Abstract
The present study investigated whether altering how certain social policies were framed would alter how many participants valued and/or discounted those policies and also whether discounting of the policies would be related to several measures of the participants’ religiousness and their political party affiliation. Five hundred ninety-seven university undergraduates were randomly divided into two groups and completed a delay-discounting task that involved one monetary and five social-policy outcomes. The phrasing of the policies differed between groups (e.g., affirmative action vs. equal rights). Results showed that framing the policies in different ways altered (a) the number of participants who indicated that the policy held value and (b) how participants discounted the policies. Levels of discounting were also related to measures of religiousness and/or political party affiliation for all but one outcome. The present results highlight the potential value of studying how individuals discount delayed outcomes pertaining to social issues.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adamek, R. J. (1994). The polls—a review, public opinion and Roe v. Wade: Measurement difficulties. Public Opinion Quarterly, 58, 409–418.
Allport, G.W., & Ross, J.M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 423–443.
Beck, R.C., & Triplett, M.F. (2009). Test-retest reliability of a group-administered paper-pencil measure of delay discounting. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 17, 345–355.
Blendon, R. J., Benson, J. M., & Donelan, K. (1993). The public and the controversy over abortion. Journal of the American Medical Association, 270, 2871–2875.
Calhoun-Brown, A. (1998). While marching to Zion: Otherworldliness and racial empowerment in the Black community. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 37, 427–439.
Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree tests for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245–276.
Chapman, G.B. (1996). Temporal discounting and utility for health and money. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 771–791.
Cook, E. A., Jelen, T. J., & Wilcox, C. (1993). Catholicism and abortion attitudes in the American states: A contextual analysis. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 32, 223–230.
Duriez, B., Luyten, P., Snauwaert, B., & Hutsebaut, D. (2002). The importance of religiosity and values in predicting political attitudes: Evidence for the continuing importance of religiosity in Flanders (Belgium). Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 5, 35–54.
Glaser, J. (2005). Intergroup bias and inequity: Legitimizing beliefs and policy attitudes. Social Justice Research, 18, 257–282.
Gorsuch, R.L. (1984). Measurement: The boom and bane of investigating religion. American Psychologist, 39, 228–236.
Gorsuch, R.L. (1988). Psychology of religion. Annual Review of Psychology, 39, 201–221.
Gorsuch, R.L., & McFarland, S. (1972). Single vs. multiple item scales for measuring religious values. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 11, 53–64.
Gorsuch, R.L., & McPherson, M.E. (1989). Intrinsic/extrinsic measurement: I/E-revised and single-item scales. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 28, 348–354.
Hardisty, D.J,. & Weber, E.U. (2009). Discounting future green: Money versus the environment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138, 329–340.
Hardisty, D.J., Johnson, E.J., & Weber, E.U. (2010). A dirty word or a dirty world? Attribute framing, political affiliation, and query theory. Psychological Science, 21, 86–92.
Kantor, J. R., & Smith, N. W. (1975). The science of psychology: An interbehavioral survey. Principia Press, Inc: Chicago, IL.
Kirkpatrick, L.A. (1988). A psychometric analysis of the Allport-Ross and Feagin measures of intrinsic-extrinsic religious orientation. In D.O. Moberg and M.L. Lynn (Eds), Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion. Vol 1, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Kirkpatrick, L.A. (1993). Fundamentalism, Christian orthodoxy, and intrinsic religious orientation as predictors of discriminatory attitudes. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 32, 256–268.
Madden, G.J., & Bickel, W.K. (Eds). (2010). Impulsivity: The behavioral and neurological science of discounting. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Mazur, J.E. (1987). An adjusting procedure for studying delayed reinforcement. In M.L. Commons, J.E. Mazur, J.A. Nevin, & H. Rachlin (Eds.), Quantitative analyses of behavior: Vol. 5. The effect of delay and intervening events on reinforcement value (p. 55–73). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
McFarland, S.G. (1989). Religious orientations and the targets of discrimination. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 28, 324–336.
Michael, J. (1993). Establishing operations. The Behavior Analyst, 16, 191–206.
Myerson, J., Green, L., & Warusawitharana, M. (2001). Area under the curve as a measure of discounting. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 76, 235–243.
Petry, N.M., & Madden, G.J. (2010). Discounting and pathological gambling. In G.J. Madden and W.K. Bickel (Eds.), Impulsivity: The behavioral and neurological science of discounting (p. 273–294). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Rabinowitz, J. L., Sears, D. O., Sidanius, J., & Krosnick, J. A. (2009). Why do White Americans oppose race-targeted policies? Clarifying the impact of symbolic racism. Political Psychology, 30, 805–828.
Rattner, A., Yagil, D., & Shermn-Segal, C. (2003). The sense of entitlement to violate the law: Legal disobedience as a public versus a private reaction. Social Behavior and Personality, 31, 545–556.
Rotter, J.B. (1954). Social learning and clinical psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Schneider, M. The difference a word makes: Responding to questions on ‘disability’ and ‘difficulty’ in South Africa (2009). Disability and Rehabilitation, 31, 42–50.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
Thaler, R.H. (1981). Some empirical evidence on dynamic inconsistency. Economic Letters, 8, 201–207.
Thibodeau, P. H., & Boroditsky, L. (2011). Metaphors we think with: The role of metaphor in reasoning. Plos One, 6, 1–11.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. In D.A. Balota & E.J. Marsh (Eds.), Cognitive psychology: Key readings (p. 621–630). New York: Psychology Press.
Weatherly, J.N. (2010). Delay discounting of different commodities varies as a function of political party affiliation in a college sample. Behavior and Social Issues, 19, 167–178.
Weatherly, J.N., Derenne, A., & Terrell, H.K. (2010). College students discount money “won” more than money “owed.” The Psychological Record, 60, 463–472.
Weatherly, J.N., & Plumm, K.M. (in press) Delay discounting as a function of intrinsic/extrinsic religiousness, religious fundamentalism, and regular church attendance. Journal of General Psychology.
Weatherly, J.N., Plumm, K.M., & Derenne, A. (2011). Delay discounting and social-policy issues. The Psychological Record, 61, 527–546.
Weatherly, J.N., & Terrell, H.K. (2011). Differences in delay discounting of some commodities as a function of church attendance. Current Psychology, 30, 258–267.
Williams, J. (2010). Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and discounting: Multiple minor traits and states. In G.J. Madden and W.K. Bickel (Eds.), Impulsivity: The behavioral and neurological science of discounting (p. 323–357). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Yi, R., Mitchell, S.H., & Bickel, W.K. (2010). Delay discounting and substance abuse-dependence. In G.J. Madden and W.K. Bickel (Eds.), Impulsivity: The behavioral and neurological science of discounting (p. 191–211). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Plumm, K.M., Borhart, H. & Weatherly, J.N. Choose your words Wisely: Delay Discounting of Differently titled Social Policy Issues. Behav. Soc. Iss. 21, 26–48 (2012). https://doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v21i0.3823
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v21i0.3823