ArticleEvolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior2014
Conceptualizing time preference: a life-history analysis.
Article in Evolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- View of Times and Temporal Focus under the Pace of Life on the Impact of Intertemporal Decision Making.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Individual Preference Framework or Group Preference Framework? Which Will Regulate the Impact Path of Product Facilities on Residents' Waste-Sorting Behavior Better.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Effortful Control Development in the Face of Harshness and Unpredictability.Human nature (Hawthorne, N.Y.) · 2020Article
- The Relationship Between Psychological Temporal Perspective and HIV/STI Risk Behaviors Among Male Sex Workers in Mexico City.Archives of sexual behavior · 2018Article
- Consideration of future consequences (CFC) serves as a buffer against aggression related to psychopathy.PloS one · 2018Article
- The Psychometric Evaluation of Human Life Histories.Evolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior · 2017Review
- From Environment to Mating Competition and Super-K in a Predominantly Urban Sample of Young Adults.Evolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Life-history theory (LHT) has drawn upon the concept of "time preference" as a psychological mechanism for the development of fast and slow strategies. However, the conceptual and empirical nature of this mechanism is ill-defined. This study compared four traits commonly used as measures of "time preference" (impulsivity, sensation seeking, future orientation and delay discounting) and evaluated their relationship to variables associated with life-history strategies (aggressive behavior and mating attitudes, biological sex, pubertal timing, victimization, and exposure to aggression in the environment). Results indicated that only sensation seeking consistently showed all the predicted associations, although impulsivity, future orientation, and delay discounting showed some significant associations. A unidimensional higher-order factor of "time preference" did not adequately fit the data and lacked structural invariance across age and sex, suggesting that personality traits associated with LHT do not represent a global trait. We discuss the use of personality traits as measures in LHT and suggest that greater caution and clarity is required when conceptualizing this construct in future work.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25300057PMC10521089What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.