The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A comparison of four models of delay discounting in humans
Open accessAbstract
The present study compared four prominent models of delay discounting: a one-parameter exponential decay, a one-parameter hyperbola (Mazur, 1987), a two-parameter hyperboloid in which the denominator is raised to a power (Green and Myerson, 2004), and a two-parameter hyperbola in which delay is raised to a power (Rachlin, 2006). Sixty-four college undergraduates made choices between hypothetical monetary rewards, one immediate and one delayed, and the fit of the four models to their data was assessed. All four equations accounted for a large proportion of the variance at both the group and the individual levels, but the exponents of both two-parameter models were significantly less than 1.0 at the group level, and frequently so at the individual level. Taken together, these results strongly suggest that more than one parameter is needed to accurately describe delay discounting by humans. Notably, both the Rachlin and the Green and Myerson models accounted for more than 99% of the variance at the group level and for 96% of the variance in the median individual. Because both models provide such good descriptions of the data, model selection will need to be based on other grounds.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Specious reward: A behavioral theory of impulsiveness and impulse control.
Ainslie, G. (1975) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0076860 · Cited by 2,708
A Discounting Framework for Choice With Delayed and Probabilistic Rewards.
Green, L., & Myerson, J. (2004) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.769 · Cited by 1,676
Self-citationON TWO TYPES OF DEVIATION FROM THE MATCHING LAW: BIAS AND UNDERMATCHING 1
Baum, W. M. (1974) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1974.22-231 · Cited by 1,460
SUBJECTIVE PROBABILITY AND DELAY
Rachlin, H., Raineri, A., & Cross, D. (1991) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1991.55-233 · Cited by 1,341
Discounting of Delayed Rewards: A Life-Span Comparison
Green, L., Fry, A. F., & Myerson, J. (1994) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00610.x · Cited by 1,165
Self-citationPreference Reversals Due to Myopic Discounting of Delayed Reward
Kirby, K. N., & Herrnstein, R. J. (1995) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1995.tb00311.x · Cited by 591
Cited by
Inhibition and impulsivity: behavioral and neural basis of response control
Bari, A., & Robbins, T. W. (2013) · Progress in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2013.06.005 · Cited by 1,921
The neural mechanisms of inter-temporal decision-making: understanding variability
Peters, J., & Büchel, C. (2011) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2011.03.002 · Cited by 693
Bickel, W. K., Jarmolowicz, D. P., Mueller, E. T., Koffarnus, M. N., & Gatchalian, K. M. (2012) · Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1016/j.pharmthera.2012.02.004 · Cited by 604
Rung, J. M., & Madden, G. J. (2018) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/xge0000462 · Cited by 358
TOWARDS A GENERAL MODEL OF TEMPORAL DISCOUNTING
van den Bos, W., & McClure, S. M. (2013) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1002/jeab.6 · Cited by 149
Metadata
- Authors
- McKerchar, T. L., Green, L., Myerson, J., Pickford, T. S., Hill, J. C., & Stout, S. C.
- Venue
- Behavioural Processes
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-06
- Volume
- 81
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 256-259
- ISSN
- 0376-6357 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1968063097
- Cited by
- 246
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 3.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A comparison of four models of delay discounting in humans. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.beproc.2008.12.017
- The paper
- McKerchar, T. L., Green, L., Myerson, J., Pickford, T. S., Hill, J. C., & Stout, S. C. (2009). A comparison of four models of delay discounting in humans. Behavioural Processes. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2008.12.017
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.