TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparing hyperbolic, delay-amount sensitivity and present-bias models of delay discounting
AU - Mitchell, Suzanne H.
AU - Wilson, Vanessa B.
AU - Karalunas, Sarah L.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - Delay discounting is a widely studied phenomenon due to its ubiquity in psychopathological disorders. Several methods are well established to quantify the extent to which a delayed commodity is devalued as a function of the delay to its receipt. The most frequently used method is to fit a hyperbolic function and use an index of the gradient of the function, k, or to calculate the area under the discounting curve. The manuscript examines the behavior of these quantification indices for three different datasets, as well as provides information about potential limitations in their use. The primary limitation examined is the lack of mechanistic specificity provided by either method. Alternative formulations that are thought to provide some mechanistic information are examined for the three separate datasets: two variants of a hyperboloid model (Rachlin, 1989, Judgment, decision and choice. New York: W.H. Freeman) and the quasi-hyperbolic model (Laibson, 1997, Q. J. Econ., 112, 443-477). Examination of the parameters of each formulation suggests that the parameters derived from the quasi-hyperbolic model allows groups and conditions within the three datasets to be reliably distinguished more readily than the hyperboloid models. However, use of the quasi-hyperbolic model is complex and its limitations might offset its ability to discriminate within the datasets."This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: SQAB 2014".
AB - Delay discounting is a widely studied phenomenon due to its ubiquity in psychopathological disorders. Several methods are well established to quantify the extent to which a delayed commodity is devalued as a function of the delay to its receipt. The most frequently used method is to fit a hyperbolic function and use an index of the gradient of the function, k, or to calculate the area under the discounting curve. The manuscript examines the behavior of these quantification indices for three different datasets, as well as provides information about potential limitations in their use. The primary limitation examined is the lack of mechanistic specificity provided by either method. Alternative formulations that are thought to provide some mechanistic information are examined for the three separate datasets: two variants of a hyperboloid model (Rachlin, 1989, Judgment, decision and choice. New York: W.H. Freeman) and the quasi-hyperbolic model (Laibson, 1997, Q. J. Econ., 112, 443-477). Examination of the parameters of each formulation suggests that the parameters derived from the quasi-hyperbolic model allows groups and conditions within the three datasets to be reliably distinguished more readily than the hyperboloid models. However, use of the quasi-hyperbolic model is complex and its limitations might offset its ability to discriminate within the datasets."This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: SQAB 2014".
KW - Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
KW - Cigarette smoking
KW - Delay discounting
KW - Impulsive behavior
KW - Reward
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84933523426&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84933523426&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.beproc.2015.03.006
DO - 10.1016/j.beproc.2015.03.006
M3 - Article
C2 - 25796454
AN - SCOPUS:84933523426
SN - 0376-6357
VL - 114
SP - 52
EP - 62
JO - Behavioural Processes
JF - Behavioural Processes
IS - 1
ER -