Age Differences in Future Orientation and Delay Discounting

Abstract

Age differences in future orientation are examined in a sample of 935 individuals between 10 and 30 years using a delay discounting task as well as a new self-report measure. Younger adolescents consistently demonstrate a weaker orientation to the future than do individuals aged 16 and older, as reflected in their greater willingness to accept a smaller reward delivered sooner than a larger one that is delayed, and in their characterizations of themselves as less concerned about the future and less likely to anticipate the consequences of their decisions. Planning ahead, in contrast, continues to develop into young adulthood. Future studies should distinguish between future orientation and impulse control, which may have different neural underpinnings and follow different developmental timetables.

Relation Between Time Perspective and Delay Discounting: A Literature Review

“…It is noteworthy though that in Green et al's (1994) study, a single function with age-sensitive parameters described all age groups' discounting curves well, suggesting that even though there are quantitative age differences in delay discounting, the process of choosing between rewards of different amounts and delays is qualitatively similar across the life span. Steinberg et al (2009) found only quantitative, not qualitative, age differences in delay discounting functions. However, in their overall younger sample, with participants aged 10 to 30 years, they found that delay discounting only decreased until age 16, after which it remained stable.…”

“…In particular, steeper delay discounting was related to higher scores on the present subscales of the ZTPI (Present-Hedonistic and PresentFatalistic) and to lower scores on the Future subscale of the ZTPI and on the CFC scale. Similarly, Steinberg et al (2009) used a self-developed scale of future orientation as a self-report measure and found that it correlated significantly, although very modestly, with delay discounting (r = .18). Consistent with the hypothesis that time perspective may affect delay discounting, Liu and Aaker (2007) reported that young individuals who had experienced at least one cancer death among their acquaintances, compared to those who had not, made decisions that favored the long-term future over short-term interests.…”

Domain-general and domain-specific aspects of temporal discounting in children with ADHD and autism spectrum disorders (ASD): A proof of concept study

“…However, TD has been found to be associated with these individual characteristics by many others. First, age effects on TD have been found consistently in both real and hypothetical monetary TD tasks (Green et al, 1994;Olson et al, 2007;Scheres et al, 2006;Steinberg et al, 2009). However, Reynolds (2006) suggests that real TD tasks may be better suited for use with children because the choices are less abstract compared to hypothetical TD tasks.…”

A dual systems model of adolescent risk‐taking

“…The present article summarizes results from a program of research my colleagues and I have recently completed, designed to examine age differences in reward-seeking and cognitive control between the ages of 10 and 30 (Cauffman et al, 2010;Steinberg et al, 2008Steinberg et al, , 2009. It is the first study to span a wide enough age range to examine the developmental course of each phenomenon from preadolescence through early adulthood, to measure self-control and reward-seeking independently within the same sample, and to employ both self-report and performance measures.…”