Hostname: page-component-5cf477f64f-n7lw4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-07T22:33:21.603Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Paid and hypothetical time preferences are the same: lab, field and online evidence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2025

Pablo Brañas-Garza Open the ORCID record for Pablo Brañas-Garza [Opens in a new window] ,
Diego Jorrat ,
Antonio M. Espín  and
Angel Sánchez
Pablo Brañas-Garza*
Affiliation:
LoyolaBehLab, Universidad Loyola Andalucía, Córdoba, Spain Fundación ETEA, Universidad Loyola Andalucía, Córdoba, Spain
Diego Jorrat
Affiliation:
LoyolaBehLab, Universidad Loyola Andalucía, Córdoba, Spain Fundación ETEA, Universidad Loyola Andalucía, Córdoba, Spain
Antonio M. Espín
Affiliation:
LoyolaBehLab, Universidad Loyola Andalucía, Córdoba, Spain Department of Social Anthropology, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain
Angel Sánchez
Affiliation:
GISC & IBiDat, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Leganés, Spain BIFI, Universidad de Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The use of real decision-making incentives remains under debate after decades of economic experiments. In time preferences experiments involving future payments, real incentives are particularly problematic due to between-options differences in transaction costs, among other issues. What if hypothetical payments provide accurate data which, moreover, avoid transaction cost problems? In this paper, we test whether the use of hypothetical or one-out-of-ten-participants probabilistic—versus real—payments affects the elicitation of short-term and long-term discounting in a standard multiple price list task. We analyze data from a lab experiment in Spain and well-powered field and online experiments in Nigeria and the UK, respectively (N = 2,038). Our results indicate that the preferences elicited using the three payment methods are mostly the same: we can reject that either hypothetical or one-out-of-ten payments change any of the four preference measures considered by more than 0.18 SD with respect to real payments.

Keywords

Time preferencesHypothetical vs. real payoffsLabFieldOnline experimentsBRIS

JEL classification

C91: Laboratory, Individual Behavior C93: Field Experiments
Type
Original Paper
Information
Experimental Economics , Volume 26 , Issue 2 , April 2023 , pp. 412 - 434
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Economic Science Association 2022.

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.)

Footnotes

Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-022-09776-5.

