Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28232810›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2017

Time-Preference Tests Fail to Predict Behavior Related to Self-control.

Kodi B Arfer, Christian C Luhmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Kodi B ArferUCLA Center for HIV Identification, Prevention, and Treatment Services, University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Christian C LuhmannPsychology Department, Stony Brook University Stony Brook, NY, USA.

Funding

TRAINEESHIPS IN AIDS PREVENTION STUDIEST32MH019105 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Carol Suzanne Camlin, Glenn-Milo Santos · 1989 to 2026
$15.3M
Post-doctoral HIV Research Training Program for HIV Combination PreventionT32MH109205 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI ROTHERAM-BORUS, MARY JANE · 2016 to 2020
$2.3M
NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH019105NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH109205
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

According to theory, choices relating to patience and self-control in domains as varied as drug use and retirement saving are driven by generalized preferences about delayed rewards. Past research has shown that measurements of these time preferences are associated with these choices. Research has also attempted to examine how well such measurements can predict choices, but only with inappropriate analytical methods. Moreover, it is not clear which of the many kinds of time-preference tests that have been proposed are most useful for prediction, and a theoretically important aspect of time preferences, nonstationarity, has been neglected in measurement. In Study 1, we examined three approaches to measuring time preferences with 181 users of Mechanical Turk. Retest reliability, for both immediate and 1-month intervals, was decent, as was convergent validity between tests, and association was similar to previous results, but predictive accuracy for 10 criterion variables (e.g., tobacco use) was approximately nil. In Study 2, we examined one other approach to measuring time preferences, and 40 criterion variables, using 7,127 participants in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979. Time preferences were significantly related to criterion variables, but predictive accuracy was again poor. Our findings imply serious problems for using time-preference tests to predict real-world decisions. The results of Study 1 further suggest there is little value in measuring nonstationarity separately from patience.

Indexed as

decision makingintertemporal choicepredictive validityretest reliabilityself-control

Identifiers

PMID28232810
PMCPMC5298954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.