Altering Participants’ Hypothetical Annual Income Can Alter Their Rates of Discounting the Same Delayed Monetary Outcome

Abstract

Delay discounting occurs when the subjective value of an outcome decreases because its delivery is delayed. Past research has shown that how steeply participants discount an outcome varies inversely with the value of previously discounted outcomes. In the present study, participants discounted the same hypothetical monetary outcome ($1,000) after their hypothetical annual income was halved (Experiment 1) or doubled (Experiment 2). Rates of discounting decreased and increased, respectively, after these manipulations (although a similar change in discounting was observed for the control and treatment groups in Experiment 2). These results suggest that altering the context in which the discounting task is framed alters the subjective value of the outcome itself, in this case money. This result has implications for understanding contrast effects that are observed in rates of discounting, as well as for researchers and practitioners who are interested in determining methods for altering how individuals discount delayed outcomes.

Effects of economic context and reward amount on delay and probability discounting

“…In delay discounting, a positive transition may increase self‐controlled choices, whereas a negative transition may result in impatience. This is consistent with previous findings that participants who received a narrative indicating a financial loss showed steeper discounting (Bickel et al, 2016; Mellis et al, 2018; Sze et al, 2017; Weatherly, 2012). One possible reason for the discrepant findings of Weatherly (2012) may be the degree of the economic shift.…”

“…One possible reason for the different results is the different ratios of outcome magnitude to economic context among the studies. In both studies, the outcome magnitude was $1,000; however, the change in economic context varied across studies, being unspecified in some studies (Bickel et al, 2016; Mellis et al, 2018; Sze et al, 2017) and a $50,000 change in one study (Weatherly, 2012).…”

“…In contrast, Weatherly (2012) found that an adverse change in hypothetical yearly earnings from $100,000 to $50,000 decreased delay discounting and observed no change in discounting when earnings increased from $100,000 to $200,000. The reasons for these differences across studies are unclear.…”

Do process simulations during episodic future thinking enhance the reduction of delay discounting for middle income participants and those living in poverty?

“…Individuals with lower incomes are also more likely to engage in behaviors associated with higher DD (e.g., problem drinking and cigarette use; Bickel et al, 2014). Previous studies have shown that negative income shock simulations (i.e., abrupt transitions to poverty) can increase rates of DD (Sze, Stein, Bickel, Paluch, & Epstein, 2017;Weatherly, 2012) and that EFT can reduce the impact of negative income shock (Sze et al, 2017). However, simulations of negative income shock may be different than chronic experiences of poverty.…”

Level of deprivation does not affect degree of discounting in pigeons

“…One can manipulate people’s hypothetical incomes (Weatherly, 2012), but another approach to this issue would be to use an animal model and manipulate level of deprivation directly. Past research with animal models investigating the relation between deprivation and delay to different rewards has yielded inconsistent results.…”