IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hrv/faseco/9972760.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What Is for Me Is Not for You: Brain Correlates of Intertemporal Choice for Self and Other

Author

Listed:
  • Albrecht, Konstanze
  • Volz, Kirsten G.
  • Sutter, Matthias
  • Laibson, David I.
  • Yves von Cramon, D.

Abstract

People have present-biased preferences: they choose more impatiently when choosing between an immediate reward and a delayed reward, than when choosing between a delayed reward and a more delayed reward. Following McClure et al. [McClure, S.M., Laibson, D.I., Loewenstein, G., Cohen, J.D. (2004). Separate neural systems value immediate and delayed monetary rewards. Science, 306, 503.], we find that areas in the dopaminergic reward system show greater activation when a binary choice set includes both an immediate reward and a delayed reward in contrast to activation measured when the binary choice set contains only delayed rewards. The presence of an immediate reward in the choice set elevates activation of the ventral striatum, pregenual anterior cingulate cortex and anterior medial prefrontal cortex. These dopaminergic reward areas are also responsive to the identity of the recipient of the reward. Even an immediate reward does not activate these dopaminergic regions when the decision is being made for another person. Our results support the hypotheses that participants show less affective engagement (i) when they are making choices for themselves that only involve options in the future or (ii) when they are making choices for someone else. As hypothesized, we also find that behavioral choices reflect more patience when choosing for someone else.

Suggested Citation

  • Albrecht, Konstanze & Volz, Kirsten G. & Sutter, Matthias & Laibson, David I. & Yves von Cramon, D., 2011. "What Is for Me Is Not for You: Brain Correlates of Intertemporal Choice for Self and Other," Scholarly Articles 9972760, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:hrv:faseco:9972760
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/9972760/What_Is_For_Me.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Laibson, 1997. "Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 443-478.
    2. Knutson, Brian & Peterson, Richard, 2005. "Neurally reconstructing expected utility," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 305-315, August.
    3. Daniel Kahneman, 2003. "Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1449-1475, December.
    4. Paul A. Samuelson, 1937. "A Note on Measurement of Utility," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 4(2), pages 155-161.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Leigh Anderson & Kostas G. Stamoulis, 2006. "Applying Behavioural Economics to International Development Policy," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2006-24, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    2. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    3. Mina Ličen & Sergeja Slapničar, 2022. "Can process accountability mitigate myopic biases? An experimental analysis," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 1-26, March.
    4. Teck H. Ho & Noah Lim & Colin Camerer, 2005. "Modeling the Psychology of Consumer and Firm Behavior with Behavioral Economics," Levine's Bibliography 784828000000000476, UCLA Department of Economics.
    5. Leonhard K. Lades, 2011. "Towards an Incentive Salience Model of Intertemporal Choice," Papers on Economics and Evolution 2011-18, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.
    6. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2017. "Richard H. Thaler: Integrating Economics with Psychology," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2017-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    7. Adriani, Fabrizio & Sonderegger, Silvia, 2020. "Optimal similarity judgments in intertemporal choice (and beyond)," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    8. Holden, Stein, 2014. "Explaining anomalies in intertemporal choice: A mental zooming theory," CLTS Working Papers 2/14, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies, revised 10 Oct 2019.
    9. Lades, Leonhard K., 2012. "Towards an incentive salience model of intertemporal choice," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 833-841.
    10. Luigi Mittone & Lucia Savadori, 2008. "Influence of time delay on choice between gambles: Savoring the emotion," CEEL Working Papers 0802, Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
    11. Philip Streich & Jack S. Levy, 2007. "Time Horizons, Discounting, and Intertemporal Choice," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 51(2), pages 199-226, April.
    12. Pier-André Bouchard St-Amant & Jean-Denis Garon, 2015. "Optimal redistributive pensions and the cost of self-control," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 22(5), pages 723-740, October.
    13. Peysakhovich, Alexander, 2014. "How to commit (if you must): Commitment contracts and the dual-self model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 100-112.
    14. Haewon Yoon, 2020. "Impatience and Time Inconsistency in Discounting Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(12), pages 5850-5860, December.
    15. Brown, Zachary & Johnstone, Nick & Haščič, Ivan & Vong, Laura & Barascud, Francis, 2013. "Testing the effect of defaults on the thermostat settings of OECD employees," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 128-134.
    16. Marzilli Ericson, K. M. & White, J. M. & Laibson, David I. & Cohen, J. D., 2015. "Money Earlier or Later? Simple Heuristics Explain Intertemporal Choices Better Than Delay Discounting Does," Scholarly Articles 30367415, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    17. Holden, Stein T. & Tilahun, Mesfin & Sommervoll, Dag Einar, 2022. "Is diminishing impatience in time-dated risky prospects explained by probability weighting?," CLTS Working Papers 3/22, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies.
    18. Yinan Yang & Qian Wang, 2018. "Insurance Inclusion, Time Preference And Stock Investment Of The Chinese Households," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 63(01), pages 27-44, March.
    19. Read, Daniel & Roelofsma, Peter H. M. P., 2003. "Subadditive versus hyperbolic discounting: A comparison of choice and matching," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 140-153, July.
    20. James Andreoni & Michael Callen & Karrar Hussain & Muhammad Yasir Khan & Charles Sprenger, 2023. "Using Preference Estimates to Customize Incentives: An Application to Polio Vaccination Drives in Pakistan," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 21(4), pages 1428-1477.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hrv:faseco:9972760. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Office for Scholarly Communication (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deharus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.