Humans are reported to discount delayed rewards at lower rates than nonhumans. conditions differing in the availability of reinforcement during delays. At one extreme participants were free YM201636 to leave their computer without returning and engage in any behavior during reward delays (modeling typical human tasks). At the opposite extreme participants were required to stay at their computer and engage in little other behavior during reward delays (modeling typical nonhuman tasks). Discounting rates increased as an orderly function of opportunity cost. Results also indicated predominantly hyperbolic discounting the ��magnitude effect �� steeper discounting of cigarettes than money and positive correlations between discounting rates of these commodities. This is the 1st study to test the effects of opportunity costs on discounting and suggests that procedural variations may partially account for observed species variations in discounting. after makes me feel JUST AS GOOD as:�� where was equal to the delayed money amount ($10 or $100) and was equal to the delay. An interactive slider tool displayed below the elicitation quick allowed participants to designate an amount in ��dollars right now�� that was subjectively equivalent to the discounted value of the delayed amount. Numerical ideals ranging from zero to the delayed amount were displayed above the slider tool in increments related to tenths of the delayed amount. The default position of the slider was constantly the delayed amount (rightmost position). As participants relocated the slider a value rounded to the nearest cent was displayed to the right of the slider. Once the participant experienced relocated the slider to his/her desired location he/she clicked a switch to post the corresponding Rabbit Polyclonal to JM4. value and advance to the next question. With the exception of distractor questions (explained below) participants could not advance to the next query unless the slider had been relocated from its default position. Cigarette discounting With the exception of the following modifications the cigarette discounting assessment was identical to the money discounting assessment. First smoking YM201636 YM201636 cigarettes replaced money as the discounted commodity (observe Table 1) and as such only smokers (Batch 1) completed this section. Second rather than taking their monetary circumstances into account when considering each framing condition participants were asked to take into account their current smoking patterns. Finally mainly because described below the response topography differed slightly from that of the slider tool used in the money discounting assessment. For each delay question the YM201636 following elicitation quick was presented immediately below the ��smoking cigarettes right now�� and ��smoking cigarettes later�� descriptions: ��Receiving smoking cigarettes after makes me feel JUST AS GOOD as receiving right now the number of smoking cigarettes in the text package below. This quantity below must be less than or equal to was equal to the money-equivalent cigarette value calculated earlier in the survey from the participant and was equal to the delay. Participants entered into a text package located below the quick the number of smoking cigarettes receivable immediately that would be subjectively equivalent to receiving the delayed amount. Process The HIT was promoted on MTurk with the title ��Tell us how you feel about hypothetical (pretend) incentive scenarios. 30-minute survey with $1 bonus possible.�� Clicking on the hyperlink to the survey opened a new tab in the participant��s internet browser. Participants were instructed to accomplish the survey in one seated. Within the survey and following demographic questions the money discounting assessment constantly preceded the cigarette discounting assessment (Batch 1 only). At the conclusion of the survey participants were instructed to generate and post a 6 alphanumeric code. Upon returning to MTurk to post the completed HIT participants were prompted to enter this code into a text package to verify that they had completed the survey. All participants with matching codes received $1 as foundation pay for submitting the survey and completing the HIT. Three techniques were used to improve participant attention and engagement or allow us to detect poor attention and engagement. First in the HIT and survey descriptions participants were instructed that paying attention during the survey and answering questions carefully could potentially result in a $1 bonus payment. Second during the survey occasional.