References

Äkerlund, D., Golsteyn, B. H. H., Grönqvist, H., & Lindahl, L. (2016). Time discounting and criminal behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(22), 6160–6165. 10.1073/pnas.1522445113CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alan, S., & Ertac, S. (2018). Fostering patience in the classroom: Results from randomized educational intervention. Journal of Political Economy, 126(5), 1865–1911. 10.1086/699007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, S., Harrison, G. W., Lau, M. I., & Rutström, E. E. (2008). Eliciting risk and time preferences. Econometrica, 76(3), 583–618. 10.1111/j.1468-0262.2008.00848.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreoni, J., & Sprenger, C. (2012). Estimating time preferences from convex budgets. The American Economic Review, 102(7), 3333–3356. 10.1257/aer.102.7.3333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreoni, J., & Sprenger, C. (2012). Risk preferences are not time preferences. The American Economic Review, 102(7), 3357–3376. 10.1257/aer.102.7.3357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arechar, A. A., Gächter, S., & Molleman, L. (2018). Conducting interactive experiments online. Experimental Economics, 21(1), 99–131. 10.1007/s10683-017-9527-2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ashraf, N., Karlan, D., & Yin, W. (2006). Tying Odysseus to the mast: Evidence from a commitment savings product in the Philippines. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(2), 635–672. 10.1162/qjec.2006.121.2.635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balakrishnan, U., Haushofer, J., & Jakiela, P. (2020). How soon is now? Evidence of present bias from convex time budget experiments. Experimental Economics, 23(2), 294–321. 10.1007/s10683-019-09617-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baltussen, G., Post, G. T., Van Den Assem, M. J., & Wakker, P. P. (2012). Random incentive systems in a dynamic choice experiment. Experimental Economics, 15(3), 418–443. 10.1007/s10683-011-9306-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickel, W. K., Pitcock, J. A., Yi, R., & Angtuaco, E. J. (2009). Congruence of BOLD response across intertemporal choice conditions: Fictive and real money gains and losses. Journal of Neuroscience, 29(27), 8839–8846. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5319-08.2009CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borghans, L., & Golsteyn, B. H. (2006). Time discounting and the body mass index. Economics and Human Biology, 4(1), 39–61. 10.1016/j.ehb.2005.10.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bosch-Domènech, A., Branas-Garza, P., & Espín, A. M. (2014). Can exposure to prenatal sex hormones (2D: 4D) predict cognitive reflection?. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 43, 1–10. 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2014.01.023CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brañas-Garza, P., Estepa, L., Jorrat, D. A., Orozco, V., & Rascón Ramírez, E. (2021). To pay or not to pay: Measuring risk preferences in lab and field. Judgment and Decision Making, 16(5), 1290–1313. 10.1017/S1930297500008433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brañas-Garza, P., Jorrat, D., Kovářík, J., & López, M. C. (2021). Hyper-altruistic behavior vanishes with high stakes. PLoS ONE, 16(8), e0255668 10.1371/journal.pone.0255668CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burks, S., Carpenter, J., Götte, L., & Rustichini, A. (2012). Which measures of time preference best predict outcomes: Evidence from a large-scale field experiment. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 84(1), 308–320. 10.1016/j.jebo.2012.03.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cadena, B. C., & Keys, B. J. (2015). Human capital and the lifetime costs of impatience. American Economic Journal Economic Policy, 7(3), 126–153. 10.1257/pol.20130081CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camerer, C. F., & Hogarth, R. M. (1999). The effects of financial incentives in experiments: A review and capital-labor-production framework. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19(1/3), 7–42. 10.1023/A:1007850605129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castillo, M., Ferraro, P. J., Jordan, J. L., & Petrie, R. (2011). The today and tomorrow of kids: Time preferences and educational outcomes of children. Journal of Public Economics, 95(11–12), 1377–1385. 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2011.07.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castillo, M., Jordan, J. L., & Petrie, R. (2019). Discount rates of children and high school graduation. The Economic Journal, 129(619), 1153–1181. 10.1111/ecoj.12574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chabris, C. F., Laibson, D., Morris, C. L., Schuldt, J. P., & Taubinsky, D. (2008). Individual laboratory-measured discount rates predict field behavior. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 37(2–3), 237–269. 10.1007/s11166-008-9053-xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Charness, G., Gneezy, U., & Halladay, B. (2016). Experimental methods: Pay one or pay all. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 131, 141–150. 10.1016/j.jebo.2016.08.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clot, S., Grolleau, G., & Ibanez, L. (2018). Shall we pay all? An experimental test of random incentivized systems. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 73, 93–98. 10.1016/j.socec.2018.01.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J., Ericson, K. M., Laibson, D., & White, J. M. (2020). Measuring time preferences. Journal of Economic Literature, 58(2), 299–347. 10.1257/jel.20191074CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coller, M., & Williams, M. B. (1999). Experimental Economics, 2(2), 107–127. 10.1023/A:1009986005690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewitte, S., & Cremer, D. D. (2001). Self-control and cooperation: Different concepts, similar decisions? A question of the right perspective. The Journal of Psychology, 135(2), 133–153. 