Advertisement

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp 100–104 | Cite as

Delay-discounting probabilistic rewards: Rates decrease as amounts increase

  • Kris N. KirbyEmail author
  • Nino N. MarakoviĆ
Brief Reports

Abstract

The independence of delay-discounting rate and monetary reward size was tested by offering subjects (N = 621) a series of choices between immediate rewards and larger, delayed rewards. In contrast to previous studies, in which hypothetical rewards have typically been employed, subjects in the present study were entered into a lottery in which they had a chance of actually receiving one of their choices. The delayed rewards were grouped into small ($30–$35), medium ($55–$65), and large amounts ($70–$85). Using a novel parameter estimation procedure, we estimated discounting rates for all three reward sizes for each subject on the basis of his/her pattern of choices. The data indicated that the discounting rate is a decreasing function of the size of the delayed reward (p < .0001), whether hyperbolic or exponential discounting functions are assumed. In addition, a reliable gender difference was found (p = .005), with males discounting at higher rates than females, on average.

Keywords

Discount Rate Delay Discount Choice Trial Hyperbolic Discount Parameter Estimation Procedure 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ainslie, G. (1974). Impulse control in pigeons.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,21, 485–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ainslie, G. (1975). Specious reward: A behavioral theory of impulsiveness and impulse control.Psychological Bulletin,82, 463–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ainslie, G. (1992).Picoeconomics: The strategic interaction of successive motivational states within the person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Benzion, U., Rapoport, A., &Yagil, J. (1989). Discount rates inferred from decisions: An experimental study.Management Science,35, 270–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Eysenck, S. B., Easting, G., &Pearson, P. R. (1984). Age norms for impulsiveness, venturesomeness and empathy in children.Personality & Individual Differences,5, 315–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Green, L., Fisher, E. B., Perlow, S., &Sherman, L. (1981). Preference reversal and self-control: Choice as a function of reward amount and delay.Behaviour Analysis Letters,1, 43–51.Google Scholar
  7. Green, L., Fristoe, N., &Myerson, J. (1994). Temporal discounting and preference reversals in choice between delayed outcomes.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,1, 383–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Green, L., Fry, A., &Myerson, J. (1994). Discounting of delayed rewards: A life span comparison.Psychological Science,5, 33–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Green, L., &Myerson, J. (1993). Alternative frameworks for the analysis of self-control.Behavior & Philosophy,21, 37–47.Google Scholar
  10. Herrnstein, R. J. (1981). Self-control as response strength. In C. M. Bradshaw, E. Szabadi, & C. F. Lowe (Eds.),Quantification of steadystate operant behavior (pp. 3–20). Amsterdam: Elsevier, North- Holland.Google Scholar
  11. Kirby, K. N., &Herrnstein, R. J. (1995). Preference reversals due to myopic discounting of delayed reward.Psychological Science,6, 83–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kirby, K. N., &Maraković, N. N. (1995). Modeling myopic decisions: Evidence for hyperbolic delay-discounting within subjects and amounts.Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes,64, 22–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Loewenstein, G. (1992). The fall and rise of psychological explanations in the economics of intertemporal choice. In G. Loewenstein & J. Elster (Eds.),Choice over time (pp. 3–34). New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Logue, A. W. (1988). Research on self-control: An integrating framework.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,11, 665–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 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 of intervening events on reinforcement value (pp. 55–73). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  16. Rachlin, H. (1990). Why do people gamble and keep gambling despite heavy losses?Psychological Science,1, 294–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rachlin, H. (1992). Diminishing marginal value as delay discounting. Special Issue: Behavior dynamics.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,57, 407–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rachlin, H., &Green, L. (1972). Commitment, choice and self-control.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,17, 15–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rachlin, H., Raineri, A., &Cross, D. (1991). Subjective probability and delay.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,55, 233–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Raineri, A., &Rachlin, H. (1993). The effect of temporal constraints on the value of money and other commodities.Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,6, 77–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Salkind, N. J., &Poggio, J. P. (1978). Sex differences in impulsivity and intellectual ability.Sex Roles,4, 91–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Samuelson, P. A. (1937). A note on measurement of utility.Review of Economic Studies,4, 155–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stevenson, M. K. (1986). A discounting model for decisions with delayed positive or negative outcomes.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,115, 131–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Stevenson, M. K. (1993). Decision making with long-term consequences: Temporal discounting for single and multiple outcomes in the future.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,122, 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Strotz, R. H. (1955). Myopia and inconsistency in dynamic utility maximization.Review of Economic Studies,23, 165–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Thaler, R. (1981). Some empirical evidence on dynamic inconsistency.Economic Letters,8, 201–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Thaler, R. H., &Shefrin, H. M. (1981). An economic theory of selfcontrol.Journal of Political Economy,89, 392–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bronfman Science CenterWilliams CollegeWilliamstown

Personalised recommendations