Domain independence and stability in young and older adults' discounting of delayed rewards

Individual discounting rates for different types of delayed reward are typically assumed to reflect a single, underlying trait of impulsivity. Recently, we showed that discounting rates are orders of magnitude steeper for directly consumable liquid rewards than for monetary rewards (Jimura et al., 2009), raising the question of whether discounting rates for different types of reward covary at the individual level. Accordingly, the present study examined the relation between discounting of hypothetical money and real liquid rewards in young adults (Experiment 1) and older adults (Experiment 2). At the group level, young adults discounted monetary rewards more steeply than the older adults, but there was no significant age difference with respect to liquid rewards. At the individual level, the rates at which young and older participants discounted each reward type were stable over a two- to fifteen-week interval (rs > 70), but there was no significant correlation between the rates at which they discounted the two reward types. These results suggest that although similar decision-making processes may underlie the discounting of different types of rewards, the rates at which individuals discount money and directly consumable rewards may reflect separate, stable traits, rather than a single trait of impulsivity.     

A behavioral analysis of altruism

Altruistic acts have been defined, in economic terms, as “…costly acts that confer economic benefits on other individuals” (Fehr and Fischbacher, 2003). In multi-player, one-shot prisoner's dilemma games, a significant number of players behave altruistically; their behavior benefits each of the other players but is costly to them. We consider three potential explanations for such altruism. The first explanation, following a suggestion by the philosopher Derek Parfit, assumes that players devise a strategy to avoid being free-loaders—and that in the present case this strategy dictates cooperation. The second explanation says that cooperators reject the one-shot aspect of the game and behave so as to maximize reward over a series of choices extending beyond the present situation (even though reward is not maximized in the present case). This explanation assumes that people may learn to extend the boundaries of their selves socially (beyond their own skin) as well as temporally (beyond the present moment). We propose a learning mechanism for such behavior analogous to the biological, evolutionary mechanism of group selection. The third explanation assumes that people's altruism is based on a straightforward balancing of undiscounted costs to themselves against discounted benefits to others (social discounting). The three proposed explanations of altruism complement each other.     

Delay discounting and gambling

Delay discounting describes the decline in the value of a reinforcer as the delay to that reinforcer increases. A review of the available studies revealed that steep delay discounting is positively correlated with problem or pathological gambling. One hypothesis regarding this correlation derives from the discounting equation proposed by Mazur (1989). According to the equation, steeper discounting renders the difference between fixed-delayed rewards and gambling-like variable-delayed rewards larger; with the latter being more valuable. The present study was designed to test this prediction by first assessing rats’ impulsive choices across four delays to a larger-later reinforcer. A second condition quantified strength of preference for mixed- over fixed-delays, with the duration of the latter adjusted between sessions to achieve indifference. Strength of preference for the mixed-delay alternative is given by the fixed delay at indifference (lower fixed-delay values reflect stronger preferences). Percent impulsive choice was not correlated with the value of the fixed delay at indifference and, therefore, the prediction of the hyperbolic model of gambling was not supported. A follow-up assessment revealed a significant decrease in impulsive choice after the second condition. This shift in impulsive choice could underlie the failure to observe the predicted correlation between impulsive choice and degree of preference for mixed- over fixed delays.     

Social discounting: The effect of outcome uncertainty

The purpose of the study was to determine the lowest hypothetical amount a participant would keep for himself/herself, preferring it over a reward that he/she would have shared with another individual representing various levels of past reciprocation. Other manipulated aspects were: emotional closeness of the receiver (close vs. distant person), procedure for deciding on how to share the reward (mutual decision vs. decision made by partner) and amount of reward to be shared (PLN 494 vs. PLN 49,400). It was found that preference for the reward to be shared increased as a function of reciprocity, and that it is higher when sharing with an emotionally close person, when the decision does not depend entirely on the partner, and when sharing a small reward. The effect of the level of reciprocity was the smallest when the reward was shared with an emotionally close person and the decision was mutual.     

