Skip to main content

Varying Impatience

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Economics of Self-Destructive Choices

Part of the book series: Advances in Japanese Business and Economics ((AJBE,volume 10))

  • 675 Accesses

Abstract

In standard economics, or “neo-classical economics,” discussions have been restricted to the paradigm of the “Discounted Utility Model.” This theory assumes that people maximize the discounted sum of the gratification flows at each point in time, where future gratifications are presupposed to be discounted at a constant rate in any situation and for any intertemporal-choice problem. However, as I discussed briefly in the previous chapter, 40 years of empirical research has shown that a decision-maker’s personal discount rate varies depending on choice conditions (e.g., differing amounts and/or delays) and the context in which the intertemporal-choice problem is framed. If this fluctuation only occurred in exceptional situations and did not introduce biases into the decision-making process, it would not be a serious problem. However, as I illustrate below, the phenomenon is associated with many, and in some cases very serious, “irrational” behaviors and social phenomena in everyday life. In economics, a phenomenon that the existing standard theory (i.e., the paradigm) cannot explain without positing unrealistic assumptions is called an (Loewenstein and Prelec 1992). The phenomenon that personal discount rates vary greatly depending on intertemporal-choice conditions and the contexts of those choices is called an intertemporal-choice anomaly or a .

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Assuming that the marginal utility of money was constant, Alfred Marshall used it as the numeraire for the measure of value (Marshall 1890). Ono et al. (2004) empirically showed that there was a lower bound for the marginal utility of money, as hypothesized by Ono (1994).

  2. 2.

    The loss (gain) elasticity of gratification represents the percentage the gratification level decreases (increases) in response to a 1 % increase in a loss (gain).

  3. 3.

    The present values are computed as \( 27+\frac{26.2}{1+0.1}+\frac{25.4}{{\left(1+0.1\right)}^2}+\cdots +\frac{23}{{\left(1+0.1\right)}^5}=120.9 \) for pattern 1 and \( 23+\frac{23.8}{1+0.1}+\cdots +\frac{27}{{\left(1+0.1\right)}^5}=118.7 \) for pattern 2.

References

  • Benzion, U., Rapoport, A., & Yagil, J. (1989). Discount rates inferred from decisions: A experimental study. Management Science, 35(3), 270–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, G. B. (1996). Temporal discounting and utility for health and money. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22(3), 771–791.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, G. B. (2000). Preferences for improving and declining sequences of health outcomes. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13(2), 203–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, G. B., & Winquist, J. R. (1998). The magnitude effect: Temporal discount rates and restaurant tips. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5(1), 119–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, R. H., & Hutchens, R. M. (1993). Wages, seniority, and the demand for rising consumption profiles. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 21(3), 251–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinari, Y., Ohtake, F., & Tsutsui, Y. (2009). Time discounting: Declining impatience and interval effect. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 39(1), 87–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein, G. (1988). Frames of mind in intetertemporal choice. Management Science, 34(2), 200–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (1991). Negative time preference. American Economic Review, 81(2), 347–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (1992). Anomalies in intertemporal choice: Evidence and an interpretation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107(2), 573–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein, G., & Sicherman, N. (1991). Do workers prefer increasing wage profiles? Journal of Labor Economics, 9(1), 67–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein, G., & Thaler, R. H. (1989). Anomalies: Intertemporal choice. Journal of Economic Perspective, 3(4), 181–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, A. (1890). Principles of economics. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ono, Y. (1994). Money, interest and stagnation: Dynamic theory and Keyne’s economics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ono, Y., Ogawa, K., & Yoshida, A. (2004). The liquidity trap and persistent unemployment with dynamic optimizing agents: Empirical evidence. Japanese Economic Review, 55(4), 355–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shefrin, H. M., & Thaler, R. H. (1988). The behavioral life-cycle hypothesis. Economic Inquiry, 26(4), 609–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, R. H. (1981). Some empirical evidence on dynamic inconsistency. Economics Letters, 8(3), 201–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Japan

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ikeda, S. (2016). Varying Impatience. In: The Economics of Self-Destructive Choices. Advances in Japanese Business and Economics, vol 10. Springer, Tokyo. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-55793-7_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics