2004RePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsRequires access

Is Discounting Hyperbolic? Experimental Evidence

Jess Benhabib, Alberto Bisin

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

A vast empirical evidence in experimental psychology on time discounting has documented various behavioral anomalies which cast doubts on the empirical support for exponential discounting, to date the most widely used assumption on time preference in economic theory. The most important of such anomalies, called ''reversal of preferences,'' has been interpreted to suggest that agents have a preference, a bias in fact, for present consumption which cannot be rationalized by preferences with exponential discounting. Psychologists (e.g., Herrnstein, 1961, de Villiers-Herrnstein, 1976, Ainsle-Herrnstein, 1981; see also Ainsle, 1992, 2001) and, most recently, behavioral economists (e.g., Elster, 1979, Laibson, 1996, O'Donoghue-Rabin, 1999) have noted that the evidence is consistent with a declining rate of time preference, and have suggested various specification of discounting which give rise to declining discount rates over time, hyperbolic discounting, and quasi-hyperbolic discounting. Such specifications of discounting would introduce a fundamental paradigm change in economic theory: preferences with hyperbolic (or quasi-hyperbolic) discounting in fact, as opposed to preferences with exponential discounting, lack time-consistency. While experimental psychologists have collected an impressive amount of data on time preference in support of declining discount rates, in fact, most of this data is not without problems: often experiments have been conducted with hypothetical rewards, or with points redeemable at the end of the experiments (thereby eliminating any rationale for time preference); often the design of the experiments gives rise to issues of strategic manipulability, or of framing effects. Rarely have the data been analyzed with proper econometric instruments; in particular, the hypothesis of hyperbolic discounting has never been tested statistically against the alternative of exponential discounting. This is the objective of the present paper.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

A vast empirical evidence in experimental psychology on time discounting has documented various behavioral anomalies which cast doubts on the empirical support for exponential discounting, to date the most widely used assumption on time preference in economic theory. The most important of such anomalies, called ''reversal of preferences,'' has been interpreted to suggest that agents have a preference, a bias in fact, for present consumption which cannot be rationalized by preferences with exponential discounting. Psychologists (e.g., Herrnstein, 1961, de Villiers-Herrnstein, 1976, Ainsle-Herrnstein, 1981; see also Ainsle, 1992, 2001) and, most recently, behavioral economists (e.g., Elster, 1979, Laibson, 1996, O'Donoghue-Rabin, 1999) have noted that the evidence is consistent with a declining rate of time preference, and have suggested various specification of discounting which give rise to declining discount rates over time, hyperbolic discounting, and quasi-hyperbolic discounting. Such specifications of discounting would introduce a fundamental paradigm change in economic theory: preferences with hyperbolic (or quasi-hyperbolic) discounting in fact, as opposed to preferences with exponential discounting, lack time-consistency. While experimental psychologists have collected an impressive amount of data on time preference in support of declining discount rates, in fact, most of this data is not without problems: often experiments have been conducted with hypothetical rewards, or with points redeemable at the end of the experiments (thereby eliminating any rationale for time preference); often the design of the experiments gives rise to issues of strategic manipulability, or of framing effects. Rarely have the data been analyzed with proper econometric instruments; in particular, the hypothesis of hyperbolic discounting has never been tested statistically against the alternative of exponential discounting. This is the objective of the present paper.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

A vast empirical evidence in experimental psychology on time discounting has documented various behavioral anomalies which cast doubts on the empirical support for exponential discounting, to date the most widely used assumption on time preference in economic theory. The most important of such anomalies, called ''reversal of preferences,'' has been interpreted to suggest that agents have a preference, a bias in fact, for present consumption which cannot be rationalized by preferences with exponential discounting. Psychologists (e.g., Herrnstein, 1961, de Villiers-Herrnstein, 1976, Ainsle-Herrnstein, 1981; see also Ainsle, 1992, 2001) and, most recently, behavioral economists (e.g., Elster, 1979, Laibson, 1996, O'Donoghue-Rabin, 1999) have noted that the evidence is consistent with a declining rate of time preference, and have suggested various specification of discounting which give rise to declining discount rates over time, hyperbolic discounting, and quasi-hyperbolic discounting. Such specifications of discounting would introduce a fundamental paradigm change in economic theory: preferences with hyperbolic (or quasi-hyperbolic) discounting in fact, as opposed to preferences with exponential discounting, lack time-consistency. While experimental psychologists have collected an impressive amount of data on time preference in support of declining discount rates, in fact, most of this data is not without problems: often experiments have been conducted with hypothetical rewards, or with points redeemable at the end of the experiments (thereby eliminating any rationale for time preference); often the design of the experiments gives rise to issues of strategic manipulability, or of framing effects. Rarely have the data been analyzed with proper econometric instruments; in particular, the hypothesis of hyperbolic discounting has never been tested statistically against the alternative of exponential discounting. This is the objective of the present paper.

Key concepts: Hyperbolic discounting, Discounting, Time preference, Preference, Economics, Intertemporal choice, Dynamic inconsistency, Econometrics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Is Discounting Hyperbolic? Experimental Evidence — Research Paper | ScholarLens