & Michimata, C. (1989). Categorization versus distance: Hemispheric differences for processing spatial information. Memory & Cognition, 17, 770–776.Google Scholar
  25. Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Westport: Praeger.Google Scholar
  26. Kirby, K. N., & Marakovic, N. N. (1996). Delay-discounting probabilistic rewards: Rates decrease as amounts increase. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3(1), 100–104.Google Scholar
  27. Kirby, K. N., Petry, N. M., & Bickel, W. K. (1999). Heroin addicts have higher discount rates for delayed rewards than non-drug-using controls. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128(1), 78–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Laibson, D. (1997). Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 62, 443–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Liebert, M. A., Chabris, C. F., Woolley, A. W., Gerbasi, M. E., Hackman, J. R., & Kosslyn, S. M. (2007). Differences in cognitive abilities and information processing styles among occupational groups. Presented at the Academy of Management Conference, Philadelphia, PA, 9 August.Google Scholar
  30. Loewenstein G., & Prelec, D. (1992). Anomalies in intertemporal choice: Evidence and an interpretation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107(2), 573–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mazur, J. E. (1987). An adjusting procedure for studying delayed reinforcement. In M. L. Commons, J. E. Mazur, J. A. Nevin, & H. Rachlin (Eds.), Quantitative Analysis of Behavior: The Effects of Delay and Intervening Events on Reinforcement Value (Vol. 5, pp. 55–73). Hillsdale: Earlbaum.Google Scholar
  32. Mitchell, S. H. (1999). Measures of impulsivity in cigarette smokers and non-smokers. Psychopharmacology, 146, 455–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Myerson, J., & Green, L. (1995). Discounting of delayed rewards: Models of individual choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 64, 263–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Petry, N. M. (2001). Delay discounting of money and alcohol in actively using alcoholics, currently abstinent alcoholics, and controls. Psychopharmacology, 154, 243–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rachlin, H., Raineri, A., & Cross, D. (1991). Subjective probability and delay. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 55(2), 233–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Reynolds, B. (2006). A review of delay-discounting research with humans: Relations to drug use and gambling. Behavioural Pharmacology, 17, 651–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Richard, F. D., Bond Jr., C. F., & Stokes-Zoota, J. J. (2003). One hundred years of social psychology quantitatively described. Review of General Psychology, 7, 331–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ross, L., & Nisbett, R. E. (1991). The person and the situation: Perspectives of social psychology. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Scharff, R. L., & Viscusi, W. K. (2008). Heterogeneous rates of time preference and the decision to smoke. Economic Inquiry, in press.Google Scholar
  40. Shamosh, N. A., & Gray, J. R. (2008). Delay discounting and intelligence: A meta-analysis. Intelligence, 36, 289–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shepard, R. N., & Metzler, J. (1971). Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 171, 701–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shephard, J. M., & Kosslyn, S. M. (2005). The MiniCog Rapid Assessment Battery: Developing a “blood pressure cuff for the mind.” Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 76, 192–197.Google Scholar
  43. Strotz, R. (1957). The empirical implications of a utility tree. Econometrica, 25(2), 269–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Swann Jr., W. B., & Selye, C. (2005). Personality psychology’s comeback and its emerging symbiosis with social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 155–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vandenberg, S. G., & Kuse, A. R. (1978). Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47, 599–604.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher F. Chabris
    • 1
    Email author
  • David Laibson
    • 2
  • Carrie L. Morris
    • 3
  • Jonathon P. Schuldt
    • 4
  • Dmitry Taubinsky
    • 2
  1. 1.Union CollegeSchenectadyUSA
  2. 2.Harvard UniversityCambridgeUSA
  3. 3.Washington University in St. LouisSt. LouisUSA
  4. 4.University of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations