↓ Skip to main content

Building a Bridge into the Future: Dynamic Connectionist Modeling as an Integrative Tool for Research on Intertemporal Choice

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Building a Bridge into the Future: Dynamic Connectionist Modeling as an Integrative Tool for Research on Intertemporal Choice
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00514
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stefan Scherbaum, Maja Dshemuchadse, Thomas Goschke

Abstract

Temporal discounting denotes the fact that individuals prefer smaller rewards delivered sooner over larger rewards delivered later, often to a higher extent than suggested by normative economical theories. In this article, we identify three lines of research studying this phenomenon which aim (i) to describe temporal discounting mathematically, (ii) to explain observed choice behavior psychologically, and (iii) to predict the influence of specific factors on intertemporal decisions. We then opt for an approach integrating postulated mechanisms and empirical findings from these three lines of research. Our approach focuses on the dynamical properties of decision processes and is based on computational modeling. We present a dynamic connectionist model of intertemporal choice focusing on the role of self-control and time framing as two central factors determining choice behavior. Results of our simulations indicate that the two influences interact with each other, and we present experimental data supporting this prediction. We conclude that computational modeling of the decision process dynamics can advance the integration of different strands of research in intertemporal choice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 3%
United States 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 69 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 22%
Student > Master 12 16%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 14 19%
Unknown 10 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 36 49%
Neuroscience 6 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 4%
Decision Sciences 3 4%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 14 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 November 2012.
All research outputs
#17,670,751
of 22,685,926 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,173
of 29,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,346
of 244,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#356
of 481 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,685,926 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,409 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 244,123 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 481 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.