Cited by 62Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesChild and Animal Learning Development

Temporal reward discounting in children, adolescents, and emerging adults during an experiential task

Open access
Scheres, Anouk, Tontsch, Chandra, Thoeny, Allison L., Sumiya, Motofumi·2014·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

The goal of this study was to examine age effects on the ability/willingness to wait for large rewards in a real temporal reward discounting task from childhood to adulthood. Therefore, a real temporal discounting (TD) task was administered to children aged 6-12 (n = 39), adolescents aged 13-17 (n = 28), and young adults aged 18-19 (n = 55). Findings indicated that the cross-sectional development of TD followed a quadratic pattern across age groups, with adolescents choosing more often than children and adults to wait for the large delayed reward, resulting in reward-maximization. Various interpretations of this finding were offered, including a focus on reward maximization despite an immature ability to exert self-control, and flexible self-control which was high during this task as a result of strong motivation to maximize financial gains.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00711

Cites

60 of 60 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?

  • One study found that 13-17 year olds were more willing to wait for a delayed reward compared to children aged 6-12 and young adults aged 18-19.

    “However, one study found that 13–17 year olds were more willing to wait for the delayed reward compared to children (aged 6–12) and young adults (aged 18–19; Scheres et al., 2014).”

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: 1

  1. Ainslie G. (1992). Picoeconomics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Scheres, A., Tontsch, C., Thoeny, A. L., & Sumiya, M.
Affiliations
University of Arizona (US)
Corresponding author
Scheres, Anouk
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2014-07-08
Volume
5
Pages
711-711
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2098135801
Cited by
62
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2
FWCI
3.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
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 › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
delay discounting, delayed rewards, age differences, children, adolescents, emerging adults, self-control, reward maximization, economic motivation

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