Within-subject differences in degree of delay discounting as a function of order of presentation of hypothetical cash rewards

Procedural variants in estimating delay discounting (DD) have been shown to yield significant differences in estimated degree of DD as well as variations in individual patterns of choice. For example, a recent study found significantly different degrees of DD between groups assessed using either an ascending or descending order of presentation of the immediately available rewards. The purpose of this study was to test for within-subject effects of order of presentation of the immediate rewards in a DD task. In a single session, college students (N = 29) were asked to complete two DD tasks, one with the immediate rewards presented in ascending order and one in descending order. Consistent with previous results, significantly larger mean area under the discounting curve (AUC) was observed when the descending sequence was used compared to the ascending order of presentation; and the correlation between both measurements was moderate. These results suggest that some DD assessment tasks may be sensitive to contextual variables such as order and range of the reward and delay values.     

Functional parameters of delay discounting assessment tasks: order of presentation

Several variants in the methods used to estimate delay discounting (DD) have been associated with within-subject differences in degree of DD. This study compared variants in the order of presentation of reward and delay values during assessment of DD of hypothetical cash. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups. For one group, the immediate reward values were presented in Ascending order and for the other, they were presented in Descending order. In addition, all participants completed a DD task with the reward values presented in a Random order. Degree of DD, calculated as area under the curve (AUC), was similar between the Ascending and Descending procedures, and was significantly higher with the Random procedure. Within-subjects AUC were positively correlated. Reaction times within choice trials changed systematically as a function of order of presentation of the immediate rewards, and distance to the indifference point within each delay value. Reaction times appear to parallel the effort involved in making the individual choices. Some procedural variants in the assessment of DD yield differences in behavior during the assessment task that affect the magnitude of the estimated delay discounting. Thus, the absolute magnitude of DD may not be directly comparable between methods.     

Delay discounting of saccharin in rhesus monkeys

The value of a reinforcer decreases as the time until its receipt increases, a phenomenon referred to as delay discounting. Although delay discounting of non-drug reinforcers has been studied extensively in a number of species, our knowledge of discounting in non-human primates is limited. In the present study, rhesus monkeys were allowed to choose in discrete trials between 0.05% saccharin delivered in different amounts and with different delays. Indifference points were calculated and discounting functions were established. Discounting functions for saccharin were well described by a hyperbolic function. Moreover, the discounting rates for saccharin in all six monkeys were comparable to those of other non-human animals responding for non-drug reinforcers. Also consistent with other studies of non-human animals, changing the amount of a saccharin reinforcer available after a 10-s delay did not affect its relative subjective value. Discounting functions for saccharin were steeper than we found in a previous study with cocaine, raising the possibility that drugs such as cocaine may be discounted less steeply than non-drug reinforcers.     

A comparison of two algorithms in computerized temporal discounting procedures

Two algorithms are commonly applied in computerized temporal discounting procedures (Decreasing Adjustment and Double-Limit Algorithms); however, the degree to which the two algorithms produce similar patterns of discounting is unknown. The present experiment compared the two common algorithms across sign (gains and losses) and magnitude ($10 and $1000) conditions. Twenty participants made choices between larger later and smaller sooner alternatives that were presented by each of the algorithms in separate conditions. Strong correlations were found between the two measures; however, the Decreasing Adjustment Algorithm tended to produce lower indifference points and higher rates of discounting than the Double-Limit Algorithm. Both algorithms found significant magnitude effects. Less consistent results were found when comparing the two algorithms across sign. The present results suggest that researchers should apply caution when making comparisons between outcomes of delay discounting studies that have used the two different algorithms. However, the interpretation of findings from individual studies is probably not strongly affected by the use of different computer algorithms.     

Parameters of delay discounting assessment: number of trials, effort, and sequential effects.

Procedural variants in estimating delay discounting (DD) have been shown to yield significant within-subject differences in estimated degree of delay discounting as well as variations in the patterns of choice. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of subject control over the number of trials in a delay discounting task, on degree of delay discounting. Participants were assessed with two computerized DD assessments: the full-length method presented participants with a fixed set of 240 trials, and the abbreviated task, where once participants had shown indifference between the immediate and delayed rewards, the remaining trials for that delay value were omitted. While the full-length and abbreviated methods did not differentially affect patterns of choice or estimated delay discounting, the order of presentation (ascending or descending) of immediate rewards produced differences in each measure: rate of delay discounting was significantly lower when estimated with the descending sequence; a larger proportion of area under the discounting curve was concentrated around the indifference point trial with the descending sequence; and a lower correlation was observed between estimates obtained across methods with the descending sequence.     

