Assessing susceptibility of a temporal discounting task to faking

(Non-) impact of task experience on behavioral economic decision-making

Behavioral economic research has been widely conducted via crowdsourcing resources to evaluate novel task designs or pilot interventions. One under recognized and yet-to-be tested concern is the impact of non-naïvety (i.e., prior task exposure) on behavioral economic task performance. We evaluated the influence of non-naïvety on task performance in two popular areas of behavioral economic research: behavioral economic demand and delay discounting. Participants (N = 485) recruited using Amazon Mechanical Turk (mTurk) completed alcohol and soda purchase tasks and delay discounting tasks for monetary and alcohol outcomes. Equivalence of responding and effect sizes with clinical variables were compared based on prior task experience. Over one quarter of participants reported demand task experience (26.9%) and nearly half endorsed delay discounting task experience (48.6%). Statistically equivalent responding was observed for alcohol purchase task data with less-than-small effect size differences based on task experience (d = 0.01-0.13). Similar results were observed for a soda purchase task thereby supporting generalization to a non-alcohol commodity. Measures of convergent and discriminant validity for behavioral economic demand indicated medium-to-large and stimulus-specific effect sizes with little variation based on prior task exposure. Delay discounting for money and alcohol showed some sensitivity to prior task experience (i.e., less steep discounting for non-naïve participants), however these effects were attenuated after accounting for group differences in alcohol use. These findings support the fidelity of behavioral economic task outcomes and emphasize that participant non-naïvety in crowdsourcing settings may minimally impact performance on behavioral economic assays commonly used in behavioral and addiction science. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Nothing but the truth? Effects of faking on the validity of the crosswise model

In self-reports, socially desirable responding threatens the validity of prevalence estimates for sensitive personal attitudes and behaviors. Indirect questioning techniques such as the crosswise model attempt to control for the influence of social desirability bias. The crosswise model has repeatedly been found to provide more valid prevalence estimates than direct questions. We investigated whether crosswise model estimates are also less susceptible to deliberate faking than direct questions. To this end, we investigated the effect of "fake good" instructions on responses to direct and crosswise model questions. In a sample of 1,946 university students, 12-month prevalence estimates for a sensitive road traffic behavior were higher and thus presumably more valid in the crosswise model than in a direct question. Moreover, "fake good" instructions severely impaired the validity of the direct questioning estimates, whereas the crosswise model estimates were unaffected by deliberate faking. Participants also reported higher levels of perceived confidentiality and a lower perceived ease of faking in the crosswise model compared to direct questions. Our results corroborate previous studies finding the crosswise model to be an effective tool for counteracting the detrimental effects of positive self-presentation in surveys on sensitive issues.

Discounting of food and water in rats shows trait- and state-like characteristics

Delay discounting is the loss in value of an outcome as a function of its delay. The present study focused on examining a trait-like characteristic of delay discounting in a preclinical animal model. Specifically, we were interested in whether there was a positive relation between discounting of 2 different outcomes in rats. That is, would rats that discount delayed food steeply also discount delayed water steeply? In addition, we examined how session-to-session variability in discounting could be attributed to differences between subjects (trait variability) and to differences within subjects (state variability). Finally, we measured discounting from early- to mid-adulthood, allowing us to examine changes in discounting as a function of age. Overall, we found a moderate, positive correlation between discounting of food and discounting of water in rats, providing further evidence that the relative consistency with which individuals discount different outcomes is a trait-like characteristic. In addition, we found a high degree of within-subject variability in discounting, indicating strong state-like differences from session to session. Finally, overall, discounting decreased as a function of age; however, individual-subject data showed variability in how discounting changed across time. Overall, our results show that differences in delay discounting between individuals reflect variability in both trait- and state-like characteristics.