Within-subject Comparison of Degree of Delay Discounting Using Titrating and Fixed Sequence Procedures

Overview

Journal Behav Processes

Specialty Social Sciences

Date 2010 Oct 12

PMID 20932882

Citations 27

Authors

Katrina Rodzon

Meredith S Berry

Amy L Odum

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Different procedures are often used across experiments to estimate the degree of delay discounting, a common measure of impulsivity. In all procedures, participants indicate their choice between a reward available immediately and one available after a delay. The present experiment determined whether there are differences in the degree of discounting for a hypothetical $100 produced by a procedure that titrates the immediate amount (titrating sequence procedure) versus a procedure that presents a fixed sequence of immediate amounts (fixed sequence procedure) using a within-subject design. The adult human participants showed no significant differences in degree of discounting between procedures as assessed by a hyperboloid model and the Area Under the Curve. Furthermore, the Area Under the Curve values from the two procedures showed a strong positive correlation. These findings suggest there may be no systematic difference between the degree of delay discounting as estimated by the titrating sequence and fixed sequence procedures. Given the apparent similarities in the results, it appears researchers may be justified in basing their choice of which procedure to use on convenience.

Citing Articles

Recent Experience Affects Delay Discounting: Evidence across Temporal Framing, Signs, and Magnitudes.

Willis-Moore M, Haynes J, Frye C, Johnson H, Cousins D, Bamfo H Perspect Behav Sci. 2024; 47(2):365-392.

PMID: 39099743 PMC: 11294302. DOI: 10.1007/s40614-024-00412-6.

Associations Between Reward and Future-Related Orientations and General and Specific Mental Health Issues in Adolescence.

Yang Y, Zhu X, Auyeung B, Obsuth I, Murray A Res Child Adolesc Psychopathol. 2023; 52(3):385-397.

PMID: 37804397 PMC: 10896876. DOI: 10.1007/s10802-023-01136-y.

Association between mental health symptoms and behavioral performance in younger vs. older online workers.

Mills-Finnerty C, Staggs H, Hogoboom N, Naparstek S, Harvey T, Beaudreau S Front Psychiatry. 2023; 14:995445.

PMID: 37065893 PMC: 10090330. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.995445.

Model-based experimental manipulation of probabilistic behavior in interpretable behavioral latent variable models.

Thome J, Pinger M, Durstewitz D, Sommer W, Kirsch P, Koppe G Front Neurosci. 2023; 16:1077735.

PMID: 36699538 PMC: 9868576. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2022.1077735.

Spending Time in Nature Serves as a Protective Factor against Problematic Alcohol Use: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach.

Almog S, Scaglione N, Cheong J, Rung J, Vasquez Ferreiro A, Berry M Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19(20).

PMID: 36293937 PMC: 9603149. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192013356.

References

Madden G, Begotka A, Raiff B, Kastern L . Delay discounting of real and hypothetical rewards. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2003; 11(2):139-45. DOI: 10.1037/1064-1297.11.2.139. View

Jones B, Rachlin H . Delay, probability, and social discounting in a public goods game. J Exp Anal Behav. 2009; 91(1):61-73. PMC: 2614818. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2009.91-61. View

Rachlin H, Green L . Commitment, choice and self-control. J Exp Anal Behav. 1972; 17(1):15-22. PMC: 1333886. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1972.17-15. View

Odum A, Baumann A . Cigarette smokers show steeper discounting of both food and cigarettes than money. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2007; 91(2-3):293-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2007.07.004. View

Myerson J, Green L, Warusawitharana M . Area under the curve as a measure of discounting. J Exp Anal Behav. 2001; 76(2):235-43. PMC: 1284836. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2001.76-235. View

Robles E, Vargas P . Parameters of delay discounting assessment: number of trials, effort, and sequential effects. Behav Processes. 2008; 78(2):285-90. DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2007.10.012. View

Rachlin H . Notes on discounting. J Exp Anal Behav. 2006; 85(3):425-35. PMC: 1459845. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2006.85-05. View

Robles E, Vargas P . Functional parameters of delay discounting assessment tasks: order of presentation. Behav Processes. 2007; 75(2):237-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2007.02.014. View

Green L, Myerson J, McFadden E . Rate of temporal discounting decreases with amount of reward. Mem Cognit. 1997; 25(5):715-23. DOI: 10.3758/bf03211314. View

10.

Madden G, Bickel W, Jacobs E . Discounting of delayed rewards in opioid-dependent outpatients: exponential or hyperbolic discounting functions?. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 1999; 7(3):284-93. DOI: 10.1037//1064-1297.7.3.284. View

11.

Madden G, Petry N, Badger G, Bickel W . Impulsive and self-control choices in opioid-dependent patients and non-drug-using control participants: drug and monetary rewards. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 1997; 5(3):256-62. DOI: 10.1037//1064-1297.5.3.256. View

12.

Rodriguez M, Logue A . Adjusting delay to reinforcement: comparing choice in pigeons and humans. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1988; 14(1):105-17. View

13.

Rachlin H, Raineri A, Cross D . Subjective probability and delay. J Exp Anal Behav. 1991; 55(2):233-44. PMC: 1323057. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1991.55-233. View

14.

Mazur J, Biondi D . Delay-amount tradeoffs in choices by pigeons and rats: hyperbolic versus exponential discounting. J Exp Anal Behav. 2009; 91(2):197-211. PMC: 2648524. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2009.91-197. View

15.

Freeman K, Green L, Myerson J, Woolverton W . Delay discounting of saccharin in rhesus monkeys. Behav Processes. 2009; 82(2):214-8. PMC: 2728786. DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2009.06.002. View

16.

Richards J, Mitchell S, de Wit H, Seiden L . Determination of discount functions in rats with an adjusting-amount procedure. J Exp Anal Behav. 1997; 67(3):353-66. PMC: 1284611. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1997.67-353. View

17.

Odum A, Madden G, Badger G, Bickel W . Needle sharing in opioid-dependent outpatients: psychological processes underlying risk. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2000; 60(3):259-66. DOI: 10.1016/s0376-8716(00)00111-3. View

18.

Robles E, Vargas P, Bejarano R . Within-subject differences in degree of delay discounting as a function of order of presentation of hypothetical cash rewards. Behav Processes. 2009; 81(2):260-3. DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2009.02.018. View

19.

Odum A, Rainaud C . Discounting of delayed hypothetical money, alcohol, and food. Behav Processes. 2003; 64(3):305-313. DOI: 10.1016/s0376-6357(03)00145-1. View

20.

Odum A, Baumann A, Rimington D . Discounting of delayed hypothetical money and food: effects of amount. Behav Processes. 2006; 73(3):278-84. DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2006.06.008. View