Four days later in Cincinnati: Longitudinal tests of hyperbolic discounting

Read, Daniel; Frederick, Shane; Airoldi, Mara

doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.02.010

Cited by 77 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our experiment therefore moves the choice date from t to t + ∆ while keeping the delay s constant. Both Sayman andÖncüler (2009) and Read et al (2012) propose similar designs but with a different nomenclature. 5 In both of those papers, dynamic consistency is defined as longitudinal time consistency.…”

Section: Time Preferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patience and time consistency in collective decisions

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present experimental evidence regarding individual and group decisions over time. Static and longitudinal methods are combined to test four conditions on time preferences: impatience, stationarity, age independence, and dynamic consistency. Decision making in groups should favor coordination via communication about voting intentions. We find that individuals are neither patient nor consistent, that groups are both patient and highly consistent, and that information exchange between participants helps groups converge to stable decisions. Finally we provide additional evidence showing that our results are driven by the specific role of groups and not by either repeated choices or individual preferences when choosing for other subjects.JEL codes: C92, D90, D03.Keywords: Time Preferences, Dynamic Consistency, present-bias, Group Decisions. * We thank Aurelien Baillon, Nicolas Houy, Vincent Merlin, Amnon Rapoport, Jeeva Somasundaram, Karine Van Der Straeten, Marie-Claire Villeval and Peter Wakker for helpful comments. We also thank Elven Priour for programming the script and organizing the sessions.

show abstract

Section: Time Preferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patience and time consistency in collective decisions

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Ainslie and Haendel (1983) focus on substance abuse patients, Read and van Leeuwen (1998) study the choice between healthy and unhealthy snacks, Read et al (1999) ask subjects to choose between highbrow and lowbrow rental movies, Ariely and Wertenbroch (2002) consider studying activities, Dellavigna and Malmendier (2006) and Charness and Gneezy (2009) focus on choices concerning attendance at the gym and physical exercise. In the recent literature, a dynamic experimental design with monetary incentives has been used in Casari (2009), Sayman and Oncüler (2009), Ginè et al (2012, and Read et al (2012).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The same concepts are sometimes referred to as cross-sectional and longitudinal choice reversal(Sayman andÖncüler 2009;Read et al 2012) or synchronic and diachronic choice reversal(Frederick et al 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…This cross-sectional design is essentially static, because subjects make all their choices at one date. In contrast, we adopted a longitudinal experimental design where individuals make decisions at multiple dates (Sayman andÖncüler 2009;Read et al 2012). 2 This dynamic design provides direct evidence on time inconsistency and self-control problems, and it also allows us to identify and measure different complementary notions of choice reversal over time.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Choice reversal without temptation: A dynamic experiment on time preferences

Casari

Dragone

2015

J Risk Uncertain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We study intertemporal choices through an experiment run over multiple dates and we show that intertemporal behavior is affected by additional drivers beyond impatience and present-biased preferences. By eliciting a subject's plan and tracking its implementation over time, this dynamic design helps our understanding of time inconsistency through the identification and measurement of three notions of choice reversal in intertemporal behavior. In the experiment, there is widespread choice reversal and demand for flexibility. Neither the usual exponential nor hyperbolic discounting models can account for the observed behavior.

show abstract

“…Here k denotes a hyperbolic discount rate (though for alternative accounts see Read, 2001;Kable and Glimcher, 2010;Read et al, 2012;Luhmann, 2013). Temporal discounting has received considerable attention in human behavioral neuroscience, not least because many forms of maladaptive behavior are readily characterized as pursuit of immediate gratification at the expense of reaping greater rewards in the future (Critchfield and Kollins, 2001;Bickel et al, 2007Bickel et al, , 2014aKoffarnus et al, 2013;Story et al, 2014).…”

Section: Vitae Summa Brevis Spem Nos Vetat Incohare Longammentioning

confidence: 99%