Experimental reductions of delay discounting and impulsive choice: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

Many behaviors posing significant risks to public health are characterized by repeated decisions to forego better long-term outcomes in the face of immediate temptations. Steeply discounting the value of delayed outcomes often underlies a pattern of impulsive choice. Steep delay discounting is correlated with addictions (e.g., substance abuse, obesity) and behaviors such as seatbelt use and risky sexual activity. As evidence accumulates suggesting steep delay discounting plays a causal role in these maladaptive behaviors, researchers have begun testing methods for reducing discounting. In this first systematic and comprehensive review of this literature, the findings of 92 articles employing different methodologies to reduce discounting are evaluated narratively and meta-analytically. Although most of the methods reviewed produced significant reductions in discounting, they varied in effect sizes. Most methods were ideal for influencing one-off choices (e.g., framing and priming manipulations), although other successful manipulations, such as episodic future thinking, could be incorporated into existing therapies designed to produce longer-lasting changes in decision-making. The largest and longest-lasting effects were produced by learning-based manipulations, although translational research is needed to determine the generality and clinical utility of these methods. Methodological shortcomings in the existing literature and suggestions for ameliorating these issues are discussed. This review reveals a variety of methods with translational potential, which, through continued refinement, may prove effective in reducing impulsive choice and its associated maladaptive decisions that negatively impact quality of life. (PsycINFO Database Record

Choice patterns reveal qualitative individual differences among discounting of delayed gains, delayed losses, and probabilistic losses

“…Finally, it cannot be over‐emphasized how important choices involving losses are in everyday life, and the present findings suggest that different people make these choices in different ways. Researchers are beginning to examine procedures that modify discounting with the goal of ameliorating behavioral problems (see Rung & Madden, ). We would point out that many problem behaviors are problems precisely because people's choices sometimes have negative consequences, often delayed and/or probabilistic, and thus understanding individual differences in discounting losses may prove critical.…”

Delay discounting of different outcomes: Review and theory

“…Because of the detrimental nature of steep delay discounting and its association with addiction, obesity, gambling, and other maladies, there is great recent interest and development in experimental techniques to decrease the degree of delay discounting. Rung and Madden () provide a comprehensive review and meta‐analysis that chronicles a variety of ways to produce short term and longer‐term reductions in delay discounting. There are a number of different intervention types that appear promising, although much translational work remains to be done.…”

Precrastination: The fierce urgency of now

“…Recent research with rats has found that both genetic and experiential factors play key parts in impulsive and risky choice behavior (Kirkpatrick, Marshall, & Smith, 2015). Timing processes also participate, as would be expected by theories which deem future-oriented cognition to be important in the evolution of anticipatory responding and which discount the reinforcing consequences of delayed versus immediate reinforcement (Ainslie, 1975;Rung, & Madden, 2018). Further work on genetic and experiential factors will be critical to elucidating the neurobiological and cognitive foundations of both normal and disordered impulsive choice behavior.…”

“…(Beran & Hopkins, 2018, p. 577) A final matter concerns the fixity or flexibility of self-control. Since publication of the classic paper by Ainslie (1975), researchers have sought to understand and possibly to modify impulsivity in both humans and animals, with an eye toward encouraging stronger self-control (Rung & Madden, 2018). Recent research with rats has found that both genetic and experiential factors play key parts in impulsive and risky choice behavior (Kirkpatrick, Marshall, & Smith, 2015).…”