Parabolic discounting of monetary rewards by physical effort
Open accessAbstract
When humans and other animals make decisions in their natural environments prospective rewards have to be weighed against costs. It is well established that increasing costs lead to devaluation or discounting of reward. While our knowledge about discount functions for time and probability costs is quite advanced, little is known about how physical effort discounts reward. In the present study we compared three different models in a binary choice task in which human participants had to squeeze a handgrip to earn monetary rewards: a linear, a hyperbolic, and a parabolic model. On the group as well as the individual level, the concave parabolic model explained most variance of the choice data, thus contrasting with the typical hyperbolic discounting of reward value by delay. Research on effort discounting is not only important to basic science but also holds the potential to quantify aberrant motivational states in neuropsychiatric disorders.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
A parabolic function best accounts for participants' choice behaviour in the physical effort task.
“Our finding that a parabolic function best accounts for participants’ choice behaviour in the physical effort task is in keeping with previous observations [33].”
From Neurocomputational mechanisms underlying subjective valuation of effort costs (2017) · cites this paper as [33]
Perceived physical effort in constant-force tasks with a hand dynamometer increases parabolically as a function of the target force.
“In particular, perceived physical effort in constant-force tasks with a hand dynamometer has been shown to increase parabolically as a function of the target force (Stevens’ power law [33, 80]).”
From Neurocomputational mechanisms underlying subjective valuation of effort costs (2017) · cites this paper as [33]
Cites
Skinner, B. F., & Hull, C. L. (1944) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1416955 · Cited by 4,061 · see citing works
Stevens, S. S. (1957) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0046162 · Cited by 3,388 · see citing works
Back to Bentham? Explorations of Experienced Utility
Kahneman, D. J., Wakker, P. P., & Sarin, R. K. (1997) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355397555235 · Cited by 2,468 · see citing works
An adjusting procedure for studying delayed reinforcement.
Mazur, J. E. (1987) · doi:10.4324/9781315825502-11 · Cited by 2,189 · see citing works
A Note on Measurement of Utility
Samuelson, P. A. (1937) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.2307/2967612 · Cited by 2,140 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
Measures of impulsivity in cigarette smokers and non-smokers
Mitchell, S. H. (1999) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/pl00005491 · Cited by 911 · see citing works
DISCOUNTING OF DELAYED REWARDS: MODELS OF INDIVIDUAL CHOICE
Myerson, J., & Green, L. (1995) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1995.64-263 · Cited by 843 · see citing works
Bidding on the future: Evidence against normative discounting of delayed rewards.
Kirby, K. N. (1997) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.126.1.54 · Cited by 750 · see citing works
Treadway, M. T., Bossaller, N. A., Shelton, R. C., & Zald, D. H. (2012) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0028813 · Cited by 733 · see citing works
Negative Symptoms in Schizophrenia: Avolition and Occam's Razor
Foussias, G., & Remington, G. (2010) · Schizophrenia Bulletin · doi:10.1093/schbul/sbn094 · Cited by 594 · see citing works
Separate Valuation Subsystems for Delay and Effort Decision Costs
Prévost, C., Pessiglione, M., Météreau, E., Cléry-Melin, M.-L., & Dreher, J.-C. (2010) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.2752-10.2010 · Cited by 499 · see citing works
Dopaminergic and Glutamatergic Regulation of Effort- and Delay-Based Decision Making
Floresco, S., Tse, M., & Ghods-Sharifi, S. (2007) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/sj.npp.1301565 · Cited by 433 · see citing works
Negative Symptoms of Schizophrenia Are Associated with Abnormal Effort-Cost Computations
Gold, J. M., Strauss, G. P., Waltz, J. A., Robinson, B. M., Brown, J. K., & Frank, M. J. (2013) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2012.12.022 · Cited by 421 · see citing works
Rachlin, H. C. (2006) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.2006.85-05 · Cited by 379 · see citing works
Calculating utility: preclinical evidence for cost–benefit analysis by mesolimbic dopamine
