Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38216839›Full record

ArticleLearning & behavior2024

Active and passive waiting in impulsive choice: Effects of fixed-interval and fixed-time delays.

Travis Smith, Anderson Fitch, Aubrey Deavours, Kimberly Kirkpatrick

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Learning & behavior, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Using sign tracking to experimentally increase self-control in rats.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior · 2024
    Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Travis SmithDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Kansas State University, 492 Bluemont Hall, 1114 Mid-Campus Drive N., Manhattan, KS, 66506, USA. smithtr@ksu.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-2439-8135
Anderson FitchDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Kansas State University, 492 Bluemont Hall, 1114 Mid-Campus Drive N., Manhattan, KS, 66506, USA.
Aubrey DeavoursDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Kansas State University, 492 Bluemont Hall, 1114 Mid-Campus Drive N., Manhattan, KS, 66506, USA.
Kimberly KirkpatrickDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Kansas State University, 492 Bluemont Hall, 1114 Mid-Campus Drive N., Manhattan, KS, 66506, USA.

Funding

The role of prestimulus oscillatory brain dynamics in auditory memoryP20GM113109 · NIGMS · KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY · PI David Edward Thompson · 2017 to 2026
$24.1M
Timing, Reward Processing and choiceR01MH085739 · NIMH · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI SMITH, TRAVIS R, VONDER HAAR, COLE · 2010 to 2025
$4.7M
NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM113109NIH HHS P20GM113109NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH085739NIMH NIH HHS R01MH085739
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Behavioral interventions to improve self-control, preference for a larger-later (LL) reward over a smaller-sooner (SS) reward, involve experience with delayed rewards. Whether they involve timing processes remains controversial. In rats, there have been inconsistent results on whether timing processes may be involved in intervention-induced improvements in self-control. Interventions that improved self-control with corresponding timing improvements used fixed-interval (FI) delays, whereas interventions that failed to find corresponding timing improvements used fixed-time (FT) delays. The FI schedule includes a response contingency (active waiting), whereas the FT schedule delivers reward automatically (passive waiting). The present study compared the effects of FI and FT schedules in interventions and impulsive choice tasks to evaluate effects on self-control and timing behavior. The impulsive choice task evaluated preference for an SS option (one pellet after 10-, 15-, 20-, 25-, and 30-s delays) versus an LL option (two pellets after a 30-s delay). The intervention task included forced-choice SS (one pellet after 10 s) and LL (two pellets after 30 s) sessions under FI or FT schedules. FI schedules produced greater sensitivity to SS delay in the impulsive choice task. Both FI and FT interventions increased LL choices. Following choice testing, temporal bisection and peak interval tasks revealed better timing precision for rats with an FI delay experience. Overall, the FI choice contingency was associated with improved temporal attention and timing precision.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorImpulsive BehaviorReinforcement ScheduleAnimalsConditioning, OperantDelay DiscountingMaleRatsRats, Sprague-DawleyRewardSelf-ControlTime FactorsActive waitingDelay discountingImpulsive choicePassive waitingRatTiming

Identifiers

PMID38216839
PMCPMC11239795

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.