Cited by 83Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsExperimental Behavioral Economics StudiesFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis

The Value of Nothing: Asymmetric Attention to Opportunity Costs Drives Intertemporal Decision Making

Open access
Read, Daniel, Olivola, Christopher Y., Hardisty, David J.·2017·Management Science

Abstract

This paper proposes a novel account of impatience: People pay more attention to the opportunity costs of choosing larger, later rewards than to the opportunity costs of choosing smaller, sooner ones. Eight studies show that when the opportunity costs of choosing smaller, sooner rewards are subtly highlighted, people become more patient, whereas when the opportunity costs of choosing larger, later rewards are highlighted this has no effect. This pattern is robust to variations in the choice task, to the participant population, and to whether the choices are incentivized or hypothetical. We argue that people are naturally aware of the opportunity costs of delayed rewards but pay less attention to those associated with smaller, sooner ones. We conclude by discussing implications for theory and policy. Data, as supplemental material, are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2547 . This paper was accepted by Yuval Rottenstreich, judgment and decision making.

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 · 10.1287/mnsc.2016.2547

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?

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 73 · Cited by 83

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Read, Olivola, and Hardisty: The Value of Nothing Management Science, Articles in Advance, pp. 1-22, © 2016 The Author(s)
  2. Akerlof GA (1991) Procrastination and obedience. Amer. Econom. Rev. 81(2):1-19.
  3. William A. Smart, trans. Library of Economics and Liberty.]
  4. Frederick S, Novemsky N, Wang J, Dhar R, Nowlis S (2009) Oppor- tunity cost neglect. J. Consumer Res. 36(4):553-561.
  5. Loewenstein G, Prelec D (1993) Preferences for sequences of out- comes. Psych. Rev. 100(1):91-108.

Authors
Read, D., Olivola, C. Y., & Hardisty, D. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Warwick (GB)
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
Corresponding author
Read, Daniel
Venue
Management Science
Published
2017-12
Volume
63
Issue
12
Pages
4277-4297
ISSN
  • 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5501
OpenAlex
W2463671667
Cited by
83
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1
FWCI
5.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Management Science (publishedVersion)
  • Warwick Research Archive Portal (University of Warwick) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Leverhulme Trust (RP2012-V022, ES/K002201/1)
  • Stanford Graduate School of Business
  • Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/K002201/1, RP2012-V-022, K002201, ES/K002201/)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Financial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Keywords
impatience, intertemporal choice, opportunity cost, attention, delayed rewards, present bias, time preference, framing effects

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