You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Vaniver comments on Which cognitive biases should we trust in? - Less Wrong Discussion

17 Post author: Andy_McKenzie 01 June 2012 06:37AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (42)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Vaniver 01 June 2012 03:18:46PM *  2 points [-]
  • hyperbolic discounting (this is clearly real, but I'm not sure I would not call it a bias)

"Discounting" in general makes great sense. The reason that's on the bias list is because of the word "hyperbolic."

Discounting means multiplying future values by some function F(t), which is generally in [0,1]. There are three simple choices: the first is no discounting, just setting it always equal to one (rarely recommended); exponential discounting, in which F(t)=exp(r t); and hyperbolic discounting, in which F(t)=1/(1+k t). Hyperbolic discounting appears to be what people natively use, but exponential discounting is what economists recommend because it's consistent in time. If I offer you a choice between A after x time units and B after x+y time units, under both no and exponential discounting the answer does not depend on x. (In the no discounting case, it doesn't depend on y either.) With hyperbolic discounting, it does depend on x- with the particularly bothersome result that a hyperbolic discounter's preferences might switch from B to A as x decreases. This can lead to self-thwarting behavior: if Bob2012 chooses $100 in six years over $50 in five years, he goes against the wishes of Bob2017, who would choose $50 now over $100 in a year.

Comment author: David_Gerard 01 June 2012 03:56:30PM 4 points [-]

Hyperbolic discounting appears to be what people natively use

As I understand it, hyperbolic discounting appears to be what WEIRDs use. Are there replicated studies on other groups?

Comment author: ciphergoth 02 June 2012 10:41:36AM *  5 points [-]

It's very well established in pigeons and rats. eg http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2648524/

Comment author: David_Gerard 02 June 2012 09:03:33PM 0 points [-]

Aha, thank you!

Comment author: Vaniver 01 June 2012 04:55:30PM 2 points [-]

I have not investigated that. I would expect that hyperbolic discounting is common, since it looks way easier to calculate.

Comment author: Andy_McKenzie 01 June 2012 04:29:30PM 0 points [-]

Ah, thanks, I should have been more diligent. Updated the post.