IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/pscirm/v12y2024i2p426-434_14.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring time preferences in large surveys

Author

Listed:
  • Bechtel, Michael M.
  • Jensen, Amalie
  • McAllister, Jordan H.
  • Scheve, Kenneth

Abstract

Time preferences may explain public opinion about a wide range of long-term policy problems with costs and benefits realized in the distant future. However, mass publics may discount these costs and benefits because they are later or because they are more uncertain. Standard methods to elicit individual-level time preferences tend to conflate risk and time attitudes and are susceptible to social desirability bias. A potential solution relies on a costly lab-experimental method, convex time budgets (CTB). We present and experimentally validate an affordable version of this approach for implementation in mass surveys. We find that the theoretically preferred CTB patience measure predicts attitudes toward a local, delayed investment problem but fails to predict support for more complex, future-oriented policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Bechtel, Michael M. & Jensen, Amalie & McAllister, Jordan H. & Scheve, Kenneth, 2024. "Measuring time preferences in large surveys," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 426-434, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:12:y:2024:i:2:p:426-434_14
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2049847023000109/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:12:y:2024:i:2:p:426-434_14. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ram .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.