An analysis of discounting model selection methods: Assessing the generalization of discounting models

How the subjective value of an outcome changes as a function of time, probability, or effort has been an active area of psychological and economic research for decades. The exact functional form of how a commodity is discounted has been debated, and there have been numerous forms proposed. One of the challenges when trying to determine the functional form of discounting data is how models are compared, what modeling methods are used, how many data points are used, and what comparison metrics were used. Thus, we sought to replicate and extend previous research comparing discounting model selection methods by simulating discounting data from five functional forms: the Mazur hyperbolic model (Mazur, 1987), Rachlin hyperboloid (Rachlin, 2006), Myerson-Green hyperboloid (Myerson & Green, 1995), Samuelson exponential model (Samuelson, 1937), and beta-delta model (Laibson, 1997). With each of these models we manipulated the number (i.e., density) of data points, used two forms of modeling, and assessed the degree to which each model generalizes to data it has not used in the fitting process. Model comparisons were conducted using the Akaike information criterion (AIC), Bayesian information criterion (BIC), and leave-one-out cross validation (LOOCV). In general, AIC, BIC, and LOOCV selected the correct model, whereas the Rachlin model had the lowest error across folds of LOOCV when relying on multilevel modeling.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
Published
2025-04-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.70015
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.27
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

An analysis of discounting model selection methods: Assessing the generalization of discounting models

Jordan D. Bailey, Mark J. Rzeszutek, Mikhail N. Koffarnus
1 citations
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
2.27
article

An analysis of discounting model selection methods: Assessing the generalization of discounting models

Jordan D. Bailey, Mark J. Rzeszutek, Mikhail N. Koffarnus
article en
1 citations

Abstract

How the subjective value of an outcome changes as a function of time, probability, or effort has been an active area of psychological and economic research for decades. The exact functional form of how a commodity is discounted has been debated, and there have been numerous forms proposed. One of the challenges when trying to determine the functional form of discounting data is how models are compared, what modeling methods are used, how many data points are used, and what comparison metrics were used. Thus, we sought to replicate and extend previous research comparing discounting model selection methods by simulating discounting data from five functional forms: the Mazur hyperbolic model (Mazur, 1987), Rachlin hyperboloid (Rachlin, 2006), Myerson-Green hyperboloid (Myerson & Green, 1995), Samuelson exponential model (Samuelson, 1937), and beta-delta model (Laibson, 1997). With each of these models we manipulated the number (i.e., density) of data points, used two forms of modeling, and assessed the degree to which each model generalizes to data it has not used in the fitting process. Model comparisons were conducted using the Akaike information criterion (AIC), Bayesian information criterion (BIC), and leave-one-out cross validation (LOOCV). In general, AIC, BIC, and LOOCV selected the correct model, whereas the Rachlin model had the lowest error across folds of LOOCV when relying on multilevel modeling.

Journal of the Experimental Analysis of BehaviorVol. 123(3)
Exponent (United States) (US), University of Kentucky (US)
Decent work and economic growth
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
2.27
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.