IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0233337.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of multiplicative and additive hyperbolic and hyperboloid discounting models in delayed lotteries involving gains and losses

Author

Listed:
  • Wojciech Białaszek
  • Przemysław Marcowski
  • David J Cox

Abstract

Many day-to-day decisions may involve risky outcomes that occur at some delay after a decision has been made. We refer to such scenarios as delayed lotteries. Despite human choice often involves delayed lotteries, past research has primarily focused on decisions with delayed or risky outcomes. Comparatively, less research has explored how delay and probability interact to influence decisions. Within research on delayed lotteries, rigorous comparisons of models that describe choice from the discounting framework have not been conducted. We performed two experiments to determine how gain or loss outcomes are devalued when delayed and risky. Experiment 1 used delay and probability ranges similar to past research on delayed lotteries. Experiment 2 used individually calibrated delay and probability ranges. Ten discounting models were fit to the data using a genetic algorithm. Candidate models were derived from past research on discounting delayed or probabilistic outcomes. We found that participants' behavior was best described primarily by a three-parameter multiplicative model. Measures based on information criteria pointed to a solution in which only delay and probability were psychophysically scaled. Absolute measures based on residuals pointed to a solution in which amount, delay, and probability are simultaneously scaled. Our research suggests that separate scaling parameters for different discounting factors may not be necessary with delayed lotteries.

