CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 65Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

Changing Delay Discounting and Impulsive Choice: Implications for Addictions, Prevention, and Human Health

Open access
Rung, Jillian M., Peck, Sara, Hinnenkamp, Jay E., Preston, Emma, Madden, Gregory J.·2019·Perspectives on Behavior Science
DOI 10.1007/s40614-019-00200-7PMC PMC6768935
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Delay discounting describes the tendency to devalue delayed consequences or future prospects. The degree to which an individual discounts delayed events appears trait-like in that it is stable over time and across functionally similar situations. Steeply discounting delayed rewards is correlated with most substance-use disorders, the severity of these disorders, rates of relapse to drug use, and a host of other maladaptive decisions impacting human health. Longitudinal data suggest steep delay discounting and high levels of impulsive choice are predictive of subsequent drug taking, which suggests (though does not establish) that reducing delay discounting could have a preventive health-promoting effect. Experimental manipulations that produce momentary or long-lasting reductions in delay discounting or impulsive choice are reviewed, and behavioral mechanisms that may underlie these effects are discussed. Shortcomings of each manipulation technique are discussed and areas for future research are identified. While much work remains, it is clear that impulsive decision-making can be reduced, despite its otherwise trait-like qualities. Such findings invite technique refinement, translational research, and hope.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This narrative review argues that delay discounting is trait-like and correlated with addictions and other maladaptive health behaviors, but experimental manipulations can produce momentary or lasting reductions in impulsive choice. It reviews framing, episodic future thinking, nature exposure, timing interventions, delay fading, and delay-exposure training, and calls for translational prevention research.

Key findings

  • Steep delay discounting is correlated with most substance-use disorders, disorder severity, relapse, and other maladaptive health decisions; longitudinal data suggest it predicts subsequent drug taking. In one cited machine-learning study, delay discounting was “the single best predictor of group CBT treatment response,” correctly predicting smoking status for 69.5% of a training cohort and 76.4% of a validation cohort.
  • Momentary manipulations can reduce delay discounting: explicit-zero framing and date framing produce medium-to-large reductions, episodic future thinking reduces discounting and can reduce cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption, and calorie intake, and brief nature exposure produces medium-to-large reductions.
  • Lasting reductions have been shown in nonhuman work: timing interventions produce moderate effects lasting at least 9 months, delay fading reduces impulsive choice in pigeons and humans, and delay-exposure training in male rats produces very large reductions (median Hedges g = 2.00), maintained at 2- and 4-month follow-ups.
  • The Preschool Life Skills delay-tolerance component increased successful waiting to more than 80% of test trials after about 13 trials per child over four days, and problem behavior during the delay decreased by 74%.

Methods

  • Design: narrative review of experimental manipulations of delay discounting and impulsive choice, with discussion of behavioral mechanisms and translational implications.
  • Data: published human and nonhuman studies, including prior meta-analyses and recent studies on framing, episodic future thinking, nature exposure, timing interventions, delay fading, and delay-exposure training.
  • Analysis: qualitative synthesis of effect directions and sizes; no new primary data are reported.

Limitations

  • The paper states that evidence linking delay discounting to addictions remains correlational and third-variable accounts remain tenable; causal relations require experimental manipulation and mediation testing.
  • The paper states that mechanisms of change are often unclear, including for timing interventions, delay fading, and delay-exposure training; delay-exposure replications were all from the same lab and only in male rats.
  • The paper states that translational work must address replication, preregistration, adequate power, long-term duration, and generalization; long-term outcomes are infrequently assessed in humans. Evident from the text: the review is explicitly an “incomplete list” rather than a systematic review.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40614-019-00200-7

Cites

142 of 142 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 135 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingcitation

    A completed experiment demonstrated that lasting reductions in rats' impulsive choice could be achieved by bundling training.

    “At the same time, we completed an experiment demonstrating that lasting reductions in rats’ impulsive choice could be achieved by providing them with “bundling training” (Stein, Smits, Johnson, Liston, & Madden, 2013).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Stein et al., 2013 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingown data

    In a follow-up study that switched reward locations mid-session to reduce side-bias, very few rats maintained preference for the larger-later reward.

    “Under this arrangement, very few rats maintained preference for the LLR.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingcitation

    In the delay-exposure experiment, rats given delay-exposure training made far fewer impulsive choices than no-delay rats when choosing between one pellet immediately and three pellets after a 15-s delay.

    “When rats subsequently chose between one pellet immediately and three pellets following a 15-s delay, delay-exposure rats made far fewer impulsive choices than did rats in the no-delay group.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Stein et al., 2013 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingcitation

    The delay-exposure effect was not due to increased impulsive choice in the no-delay comparison group.

    “the effect was not due to increased impulsive choice in the no-delay comparison group (Renda, Rung, Hinnenkamp, Lenzini, & Madden, 2018)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Renda et al., 2018

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingcitation

    The impulsivity-reducing effect of delay-exposure training was obtained in a different strain of rats.