10.1080/00223980109603686CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D., & Sunde, U. (2010). Are risk aversion and impatience related to cognitive ability?. The American Economic Review, 100(3), 1238–1260. 10.1257/aer.100.3.1238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. (2005). Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science, 16(12), 939–944. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01641.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Epper, T., Fehr, E., Fehr-Duda, H., Kreiner, C. T., Lassen, D. D., Leth-Petersen, S., & Rasmussen, G. N. (2020). Time discounting and wealth inequality. The American Economic Review, 110(4), 1177–1205. 10.1257/aer.20181096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Espín, A. M., Brañas-Garza, P., Herrmann, B., & Gamella, J. F. (2012). Patient and impatient punishers of free-riders. Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences, 279(1749), 4923–4928. 10.1098/rspb.2012.2043CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Espín, A. M., Correa, M., & Ruiz-Villaverde, A. (2019). Patience predicts within-group cooperation in an ingroup bias-free way. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 83, 101456.Google Scholar
Espín, A. M., Exadaktylos, F., Herrmann, B., & Brañas-Garza, P. (2015). Short-and long-run goals in ultimatum bargaining: Impatience predicts spite-based behavior. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 9, 214 10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00214CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Falk, A., Becker, A., Dohmen, T. J., Huffman, D., & Sunde, U. (2016). The preference survey module: A validated instrument for measuring risk, time, and social preferences. Netspar Discussion Paper No. 01/2016-003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falk, A., Becker, A., Dohmen, T., Enke, B., Huffman, D., & Sunde, U. (2018). Global evidence on economic preferences. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 133(4), 1645–1692. 10.1093/qje/qjy013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4), 25–42. 10.1257/089533005775196732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frederick, S., Loewenstein, G., & O’Donoghue, T. (2002). Time discounting and time preference: A critical review. Journal of Economic Literature, 40(2), 351–401. 10.1257/jel.40.2.351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giné, X., Goldberg, J., Silverman, D., & Yang, D. (2017). Revising commitments: Field evidence on the adjustment of prior choices. The Economic Journal, 128(608), 159–188. 10.1111/ecoj.12378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golsteyn, B. H., Grönqvist, H., & Lindahl, L. (2014). Adolescent time preferences predict lifetime outcomes. The Economic Journal, 124(580), F739–F761. 10.1111/ecoj.12095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, G. W., Lau, M. I., & Williams, M. B. (2002). Estimating individual discount rates in Denmark: A field experiment. The American Economic Review, 92(5), 1606–1617. 10.1257/000282802762024674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holt, C. A., & Laury, S. K. (2002). Risk aversion and incentive effects. The American Economic Review, 92(5), 1644–1655. 10.1257/000282802762024700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horton, J. J., Rand, D. G., & Zeckhauser, R. J. (2011). The online laboratory: Conducting experiments in a real labor market. Experimental Economics, 14(3), 399–425. 10.1007/s10683-011-9273-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, M. O., & Yariv, L. (2014). Present bias and collective dynamic choice in the lab. The American Economic Review, 104(12), 4184–4204. 10.1257/aer.104.12.4184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, M. W., & Bickel, W. K. (2002). Within-subject comparison of real and hypothetical money rewards in delay discounting. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 77(2), 129–146. 10.1901/jeab.2002.77-129CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, H. B., Choi, S., Kim, B., & Pop-Eleches, C. (2018). The role of education interventions in improving economic rationality. Science, 362(6410), 83–86. 10.1126/science.aar6987CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirby, K. N., Winston, G. C., & Santiesteban, M. (2005). Impatience and grades: Delay-discount rates correlate negatively with college GPA. Learning and Individual Differences, 15(3), 213–222. 10.1016/j.lindif.2005.01.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laibson, D. (1997). Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2), 443–478. 10.1162/003355397555253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larney, A., Rotella, A., & Barclay, P. (2019). Stake size effects in ultimatum game and dictator game offers: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 151, 61–72. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.01.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawyer, S. R., Schoepflin, F., Green, R., & Jenks, C. (2011). Discounting of hypothetical and potentially real outcomes in nicotine-dependent and nondependent samples. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 19(4), 263–274. 10.1037/a0024141CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lührmann, M., Serra-Garcia, M., & Winter, J. (2018). The impact of financial education on adolescents’ intertemporal choices. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 10(3), 309–332.Google Scholar
