Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42618871›Full record

ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2026

Dissociating the relationship between time perception and decisions to delay gratification.

Isaac J George, Morgan G Moll, Ryan K Read, Hannah M Stealey, Thomas W Elston

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2026. 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.

Isaac J GeorgeDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 78712, USA.
Morgan G MollDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 78712, USA.
Ryan K ReadDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 78712, USA.
Hannah M StealeyDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 78712, USA.
Thomas W ElstonDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 78712, USA. elston@utexas.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ability to forgo an immediate reward in favor of a larger, later one is central to healthy decision-making--yet some people struggle to delay gratification. A prominent theory proposes that people with faster internal clocks experience delays as subjectively longer and more costly, leading them to discount future rewards more steeply. Here, we test this theory's central prediction by asking whether individual differences in time perception can explain individual differences in temporal decision-making. We recruited 226 participants to complete tasks measuring time perception and delay sensitivity across experiential and hypothetical decisions. We found no relationship between time perception and temporal decision-making. We also found that survey and task-based measures of temporal discounting are unrelated and that neither measure predicts real-world timing-related behaviors. Our findings indicate that time perception and temporal decision-making derive from dissociable cognitive processes and that standard laboratory measures of discounting have limited ecological validity. We suggest that foraging paradigms, which embed time-reward trade-offs in naturalistic behavioral contexts offer a promising path toward more ecologically valid and mechanistically tractable approaches to understanding how the brain trades off time and reward during decision-making.

Indexed as

Decision MakingDelay DiscountingRewardTime PerceptionAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansIndividualityMaleYoung AdultDecision makingDelay discountingDelayed gratificationTime perception

Identifiers

PMID42618871
PMCPMC13490008

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.