No abstract

Rationale In delay discounting, temporally remote rewards have less value. Cigarette smoking is associated with steeper discounting of delayed money. The generality of this to nonmonetary outcomes, however, is unknown. Objectives We sought to determine whether cigarette smokers also show steep discounting of other delayed outcomes. Methods Sixty-five participants (32 smokers and 33 non-smokers) completed four delay-discounting tasks, each involving different hypothetical outcomes. In the monetary task, participants indicated their preference for a smaller amount of money available immediately (titrated across trials) and $100 awarded at delays ranging from 1 week to 25 years (tested in blocks). In the three other discounting tasks the larger-later reward was $100 worth of a favorite food, alcoholic drink, or a favorite form of entertainment. All other aspects of these discounting tasks were identical to the monetary discounting task. Results As previously shown, smokers discounted delayed money more steeply than non-smokers did. In addition, smokers discounted delayed food and entertainment rewards more steeply than did nonsmokers. A person’s discounting of one outcome was correlated with discounting of other outcomes. Non-smokers discounted money less steeply than all other outcomes; smokers discounted money significantly less than food. Conclusions When compared to nonsmokers, cigarette smokers more steeply discount several types of delayed outcomes. This result, together with the finding that cross-commodity discounting rates were correlated within subjects, suggests that delay discounting is a trait that extends across domains.

We examined the effects of the framing of time on delay discounting. Delay discounting is the process by which delayed outcomes are devalued as a function of time. Time in atitrating delay discounting task is often framed in calendar units (e.g., as 1 week, 1 month, etc.). When time is framed as a specific date, delayed outcomes are discounted less compared to the calendar format. Other forms of framing time; however, have not been explored. All participants completed atitrating calendar unit delay-discounting task for money. Participants were also assigned to one of two delay discounting tasks: time as dates (e.g., June 1st, 2015) or time in units of days (e.g., 5000 days), using the same delay distribution as the calendar delay discounting task. Time framed as dates resulted in less discounting compared to the calendar method, whereas time framed as days resulted in greater discounting compared to the calendar method. The hyperboloid model fit best compared to the hyperbola and exponential models. How time is framed may alter how participants attend to the delays as well as how the delayed outcome is valued. Altering how time is framed may serve to improve adherence to goals with delayed outcomes.

Objective: Excessive delay discounting, the rapid devaluation of future rewards, is often demonstrated by individuals suffering from substance use disorders, including chronic cigarette smokers. This constricted temporal window not only produces increased valuation of immediate unhealthy rewards (e.g., cigarettes) but also a decreased valuation of both future healthy rewards (e.g., increased energy) and future consequences (e.g., lung cancer). Moreover, in addition to cigarettes, smokers tend to engage in other behaviors that elicit immediate rewards and negative future consequences such as over-consuming alcohol, unhealthy eating, physical inactivity, and/or irresponsible spending. The present study sought to determine whether smokers’ discounting rate would predict the frequency of engagement in other poor health and financial behaviors, independent of cigarette smoking. Methods: A total of 303 daily smokers were asked to complete a delay discounting task and then answer how frequently they typically engaged in health and finance related behaviors. Results: A structural equation model was used to group the questions into highly significantly latent factors of “Drug Use”, “Finances”, “Fitness”, “Food”, “Health”, “Household Savings”, “Personal Development”, and “Safe Driving”. When regressed on the model, delay discounting significantly predicted engagement all of the factors, except “Safe Driving”, independent of smoking status. Conclusion: In sum, these findings highlight delay discounting as a useful metric for predicting whether individuals engagement in variety of healthy physical and financial behaviors, as a function of their temporal window.

In delay discounting, temporally remote outcomes have less value. Cigarette smoking is associated with steeper discounting of money and consumable outcomes. It is presently unclear whether smokers discount health outcomes more than non-smokers. We sought to establish the generality of steep discounting for different types of health outcomes in cigarette smokers. Seventy participants (38 smokers and 32 non-smokers) completed four hypothetical outcome delay-discounting tasks: a gain of $500, a loss of $500, a temporary boost in health, and temporary cure from a debilitating disease. Participants reported the duration of each health outcome that would be equivalent to $500; these durations were then used in the respective discounting tasks. Delays ranged from 1 week to 25 years. Smokers’ indifference points for monetary gains, boosts in health, and temporary cures were lower than indifference points from non-smokers. Indifference points of one outcome were correlated with indifference points of other outcomes. Smokers demonstrate steeper discounting across a range of delayed outcomes. How a person discounts one outcome predicts how they will discount other outcomes. These two findings support our assertion that delay discounting is in part a trait.