Phillips, P. E. M., Walton, M. E., & Jhou, T. C. (2007) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-006-0626-6 · Cited by 237 · see citing works
Stevens, J. C., & Mack, J. D. (1959) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0046906 · Cited by 217 · see citing works
Mitchell, S. H. (2004) · Nicotine & Tobacco Research · doi:10.1080/14622200412331296002 · Cited by 190 · see citing works
Decision making and neuropsychiatry
Rahman, S., Sahakian, B. J., Cardinal, R. N., Rogers, R. D., & Robbins, T. W. (2001) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(00)01650-8 · Cited by 178 · see citing works
Neural integration of risk and effort costs by the frontal pole: only upon request
Burke, C. J., Brünger, C., Kahnt, T., Park, S. Q., & Tobler, P. N. (2013) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.3662-12.2013 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
Self-citationReformative self‐control and discounting of reward value by delay or effort1
Sugiwaka, H., & Okouchi, H. (2004) · Japanese Psychological Research · doi:10.1111/j.1468-5884.2004.00231.x · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Choice, Behavioural Economics and Addiction
(2003) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-044056-9.x5040-4 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Discounting the Value of Commodities According to Different Types of Cost
Mitchell, S. H. (2003) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-008044056-9/50053-1 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
AN ANALYSIS OF CONCEPTUAL STRATEGY IN LEARNING-PROCESS OF SHIFT LEARNING
MARUNO, S. (1975) · The Japanese journal of psychology · doi:10.4992/jjpsy.46.1 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Neurocomputational mechanisms underlying subjective valuation of effort costs
Chong, T. T.-J., Apps, M., Giehl, K., Sillence, A., Grima, L. L., & Husain, M. (2017) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002598 · Cited by 415 · see citing works
The anatomy of apathy: a neurocognitive framework for amotivated behaviour
Le Heron, C., Apps., M. A. J., & Husain, M. (2018) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.07.003 · Cited by 380 · see citing works
Hartmann, M. N., Hager, O. M., Reimann, A. V., Chumbley, J. R., Kirschner, M., Seifritz, E., Tobler, P. N., & Kaiser, S. (2015) · Schizophrenia Bulletin · doi:10.1093/schbul/sbu102 · Cited by 200 · see citing works
Self-citationSkvortsova, V., Palminteri, S., & Pessiglione, M. (2014) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.1350-14.2014 · Cited by 177 · see citing works
Klein-Flügge, M. C., Kennerley, S. W., Saraiva, A. C., Penny, W. D., & Bestmann, S. (2015) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004116 · Cited by 163 · see citing works
Individual Differences in Premotor Brain Systems Underlie Behavioral Apathy
Bonnelle, V., Manohar, S., Behrens, T., & Husain, M. (2015) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhv247 · Cited by 163 · see citing works
The role of cognitive effort in subjective reward devaluation and risky decision-making
Apps, M. A. J., Grima, L. L., Manohar, S., & Husain, M. (2015) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep16880 · Cited by 145 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hartmann, M. N., Hager, O. M., Tobler, P. N., & Kaiser, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Zurich (CH)
- Venue
- Behavioural Processes
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-11
- Volume
- 100
- Pages
- 192-196
- ISSN
- 0376-6357 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2031406936
- Cited by
- 169
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5
- FWCI
- 3.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- Locations
- Behavioural Processes (publishedVersion)
- Research portal (Tilburg University) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion)
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
- Funders
- Swiss National Science Foundation (PP00P1_128574, CRSII3_141965)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Keywords
- effort discounting, reward discounting, hyperbolic discounting, monetary rewards, handgrip force, binary choice task, delay discounting, probability discounting, decision-making, neuropsychiatric disorders
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Choice Behavior, Physical Exertion, Female, Humans, Male, Motivation, Prospective Studies, Reward, Hand Strength
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