Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Degree of Delay Discounting as a Function of Who Receives the Outcome and the Discounter’s Perceived Level of Social Support

  • Published:
Current Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Delay discounting occurs when the subjective value of an outcome decreases as its delivery is delayed. The present study investigated whether how individuals discount delayed outcomes would vary as a function of who would hypothetically experience the outcome and the participants’ perceived level of social support. In Experiment One, 600 university students completed a measure of perceived social support and a discounting task involving four different outcomes, with different groups differing in terms of who would hypothetically receive the outcome being discounted (themselves, their mother, or a classmate). The degree of discounting did not vary as a function of recipient of the outcome, but did vary significantly and inversely with perceived level of social support. Experiment Two replicated the effect of perceived social support in 488 university students, but failed to demonstrate that the degree of discounting varied as a function of the level of social support available to the recipient of the outcome being discounted. These results suggest that people discount outcomes similarly regardless of who will be the recipient of the outcome, but that rates of discounting are reliably altered by the discounter’s own perceived level of social support. The latter finding is potentially informative as to why social-support groups may be valuable in therapeutic environments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Weatherly et al. (2010) used the fill-in-the-blank method (Chapman 1996) to collect the discounting data and the analyses were conducted on the area under the discounting curve (Myerson et al. 2001).

  2. Researchers have, however, applied a discounting framework to “social” topics such as altruism (e.g., see Rachlin and Jones 2010).

  3. There are multiple methods for collecting delay discounting data (see Madden and Bickel 2010) and research comparing them has indicated that they sometimes produce different results (e.g., Smith and Hantula 2008; Weatherly and Derenne 2011). It has yet to be established, however, which method is the most “accurate” and/or whether the different methods might be measuring somewhat different things.

  4. Hierarchical regression analyses are recommended for examining interactions between discrete and continuous variables (Aiken and West 1991). Thus, the influence of altering the recipient of the outcome and of participant’s perceived level of social support was analyzed by conducting hierarchical regression models in which AUC values for the different outcomes served as the dependent measures.

  5. An analysis of covariance, rather than a regression analysis, was conducted because we were not predicting interactions between discrete and continuous variables.

