Cited by 90Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis

The effects of the framing of time on delay discounting

Open access
DeHart, William Brady, Odum, Amy L.·2015·Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

Abstract

We examined the effects of the framing of time on delay discounting. Delay discounting is the process by which delayed outcomes are devalued as a function of time. Time in a titrating delay discounting task is often framed in calendar units (e.g., as 1 week, 1 month, etc.). When time is framed as a specific date, delayed outcomes are discounted less compared to the calendar format. Other forms of framing time; however, have not been explored. All participants completed a titrating calendar unit delay‐discounting task for money. Participants were also assigned to one of two delay discounting tasks: time as dates (e.g., June 1 st , 2015) or time in units of days (e.g., 5000 days), using the same delay distribution as the calendar delay‐discounting task. Time framed as dates resulted in less discounting compared to the calendar method, whereas time framed as days resulted in greater discounting compared to the calendar method. The hyperboloid model fit best compared to the hyperbola and exponential models. How time is framed may alter how participants attend to the delays as well as how the delayed outcome is valued. Altering how time is framed may serve to improve adherence to goals with delayed outcomes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jeab.125

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Murphy JG Vuchinich RE Simpson CA 2001 Delayed reward and cost discounting The Psychological Record 51 571 588 10.3386/w6410 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
DeHart, W. B., & Odum, A. L.
Affiliations
Utah State University (US)
Corresponding author
DeHart, William Brady
Venue
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-12-18
Volume
103
Issue
1
Pages
10-21
ISSN
  • 0022-5002 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-3711
OpenAlex
W1501926725
Cited by
90
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6
FWCI
3.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (RO1DA029100)
  • Utah State Department Of Psychology
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Financial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Keywords
delay discounting, temporal framing, hyperboloid model, hyperbolic discounting, exponential discounting, long-term outcomes, goal adherence
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Male, Models, Psychological, Reward, Time Factors, Time Perception, Young Adult, Delay Discounting

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review