The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Fragility of Time: Time-Insensitivity and Valuation of the Near and Far Future
Abstract
We propose that the temporal dimension is fragile in that choices are insufficiently sensitive to it, and second, such sensitivity as exists is exceptionally malleable, unlike other dimensions such as money, which are attended by default. To test this, we axiomatize a “constant-sensitivity” discount function, and in four studies, we show that the degree of time-sensitivity is inadequate relative to the compound discounting norm, and strongly susceptible to manipulation. Time-sensitivity is increased by a comparative within-subject presentation (Experiment 1), direct instruction (Experiment 3), and provision of a visual cue for time duration (Experiment 4); time-sensitivity is decreased using a time pressure manipulation (Experiment 2). In each study, the sensitivity manipulation has an opposite effect on near-future and far-future valuations: Increased sensitivity decreases discounting in the near future and increases discounting in the far future. In contrast, such sensitivity manipulations have little effect on the money dimension.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“Ebert and Prelec (2007) found that manipulations of time sensitivity affected the valuation of near-future and far-future rewards differently.”
From Individual Differences in Delay Discounting Under Acute Stress: The Role of Trait Perceived Stress (2012) · cites this paper as Ebert and Prelec (2007)
Citations
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810
Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting
Laibson, D. (1997) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355397555253 · Cited by 6,122
Duration neglect in retrospective evaluations of affective episodes.
Fredrickson, B. L., & Kahneman, D. (1993) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.65.1.45 · Cited by 1,228
Redelmeier, D. A., & Kahneman, D. (1996) · Pain · doi:10.1016/0304-3959(96)02994-6 · Cited by 1,078
Research works printed but not linked: 46
- 10.1037/0022-3514.75.2.347 · DOI
- 10.1017/CBO9781139164191 · DOI
- Ainslie G., 1983, Etiology Aspects of Alcohol and Drug Abuse, 119
- Ainslie G., 1992, Choice Over Time, 57
- 10.1016/S0376-6357(03)00150-5 · DOI
- 10.1037/0096-3445.129.4.508 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03209393 · DOI
- Chaiken S., 1999, Dual Process Theories in Social Psychology
- 10.1177/0272989X9901900309 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF01673482 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0001-6918(01)00033-6 · DOI
- 10.2307/2526382 · DOI
- 10.1257/jel.40.2.351 · DOI
- Frederickson B. L., 1993, J. Personality Soc. Psych., 65, 44
- 10.1017/CBO9780511808098.011 · DOI
- 10.1017/CBO9780511808098 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03213979 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03211314 · DOI
- 10.1086/208721 · DOI
- Green P. E., 1975, Harvard Bus. Rev., 107
- 10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1128 · DOI
- 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199803)7:2<121::AID-HEC318>3.0.CO;2-H · DOI
- 10.1006/obhd.1996.0077 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-2909.99.3.422 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1006/obhd.1995.1080 · DOI
- 10.1037/0096-3445.126.1.54 · DOI
- 10.1006/obhd.1995.1086 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.5 · DOI
- 10.2307/2232929 · DOI
- 10.1287/mnsc.34.2.200 · DOI
- Loewenstein G. F., 1992, Choice Over Time, 3
- Loewenstein G. F., 1991, Amer. Econom. Rev., 81, 347
- 10.1006/jmps.1999.1301 · DOI
- 10.2307/2998573 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.0347-0520.2004.00375.x · DOI
- 10.1287/mnsc.37.7.770 · DOI
- 10.1901/jeab.1991.55-233 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1023/A:1011198414683 · DOI
- Rosenthal R., 1991, Essentials of Behavioral Research: Methods and Data Analysis
- Senior N. W., 1836, An Outline of the Science of Political Economy
- 10.1287/mnsc.39.7.806 · DOI
- 10.1002/bdm.370 · DOI
- 10.1016/0167-4870(93)90012-A · DOI
- 10.1016/0165-1765(81)90067-7 · DOI
- 10.1002/bdm.3960050303 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03209465 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Malleability of Intertemporal Choice
Lempert, K. M., & Phelps, E. A. (2016) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2015.09.005 · Cited by 207
van den Bos, W., Rodriguez, C. A., Schweitzer, J. B., & McClure, S. M. (2014) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.4105-13.2014 · Cited by 178
Behavioral trainings and manipulations to reduce delay discounting: A systematic review
Scholten, H., Scheres, A., de Water, E., Graf, U., Granic, I., & Luijten, M. (2019) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-019-01629-2 · Cited by 135
Individual Differences in Delay Discounting Under Acute Stress: The Role of Trait Perceived Stress
Lempert, K. M., Porcelli, A. J., Delgado, M. R., & Tricomi, E. (2012) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00251 · Cited by 112
Mechanisms of impulsive choice: I. Individual differences in interval timing and reward processing
Marshall, A. T., Smith, A. P., & Kirkpatrick, K. (2014) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1002/jeab.88 · Cited by 75
Metadata
- Authors
- Ebert, J. E. J., & Prelec, D.
- Affiliations
- Department of Marketing and Logistics, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
- Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 2007-09
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1423-1438
- ISSN
- 0025-1909
- 1526-5501
- Cited by
- 219
- References
- 5
- Language
- en
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