时间是如何飞逝的?时间感知与跨时空选择

IF 1.6 3区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics Pub Date : 2024-01-05 DOI:10.1016/j.socec.2023.102160
Xiu Chen , Xiaojian Zhao
{"title":"时间是如何飞逝的?时间感知与跨时空选择","authors":"Xiu Chen ,&nbsp;Xiaojian Zhao","doi":"10.1016/j.socec.2023.102160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper identifies a potential gap between time preference and intertemporal choices such as time discounting tasks: The intertemporal choices could be partly driven by a biased perception of time and thus may not completely reveal actual time preference. To test this, we explore the causal relationship between time perception and intertemporal choices by conducting a laboratory experiment in which cognitive load is used as a stimulating instrument to induce differences in time perception. We establish that the perceived time lengths for subjects with high cognitive load are shorter than those with low cognitive load and that individuals who underestimate time appear more patient in their intertemporal choices. Mediation analyses show that time perception mediates a significant portion of cognitive load’s effect on intertemporal choices. Our study thus demonstrates that time preference identified by intertemporal choices might be confounded by potentially biased time perception, calling for improving suboptimal time-related economic decisions due to an individual’s misperception of how time flies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51637,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How time flies: Time perception and intertemporal choice\",\"authors\":\"Xiu Chen ,&nbsp;Xiaojian Zhao\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.socec.2023.102160\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This paper identifies a potential gap between time preference and intertemporal choices such as time discounting tasks: The intertemporal choices could be partly driven by a biased perception of time and thus may not completely reveal actual time preference. To test this, we explore the causal relationship between time perception and intertemporal choices by conducting a laboratory experiment in which cognitive load is used as a stimulating instrument to induce differences in time perception. We establish that the perceived time lengths for subjects with high cognitive load are shorter than those with low cognitive load and that individuals who underestimate time appear more patient in their intertemporal choices. Mediation analyses show that time perception mediates a significant portion of cognitive load’s effect on intertemporal choices. Our study thus demonstrates that time preference identified by intertemporal choices might be confounded by potentially biased time perception, calling for improving suboptimal time-related economic decisions due to an individual’s misperception of how time flies.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51637,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804323001866\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804323001866","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文指出了时间偏好与时间折扣任务等时际选择之间的潜在差距:时际选择的部分原因可能是对时间的感知有偏差,因此可能无法完全揭示实际的时间偏好。为了验证这一点,我们通过一项实验室实验来探索时间感知与跨时选择之间的因果关系。在实验中,我们使用认知负荷作为刺激工具来诱导时间感知的差异。我们发现,认知负荷高的受试者感知到的时间长度比认知负荷低的受试者短,而低估时间的个体在进行跨时选择时显得更有耐心。中介分析表明,时间感知在认知负荷对时际选择的影响中起着重要的中介作用。因此,我们的研究表明,通过时际选择确定的时间偏好可能会受到潜在的时间感知偏差的干扰,这就要求改善由于个体对时间流逝的错误感知而导致的与时间相关的次优经济决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
How time flies: Time perception and intertemporal choice

This paper identifies a potential gap between time preference and intertemporal choices such as time discounting tasks: The intertemporal choices could be partly driven by a biased perception of time and thus may not completely reveal actual time preference. To test this, we explore the causal relationship between time perception and intertemporal choices by conducting a laboratory experiment in which cognitive load is used as a stimulating instrument to induce differences in time perception. We establish that the perceived time lengths for subjects with high cognitive load are shorter than those with low cognitive load and that individuals who underestimate time appear more patient in their intertemporal choices. Mediation analyses show that time perception mediates a significant portion of cognitive load’s effect on intertemporal choices. Our study thus demonstrates that time preference identified by intertemporal choices might be confounded by potentially biased time perception, calling for improving suboptimal time-related economic decisions due to an individual’s misperception of how time flies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
113
审稿时长
83 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly the Journal of Socio-Economics) welcomes submissions that deal with various economic topics but also involve issues that are related to other social sciences, especially psychology, or use experimental methods of inquiry. Thus, contributions in behavioral economics, experimental economics, economic psychology, and judgment and decision making are especially welcome. The journal is open to different research methodologies, as long as they are relevant to the topic and employed rigorously. Possible methodologies include, for example, experiments, surveys, empirical work, theoretical models, meta-analyses, case studies, and simulation-based analyses. Literature reviews that integrate findings from many studies are also welcome, but they should synthesize the literature in a useful manner and provide substantial contribution beyond what the reader could get by simply reading the abstracts of the cited papers. In empirical work, it is important that the results are not only statistically significant but also economically significant. A high contribution-to-length ratio is expected from published articles and therefore papers should not be unnecessarily long, and short articles are welcome. Articles should be written in a manner that is intelligible to our generalist readership. Book reviews are generally solicited but occasionally unsolicited reviews will also be published. Contact the Book Review Editor for related inquiries.
期刊最新文献
Privacy during pandemics: Attitudes to public use of personal data Understanding inconsistencies in risk attitude elicitation games: Evidence from smallholder farmers in five African countries Inflation expectations in the wake of the war in Ukraine Asking for a friend: Reminders and incentives for crowdfunding college savings ‘Update Bias’: Manipulating past information based on the existing circumstances
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1