The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Frames of Mind in Intertemporal Choice
Open accessAbstract
Recent research has demonstrated that choices between gambles are systematically influenced by the way they are expressed. Kahneman and Tversky's Prospect Theory (Kahneman, D., A. Tversky. 1979. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2) 363–391.) explains many of these “framing” effects as shifts in the point of reference from which prospects are evaluated. This paper demonstrates the applicability of the reference point concept to intertemporal choice. Three experiments demonstrate that when people choose between immediate and delayed consumption, the reference point used to evaluate alternatives can significantly influence choice. The first study elicited relative preference for immediate and delayed consumption using three methods, each of which differently framed choices between alternatives offering identical end-state consumption. The conventional discounted utility model predicts that the three methods of elicitation should yield similar estimates of time preference, but preferences were found to differ in accordance with a reference point model. The second and third studies extend and replicate the results from the first, the third using real rather than hypothetical choices.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7455683 · Cited by 18,497
Regret Theory: An Alternative Theory of Rational Choice Under Uncertainty
Loomes, G., & Sugden, R. (1982) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2232669 · Cited by 4,042
Specious reward: A behavioral theory of impulsiveness and impulse control.
Ainslie, G. (1975) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0076860 · Cited by 2,708
An economic theory of self-control.
Thaler, R. H., & Shefrin, H. M. (1981) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/260971 · Cited by 2,203
Cited by
Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/2937956 · Cited by 6,432
Data collection in a flat world: the strengths and weaknesses of Mechanical Turk samples
Goodman, J. K., Cryder, C. E., & Cheema, A. (2013) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.1753 · Cited by 2,242
Reference Price Research: Review and Propositions
Mazumdar, T., Raj, S. P., & Sinha, I. (2005) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.2005.69.4.84 · Cited by 848
Costs and benefits of judgment errors: Implications for debiasing.
Arkes, H. R. (1991) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.110.3.486 · Cited by 764
Chen, M. K. (2013) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.103.2.690 · Cited by 745
Metadata
- Authors
- Loewenstein, G. F.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 1988-02
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 200-214
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2115351542
- Cited by
- 635
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 4.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Frames of Mind in Intertemporal Choice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mnsc.34.2.200
- The paper
- Loewenstein, G. F. (1988). Frames of Mind in Intertemporal Choice. Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.34.2.200
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.