Survey of time preference, delay discounting models
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2013, Vol 8, Issue 2
Abstract
The paper surveys over twenty models of delay discounting (also known as temporal discounting, time preference, time discounting), that psychologists and economists have put forward to explain the way people actually trade off time and money. Using little more than the basic algebra of powers and logarithms, I show how the models are derived, what assumptions they are based upon, and how different models relate to each other. Rather than concentrate only on discount functions themselves, I show how discount functions may be manipulated to isolate rate parameters for each model. This approach, consistently applied, helps focus attention on the three main components in any discounting model: subjectively perceived money; subjectively perceived time; and how these elements are combined. We group models by the number of parameters that have to be estimated, which means our exposition follows a trajectory of increasing complexity to the models. However, as the story unfolds it becomes clear that most models fall into a smaller number of families. We also show how new models may be constructed by combining elements of different models. The surveyed models are: Exponential; Hyperbolic; Arithmetic; Hyperboloid (Green & Myerson, Rachlin); Loewenstein and Prelec Generalized Hyperboloid; quasi-Hyperbolic (also known as β -δ discounting); Benhabib et al’s fixed cost; Benhabib et al’s Exponential / Hyperbolic / quasi-Hyperbolic; Read’s discounting fractions; Roelofsma’s exponential time; Scholten and Read’s discounting-by-intervals (DBI); Ebert and Prelec’s constant sensitivity (CS); Bleichrodt et al.’s constant absolute decreasing impatience (CADI); Bleichrodt et al.’s constant relative decreasing impatience (CRDI); Green, Myerson, and Macaux’s hyperboloid over intervals models; Killeen’s additive utility; size-sensitive additive utility; Yi, Landes, and Bickel’s memory trace models; McClure et al.’s two exponentials; and Scholten and Read’s trade-off model. For a convenient overview, a single “cheat sheet” table captures the notation and essential mathematics behind all but one of the models.
Authors and Affiliations
John R. Doyle
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP678047
- DOI -
- Views 117
- Downloads 0
Decision making under hypoxia: Oxygen depletion increases risk seeking for losses but not for gains
We report a preliminary study that compared decisions made in an oxygen depleted environment with those made in a normoxic environment. Participants were presented with a series of choices that involved either losses or...
Inverted U-shaped model: How frequent repetition affects perceived risk
We asked how repeated media reports on technological hazards influence an individual’s risk perception. We looked for two contradictory effects, an increasing effect of repetition on perceived risk with the first few rep...
Challenging some common beliefs: Empirical work within the adaptive toolbox metaphor
The authors review their own empirical work inspired by the adaptive toolbox metaphor. The review examines factors influencing strategy selection and execution in multi-attribute inference tasks (e.g., information costs,...
The effects of mental steps and compatibility on Bayesian reasoning
Four laboratory studies were conducted to test the hypothesis that correct Bayesian reasoning can be predicted by two factors of task complexity — the number of mental steps required to reach the normative solution, and...
What might judgment and decision making research be like if we took a Bayesian approach to hypothesis testing?
Judgment and decision making research overwhelmingly uses null hypothesis significance testing as the basis for statistical inference. This article examines an alternative, Bayesian approach which emphasizes the choice b...