ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2025
Don't Give-Up: Why some intervention schemes encourage suboptimal behavior.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Many social challenges stem from individuals' tendency to prefer immediately rewarding but suboptimal behaviors ("Give-Up" options) over more costly endeavors that yield much better outcomes in the long run ("Try" options). For example, many people forgo the long-term benefits of formal education, healthy diets, learning new technologies, and even finding true love. This paper examines various incentivization programs that combine external rewards and punishments to discourage such counterproductive behaviors, which often result in only temporary behavioral change. Our findings suggest that some interventions' limited impact may be due to their focus on only shifting behaviors from "Give-Up" (e.g., dropping out of college, avoiding the gym) to "Try" (e.g., attending college, exercising regularly), without promoting sufficient exploration of these "Try" options. Yet exploration of the long-term benefits of "Trying" may be crucial to increase the chances of long-term learning and commitment. Using a simplified abstraction of this dilemma, our results show a high tendency to choose "Give-Up" options prior to intervention. Examination of four different incentivization strategies suggests that only rewarding exploration of new "Try" options is a straightforward strategy to increase exploration and optimal choice. Punishing both the selection of "Give-Up" options and the choice to exploit suboptimal "Try" options produced similar results. Other common guidance strategies were less effective, as these strategies simply tended to replace one suboptimal behavior with another. Surprisingly, punishments seemed to be a relatively more successful incentive than rewards. We discuss how these insights can help guide policy aiming to improve long-term outcomes through incentivization.
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.