    “the impulsivity-reducing effect of delay-exposure training could be obtained in a different strain of rats (Renda & Madden, 2016)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Renda & Madden, 2016

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims. 21
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 2
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 8

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In an unpublished lab experiment, all rats maintained preference for the larger-later reward as the delay to the smaller reward was gradually faded out, but almost none continued to choose the larger-later reward when lever assignments were reversed.

    “Although all of the rats maintained their preference for the LLR as the delay to the SSR was gradually faded out, almost none of the rats continued to choose the LLR when the lever assignments were reversed.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Post-experiment analysis showed that the efficacy of reward bundling during training did not predict post-training reductions in impulsive choice; instead, exposure to delays correlated with those reductions.

    “a post-experiment analysis of the hypothesized mechanism of behavior change revealed that the efficacy of reward bundling during training did not predict post-training reductions in impulsive choice. Instead, what correlated with reductions in impulsive choice was, quite simply, exposure to delays”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Delay-exposure training significantly reduced impulsive choice, but the trained rats were no more precise in timing than more-impulsive comparison groups, and timing precision was not correlated with impulsive choice.

    “Although delay-exposure training significantly reduced impulsive choice, these rats were no more precise in their timing than the more-impulsive comparison groups; indeed, timing precision was not correlated with impulsive choice.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rung et al., 2018

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premiseown data

    Other measures such as memory, locus of control, and Fagerström nicotine-dependence scores improved smoking predictions very little in the training cohort or not at all in the validation cohort.

    “Other measures (e.g., memory, locus of control, scores on the Fagerström test of nicotine dependence) either improved these predictions very little (training cohort), or not at all (validation cohort).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Coughlin et al., 2018

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Premisecitation

    Pre-treatment discount rates correctly predicted smoking status for 69.5% of the training cohort and 76.4% of the validation cohort.

    “Pre-treatment discount rates correctly predicted the smoking status of 69.5% of the participants in the training cohort”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Coughlin et al., 2018

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Longitudinal studies indicate that steep delay discounting precedes and predicts human drug use, lower rates of drug abstinence, and greater relapse during treatment.

    “Longitudinal studies suggest that steep delay discounting precedes and predicts human drug use”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Audrain-McGovern et al., 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Coughlin et al., 2018

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites MacKillop & Kahler, 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Premisecitation

    Individual differences in how steeply larger-later rewards are discounted correlate robustly with the incidence and severity of problem substance use and with other maladaptive health decisions.

    “Consistent with this conceptual analysis, individual differences in how steeply LLRs are discounted robustly correlates with the incidence and severity of problem substance use”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Bickel et al., 1999 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Madden et al., 1997 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Amlung et al., 2017 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Steep discounting of delayed rewards is correlated with most substance-use disorders, their severity, relapse to drug use, and many other maladaptive health-related decisions.

    “Steeply discounting delayed rewards is correlated with most substance-use disorders, the severity of these disorders, rates of relapse to drug use, and a host of other maladaptive decisions impacting human health.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Amlung et al., 2017 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites MacKillop et al., 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Experimental manipulations can reduce delay discounting and impulsive choice, and some manipulations can increase them.

    “Ample evidence reveals that experimental manipulations can reduce delay discounting and impulsive choice (for reviews see Koffarnus, Jarmolowicz, Mueller, & Bickel, 2013; Rung & Madden, 2018a) or increase it (e.g., Van den Bergh, Dewitte, & Warlop, 2008).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Koffarnus et al., 2013

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Rung & Madden, 2018a

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Van den Bergh et al., 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The evidence linking delay discounting to addictions remains correlational, and third-variable explanations remain tenable.

    “it is important to note that the evidence for a relation between delay discounting and addictions remains correlational; third-variable accounts remain tenable”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Levin et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisereasoning

    A causal relation can be established only by experimentally manipulating delay discounting, monitoring potential mediators, and evaluating the effects of that manipulation on later addictive behavior.

    “A causal relation can be established only by experimentally manipulating delay discounting, monitoring potential mediators, and evaluating the effects of this manipulation on subsequent addictive behavior.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Discounting rates vary across commodities, but people who steeply discount one commodity tend also to steeply discount another.

    “although discounting rates varied across commodities (e.g., steeper discounting of delayed food relative to delayed money), those who steeply discounted one commodity tended also to steeply discount the other one”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Odum, 2011b

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Bickel et al., 2012 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Friedel et al., 2014 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    McClure et al. concluded that the relation between timing precision and delay discounting in rats was due to a third variable correlated with both measures.

    “When McClure et al. (2014) reported a significant relation between timing precision and delay discounting in rats, the complete profile of their data led them to conclude that this relation was due to a third variable correlated with these two dependent measures.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites McClure et al., 2014 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Repeated exposure to nature has known health benefits.

