Cited by 44Schizophrenia research and treatmentDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Steeper discounting of delayed rewards in schizophrenia but not first-degree relatives

Open access
Yu, Linda Q., Lee, Sangil, Katchmar, Natalie, Satterthwaite, Theodore D., Kable, Joseph W., Wolf, Daniel H.·2017·Psychiatry Research

Abstract

Excessive discounting of future rewards has been related to a variety of risky behaviors and adverse clinical conditions. Prior work examining delay discounting in schizophrenia suggests an elevated discount rate. However, it remains uncertain whether this reflects the disease process itself or an underlying genetic vulnerability, whether it is selective for delay discounting or reflects pervasive changes in decision-making, and whether it is driven by specific clinical dimensions such as cognitive impairment. Here we investigated delay discounting, as well as loss aversion and risk aversion, in three groups: schizophrenia (SZ), unaffected first-degree family members (FM), and controls without a family history of psychosis (NC). SZ had elevated discounting, without changes in loss aversion or risk aversion. Contrary to expectations, the FM group did not show an intermediate phenotype in discounting. Higher discount rates correlated with lower cognitive performance on verbal reasoning, but this did not explain elevated discount rates in SZ. Group differences were driven primarily by the non-smoking majority of the sample. This study provides further evidence for elevated discounting in schizophrenia, and demonstrates that steeper discounting is not necessarily associated with familial risk, cannot be wholly accounted for by cognitive deficits, and is not attributable to smoking-related impulsivity.

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 · 10.1016/j.psychres.2017.02.062

Cites

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?

  • The choice set used to measure discount rates was widely adopted and designed to capture a broad range of discount rates.

    “We used a widely adopted choice set designed to capture a broad range of discount rates31–37.”

    From Temporal discounting predicts procrastination in the real world (2024) · cites this paper as [33]

    Methods §2.3 describes a 51-choice task used to measure discount rates, with varying reward amounts and delays, and says it resembles an earlier questionnaire. Methods §2.4.2 explains how discount rates were estimated from those choices. The copy does not say the choice set was widely adopted or specifically designed to capture a broad range of discount rates; page numbers are unavailable. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 69 · Cited by 44

Authors
Yu, L. Q., Lee, S., Katchmar, N., Satterthwaite, T. D., Kable, J. W., & Wolf, D. H.
Affiliations
University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Yu, Linda Q.
Venue
Psychiatry Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-06
Volume
252
Pages
303-309
ISSN
0165-1781 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2593497555
Cited by
44
References
69
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1
FWCI
4.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychiatry Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Mental Health (R01MH101111, R01MH107703, K23MH085096, K23MH098130)
  • Brain and Behavior Research Foundation
  • Penn Medicine Neuroscience Center
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
delay discounting, schizophrenia, loss aversion, risk aversion, cognitive impairment, verbal reasoning, smoking, impulsivity, genetic susceptibility, decision-making
MeSH terms
Adult, Family, Female, Humans, Male, Reward, Risk-Taking, Schizophrenia, Schizophrenic Psychology, Case-Control Studies, Cognitive Dysfunction, 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