Tradeoffs between sequences: Weighing accumulated outcomes against outcome-adjusted delays

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 38, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 1675-1688

  Read, Daniel ^a   Scholten, Marc ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

^b INSTITUTO SUPERIOR DE PSICOLOGIA APLICADA   (Portugal)

Author keywords

Discounting; Intertemporal choice; Sequences; Tradeoffs

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONCEPT FORMATION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROBABILITY; TIME;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; CONCEPT FORMATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROBABILITY; TIME FACTORS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84867141490     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0028216     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Andersen, S., Harrison, G. W., Lau, M. I., & Rutström, E. E. (2010). Behavioral econometrics for psychologists. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31, 553-576. doi:10.1016/j.joep.2010.03.017
2. Frederick, S., & Loewenstein, G. (2008). Conflicting motives in evaluations of sequences. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 37, 221-235. doi:10.1007/s11166-008-9051-z
3. Laibson, D. (1997). Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112, 443-478. doi:10.1162/003355397555253
4. Leland, J. W. (2002). Similarity judgments and anomalies in intertemporal choice. Economic Inquiry, 40, 574-581. doi:10.1093/ei/40.4.574
5. Loewenstein, G. (1987). Anticipation and the valuation of delayed consumption. Economic Journal, 97, 666-684. doi:10.2307/2232929
6. Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (1992). Anomalies in intertemporal choice: Evidence and an interpretation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107, 573-597. doi:10.2307/2118482
7. Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (1993). Preferences for sequences of outcomes. Psychological Review, 100, 91-108. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.100.1.91
8. Lopes, L. L., & Oden, G. C. (1999). The role of aspiration level in risky choice: A comparison of cumulative prospect theory and SP/A theory. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 43, 286 -313. doi:10.1006/jmps.1999.1259
9. Magen, E., Dweck, C. S., & Gross, J. J. (2008). The hidden-zero effect. Representing a single choice as an extended sequence reduces impulsive choice. Psychological Science, 19, 648-649. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02137.x
10. Rao, L. L., & Li, S. (2011). New paradoxes in intertemporal choice. Judgment and Decision Making, 6, 122-129.
11. Read, D. (2001). Is time-discounting hyperbolic or subadditive? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 23, 5-32. doi:10.1023/A:1011198414683
12. Read, D., Frederick, S., & Scholten, M. (2012). Outcome framing in intertemporal choice: The DRIFT Model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. Manuscript submitted for publication.
13. Roelofsma, P. H. M. P., & Read, D. (2000). Intransitive intertemporal choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13, 161-177. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(200004/06)13:2<161::AID-BDM348>3.0.CO;2-P
14. Rubinstein, A. (2003). "Economics and psychology"? The case of hyperbolic discounting. International Economic Review, 44, 1207-1216. doi:10.1111/1468-2354.t01-1-00106
15. Samuelson, P. (1937). A note on measurement of utility. Review of Economic Studies, 4, 155-161. doi:10.2307/2967612
16. Scholten, M., & Read, D. (2006). Discounting by intervals: A generalized model of intertemporal choice. Management Science, 52, 1424-1436. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1060.0534
17. Scholten, M., & Read, D. (2010). The psychology of intertemporal tradeoffs. Psychological Review, 117, 925-944. doi:10.1037/a0019619
18. Scholten, M., & Read, D. (2012a). A quantitative comparison between three models of intertemporal choice. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. Manuscript submitted for publication.
19. Scholten, M., & Read, D. (2012b). Time and outcome framing in intertemporal tradeoffs: The delay-speedup asymmetry. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. Manuscript submitted for publication.
20. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106, 1039-1061. doi:10.2307/2937956
21. Urminsky, O., & Kivetz, R. (2011). Scope insensitivity and the "mere token" effect. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, 282-295. doi:10.1509/jmkr.48.2.282