References

  • Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baer, R. A., & Huss, D. B. (2008). Mindfulness- and acceptance-based therapy. In J. L. Lebow (Ed.), Twenty-first century psychotherapies: Contemporary approaches to theory and practice (pp. 123–166). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, R. C., & Triplett, M. F. (2009). Test-retest reliability of a group-administered paper-pencil measure of delay discounting. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 17, 345–355.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bickel, W. K., & Johnson, M. W. (2003). Delay discounting: A fundamental behavioral process of drug dependence. In G. Loewenstein, D. Read, & R. Baumeister (Eds.), Time and decision: Economic and psychological perspectives on intertemporal choice (pp. 419–440). New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birnie, K., Speca, M., & Carlson, L. E. (2010). Exploring self-compassion and empathy in the context of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR). Journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress, 26, 359–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canty-Mitchell, J., & Zimet, G. D. (2000). Psychometric properties of the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support in urban adolescents. American Journal of Community Psychology, 28, 391–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, G. B. (1996). Temporal discounting and utility for health and money. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 771–791.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dalbert, C., & Umlauft, S. (2009). The role of the justice motive in economic decision making. Journal of Economic Psychology, 30, 172–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, M. R., Marley, J., & Jacobs, E. A. (2003). Delay discounting by pathological gamblers. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 449–458.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hardisty, D. J., & Weber, E. U. (2009). Discounting future green: money versus the environment. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 138, 329–340.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Madden, G. J., & Bickel, W. K. (Eds.). (2010). Impulsivity: The behavioral and neurological science of discounting. Washington: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matheson, K., Wohl, M. J. A., & Anisman, H. (2009). The interplay of appraisals, specific coping styles, and depressive symptoms among young male and female gamblers. Social Psychology, 40, 212–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 analyses of behavior: Vol. 5. The effect of delay and intervening events on reinforcement value (pp. 55–73). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myerson, J., Green, L., & Warusawitharana, M. (2001). Area under the curve as a measure of discounting. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 76, 235–243.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Neighbors, C., Lostutter, T. W., Cronce, J. M., & Larimer, M. E. (2002). Exploring college student gambling motivation. Journal of Gambling Studies, 18, 361–370.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Petry, N. M. (2005). Pathological gambling: Etiology, comorbidity, and treatment. Washington: American Psychological Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rachlin, H., & Jones, B. A. (2010). The extended self. In G. J. Madden & W. K. Bickel (Eds.), Impulsivity: The behavioral and neurological science of discounting (pp. 411–431). Washington: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ruthig, J. C., Haynes, T. L., Stupnisky, R. H., & Perry, R. P. (2009). Perceived academic control: mediating the effects of optimism and social support on college students’ psychological health. Social Psychology of Education, 12, 233–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salovey, P., Rothman, A. J., Detweiler, J. B., & Steward, W. T. (2000). Emotional states and physical health. American Psychologist, 55, 110–121.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shaikh, F. A., & Ghosh, A. (2008). Perceived social support and recovery from substance abuse: a qualitative enquiry. Indian Journal of Community Psychology, 4, 131–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, C. L., & Hantula, D. A. (2008). Methodological considerations in the study of delay discounting in intertemporal choice: a comparison of tasks and modes. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 940–953.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tayler, S., Arantes, J., & Grace, R. C. (2009). Temporal discounting for monetary and close relationship outcomes. Personal Relationships, 16, 385–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsukayama, E., & Duckworth, A. L. (2010). Domain-specific temporal discounting and temptation. Judgment and Decision Making, 5, 72–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherly, J. N. (2010). Delay discounting of different commodities varies as a function of political party affiliation in a college sample. Behavior and Social Issues, 19, 167–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherly, J. N., & Derenne, A. (2011). Comparing delay discounting rates when using the fill-in-the-blank and multiple-choice methods. The Journal of General Psychology, 138, 300–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weatherly, J. N., & Ferraro, F. R. (2011). Executive function and delay discounting of four different outcomes in university students. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 183–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weatherly, J. N., & Terrell, H. K. (2011). Delay discounting of different commodities II: confirmatory analyses. The Journal of General Psychology, 138, 35–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weatherly, J. N., Derenne, A., & Terrell, H. K. (2010). College students discount money “won” more than money “owed”. Psychological Record, 60, 463–472.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherly, J. N., Terrell, H. K., & Derenne, A. (2010). Delay discounting of different commodities. The Journal of General Psychology, 137, 273–286.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weatherly, J. N., Plumm, K. M., & Derenne, A. (2011). Delay discounting and social-policy issues. Psychological Record, 61, 527–546.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yi, R., Mitchell, S. H., & Bickel, W. K. (2010). Delay discounting and substance abuse-dependence. In G. J. Madden & W. K. Bickel (Eds.), Impulsivity: The behavioral and neurological science of discounting (pp. 191–211). Washington: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zimet, G. D., Dalem, N. W., Zimet, S. G., & Farley, G. K. (1988). The multidimensional scale of perceived social support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52, 30–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimet, G. D., Powell, S. S., Farley, G. K., Werkman, S., & Berkoff, K. A. (1990). Psychometric characteristics of the multidimensional scale of perceived social support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 55, 610–617.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND, 58202-8380, USA

    Jeffrey N. Weatherly & Joelle C. Ruthig

Authors
  1. Jeffrey N. Weatherly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joelle C. Ruthig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeffrey N. Weatherly.

Appendices

Appendix A

X time = six months, one year, three years, five years, or 10 years. Labels are provided for the reader; questions were not labeled when presented to the participants. The wording of the “you” questions was identical to those in Weatherly et al. (2010).

Money (Control)

You have won $1,000 but you need to wait X time before you can collect the money. What is the minimum percentage of the $1,000 you would be willing to accept immediately rather than waiting X time?

100% (willing to wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (I don’t want the money)

Money (Treatment)

You

You have won $100,000 but you need to wait X time before you can collect the money. What is the minimum percentage of the $100,000 you would be willing to accept immediately rather than waiting X time?

100% (willing to wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (I don’t want the money)

Mother

Your mother has won $100,000 but she will need to wait X time before she can collect the money. What is the minimum percentage of the $100,000 you would advise her to accept immediately rather than waiting X time?

100% (willing to wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (She shouldn’t have the money)

Classmate

A classmate has won $100,000 but s/he will need to wait X time before s/he can collect the money. What is the minimum percentage of the $100,000 you would advise him/her to accept immediately rather than waiting X time?

100% (willing to wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (S/he shouldn’t have the money)

Body Image (Treatment)

You

A specific diet and exercise plan will help you attain your ideal body image if you stay on the plan for X time. However, an alternative plan is available that is less effective but gives you immediate results. What is the smallest percentage of your ideal body image (i.e., of 100%) would you settle for to get immediate results?