    “Repeated exposure to nature has known health benefits (e.g., Li et al., 2008)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Li et al., 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Imprecision in interval timing is correlated with impulsive choice and with delay discounting.

    “The empirical observation that imprecision in interval timing is correlated with impulsive choice (Darcheville, Rivière, & Wearden, 1992; Marshall, Smith, & Kirkpatrick, 2014) and delay discounting (McClure, Podos, & Richardson, 2014)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Darcheville et al., 1992 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Marshall et al., 2014 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites McClure et al., 2014 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Long-term nature exposure coincides with reduced delay discounting, and that reduction coincides with decision-making that improves health.

    “That is, long-term nature exposure coincides with reduced delay discounting and this reduction coincides with decision-making that improves health.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Repke et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Smith et al. reported that interval-schedule training improved timing precision, but other studies did not replicate this improvement.

    “Although Smith et al. (2015) reported that training rats with interval schedules of reinforcement improved timing precision, other studies have not replicated this effect (Peterson & Kirkpatrick, 2016; Stuebing et al., 2018; Fox et al., 2018).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Smith et al., 2015 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Peterson & Kirkpatrick, 2016

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Stuebing et al., 2018

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Several studies found no significant relation between naturally occurring timing precision and impulsive choice, and post-intervention findings on their relation are mixed.

    “several studies have found no significant relation between these variables as they naturally occur (Peterson & Kirkpatrick, 2016; Rung, Buhusi, & Madden, 2018), and post-intervention the significance of their relation is mixed (e.g., Peterson & Kirkpatrick, 2016; cf. Fox et al., 2018).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Peterson & Kirkpatrick, 2016

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Rung et al., 2018

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Fox et al., 2018

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Delay-exposure training and timing training are two procedures that produce large and lasting reductions in impulsive choice in male rats.

    “Delay-exposure training offers one procedure for producing large and lasting reductions in impulsive choice in male rats, timing-training offers another.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Failures of generalization are common and should be planned for in the design of any widely used intervention.

    “Failures of generalization are common and should be planned for in the design of any widely used intervention (Lovaas, Koegel, Simmons, & Long, 1973; Stokes & Baer, 1977).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Lovaas et al., 1973 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Stokes & Baer, 1977 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Daniel et al. (2015) found that EFT lowered delay discounting and energy intake among 9-14 year-old children in a laboratory setting.

    “Daniel et al. (2015) demonstrated that EFT could reduce delay discounting and energy intake in 9–14 year-old children in the lab”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Daniel et al. (2015) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Early delay-discounting research was largely correlational, though that situation is shifting.

    “Much of the early work in delay discounting was correlational but that is changing.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The reviewed methods do not yet amount to a full technology of behavior.

    “It should be clear from this review that these techniques fall short of a “technology of behavior.””
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The delay-exposure replications have all been conducted in the same laboratory and only with male rats, so replication in other laboratories, species, and females is unknown.

    “A shortcoming of these replications is that they have all been conducted in the same lab and only with male rats. Whether these effects could be replicated in other labs, with other species, and in females is unknown.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    More attention is now given to longitudinal studies of discounting as an antecedent of addiction and to experiments aiming to lower discounting and impulsive choice.

    “There is greater interest in longitudinal research evaluating discounting as a precursor to addictions, and experimental work designed to reduce delay discounting and impulsive choice.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisenone given

    Currently, researchers show reduced interest in repeating the result that steep discounting correlates with addictions.

    “Today there is less interest in replicating the finding that steep delay discounting is correlated with addictions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
26 of 26

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Impulsive choice and human conduct more broadly are taken to contribute to climate change, obesity, and opioid problems.

    “we recognize the role of human behavior in general, and impulsive choice in particular. Reducing the extent to which individuals discount the value of delayed outcomes holds promise in influencing the many small choices that contribute to these crises.”
1 of 1

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 143 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Rachlin, H. (1989). Judgment, decision and choice. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Rung, J. M., Peck, S., Hinnenkamp, J. E., Preston, E., & Madden, G. J.
Affiliations
  • University at Buffalo, State University of New York (US)
  • Utah State University (US)
Corresponding author
Rung, Jillian M.
ORCID
Venue
Perspectives on Behavior Science
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2019-05-09
Volume
42
Issue
3
Pages
397-417
ISSN
  • 2520-8969 (ISSN-L)
  • 2520-8977
DOI
10.1007/s40614-019-00200-7
PMC
PMC6768935
OpenAlex
W2944765522
Cited by
65
References
143
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 1
FWCI
25.78
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Perspectives on Behavior Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (R21 DA042174-01 and R03 DA044927-01)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
delay discounting, impulsive choice, impulsivity, substance use disorders, relapse, addiction prevention, delayed rewards, decision-making, trait stability, behavioral interventions, drug use

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-09.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-09.

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