Using crowdsourcing to examine relations between delay and probability discounting

Although the extensive lines of research on delay and/or probability discounting have greatly expanded our understanding of human decision-making processes, the relation between these two phenomena remains unclear. For example, some studies have reported robust associations between delay and probability discounting, whereas others have failed to demonstrate a consistent relation between the two. The current study sought to clarify this relation by examining the relation between delay and probability discounting in a large sample of internet users (n = 904) using the Amazon Mechanical Turk (AMT) crowdsourcing service. Because AMT is a novel data collection platform, the findings were validated through the replication of a number of previously established relations (e.g., relations between delay discounting and cigarette smoking status). A small but highly significant positive correlation between delay and probability discounting rates was obtained, and principal component analysis suggested that two (rather than one) components were preferable to account for the variance in both delay and probability discounting. Taken together, these findings suggest that delay and probability discounting may be related, but are not manifestations of a single construct (e.g., impulsivity).     

On the scaling interpretation of exponents in hyperboloid models of delay and probability discounting

Previously, we (McKerchar et al., 2009) showed that two-parameter hyperboloid models ( [Green and Myerson, 2004] and [Rachlin, 2006]) provide significantly better fits to delay discounting data than simple, one-parameter hyperbolic and exponential models. Here, we extend this effort by comparing fits of the two-parameter hyperboloid models to data from a larger sample of participants (N = 171) who discounted probabilistic as well as delayed rewards. In particular, we examined the effects of amount on the exponents in the two hyperboloid models of delay and probability discounting in order to evaluate key theoretical predictions of the standard psychophysical scaling interpretation of these exponents. Both the Rachlin model and the Green and Myerson model provided very good fits to delay and probability discounting of both small and large amounts at both the group and individual levels (all R²s > .97 at the group level; all median R²s > .92 at the individual level). For delay discounting, the exponent in both models did not vary as a function of delayed amount, consistent with the psychophysical scaling interpretation. For probability discounting, however, the exponent in both models increased as the probabilistic amount increased—a finding inconsistent with the scaling interpretation.     

Effect of delay and social distance on the perceived value of social interaction

Temporal discounting is a process by which the perceived value of an outcome decreases as delay increases. Social discounting is a process by which the perceived value of an outcome decreases as the social distance between the decision-maker and recipient increases. Both temporal and social discounting are well established for monetary outcomes. However, little is known regarding the effect of delay-to-occurrence or increased social distance on the perceived value of social interactions. The current study demonstrates that the decrease in perceived value for delayed social interactions is well described by the same hyperbola-like function used for monetary outcomes and that the rate of discounting decreases (indicating increased preference for larger, more delayed outcomes) as social distance increases. Conceptualizing the current discounting procedure as entailing both potential gains and losses, suggest that under certain circumstances, higher discount rates may not reflect increased preference.     

Percent body fat is related to delay and probability discounting for food in humans

This study describes delay and probability discounting patterns for hypothetical food and money in relation to percent body fat (PBF). Sixty university students completed four computerized discounting tasks in which they were asked to make a series of hypothetical decisions between (a) 10 dollars after one of several different delays (1, 2, 30, 180, and 365 days) or a smaller amount of money available immediately; (b) 10 bites of food after one of several delays (1, 2, 5, 10, and 20 h) or a smaller number of bites available immediately; (c) $10 at one of several probabilities (0.9, 0.75, 0.5, 0.25, 0.1) or a smaller amount of money to be received for sure; and (d) 10 bites of food at one of several probabilities (0.9, 0.75, 0.5, 0.25, 0.1) or a smaller number of bites to be received for sure. Median indifference points for all participants across each task were well described using the hyperbolic discounting function. Results suggest that percent body fat predicted discounting for hypothetical food, but not money, using regression analyses with the entire sample and when comparing individuals in the high and low quartiles for PBF. None of the other dietary variables (body mass index, subjective hunger, and time since last meal or snack) were related to discounting patterns. This suggests that individuals with high PBF may exhibit heightened sensitivities to delay and probability when making decisions about food.     

