Association for Behavior Analysis International

The Association for Behavior Analysis International® (ABAI) is a nonprofit membership organization with the mission to contribute to the well-being of society by developing, enhancing, and supporting the growth and vitality of the science of behavior analysis through research, education, and practice.

Search

11th International Conference; Dublin, Ireland; 2022

Event Details


Previous Page

 

Symposium #10
A Review of Recent Research in Discounting
Friday, September 2, 2022
9:00 AM–9:50 AM
Meeting Level 2; Wicklow Hall 2B
Area: EAB; Domain: Basic Research
Chair: Steven R. Lawyer (Idaho State University)
Abstract: Delay discounting, the decline in outcome value as its receipt in time increases, has been used to assess impulsive choice in humans and animals. Hypothetical delay discounting (using verbal questionnaires) with humans has gained traction in research as a way of evaluating impulsive choice in a cost-effective and efficient manner. These hypothetical questionnaires have been used to evaluate impulsivity among various maladaptive behaviors, including gambling, substance use, and sexual behaviors. Although many impulsive behaviors are related to commodities, the the vast majority of discounting studies with humans focus on monetary discounting.However, conducting research on commodity discounting is fraught with obstacles. The purpose of this presentation is to discuss the obstacles in commodity discounting (e.g. framing effects, the types of commodities and the procedure used, and marginal utility) and to discuss recent research related to these area. The presentations will address how these obstacles may be addressed and review data on commodity discounting in these areas.
Instruction Level: Basic
Keyword(s): choice, commodity, discounting, eab
 
Diminishing Marginal Utility: The Utility of the Delay Discounting Model
COURTNEY SMITH (University of Nevada, Reno), Matt Locey (University of Nevada, Reno)
Abstract: Delay discounting models offer quantitative relations between reward value, reward amount, and the delay to the receipt of rewards. In holding delay constant (and assuming the delay discounting rate k> 0), the relation between reward value and reward amount is displayed as being consistently proportional to one another. Considering these conditions with Mazur’s (1987) hyperbolic function, for example, the reward value of $1,000 (at any delay) would be twice as valuable as $500 (with the delay held constant). It follows, then, that the reward value of 20 candy bars (at any delay) would be twice as valuable as 10 candy bars (with delay held constant). However, the law of diminishing marginal utility (Ormazabal, 1995) positis that this relation may not hold true for all commodities. The current study assesses the relation between reinforcer value and reinforcer amount by using 4 commodities (bites of food, cans of beverage, minutes of music, and minutes of preferred video) and the monetary amount that would be exchanged for 4 different amounts of those commodities (1, 2, 10, and 20 units) presented in a questionnaire format. The implications of these findings will be discussed.
 
Framing effects: Thoughts of time or future?
NATALIE BUDDIGA (University of Nevada, Reno), Matt Locey (University of Nevada, Reno)
Abstract: Delay discounting, the decline in outcome value as its receipt in time increases, has been used to assess impulsive choice in humans and animals. Hypothetical delay discounting (using verbal questionnaires) with humans has gained traction in research as a way of evaluating impulsive choice in a cost-effective and efficient manner. These hypothetical questionnaires have been used to evaluate impulsivity among various maladaptive behaviors, including gambling, substance use, and sexual behaviors. Framing effects refer to the wording used in these questionnaires and how different wording can impact delay discount rates. For example, the explicit zero effect (e.g., “$5 now and $0 in 1 year OR $0 now and $100 in 1 year”). has been shown to decrease delay discount rates compared to the standard choice presentation (e.g., “$5 now OR $100 in 1 year”). The present study investigates framing effects, specifically explicit zero, through a comparison standard discounting, “explicit small” framing ($1 offered in place of $0), and “explicit large” framing ($500 in place of $0) through a between- and within-groups comparison. Contrary to the literature, explicit zero did not always yield shallower discounting (less impulsive choice) than standard discounting. Further, order effects played a large role in discounting, depending on which framing was presented first. These data can inform whether “time” or “future” impacts impulsive choice in delay discounting questionnaires.
 
Comparing an Adjusting Amount Procedure with an Adjusting Delay Procedure Across Commodities
ASHLYN RENEE FRITS (University of Nevada Reno), Matt Locey (University of Nevada, Reno)
Abstract: Individuals will often choose a smaller reward available sooner over a larger delayed reward. Due to the correlation of steep discounting with many socially significant maladaptive behaviors, research on discounting is rapidly increasing. An abundance of the literature on delay discounting has focused on monetary outcomes. Although most discounting research has been on monetary discounting, maladaptive behaviors of interest typically result in non-monetary outcomes. Thus, it is important to investigate commodity discounting, discounting pertaining to different commodities since differences in discounting have been observed across various commodities. In monetary discounting, adjusting amount procedures and adjusting delay procedures have been compared. While these procedures yield similar discounting curves with monetary outcomes, few studies have been conducted comparing them across various commodities. The present study compares a five-trial adjusting amount and a five-trial adjusting delay procedure across five different commodities. These data can inform which procedure may be better suited for certain types of commodities.
 

BACK TO THE TOP

 

Back to Top
Modifed by Eddie Soh
DONATE