Literature DB >> 35098030

On the Appropriate Measure to Estimate Hyperbolic Discounting Rate (K) using the Method of Least Squares.

Harli R Berk1, Tanya A Gupta1, Federico Sanabria1.   

Abstract

The estimation of the rate at which value declines with delay requires identifying the correct discounting model, applying the appropriate parameter estimation method, and choosing the dependent measure from which parameters are estimated. The simplest adequate discounting model is the hyperbolic model; the simplest method to estimate its sole free parameter, K, is the method of least squares. Estimates of K based on relative subjective values (RSV), although typical, are not necessarily more reliable than those obtained through other measures. We consider an alternative measure termed immediacy premium (IP): the ratio of value lost over value preserved due to outcome delay. According to hyperbolic discounting, IP is a linear function of delay. As a result, estimates of K obtained from IP circumvent the divergence between individual and aggregate estimates obtained with the RSV method. Moreover, published data suggests that estimates of K based on RSV and IP differ systematically in humans and in pigeons. Regardless of the dependent measure adopted, estimates of K obtained from nonhuman animals, but not from humans, yield residuals that conform with error-distribution assumptions of the method of least squares. Although residuals obtained using the IP method in human data diverged more from normality than those obtained using the RSV method, the sequential dependence over delays of the former was weaker than that of the latter. We therefore recommend adopting both RSV and IP when estimating hyperbolic K using the method of least squares, resorting to more elaborate estimation methods when inferences drawn from these estimates are inconsistent. © Association for Behavior Analysis International 2021.

Entities:  

Keywords:  delay discounting; hyperbolic discounting; impulsivity; intertemporal choice; method of least squares; parameter estimation

Year:  2021        PMID: 35098030      PMCID: PMC8738796          DOI: 10.1007/s40614-021-00306-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Perspect Behav Sci        ISSN: 2520-8969


  26 in total

1.  Area under the curve as a measure of discounting.

Authors:  J Myerson; L Green; M Warusawitharana
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Discounting of delayed food rewards in pigeons and rats: is there a magnitude effect?

Authors:  Leonard Green; Joel Myerson; Daniel D Holt; John R Slevin; Sara J Estle
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Delay discounting in Lewis and Fischer 344 rats: steady-state and rapid-determination adjusting-amount procedures.

Authors:  Jeffrey S Stein; Jonathan W Pinkston; Adam T Brewer; Monica T Francisco; Gregory J Madden
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Delay-amount tradeoffs in choices by pigeons and rats: hyperbolic versus exponential discounting.

Authors:  James E Mazur; Dawn R Biondi
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  An additive-utility model of delay discounting.

Authors:  Peter R Killeen
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 8.934

6.  An overview of Bayesian reasoning in the analysis of delay-discounting data.

Authors:  Christopher T Franck; Mikhail N Koffarnus; Todd L McKerchar; Warren K Bickel
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2019-02-19       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Functional parameters of delay discounting assessment tasks: order of presentation.

Authors:  Elias Robles; Perla A Vargas
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2007-02-21       Impact factor: 1.777

8.  Delay discounting of monetary rewards over a wide range of amounts.

Authors:  Leonard Green; Joel Myerson; Luís Oliveira; Seo Eun Chang
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2013-08-27       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  A comparison of four models of delay discounting in humans.

Authors:  Todd L McKerchar; Leonard Green; Joel Myerson; T Stephen Pickford; Jade C Hill; Steven C Stout
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2008-12-27       Impact factor: 1.777

10.  Simpson's paradox in psychological science: a practical guide.

Authors:  Rogier A Kievit; Willem E Frankenhuis; Lourens J Waldorp; Denny Borsboom
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-08-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.