Hostname: page-component-5cf477f64f-bmd9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-06T20:57:17.497Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Can intertemporal choice experiments elicit time preferences for consumption?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2025

Robin P. Cubitt  and
Daniel Read
Robin P. Cubitt*
Affiliation:
School of Economics, Sir Clive Granger Building, University Park, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK
Daniel Read*
Affiliation:
Durham Business School, University of Durham, Mill Hill Lane, Durham, DH1 3LB, UK
*
e-mail: [email protected]
e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The paper considers what can be inferred about experimental subjects’ time preferences for consumption from responses to laboratory tasks involving tradeoffs between sums of money at different dates, if subjects can reschedule consumption spending relative to income in external capital markets. It distinguishes three approaches identifiable in the literature: the straightforward view; the separation view; and the censored data view. It shows that none of these is fully satisfactory and discusses the resulting implications for intertemporal decision-making experiments.

Keywords

Discount ratesElicitation of time preferencesIntertemporal decision-making experiments

JEL classification

D12: Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis D11: Consumer Economics: Theory C91: Laboratory, Individual Behavior D90: General‡ C90: General D91: Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making‡
Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Economics , Volume 10 , Issue 4 , December 2007 , pp. 369 - 389
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 Economic Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andersen, S., Harrison, G. W., Lau, M. I., & Rutstrom, E. E. (2006). Eliciting risk and time preferences, mimeo, Universities of Copenhagen, Central Florida and Durham.Google Scholar
Coller, M., & Williams, M. B. (1999). Eliciting individual discount rates. Experimental Economics, 2, 107–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, I. (1930). The theory of interest. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Frederick, S., Loewenstein, G., & O'Donoghue, T. (2002). Time discounting and time preference: a critical review. Journal of Economic Literature, XL, 351–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, G. W. (1992). Theory and misbehaviour of first-price auctions: reply. American Economic Review, 82, 1426–1443.Google Scholar
Harrison, G. W., Lau, M. I., & Williams, M. B. (2002). Estimating individual discount rates in Denmark. American Economic Review, 92, 1606–1617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, G. W., Harstad, R. M., & Rutstrom, E. E. (2004). Experimental methods and elicitation of values. Experimental Economics, 7, 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, G. W., Lau, M. I., Rutstrom, E. E., & Sullivan, M. B. (2005). Eliciting risk and time preferences using field experiments: some methodological issues. In Carpenter, J., Harrison, G. W., & List, J. A. (Eds.), Field experiments in economics Vol. 10, (pp. 125–218). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, Research in Experimental Economics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koopmans, T. C. (1960). Stationary ordinal utility and impatience, Econometrica, 28, 287–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, R. F. (1976). Preferences over time. In Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (Eds.), Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs (ch. 9). John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Mulligan, C. B. (1996). A logical economist's argument against hyperbolic discounting, mimeo, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Pender, J. L. (1996). Discount rates and credit markets: theory and evidence from rural India. Journal of Development Economics, 50, 257–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Read, D. (2004). Intertemporal choice. In Koehler, D., & Harvey, N. (Eds.), Handbook of judgement and decision making. Blackwell.Google Scholar
Roelofsma, P. H. M. P., & Read, D. (2000). Intransitive intertemporal choice. Journal of Behavioural Decision Making, 13, 161–177.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P. A. (1937). A note on measurement of utility. Review of Economic Studies, 4, 155–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugden, R. (1998). The metric of opportunity. Economics and Philosophy, 14, 307–338.Google Scholar
Sugden, R. (2004). The opportunity criterion: consumer sovereignty without the assumption of coherent preferences. American Economic Review, 94, 1014–1033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thaler, R. (1981). Some empirical evidence on dynamic inconsistency. Economics Letters, 8, 201–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, A., Slovic, P., & Kahneman, D. (1990). The causes of preference reversal. American Economic Review, 80, 204–217.Google Scholar