Response bias is unaffected by delay length in a delay discounting paradigm

This study examined the contribution of response bias to measures of delay discounting in Long-Evans rats (n = 8) using the adjusting amount procedure. Under this procedure, we assessed preference for 150 μl of 10% sucrose solution delivered following a delay over a variable-amount alternative delivered immediately. Bias was calculated based on relative preference when reinforcers were delivered immediately from both alternatives. We extended this assessment procedure to examine preference when rewards from both alternatives were equally delayed (2, 4, 8, or 16 s) in addition to assessing a traditional delay discounting function. Relative preference was similar across delays and slightly larger than 150 μl. These results indicate that response bias was stable and suggests a relative aversion for the adjusting alternative, which may be due to the variability in reward size associated with that alternative.     

The date-delay framing effect in temporal discounting depends on substance abuse

In the present study, individuals with substance use disorders (n=30) and non-addicted controls (n=30) were presented with a delay-discounting task with time being described either as dates or as temporal intervals. Three main results were obtained. First, in both groups reward size had a large impact on discounting future rewards, with discount rates becoming larger with smaller reward sizes. Second, participants discounted future rewards less strongly when their time of delivery was presented as a date instead of a temporal distance. Third, whereas discount rates of individuals with substance use disorders varied substantially with regard to the presentation of time in the task, the controls changed their choices depending on time presentation only slightly.     

The genetic basis of delay discounting and its genetic relationship to alcohol dependence

Delay discounting is steeper for individuals who drink heavily or are alcohol dependent, but the reasons for this are unclear. Given the substantial genetic component for alcohol dependence it is not unreasonable to ask whether discounting and alcohol dependence have a genetic relationship. For there to be a genetic relationship, delay discounting must have a genetic component (heritability). A review of the human and animal literature suggests that this is the case. Other literature examining whether discounting is a correlated phenotype in individuals who are genetically predisposed to drink (family history positive individuals and selected lines of rats and mice) is mixed, suggesting that networks of genes are critical for the relationship to be seen. The identities of the genes in this network are not yet known, but research examining polymorphisms associated with differences in discounting is beginning to address this issue.     

Altruism among relatives and non-relatives

Hamilton's [Hamilton, W.D., 1964. The genetical evolution of social behavior, I, II. J. Theor. Biol. 7, 1-52] kin-selection theory predicts that altruism will be greater with greater genetic overlap (degree of kinship) between giver and receiver. Kin may be identified in terms of social distance-the closer you feel to someone else, (a) the greater your genetic overlap with them should be, and (b) the more altruistic you should be toward them. The present experiment determined the amount of their own (hypothetical) monetary reward undergraduates were willing to forgo in order to give $75 to other people at various social distances. We found that (a) genetic relationship and (b) altruism varied inversely with social distance; the closer you feel to someone else, the closer their relation to you is likely to be, and the more altruistic you are likely to be toward them. However, even at the same social distance, participants were willing to forgo significantly more money for the benefit of relatives than for the benefit of non-relatives. These results are consistent with kin-selection theory and imply that altruism is determined by factors in addition to social distance.     

Relations between delay discounting and low to moderate gambling, cannabis, and alcohol problems among university students

Research has generally demonstrated that the discounting of delayed rewards is associated with severity of addictive behaviour. Less clear, however, is the relative strength of the relation for specific addictive behaviours. University students (N = 218) completed a computerized delay discounting task for hypothetical monetary rewards, and gambling, cannabis, and alcohol problem severity was assessed. A multiple regression analysis revealed that while the overall model was significant, only gambling problem severity accounted for delay discounting scores above and beyond cannabis and alcohol problem severity. The results support the hypothesis that delay discounting of hypothetical monetary rewards is more associated with gambling than other addictive behaviour problems, including substance use problems.     

Within-subject comparison of degree of delay discounting using titrating and fixed sequence procedures

Different procedures are often used across experiments to estimate the degree of delay discounting, a common measure of impulsivity. In all procedures, participants indicate their choice between a reward available immediately and one available after a delay. The present experiment determined whether there are differences in the degree of discounting for a hypothetical $100 produced by a procedure that titrates the immediate amount (titrating sequence procedure) versus a procedure that presents a fixed sequence of immediate amounts (fixed sequence procedure) using a within-subject design. The adult human participants showed no significant differences in degree of discounting between procedures as assessed by a hyperboloid model and the Area Under the Curve. Furthermore, the Area Under the Curve values from the two procedures showed a strong positive correlation. These findings suggest there may be no systematic difference between the degree of delay discounting as estimated by the titrating sequence and fixed sequence procedures. Given the apparent similarities in the results, it appears researchers may be justified in basing their choice of which procedure to use on convenience.