The Worldwide Prevalence of Temporal Discounting

Post by Megan McCullough

The takeaway

Consistent patterns of temporal discounting were observed in a diverse sample that included participants from 61 countries.

What's the science?

Temporal discounting is a cognitive bias in humans that describes the tendency to choose rewards that will occur immediately rather than rewards that will occur in the future. Previous studies that have examined temporal discounting globally, have found an association between temporal discounting and income inequality – those with lower incomes tend to prefer smaller, immediate gains over larger ones that would occur in the future. Although these studies found consistent results throughout different populations, they have used narrow measurements that have only examined immediate gains compared to future gains. This week in Nature Human Behavior, Ruggeri and colleagues aimed to investigate patterns of temporal discounting around the world using multiple measures of intertemporal choice anomalies (decisions in the short-term that affect the long-term that are not expected).  

How did they do it?

The authors designed an assessment to administer to individuals from 61 countries that measured multiple facets of intertemporal choice anomalies including absolute magnitude, gain-loss asymmetry, delay-speedup asymmetry, and present bias. The authors’ assessment included scenarios in which the participants made decisions regarding receiving rewards now or in the future. Local currencies and value standards were used for each country. The participants then answered questions regarding their financial circumstances.

What did they find?

Overall, the authors found that increased wealth and income at individual and national levels are associated with lower temporal discounting. The data showed a trend that individuals living in countries with a lower gross domestic product (GDP) tended to prefer immediate gains and later payments compared to individuals living in countries with higher GDPs. However, all countries, independent of the economic environment, exhibited some temporal discounting. Temporal discounting also became more common at high levels of inflation. The authors also found higher within-country differences in temporal discounting rates compared to between-country differences, which shows that temporal discounting is a globalizable occurrence.

What's the impact?

This study found that temporal discounting, and the common anomalies associated with it, are present globally. The authors also found consistent patterns of intertemporal choices across the 61 countries examined. This research has policy implications as it demonstrates the effects of economic inequality and inflation on decision-making.

Access the original scientific publication here.

The Role of Perceived Control in Stress Management

Post by Elisa Guma

Stress and goal achievement

The ability to cope with and persist through adversity is often associated with success. However, stress may diminish our capacity to cope with difficult tasks or challenges, increasing the likelihood of mental and emotional distress including stress overload and burnout. Exposure to stress is accompanied by a myriad of physiological changes that have both short and long-term effects. These physiological changes likely also influence our psychological state, alter our behaviour, and perhaps prevent us from overcoming obstacles to pursue our goals. Interestingly, the decision to persist can differ when setbacks feel controllable, versus those that are or feel uncontrollable. Perceived control over one’s outcomes can have positive effects on emotion regulation, motivation, and learning, potentially buffering some of the negative effects of stress. 

How does perceived control influence stress management?

Perceived control is the perception that one has the ability, resources, or opportunities to achieve positive outcomes or avoid negative effects through one’s own actions. Perceived control may be further broken down into two strategies: 1) primary perceived control describes the attempt to modify the environment to align with one’s wishes, while 2) secondary perceived control refers to using mental strategies to change one’s wishes to reflect the environment. Typically, a sense of perceived control is associated with the belief that our personal actions control outcomes, and that we have the skill required to enact those actions (internal locus of control), rather than believing that external factors will control the outcome (external locus of control). Research has found associations between perceived control and enhanced emotional well-being or improved ability to cope with stress.

Given the positive benefits on mindset, perceived control is thought to be a key protective factor for well-being in general. Indeed, some studies have found that individuals with higher perceived control over their cardiovascular disease and immunocompetence had decreased risk of physical decline. Although these relationships are likely multifactorial, this mindset may have benefits extending beyond psychological health to physical health as well.

Perceived control and COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted the psychological states of many individuals worldwide, increasing feelings of distress and anxiety. In addition to the physical disease burden that COVID-19 has caused, there are other stressors to consider such as uncertain prognoses, isolation (especially when paired with grief and loss), unfamiliar public health measures, and financial distress, all of which may have substantial and potentially long-lasting effects on mental health. Several recent studies have investigated potential buffers against the stress related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Some evidence from studies conducted in China, the United States, and Norway/Austria/Germany indicate that individuals who believe they have control over their environment and future (i.e., higher internal locus of control) may have better mental health outcomes. Additionally, the latter study also found that individuals who feel as though external factors beyond their control influence their success and failure (external locus of control) were prone to higher levels of anxiety and depression. These associations are likely more nuanced and require more research. However, these initial insights may help to identify certain traits that increase susceptibility to stress. Furthermore, policy makers and public health officials can implement strategies to try and enhance citizens' sense of certainty and control, for example by promoting clear, transparent, and science-backed communication.

