关键词: 跨期选择, 序列选择, 消费结果, 金钱结果, 折扣

Abstract:

Researchers have generally accepted the conclusion that people prefer improving sequences to deteriorating ones since the work of Loewenstein and his colleagues in the 1990s. Nevertheless, recent research using unlabeled money as outcomes has found the opposite preference. Because these contradictions are found in different studies, it is difficult to compare them directly. The aim of the current study is to directly compare the preference for sequences of unlabeled money with the preference for sequences of consumption.

This research consisted of four experiments. A total of 1498 participants finished those experiments. One hundred and ninety-nine participated in Experiment 1A, 428 in Experiment 1B, 445 in Experiment 2A, and 426 in Experiment 2B. Experiments 1A and 1B used between-subject and within-subject designs respectively to compare the sequence preferences for money outcome with that for consumable outcome, with these two outcomes controlled (Experiment 1B) or not (Experiment 1A). Experiment 2A asked participants to recall and qualify the importance of two goals which are “getting better outcomes as soon as possible” and “outcomes becoming better” in the decision-making process. The aim of Experiment 2A was to examine the mediating roles of these two goals. Experiment 2B further tested the roles of the two goals in the preference for monetary sequence by manipulating the gradient of the sequence outcomes.

The results of Experiments 1A and 1B showed that the preference for deteriorating sequences was stronger in the sequence of monetary outcomes than for the sequence of consumable outcomes (in Experiment 1A: χ²(1) = 68.37, p < .001, φ = .59; in Experiment 1B: χ² (1) = 88.53, p < .001, φ = .45). Furthermore, participants preferred deteriorating monetary sequence, while preferred improving consumable sequence. Experiment 2A indicated the mediating role of the goals of “getting better outcomes as soon as possible” and “outcomes becoming better”. Specifically, it demonstrated that, compared to participants in the condition of consumable outcomes, those in the condition of monetary outcomes attached more importance to the goal of “getting better outcomes quickly” while attached less importance to the goal of “outcomes becoming better”. That is, they preferred deteriorating sequences to improve ones(the indirect effect value of “getting better outcomes quickly” is .246 (95% CI: .120~ .404), and the indirect effect value of “outcomes becoming better” is .131 (95% CI: .042~ .239)). Furthermore, Experiment 2B showed that in the condition of sequence of monetary outcomes, “getting more money quickly” may be a salient goal which is not susceptible to the gradients of sequence, while the goal of “outcomes becoming better” is susceptible to the gradients of sequence, thus weakening a preference for deteriorating sequence when the gradient is smaller (the indirect effect value of “getting better outcomes quickly” is -.069 (95% CI: -.209~ .067), the indirect effect value of “outcomes becoming better” is -.070 (95% CI: -.159~-.003)). In summary, the results of four experiments show that participants are more preferable to deteriorating sequences when outcomes are money than when outcomes are consumable ones and the preference is meditated by the goals of “getting better outcomes quickly” and “outcomes becoming better”.

The results have implications for researchers when studying intertemporal choice and for practitioners when designing policies or management measures involving intertemporal sequences.

Key words: intertemporal choice, sequence choice, consumption, money, discounting