IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v53y2007i9p1423-1438.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Fragility of Time: Time-Insensitivity and Valuation of the Near and Far Future

Author

Listed:
  • Jane E. J. Ebert

    (Department of Marketing and Logistics, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455)

  • Drazen Prelec

    (Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142)

Abstract

We propose that the temporal dimension is fragile in that choices are insufficiently sensitive to it, and second, such sensitivity as exists is exceptionally malleable, unlike other dimensions such as money, which are attended by default. To test this, we axiomatize a "constant-sensitivity" discount function, and in four studies, we show that the degree of time-sensitivity is inadequate relative to the compound discounting norm, and strongly susceptible to manipulation. Time-sensitivity is increased by a comparative within-subject presentation (Experiment 1), direct instruction (Experiment 3), and provision of a visual cue for time duration (Experiment 4); time-sensitivity is decreased using a time pressure manipulation (Experiment 2). In each study, the sensitivity manipulation has an opposite effect on near-future and far-future valuations: Increased sensitivity decreases discounting in the near future and increases discounting in the far future. In contrast, such sensitivity manipulations have little effect on the money dimension.

Suggested Citation

  • Jane E. J. Ebert & Drazen Prelec, 2007. "The Fragility of Time: Time-Insensitivity and Valuation of the Near and Far Future," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(9), pages 1423-1438, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:53:y:2007:i:9:p:1423-1438
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0671
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0671
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0671?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Drazen Prelec & George Loewenstein, 1991. "Decision Making Over Time and Under Uncertainty: A Common Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(7), pages 770-786, July.
    2. Fishburn, Peter C & Rubinstein, Ariel, 1982. "Time Preference," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 23(3), pages 677-694, October.
    3. Dorte Gyrd‐Hansen & Jes Søgaard, 1998. "Discounting life‐years: whither time preference?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(2), pages 121-127, March.
    4. Sultan, Fareena & Winer, Russell S., 1993. "Time preferences for products and attributes and the adoption of technologydriven consumer durable innovations," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 587-613, December.
    5. Thaler, Richard, 1981. "Some empirical evidence on dynamic inconsistency," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 201-207.
    6. Drazen Prelec, 2004. "Decreasing Impatience: A Criterion for Non‐stationary Time Preference and “Hyperbolic” Discounting," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 106(3), pages 511-532, October.
    7. Read, Daniel, 2001. "Is Time-Discounting Hyperbolic or Subadditive?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 5-32, July.
    8. Hsee, Christopher K., 1996. "The Evaluability Hypothesis: An Explanation for Preference Reversals between Joint and Separate Evaluations of Alternatives," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 247-257, September.
    9. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    10. Kirby, Kris N. & Marakovic, Nino N., 1995. "Modeling Myopic Decisions: Evidence for Hyperbolic Delay-Discounting within Subjects and Amounts," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 22-30, October.
    11. Gretchen B. Chapman & Elliot J. Coups, 1999. "Time Preferences and Preventive Health Behavior," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 19(3), pages 307-314, August.
    12. George F. Loewenstein, 1988. "Frames of Mind in Intertemporal Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 200-214, February.
    13. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    14. Green, Paul E & Srinivasan, V, 1978. "Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 5(2), pages 103-123, Se.
    15. Drazen Prelec, 1998. "The Probability Weighting Function," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(3), pages 497-528, May.
    16. Loewenstein, George, 1987. "Anticipation and the Valuation of Delayed Consumption," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(387), pages 666-684, September.
    17. Shane Frederick & George Loewenstein & Ted O'Donoghue, 2002. "Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 351-401, June.
    18. Maribeth Coller & Melonie Williams, 1999. "Eliciting Individual Discount Rates," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 2(2), pages 107-127, December.
    19. Lowenstein, George & Prelec, Drazen, 1991. "Negative Time Preference," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(2), pages 347-352, May.
    20. Marjorie K. Shelley, 1993. "Outcome Signs, Question Frames and Discount Rates," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(7), pages 806-815, July.
    21. 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.
    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. Manzini, Paola & Mariotti, Marco, 2007. "Choice Over Time," IZA Discussion Papers 2993, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Scholten, Marc & Read, Daniel, 2006. "Beyond discounting: the tradeoff model of intertemporal choice," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 22710, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Jos'e Cl'audio do Nascimento, 2019. "Decision-making and Fuzzy Temporal Logic," Papers 1901.01970, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2019.
    4. Jeffery L. Guyse & L. Robin Keller & Candice H. Huynh, 2020. "Valuing Sequences of Lives Lost or Saved Over Time: Preference for Uniform Sequences," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 24-38, March.
    5. W. David Bradford & Paul Dolan & Matteo M. Galizzi, 2019. "Looking ahead: Subjective time perception and individual discounting," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 43-69, February.
    6. Serdar Sayman & Ayse Öncüler, 2009. "An Investigation of Time Inconsistency," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(3), pages 470-482, March.
    7. Uri Ben-Zion & Jan Pieter Krahnen & TAL SHAVIT, 2007. "Subjective Evaluation Of Delayed Risky Outcomes: An Experimental Approach," Working Papers 0709, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    8. Thomas Epper & Helga Fehr-Duda & Adrian Bruhin, 2011. "Viewing the future through a warped lens: Why uncertainty generates hyperbolic discounting," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 169-203, December.
    9. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Han Bleichrodt & Olivier l’Haridon, 2013. "Sign-dependence in intertemporal choice," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 225-253, December.
    10. Takeuchi, Kan, 2011. "Non-parametric test of time consistency: Present bias and future bias," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 456-478, March.
    11. Thomas Epper & Helga Fehr-Duda, 2012. "The missing link: unifying risk taking and time discounting," ECON - Working Papers 096, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Oct 2018.
    12. Huang, Yeu-Shiang & Hsu, Chao-Ze, 2008. "An anticipative hyperbolic discount utility on intertemporal decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 184(1), pages 281-290, January.
    13. Manel Baucells & Franz H. Heukamp, 2012. "Probability and Time Trade-Off," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(4), pages 831-842, April.
    14. Walther, Herbert, 2010. "Anomalies in intertemporal choice, time-dependent uncertainty and expected utility - A common approach," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 114-130, February.
    15. McAlvanah, Patrick, 2010. "Subadditivity, patience, and utility: The effects of dividing time intervals," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 325-337, November.
    16. Venkataraghavan Krishnaswamy & R. P. Sundarraj, 2019. "Impatience Characteristics in Cloud-Computing-Services Procurement: Effects of Delay Horizon and Situational Involvement," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(5), pages 961-990, October.
    17. Faralla, Valeria & Novarese, Marco & Ardizzone, Antonella, 2017. "Framing Effects in Intertemporal Choice: A Nudge Experiment," MPRA Paper 82086, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Wang, Mei & Rieger, Marc Oliver & Hens, Thorsten, 2016. "How time preferences differ: Evidence from 53 countries," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 115-135.
    19. Shotaro Shiba & Kazumi Shimizu, 2018. "Does time inconsistency differ between gain and loss? An intra-personal comparison using a non-parametric elicitation method (A revised version)," Working Papers 1807, Waseda University, Faculty of Political Science and Economics.
    20. Dorian Jullien, 2018. "Under Risk, Over Time, Regarding Other People: Language and Rationality within Three Dimensions," Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, in: Including a Symposium on Latin American Monetary Thought: Two Centuries in Search of Originality, volume 36, pages 119-155, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:53:y:2007:i:9:p:1423-1438. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.