Mindfulness as a stress management technique

Given the numerous benefits associated with feelings of perceived control, finding ways to foster perceptions of control may be beneficial. Mindfulness, or the moment-to-moment awareness and acceptance of our feelings and experience, may promote flexibility in responding to a changing environment, rather than relying too heavily on previously learned patterns. Mindfulness practice has been linked to higher levels of both primary and secondary perceived control – helping people to see that there is a possibility to change our environment, or that our perception can be altered. This practice has been associated with numerous other benefits and may help us navigate feelings of distress in uncertain times or stressful situations.

What’s next?

As we navigate a changing world, many will experience varying levels of perceived control. Further, many factors can influence perceived control, such as individual differences, early life experiences, or previous success or reward. More research is needed to better understand the factors that affect perceived control, how feelings of control can change over time, and how they can be fostered to improve stress management.  

References +

1. Bhanji et al. Perceived Control Alters the Effect of Acute Stress on Persistence. Journal of experimental psychology General (2016).
2. Compas et al. Perceived Control and Coping with Stress: A Developmental Perspective. Journal of Social Issues (1991).
3. Daly & Robinson. Psychological distress and adaptation to the COVID-19 crisis in the United States. Journal of Psychiatric Research (2021).
4. Krampe et al. Locus of control moderates the association of COVID-19 stress and general mental distress: results of a Norwegian and a German-speaking cross-sectional survey. BMC Psychiatry (2021).
5. Hortop et al. The why and how of goal pursuits: Effects of global autonomous motivation and perceived control on emotional well-being. Motivation and emotion (2013).
6. Kozela et al. Perceived control as a predictor of cardiovascular disease mortality in Poland. The HAPIEE study. Journal of Cardiology (2015).
7. Paganini et al. Perceived Control and Mindfulness: Implications for Clinical Practice. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration (2016).
8. Pfefferbaum & North. Mental health and the Covid-19 pandemic. New England Journal of Medicine (2020).
9. Wallston. Control Beliefs: Health Perspectives. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (2001).
10. Wiedenfeld et al. Impact of perceived self-efficacy in coping with stressors on components of the immune system. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (1990).
11. Zheng et al. Perceived Control Buffers the Effects of the COVID‐19 Pandemic on General Health and Life Satisfaction: The Mediating Role of Psychological Distance. Applied Psychology Health Well Being (2020).

The Link between Conspiracy Mentality and Political Affiliation

Post by Megan McCullough

The takeaway

There is a relationship between political affiliation and the tendency to support conspiracy theories, with those on both the extreme left and the extreme right showing a greater conspiracy mentality than those in the political center.

What's the science?

Conspiracy mentality describes the tendency for individuals to endorse conspiracy theories, defined as beliefs that a certain group of people are secretly working together to achieve a malicious goal. Previous studies into the effect of political orientation on conspiracy mentality have shown a U-shaped relationship between political views and conspiracy mentality, suggesting that individuals at both political extremes have a higher tendency to support conspiracy theories than those in the political center. This week in Nature Human Behavior, Imhoff and colleagues used data from 26 countries to conduct the largest study to date into this relationship between political orientation and conspiracy mentality. The authors investigated the relationship between political affiliation and the tendency to support conspiracy theories while controlling for the theory that conspiracy mentality increases among a specific political party when their preferred political party is not in power.

How did they do it?

Data for this study came from two surveys that aimed to investigate the relationship between political leaning and conspiracy mentality. The first survey had a dataset from 23 countries and the second survey had samples from 13 countries, with over 100,000 surveyed individuals between the two surveys. Political orientation was measured using a self-reported scale that asked participants to rank themselves from extremely left-wing to extremely right-wing. Voting intentions were also gathered as a measure of political orientation. Both methods for determining political orientation were used because interpretations of right or left in a political context can be different across countries. Next, the Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire was administered to assess conspiracy mentality in each of the participants. To determine if perceived lack of political control was a factor in the U-shaped relationship seen in previous research, the authors of this study collected whether the preferred political party was in power at the time of data collection and used this along with demographic information as control variables.

What did they find?

The authors found a consistent relationship between political orientation and conspiracy mentality across the 26 countries of study. Individuals at the extreme ends of the political spectrum were more likely to believe in conspiracies compared to individuals in the middle. The U-shaped relationship was not symmetrical; conspiracy mentality tended to be higher for those on the far right. The authors also found that individuals who supported political parties not included in the current government of their countries were more likely to exhibit conspiracy mentality compared to individuals whose parties were included in government. However, the U-shaped relationship was still intact when this variable was controlled for. This shows that although a perceived loss of control of a political party does influence conspiracy mentality, there are other more important factors at play to explain increased conspiracy mentality at both ends of the political spectrum.

What's the impact?

This is the largest study to investigate the relationship between political orientation and conspiracy mentality. This research is important as it provides nuance into the psychology behind conspiracy mentalities and provides a greater understanding of the connection with political affiliation.

Access the original scientific publication here