Macchia, L., Plagnol, A. C., & Reimers, S. (2018). Does experience with high inflation affect intertemporal decision making? Sensitivity to inflation rates in Argentine and British delay discounting choices. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 75, 76–83. 10.1016/j.socec.2018.05.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madden, G. J., Begotka, A. M., Raiff, B. R., & Kastern, L. L. (2003). Delay discounting of real and hypothetical rewards. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 11(2), 139–145. 10.1037/1064-1297.11.2.139CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Madden, G. J., Raiff, B. R., Lagorio, C. H., Begotka, A. M., Mueller, A. M., Hehli, D. J., & Wegener, A. A. (2004). Delay discounting of potentially real and hypothetical rewards: II. Between-and within-subject comparisons. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 12(4), 251–261. 10.1037/1064-1297.12.4.251CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martín, J., Brañas-Garza, P., Espín, A. M., Gamella, J. F., & Herrmann, B. (2019). The appropriate response of Spanish Gitanos: Short-run orientation beyond current socio-economic status. Evolution and Human Behavior, 40(1), 12–22. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2018.07.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matusiewicz, A. K., Carter, A. E., Landes, R. D., & Yi, R. (2013). Statistical equivalence and test–retest reliability of delay and probability discounting using real and hypothetical rewards. Behavioural Processes, 100, 116–122. 10.1016/j.beproc.2013.07.019CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McClure, S. M., Laibson, D. I., Loewenstein, G., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). Sepa-rate neural systems value immediate and delayed monetary rewards. Science, 306(5695), 503–507. 10.1126/science.1100907CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, S., & Sprenger, C. (2010). Present-biased preferences and credit card borrowing. American Economic Journal Applied Economics, 2(1), 193–210. 10.1257/app.2.1.193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, S., & Sprenger, C. D. (2013). Discounting financial literacy: Time preferences and participation in financial education programs. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 95, 159–174. 10.1016/j.jebo.2012.02.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matousek, J., Havranek, T., & Irsova, Z. (2022). Individual discount rates: A meta-analysis of experimental evidence. Experimental Economics, 25(1), 318–358. 10.1007/s10683-021-09716-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Non, A., & Tempelaar, D. (2016). Time preferences, study effort, and academic performance. Economics of Education Review, 54, 36–61. 10.1016/j.econedurev.2016.06.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palan, S., & Schitter, C. (2018). Prolific.ac—A subject pool for online experiments. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 17, 22–27. 10.1016/j.jbef.2017.12.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paola, M. D., & Gioia, F. (2014). Does patience matter in marriage stability? Some evidence from Italy. Review of Economics of the Household, 15(2), 549–577. 10.1007/s11150-014-9275-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paola, M. D., & Gioia, F. (2017). Impatience and academic performance: Less effort and less ambitious goals. Journal of Policy Modeling, 39(3), 443–460. 10.1016/j.jpolmod.2016.11.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perez-Arce, F. (2017). The effect of education on time preferences. Economics of Education Review, 56, 52–64. 10.1016/j.econedurev.2016.11.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phelps, E. S., & Pollak, R. A. (1968). On second-best national saving and game-equilibrium growth. The Review of Economic Studies, 35(2), 185–199. 10.2307/2296547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prissé, B. (2022). Visual continuous time preferences: Lab, field and high schools. Mimeo., 2, 888.Google Scholar
Prissé, B., & Jorrat, D. (2022). Lab vs online experiments: No differences. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 100, 101910 10.1016/j.socec.2022.101910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rachlin, H. (2002). Altruism and selfishness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25(02), 788 10.1017/S0140525X02000055CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rand, D. G. (2012). The promise of Mechanical Turk: How online labor markets can help theorists run behavioral experiments. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 299, 172–179. 10.1016/j.jtbi.2011.03.004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schaner, S. (2015). Do opposites detract? Intrahousehold preference heterogeneity and inefficient strategic savings. American Economic Journal Applied Economics, 7(2), 135–174. 10.1257/app.20130271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sozou, P. (1998). On hyperbolic discounting and uncertain hazard rates. Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences, 265(1), 2015–2020. 10.1098/rspb.1998.0534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunde, U., Dohmen, T., Enke, B., Falk, A., Huffman, D., & Huffman, G. (2022). Patience and Comparative Development. The Review of Economic Studies, 89(5), 2806–2840. 10.1093/restud/rdab084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutter, M., Kocher, M. G., Glätzle-Rützler, D., & Trautmann, S. T. (2013). Impatience and uncertainty: Experimental decisions predict adolescents field behavior. The American Economic Review, 103(1), 510–531. 10.1257/aer.103.1.510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takeuchi, K. (2011). Non-parametric test of time consistency: Present bias and future bias. Games and Economic Behavior, 71, 456–478. 10.1016/j.geb.2010.05.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanaka, T., Camerer, C. F., & Nguyen, Q. (2010). Risk and time preferences: Linking experimental and household survey data from Vietnam. The American Economic Review, 100(1), 557–571. 10.1257/aer.100.1.557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ubfal, D. (2016). How general are time preferences? Eliciting good-specific discount rates. Journal of Development Economics, 118, 150–170. 10.1016/j.jdeveco.2015.07.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zizzo, D. J. (2010). Experimenter demand effects in economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 13(1), 75–98. 10.1007/s10683-009-9230-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Brañas-Garza et al. supplementary material

Online Appendix for Paid and hypothetical time preferences are the same: Lab, field and online evidence
Download Brañas-Garza et al. supplementary material(File)
File 820.3 KB