Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30762382›Full record

ArticleExperimental and clinical psychopharmacology2019

Demand characteristics in episodic future thinking II: The role of cues and cue content in changing delay discounting.

Jillian M Rung, Gregory J Madden

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Imagining emotional events benefits future-oriented decisions.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2022
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. A web-based episodic specificity and future thinking session modulates delay discounting in cannabis users.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2020
    Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. An ecological momentary episodic future thinking intervention on mother's weekly food purchases.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Jillian M RungDepartment of Psychology, Utah State University.
Gregory J MaddenDepartment of Psychology, Utah State University.

Funding

Delay Exposure Training Produces Large and Lasting Changes in Impulsive Choice – Why?R21DA042174 · NIDA · UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY · PI MADDEN, GREGORY J · 2016 to 2017
$388k
Delay Exposure Training and Allomorphic ChoiceR03DA044927 · NIDA · UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY · PI MADDEN, GREGORY J · 2018 to 2019
$145k
NIDA NIH HHS R03 DA044927NIDA NIH HHS R21 DA042174NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Episodic future thinking (EFT), or imagining experiencing one's future, reduces discounting of future rewards, but the mechanisms of this effect are unclear. We examined the role of cues to engage in EFT, possible demand characteristics inherent to those cues (prompting awareness of the hypothesized effects of EFT), and changes in temporal horizon (how far one thinks into the future) in these reductions in delay discounting. In Experiment 1, cues prompting participants to engage in EFT during the discounting task were presented or withheld: EFT decreased discounting only when cues were present. In a time-perspective task in which cues were not presented, EFT did not broaden temporal horizon; however, episodic recent thinking (the putative control activity) shortened temporal horizons. In Experiment 2, cues were manipulated in a way designed to make them either more theoretically relevant (prompting episodic thought) or more prone to demand characteristics (prompting attention to the correspondence in delays between EFT and discounting tasks). Only theoretically relevant cues reduced delay discounting. These results do not support the hypothesis that EFT reduces delay discounting because of demand characteristics. Instead, they suggest limitations on the generalizability of EFT effects in uncued contexts and suggest that mechanisms other than temporal horizon may be responsible for its effects. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Indexed as

CuesDelay DiscountingImaginationAdultFemaleHumansImpulsive BehaviorMaleMemory, EpisodicThinking

Identifiers

PMID30762382
PMCPMC6800018

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.