Reliability and validity of behavioral‐economic measures: A review and synthesis of discounting and demand

Abstract

This review sought to synthesize the literature on the reliability and validity of behavioral‐economic measures of demand and discounting in human research, introduce behavioral‐economic research methodologies for studying addictive behaviors, discuss gaps in the current literature, and review areas for future research. A total of 34 studies was included in this review. The discounting literature showed similar responding regardless of whether hypothetical or actual outcomes were used, though people tended to discount the outcome presented first more steeply, suggesting order effects. Although delay‐discounting measures seem to show temporal stability, exceptions were found for probability‐ and experiential‐discounting tasks. The demand literature also demonstrated similar responding regardless of outcome type; however, some demand indices showed exceptions. Randomized price sequences tended to show modest increases in Omax and α and modestly higher rates of inconsistent or nonsystematic responses compared with sequential price sequences. Demand indices generally showed temporal stability, although the stability was weaker the larger the time interval between test sessions. Future studies would benefit by examining addictive commodities beyond alcohol, nicotine, and money; examining temporal stability over longer time intervals; using larger delays in discounting tasks; and using larger sample sizes.

An apparatus and procedure for studying discounting of real outcomes of money and aversive sound

“…Findings tend to be consistent across research using real and hypothetical monetary rewards (Dixon et al, 2013;Johnson & Bickel, 2002;Lagorio & Madden, 2005;Locey et al, 2011;Madden et al, 2003;Madden et al, 2004;Matusiewicz et al, 2013). In general, real rewards are discounted similarly to hypothetical rewards (Miller et al, 2023; but see Green & Lawyer, 2014;Lawyer et al, 2022).…”

Delay discounting in individuals with anxiety and related disorders compared to healthy controls.

“…The discounting measures assessed choices for hypothetical monetary rewards. Although previous research suggests that discounting rates from hypothetical and incentivized discounting tasks are highly consistent (see review by Miller et al, 2023), this question has not been systematically examined in psychiatric populations. Finally, the sample sizes for some of the clinical groups were modest, and this may have contributed to constrained power to detect significant effects, particularly once smokers were excluded.…”

Adaptación de una tarea de descuento temporal con estímulos alimentarios

“…Para evaluar el DT comúnmente se presentan recompensas en pares de opciones que se entregan de inmediato o en un tiempo determinado en el futuro (Miller, Reed y Amlung, 2023), dichas recompensas pueden ser reales, potencialmente reales o hipotéticas (Scholten et al, 2019) y su objetivo es encontrar el punto de indiferencia o valor subjetivo, es decir el cambio de punto de elección del valor inmediato al retardado o viceversa (Miller et al, 2023). Con estos puntos de indiferencia se genera una curva con valores subjetivos para cada participante y se calcula una tasa de descuento que refleja el grado de impulsividad de quien resuelve la tarea (Escobar et al, 2023).…”