100% (willing to wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (I don’t care what I look like)

Mother

Your mother tells you that a specific diet and exercise plan will help her attain her ideal body image if she stays on the plan for X time. However, an alternative plan is available that is less effective but would give her immediate results. What is the smallest percentage of her ideal body image (i.e., of 100%) you would advise your mother to settle for to get immediate results?

100% (willing to wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (She shouldn’t care what she looks like)

Classmate

A classmate you that a specific diet and exercise plan will help him/her attain his/her ideal body image if s/he stays on the plan for X time. However, an alternative plan is available that is less effective but would give him/her immediate results. What is the smallest percentage of his/her ideal body image (i.e., of 100%) you would advise your classmate to settle for to get immediate results?

100% (willing to wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (S/he shouldn’t care what s/he looks like)

Medical Treatment (Treatment)

You

Suppose you were suffering from a serious disease and your physician informed you that you would need to wait X time before getting a treatment that was 100% successful. However, you could immediately begin a different treatment that has a lesser chance of success. What is the minimum percentage of success that the different treatment could have for you to choose it?

100% (willing to wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (I don’t want any treatment)

Mother

Suppose your mother was suffering from a serious disease and her physician informed her that she would need to wait X time before getting a treatment that was 100% successful. However, she could immediately begin a different treatment that has a lesser chance of success. What is the minimum percentage of success that the different treatment could have for you to advise your mother to choose it?

100% (willing to wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (She shouldn’t receive any treatment)

Classmate

Suppose a classmate was suffering from a serious disease and his/her physician informed him/her that s/he would need to wait X time before getting a treatment that was 100% successful. However, s/he could immediately begin a different treatment that has a lesser chance of success. What is the minimum percentage of success that the different treatment could have for you to advise your classmate to choose it?

100% (willing to wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (S/he shouldn’t receive any treatment)

Retirement (Treatment)

You

Your financial advisor informs you that you could retire at a wage of $100,000 per year but that you need to work for X time before that is possible. What is the smallest annual amount of money you would accept today rather than having to work X time?

100% (willing to wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (I never want to retire)

Mother

Your mother’s financial advisor informs her that she could retire at a wage of $100,000 per year but that she would need to work for X time before that is possible. What is the smallest annual amount of money you would advise your mother to accept today rather than having to work X time?

100% (willing to wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (She should never retire)

Classmate

Your classmate’s financial advisor informs him/her that s/he could retire at a wage of $100,000 per year but that s/he would need to work for X time before that is possible. What is the smallest annual amount of money you would advise your classmate to accept today rather than having to work X time?

100% (willing to wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (S/he should never retire)

Appendix B

X time = 6 months, 1 year, 3 years, 5 years, or 10 years. Labels are provided for the reader; questions were not labeled when presented to the participants.

Low Social Support–Medical Treatment

An old schoolmate contacts you. She is single and lives alone in a major city far from the rest of her family. She informs you that she is suffering from a serious disease and her physician informed her that she would need to wait X time before getting a treatment that was 100% successful. However, she could immediately begin a different treatment that has a lesser chance of success. What is the minimum percentage of success that the different treatment could have before you would advise her to choose it?

100% (She should wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50% 45%

40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (She shouldn’t receive any treatment)

Low Social Support–Retirement

An old schoolmate contacts you. She is single and lives alone in a major city far from the rest of her family. She tells you that her financial advisor has informed her that she could retire at a wage of $100,000 per year but that she would need to work for X time before that is possible. What is the smallest annual amount of money you would advise her to accept today rather than having to work another X time?

100% (She should wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50% 45%

40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (She should never retire)

High Social Support–Medical Treatment

A close friend of yours contacts you. She is married and lives with her family in the same town where she grew up and that her parents and siblings still live. She informs you that she is suffering from a serious disease and her physician informed her that she would need to wait X time before getting a treatment that was 100% successful. However, she could immediately begin a different treatment that has a lesser chance of success. What is the minimum percentage of success that the different treatment could have before you would advise her to choose it?

100% (willing to wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50% 45%

40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (She shouldn’t receive any treatment)

High Social Support–Retirement

A close friend of yours contacts you. She is married and lives with her family in the same town where she grew up and that her parents and siblings still live. She tells you that her financial advisor has informed her that she could retire at a wage of $100,000 per year but that she would need to work for X time before that is possible. What is the smallest annual amount of money you would advise her to accept today rather than having to work another X time?

100% (She should wait) 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50% 45%

40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% (She should never retire)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Weatherly, J.N., Ruthig, J.C. Degree of Delay Discounting as a Function of Who Receives the Outcome and the Discounter’s Perceived Level of Social Support. Curr Psychol 32, 1–17 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-012-9160-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-012-9160-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation