Associations between a one-shot delay discounting measure and age, income, education and real-world impulsive behavior

By S. Reimers, E. Maylor, Neil Stewart, N. Chater. 2009

356 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, General Decision Sciences

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f81d1ae81f1d3dcc27eb7d910619b71540d075a2

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

1. David H. Krantz
2. Elke U. Weber
3. David J. Hardisty

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. Elke U. Weber
2. David J. Hardisty

In General Decision Sciences

1. David H. Krantz
2. Elke U. Weber
3. David J. Hardisty
4. S. van der Linden
5. Dan Kahan
6. R. Gifford
7. P. Stern
8. Paul Slovic

Citations in the corpus

• How to measure time preferences: An experimental comparison of three methods (2013, background): “Subsequently, all participants answered a number of demographic questions (mostly drawn from Chabris et al., 2008; Reimers et al., 2009): gender, age, education, relevant college courses, ethnicity, political affiliation, height, weight, exercise, dieting, healthy eating, dental checkups, flossing, ”
• Delayed reward discounting and addictive behavior: a meta-analysis (2011, unknown): “With regard to delayed reward amounts, where multiple delayed amounts were used to generate a discounting estimate, means are provided Abbreviations: k hyperbolic temporal discounting function, AUC area under the curve, ICR impulsive choice ratio Comparisons identified as criterion>control reflect s”