Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Reason and Intuition01:37

Reason and Intuition

The human brain processes information for decision-making using one of two routes: an intuitive system and a rational system (Epstein, 1994; popularized by Kahneman, 2011 as System 1 and System 2, respectively). The intuitive system is quick, impulsive, and operates with minimal effort, relying on emotions or habits to provide cues for what to do next, while the rational system is logical, analytical, deliberate, and methodical. Research in neuropsychology suggests that the brain can only use...
Framing Effects03:26

Framing Effects

Information is everywhere and its presentation—such as how and when items are presented—can impact our perceptions and decisions surrounding the info. This broad concept umbrellas framing effects—influences that occur due to the way information is framed in its appearance, whether it’s purely the order or the specific wording of a message. Let’s take a look at numerous ways in which two versions of something can objectively say the same thing, yet we respond in different ways based on the...
Timing and Consequences on Behavior01:08

Timing and Consequences on Behavior

In operant conditioning, the timing of reinforcement is crucial. For animals like rats and cats, immediate reinforcement (within a few seconds) is much more effective than delayed reinforcement. For example, a food reward for a rat needs to follow within 30 seconds of pressing a bar to be effective. 
Humans, however, can respond to delayed reinforcers. We often make decisions between immediate small rewards and delayed larger rewards. This ability to delay gratification is a significant factor...
The Availability Heuristic01:08

The Availability Heuristic

A heuristic is a general problem-solving framework (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). You can think of these as mental shortcuts that are used to solve problems. Different types of heuristics are used in different types of situations, and the impulse to use a heuristic occurs when one of five conditions is met (Pratkanis, 1989):
Decision Making01:20

Decision Making

Decision-making is a fundamental cognitive process that involves evaluating alternatives and selecting among them. This process can range from simple choices, such as deciding what to wear, to complex decisions, like choosing a major in college or a career path. The complexity of the decision often dictates the approach we use, which can be broadly categorized into two types: automatic and controlled decision-making.
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...
The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic01:25

The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic

In order to make good decisions, we use our knowledge and our reasoning. Often, this knowledge and reasoning is sound and solid. However, sometimes, we are swayed by biases or by others manipulating a situation. For example, let’s say you and three friends wanted to rent a house and had a combined target budget of $1,600. The realtor shows you only very run-down houses for $1,600 and then shows you a very nice house for $2,000. Might you ask each person to pay more in rent to get the $2,000...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

The Political Psychology of Economic Inequality.

Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society·2026
Same author

Willful inattention: Keeping aversive information out of mind.

Current opinion in psychology·2025
Same author

Self-control ≠ temporal discounting.

Current opinion in psychology·2024
Same author

Conversational technology and reactions to withheld information.

PloS one·2024
Same author

Using curiosity to counter health information avoidance.

Social science & medicine (1982)·2023
Same author

Where next for behavioral public policy?

The Behavioral and brain sciences·2023
Same journal

The microlandscapes of tree trunks: the effect of lichen and tree-level characteristics on arthropod communities.

Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences·2026
Same journal

Centimetre-scale landscapes to assess the motion behaviour and cognition of gastropods and bivalves.

Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences·2026
Same journal

Intertidal microcosms of wave-swept rocky shores: ecological and physiological insights from a uniquely stressful environment.

Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences·2026
Same journal

Temporal and spatial variation in temperature and oxygen at the microscale: key niche axes for aquatic life.

Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences·2026
Same journal

Natural microcosms in ecology: fulfilling the promise of model systems?

Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences·2026
Same journal

Microbe-induced galls and plant defence: metabolite crosstalk in a co-evolutionary battle.

Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 29, 2026

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies
08:24

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: August 25, 2023

Intangibility in intertemporal choice.

Scott Rick1, George Loewenstein

  • 1Department of Operations and Information Management, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. srick@wharton.upenn.edu

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences
|October 3, 2008
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

People often use anticipatory emotions to make decisions with intangible future outcomes, moving beyond traditional economic models. This neuroeconomic approach offers a more realistic view of intertemporal choice.

More Related Videos

Measuring Delay Discounting in Humans Using an Adjusting Amount Task
07:47

Measuring Delay Discounting in Humans Using an Adjusting Amount Task

Published on: January 9, 2016

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice
07:07

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Published on: June 5, 2016

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 29, 2026

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies
08:24

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: August 25, 2023

Measuring Delay Discounting in Humans Using an Adjusting Amount Task
07:47

Measuring Delay Discounting in Humans Using an Adjusting Amount Task

Published on: January 9, 2016

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice
07:07

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Published on: June 5, 2016

Area of Science:

  • Neuroeconomics
  • Behavioral Economics
  • Decision Science

Background:

  • The discounted utility (DU) model frames intertemporal choice via explicit trade-offs.
  • DU's explicit trade-off perspective, while useful, lacks realism for many daily decisions.
  • Common intertemporal choices involve concrete immediate outcomes versus intangible future ones.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To propose and review neuroeconomic evidence for anticipatory emotions in decisions with intangible outcomes.
  • To explore how emotions serve as proxies for abstract future benefits.
  • To extend this understanding beyond spending and saving to other ill-defined trade-off domains.

Main Methods:

  • Review of existing neuroeconomic studies.
  • Analysis of decision-making processes involving tangible vs. intangible outcomes.
  • Examination of the role of emotions in implicit trade-offs.

Main Results:

  • Anticipatory emotions play a crucial role when future outcomes are intangible.
  • Neuroeconomic evidence supports the use of emotions as proxies for abstract future benefits.
  • This emotional proxy mechanism is particularly relevant in spending and saving decisions.

Conclusions:

  • Anticipatory emotions are key to understanding intertemporal choices with intangible outcomes.
  • The neuroeconomic framework offers a more realistic model than traditional DU for certain decisions.
  • Future research can apply this emotional proxy concept to diverse decision-making contexts with ill-defined trade-offs.