ArticleJournal of psychopathology and clinical science2022
Delay discounting in suicidal behavior: Myopic preference or inconsistent valuation?
Article in Journal of psychopathology and clinical science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A multinational analysis of how emotions relate to economic decisions regarding time or risk.Nature human behaviour · 2024Pooled it
- Self-injurious thoughts and behaviors and alterations in positive valence systems: A systematic review of the literature.Journal of psychiatric research · 2022Pooled it
- When to quit: Calibration of voluntary persistence and attempted suicide in depression.Behaviour research and therapy · 2026Article
- High Prevalence of Suicidal Behavior in Severe Alcohol Use Disorder Linked to Specific Neurocognitive Deficits: The Cognition, Alcohol, Genes, and Environment Study.Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs · 2026Article
- Suicide attempt history is associated with blunted neural reward responsiveness after accounting for a history of suicidal ideation and preparatory behaviors.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2026Article
- Age matters: a narrative review and machine learning analysis on shared and separate multidimensional risk domains for early and late onset suicidal behavior.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Review
- Risk, reward, and suicide: how impulsivity and loss aversion influence decision-making in individuals who have attempted suicide.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Computational Modeling of Uncertainty and Volatility Beliefs in Escape-Avoidance Learning: Comparing Individuals with and Without Suicidal Ideation.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- Review: Suicide and its relationship to aggression and impulsivity.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2025Review
- Dimensions of trait and task-based impulsivity associated with alcohol use disorder and history of suicidality.Journal of psychiatric research · 2025Article
- Relevant factors contributing to risk of suicide among adolescents.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Choice and motor impulsivity in Veterans with mild traumatic brain injury with and without history of suicide attempt.Psychiatry research · 2024Article
- Leveraging Decision Science to Characterize Depression.Current directions in psychological science · 2023Article
- Suicide prevention and ketamine: insights from computational modeling.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Review
- Anhedonia and Suicide.Current topics in behavioral neurosciences · 2022Review
- What Can Reinforcement Learning Models of Dopamine and Serotonin Tell Us about the Action of Antidepressants?Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2022Review
- Social Disconnection in Late Life Suicide: An NIMH Workshop on State of the Research in Identifying Mechanisms, Treatment Targets, and Interventions.The American journal of geriatric psychiatry : official journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Prior studies sought to explain the predisposition to suicidal behavior in terms of myopic preference for immediate versus delayed reward, generating mixed evidence. Data from gambling and bandit tasks, however, suggest that suboptimal decisions in suicidal individuals are explained by inconsistent valuation rather than myopic preferences. We tested these two alternative hypotheses using a delay discounting task in 622 adults (suicide attempters with depression, suicide ideators with depression, nonsuicidal participants with depression, and healthy controls) recruited across three sites through inpatient psychiatric units, mood disorders clinics, primary care, and advertisements. Multilevel models revealed group differences in valuation consistencies in all three samples, with high-lethality suicide attempters exhibiting less consistent valuation than all other groups in Samples 1 and 3 and less consistent valuation than the healthy controls or participants with depression in Sample 2. In contrast, group differences in preference for immediate versus delayed reward were observed only in Sample 1 and were due to the high-lethality suicide attempters displaying a weaker preference for immediate reward than low-lethality suicide attempters. The findings were robust to confounds such as cognitive functioning and comorbidities. Seemingly impulsive choices in suicidal behavior are explained by inconsistent reward valuation rather than a true preference for immediate reward. In a suicidal crisis, this inconsistency may result in a misestimation of the value of suicide relative to constructive alternatives and deterrents. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.