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

Abstract

Steep delay and shallow probability discounting are associated with myriad problem behaviors; thus, it is important to understand factors that influence the degree of discounting. The present study evaluated the effects of economic context and reward amount on delay and probability discounting. Two hundred thirteen undergraduate psychology students completed four delay‐ or probability‐discounting tasks. Participants were exposed to hypothetical narratives involving four bank amounts ($750, $12,000, $125,000, and $2,000,000). The delayed/probabilistic amount was $3,000 for the two smaller bank amounts and $500,000 for the two larger bank amounts. The discounting tasks included five delays to, or probabilities of, receipt of the larger amount. The area under the empirical discounting function was calculated for each participant. Participants discounted delayed and uncertain outcomes more when the bank amount was smaller than the outcome (i.e., the economic context was low). Participants discounted the delayed larger amounts less than delayed smaller amounts, even when the relative economic context was the same. In contrast, probability discounting did not differ across magnitudes, which suggests that economic context may attenuate the magnitude effect in probability discounting. The results further highlight the importance of considering the economic context in delay and probability discounting.

Belief in future occurrence modulates the effect of episodic future thinking on delay discounting

“…Framing change in delay discounting as an adaptation to an evolving environment can also be linked to the literature exploring how the economic context shapes one's tendency to discount future rewards. Studies have shown that individuals living in a context of economic scarcity tend to prefer immediate over delayed rewards more often than people living in wealthier conditions (Anderson et al, 2023;Griskevicius et al, 2011;Mani et al, 2013). One explanation is that preferring an immediateyet smallerreward is a good strategy when the future is too difficult to predict (Burk & Averbeck, 2023;Frankenhuis et al, 2016).…”