Delay discounting refers to a decline in the value of a reward when it is delayed relative to when it is immediately available. Delay discounting tasks are used to identify indifference points, which reflect equal preference for two dichotomous reward alternatives differing in both delay and magnitude. Indifference points are key to assessing delay discounting because they allow us to quantify the degree to which delay impacts value for a given individual. For example, if at a 1 week delay and a maximum of $1000, the indifference point is at $700 we know that, for that participant, a 1-week delay corresponds to a 30% reduction in value. This video outlines an adjusting amount delay discounting task that identifies indifference points relatively quickly and is inexpensive and easy to administer. Once data have been collected, non-linear regression techniques are typically used to generate discounting curves. The steepness of the discounting curve reflects the degree of impulsive choice of a group or individual. These techniques have been used with a wide range of commodities and have identified populations that are relatively impulsive. For example, people with substance abuse problems discount delayed rewards more steeply than control participants. While degree of discounting varies as a function of the commodity examined, discounting of one commodity correlates with discounting of other commodities, which suggests that discounting may be a trait-like variable1.

The evolution of science derives, in part, from the development and use of new methods and techniques. Here, we discuss one development that may have impact on the understanding of tobacco regulatory science: namely, the application of behavioral economics to the complex tobacco marketplace. The purpose of this paper is to review studies that examine conditions impacting the degree to which electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) products substitute for conventional cigarettes in the Experimental Tobacco Marketplace (ETM). Collectively, the following factors constitute the current experimental understanding of conditions that will affect ENDS use and substitution for conventional cigarettes: increasing the base price of conventional cigarettes, increasing taxation of conventional cigarettes, subsidizing the price of ENDS products, increasing ENDS nicotine strength, and providing narratives that illustrate the potential health benefits of ENDS consumption in lieu of conventional cigarettes. Each of these factors are likely moderated by consumer characteristics, which include prior ENDS use, ENDS use risk perception, and gender. Overall, the ETM provides a unique method to explore and identify the conditions by which various nicotine products may interact with one another that mimics the real world. In addition, the ETM permits the efficacy of a broad range of potential nicotine policies and regulations to be measured prior to governmental implementation.

Introduction The experimental tobacco marketplace (ETM) approximates real-world situations by estimating the effects of several, concurrently available products and policies on budgeted purchasing. Although the effects of increasing cigarette price on potentially less harmful substitutability are well documented, the effects of other, nuanced pricing policies remain speculative. This study used the ETM as a tool to assess the effects of two pricing policies, conventional cigarette taxation and e-liquid subsidization, on demand and substitutability. Methods During sampling periods, participants were provided 2-day samples of 24 mg/mL e-liquid, after which ETM purchase sessions occurred. Across two ETM sessions, conventional cigarettes were taxed or e-liquid was subsidized in combination with increasing cigarette price. The other four available products were always price constant and not taxed or subsidized. Results E-liquid functioned as a substitute for conventional cigarettes across all conditions. Increasing cigarette taxation and e-liquid subsidization increased the number of participants for which e-liquid functioned as a substitute. Cigarette taxation decreased cigarette demand, by decreasing demand intensity, and marginally increased the initial intensity of e-liquid substitution, but did not affect the functions’ slopes (substitutability). E-liquid subsidization resulted in large increases in the initial intensity of e-liquid substitution, but did not affect e-liquid substitutability nor cigarette demand. Implications 24 mg/mL e-cigarette e-liquid was the only product to significantly substitute for cigarettes in at least one condition throughout the experiment; it functioned as a significant substitute throughout all four tax and all four subsidy conditions. Increasing cigarette taxes decreased cigarette demand through decreases in demand intensity but did not affect e-cigarette substitution. Increasing e-liquid subsidies increased e-liquid initial intensity of substitution but did not affect cigarette demand. Conclusions This study extended research on the behavioral economics of conventional cigarette demand and e-liquid substitutability in a complex marketplace. The results suggest that the most efficacious method to decrease conventional cigarette purchasing and increase e-liquid purchasing may involve greatly increasing cigarette taxes while also increasing the value of e-liquid through potentially less harmful product subsidization or differential taxation.