Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41067396›Full record

ArticleBehavioural processes2025

Time estimation variability in delay discounting: Model comparison and considerations.

Brett W Gelino, Madison E Graham, Justin C Strickland, Matthew W Johnson, Derek D Reed

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavioural processes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Brett W GelinoDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. Electronic address: gelinob@gmail.com.
Madison E GrahamDepartment of Applied Behavioral Science, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA.
Justin C StricklandDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Matthew W JohnsonInstitute for Advanced Diagnostics and Therapeutics, Sheppard Pratt, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Derek D ReedDepartment of Applied Behavioral Science, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA; Institutes for Behavior Resources, Inc., Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

HUMAN BEHAVIORAL PHARMACOLOGY OF SUBSTANCE ABUSET32DA007209 · NIDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Eric C. Strain, Elise M Weerts · 1985 to 2026
$12.9M
Evaluation of the Electronic Cigarette Withdrawal Syndrome: Mechanistic Targets for InterventionR01DA057925 · NIDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Tory Richard Spindle, Justin Charles Strickland · 2023 to 2026
$2.9M
Greenwashing cigarettes: Perceptual and behavioral evidence of inaccurate modified risk advertisingR01DA049814 · NIDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI MORAN, MEGHAN BRIDGID · 2020 to 2022
$1.4M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA049814NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA057925NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA007209
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Delay discounting describes an organism's sensitivity to delayed consequences. The advent of hyperboloid discounting models introduced the s discounting parameter, a fitted metric that reduces residual variance when working with human subjects. Mathematically, discounting s allows for a nonlinear relation between consequence (A) and delay (D) and could be conceptually accounted for as a psychophysical scalar that describes subjective differences in the rate of time passage. This study offers a proof-of-concept examination of hyperboloid s in relation to participant time-based experiences. A crowdsourced sample of adults (N = 211) completed tasks measuring time estimation (i.e., reporting how much time passed during a distractor task) and temporal distance estimation (i.e., reporting how temporally distant a delay feels). Participants generally underestimated durations in the time estimation task, where income and completion of a preceding day-framed discounting task (versus date-framed), but not Myerson and Green's s (b = -0.19), and modestly Rachlin's s (b = 0.82), exhibited a statistically significant relation with time estimation accuracy. Similarly, participant age and delay framing, but not hyperboloid s, exhibited a statistically significant relation with temporal distance estimation discrepancies. Broadly, data suggest that s may not be accounting for differences in time estimation as measured in this sample. At most, the modest effect observed for Rachlin's s suggests limited conceptual value, meriting further consideration of the metric's account of subject-level differences.

Indexed as

Delay DiscountingModels, PsychologicalTime PerceptionAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedYoung AdultBehavioral economicsDelay discountingHyperboloidTemporal distanceTime estimation

Identifiers

PMID41067396
PMCPMC12831992

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.