Cited by 358Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesBehavioral Health and Interventions

Experimental reductions of delay discounting and impulsive choice: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Open access
Rung, Jillian M., Madden, Gregory J.·2018·Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Abstract

Many behaviors posing significant risks to public health are characterized by repeated decisions to forego better long-term outcomes in the face of immediate temptations. Steeply discounting the value of delayed outcomes often underlies a pattern of impulsive choice. Steep delay discounting is correlated with addictions (e.g., substance abuse, obesity) and behaviors such as seatbelt use and risky sexual activity. As evidence accumulates suggesting steep delay discounting plays a causal role in these maladaptive behaviors, researchers have begun testing methods for reducing discounting. In this first systematic and comprehensive review of this literature, the findings of 92 articles employing different methodologies to reduce discounting are evaluated narratively and meta-analytically. Although most of the methods reviewed produced significant reductions in discounting, they varied in effect sizes. Most methods were ideal for influencing one-off choices (e.g., framing and priming manipulations), although other successful manipulations, such as episodic future thinking, could be incorporated into existing therapies designed to produce longer-lasting changes in decision-making. The largest and longest-lasting effects were produced by learning-based manipulations, although translational research is needed to determine the generality and clinical utility of these methods. Methodological shortcomings in the existing literature and suggestions for ameliorating these issues are discussed. This review reveals a variety of methods with translational potential, which, through continued refinement, may prove effective in reducing impulsive choice and its associated maladaptive decisions that negatively impact quality of life. (PsycINFO Database Record

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 · 10.1037/xge0000462

Cites

214 of 214 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?

  • The most promising ways to lower discount rates are episodic future thinking and mindfulness-based training/acceptance-based training.

    “The most promising ways to lower discount rates are episodic future thinking and mindfulness-based training/acceptance-based training48,49.”

    From Temporal discounting predicts procrastination in the real world (2024) · cites this paper as [48]

    The Results section on episodic future thinking reports sizeable, significant reductions in delay discounting. The Results section on clinical interventions says mindfulness-based approaches, including acceptance-based therapy, produced a reduction that only approached significance; the acceptance-based study's between-group difference was not significant. The paper therefore supports episodic future thinking but does not establish mindfulness- or acceptance-based training as among the most promising ways to lower discount rates. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Benoit RG Gilbert SJ Burgess PW 2011b A neural mechanism mediating the impact of episodic prospection on farsighted decisions The Journal of Neuroscience 31 18 6771 6779 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.6559-10.2011 21543607 PMC6632845 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Logue AW Mazur J 1981 Maintenance of self-control acquired through a fading procedure: follow-up on Mazur and Logue (1978) BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS LETTERS 1 131 137
  3. Thaler RH Benartzi S 2004 Save More Tomorrow ™: Using Behavioral Economics to Increase Employee Saving Save More Tomorrow: Using Behavioral Economics to Increase Employee Saving Shlomo Benartzi Journal of Political Economy 112 February 2004 S164 S187

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rung, J. M., & Madden, G. J.
Affiliations
Utah State University (US)
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
Published
2018-09
Volume
147
Issue
9
Pages
1349-1381
ISSN
  • 0096-3445 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2222
OpenAlex
W2889331490
Cited by
358
References
214
Citations by year
2026: 41 · 2025: 56 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 4
FWCI
25.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Psychology General (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (R21 DA042174)
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 › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
delay discounting, impulsive choice, impulsivity, decision-making, addiction, substance abuse, obesity, sexual risk behavior, seat belt use, framing effects, priming, episodic future thinking, long-term outcomes, public health behavior
MeSH terms
Choice Behavior, Humans, Impulsive Behavior, Public Health, Risk-Taking, 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