ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2026
Dissociating the relationship between time perception and decisions to delay gratification.
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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.