Suggested Citation

  • Wojciech Białaszek & Przemysław Marcowski & David J Cox, 2020. "Comparison of multiplicative and additive hyperbolic and hyperboloid discounting models in delayed lotteries involving gains and losses," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-18, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0233337
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233337
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0233337
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0233337&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0233337?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marzilli Ericson, K. M. & White, J. M. & Laibson, David I. & Cohen, J. D., 2015. "Money Earlier or Later? Simple Heuristics Explain Intertemporal Choices Better Than Delay Discounting Does," Scholarly Articles 30367415, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    2. David J. Hardisty & Jeffrey Pfeffer, 2017. "Intertemporal Uncertainty Avoidance: When the Future Is Uncertain, People Prefer the Present, and When the Present Is Uncertain, People Prefer the Future," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(2), pages 519-527, February.
    3. Caroline J. Charpentier & Jan-Emmanuel De Neve & Jonathan P. Roiser & Tali Sharot, 2016. "Models of affective decision-making: how do feelings predict choice?," CEP Discussion Papers dp1408, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    4. Thaler, Richard, 1981. "Some empirical evidence on dynamic inconsistency," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 201-207.
    5. Victor R. Fuchs, 1982. "Time Preference and Health: An Exploratory Study," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Aspects of Health, pages 93-120, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Gretchen B. Chapman & Arthur S. Elstein, 1995. "Valuing the Future," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 15(4), pages 373-386, October.
    7. Gretchen B. Chapman & Elliot J. Coups, 1999. "Time Preferences and Preventive Health Behavior," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 19(3), pages 307-314, August.
    8. Keith M. Ericson & John Myles White & David Laibson & Jonathan D. Cohen, 2015. "Money Earlier or Later? Simple Heuristics Explain Intertemporal Choices Better than Delay Discounting," NBER Working Papers 20948, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Scrucca, Luca, 2013. "GA: A Package for Genetic Algorithms in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 53(i04).
    10. Charpentier, Caroline J. & Neve, Jan-Emmanuel De & Roiser, Jonathan P. & Sharot, Tali, 2016. "Models of affective decision-making: how do feelings predict choice?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 66420, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Manel Baucells & Franz H. Heukamp, 2012. "Probability and Time Trade-Off," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(4), pages 831-842, April.
    12. Martin Ahlbrecht & Martin Weber, 1997. "An Empirical Study on Intertemporal Decision Making Under Risk," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(6), pages 813-826, June.
    13. Uri Benzion & Amnon Rapoport & Joseph Yagil, 1989. "Discount Rates Inferred from Decisions: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 270-284, March.
    14. Kroll, Yoram & Levy, Haim & Rapoport, Amnon, 1988. "Experimental Tests of the Separation Theorem and the Capital Asset Pricing Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(3), pages 500-519, June.
    15. David J. Hardisty & Jeffrey Pfeffer, 2017. "Intertemporal Uncertainty Avoidance: When the Future Is Uncertain, People Prefer the Present, and When the Present Is Uncertain, People Prefer the Future," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(2), pages 519-527, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Faralla, Valeria & Novarese, Marco & Ardizzone, Antonella, 2017. "Framing Effects in Intertemporal Choice: A Nudge Experiment," MPRA Paper 82086, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Galizzi, Matteo M. & Miraldo, Marisa & Stavropoulou, Charitini & van der Pol, Marjon, 2016. "Doctor–patient differences in risk and time preferences: A field experiment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 171-182.
    3. Kang, Myong-Il & Ikeda, Shinsuke, 2016. "Time discounting, present biases, and health-related behaviors: Evidence from Japan," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 122-136.
    4. Read, Daniel & Roelofsma, Peter H. M. P., 2003. "Subadditive versus hyperbolic discounting: A comparison of choice and matching," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 140-153, July.
    5. Cruz Rambaud, Salvador & Parra Oller, Isabel María & Valls Martínez, María del Carmen, 2018. "The amount-based deformation of the q-exponential discount function: A joint analysis of delay and magnitude effects," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 508(C), pages 788-796.
    6. Kossova, Tatiana (Коссова, Татьяна) & Kossova, Elena (Коссова, Елена) & Sheluntsova, Maria (Шелунцова, Мария), 2014. "A healthy lifestyle and individual intertemporal preferences of Russia [Здоровый Образ Жизни И Индивидуальные Межвременные Предпочтения Жителей России]," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 5, pages 172-190, October.
    7. Steffen Andersen & Glenn W. Harrison & Morten I. Lau & E. Elisabet Rutström, 2013. "Discounting Behaviour and the Magnitude Effect: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Denmark," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 80(320), pages 670-697, October.
    8. Dodd, Mark C., 2014. "Intertemporal discounting as a risk factor for high BMI: Evidence from Australia, 2008," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 83-97.
    9. Przemysław Sawicki & Michał Białek, 2016. "Side Effects in Time Discounting Procedures: Fixed Alternatives Become the Reference Point," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-11, October.
    10. Ebert, Jane E.J., 2010. "The surprisingly low motivational power of future rewards: Comparing conventional money-based measures of discounting with motivation-based measures," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 71-92, March.
    11. Ali al-Nowaihi & Sanjit Dhami, 2021. "Preferences over Time and under Uncertainty: Theoretical Foundations," CESifo Working Paper Series 9215, CESifo.
    12. Tatiana Kossova & Elena Kossova & Maria Sheluntcova, 2014. "Estimating the Relationship Between Rate of Time Preferences And Socio-Economic Factors In Russia," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(1), pages 39-68.
    13. Jeffery L. Guyse & Jay Simon, 2011. "Consistency Among Elicitation Techniques for Intertemporal Choice: A Within-Subjects Investigation of the Anomalies," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 8(3), pages 233-246, September.
    14. Shane Frederick & George Loewenstein & Ted O'Donoghue, 2002. "Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 351-401, June.
    15. Jeffery L. Guyse & L. Robin Keller & Candice H. Huynh, 2020. "Valuing Sequences of Lives Lost or Saved Over Time: Preference for Uniform Sequences," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 24-38, March.
    16. Herweg, Fabian & Weinschenk, Philipp, 2022. "Multi-attribute heuristics and intertemporal choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 174-181.
    17. Yuanyuan Liu & Timothy B. Heath & Ayse Onculer, 2020. "The Future Ambiguity Effect: How Narrow Payoff Ranges Increase Future Payoff Appeal," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(8), pages 3754-3770, August.
    18. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:3:p:236-249 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Evgeny Kagan & Alexander Rybalov, 2022. "Subjective Trusts and Prospects: Some Practical Remarks on Decision Making with Imperfect Information," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-24, March.
    20. Jindrich Matousek & Tomas Havranek & Zuzana Irsova, 2022. "Individual discount rates: a meta-analysis of experimental evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 318-358, February.
    21. Khwaja, Ahmed & Silverman, Dan & Sloan, Frank, 2007. "Time preference, time discounting, and smoking decisions," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 927-949, September.

    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:plo:pone00:0233337. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.