Cited by 487Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies

One-year temporal stability of delay-discount rates

Open access
Kirby, Kris N.·2009·Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

Abstract

The temporal stability of delay-discount rates for monetary rewards was assessed using a monetary choice questionnaire (Kirby & Marakovic, 1996). Of 100 undergraduate participants who completed the questionnaire at the initial session, 81 returned 5 weeks later and 46 returned 57 weeks later for subsequent sessions. The 5-week test-retest stability of discount rates was .77 (95% confidence interval = .67-.85), the 1-year stability was .71 (.50-.84), and the 57-week stability was .63 (.41-.77). Thus, at least when similar testing situations are reinstated, discount rates as individual differences have 1-year stabilities in the range that is typically obtained for personality traits. Discount rates index an attribute of the person that is relatively stable over time but that is moderated by aspects of the situation, such as reward type and deprivational state.

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 · 10.3758/pbr.16.3.457

Cites

29 of 29 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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kirby, K. N.
Affiliations
Williams College (US)
Corresponding author
Kirby, Kris N.
Venue
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
Published
2009-06
Volume
16
Issue
3
Pages
457-462
ISSN
  • 1069-9384 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-5320
OpenAlex
W2083649502
Cited by
487
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 71 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 40 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 20
FWCI
8.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychonomic Bulletin & Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (MH55262, R29MH055262)
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 › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Keywords
delay discounting, temporal stability, discount rate, monetary rewards, test-retest reliability, individual differences, personality traits, reward type
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Character, Choice Behavior, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Impulsive Behavior, Individuality, Male, Motivation, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reward, Time Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Young Adult

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