Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2014 | Research

A quasi-hyperbolic discounting approach to smoking behavior

Author: Takanori Ida

Published in: Health Economics Review | Issue 1/2014

Abstract

Addiction has attracted considerable attention in health and behavioral economics, and economists have attempted to understand addiction from the viewpoint of decision making over time. This paper investigates whether two time preference parameters can successfully predict smoking status, including cigarette dependence. Both the present bias and the constant time preference parameters account for smoking behavior status and cigarette dependence.

Available only for authorised users

Chaloupka FJ, Warner KE: The economics of smoking. In The handbook of health economics 1B. Edited by: Newhouse J, Culyer A. Elsevier, Amsterdam: North-Holland; 2000:1539–1612. 10.1016/S1574-0064(00)80042-6CrossRef

Laibson D: Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting. Q J Econ 1997, 62: 443–477. 10.1162/003355397555253CrossRef

Gruber J, Koszegi B: Is addiction rational: theory and evidence. Q J Econ 2001, 116: 1261–1303. 10.1162/003355301753265570CrossRef

Kan K: Cigarette smoking and self-control. J Health Econ 2007, 26: 61–81. 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2006.07.002CrossRefPubMed

Doyle JR: Survey of time preference, delay discounting models. Judgm Decis Mak 2013, 8: 116–135.

Van de Ven J, Weale M: An empirical investigation of quasi-hyperbolic discounting. NIESR discussion papers 355. National Institute of Economic and Social Research, London, United Kingdom; 2010.

Fagerström K: Determinants of tobacco Use and renaming the FTND to the fagerström test for cigarette dependence. Nicotine Tob Res 2011, 14: 75–78. 10.1093/ntr/ntr137CrossRefPubMed

Heatherton TF, Kozlowski LT, Frecker RC, Fagerström KO: The fagerström test for nicotine dependence: a revision of the fagerström tolerance questionnaire. Br J Addict 1991, 86: 1119–1127. 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1991.tb01879.xCrossRefPubMed

Frederick S, Lowenstein G, O’Donoghue T: Time discounting and time preference: a critical review. J Econ Lit 2002, 40: 351–401. 10.1257/jel.40.2.351CrossRef

10.

Strotz R: Myopia and inconsistency in dynamic utility maximization. Rev Econ Stud 1956, 23: 165–180. 10.2307/2295722CrossRef

11.

Prelec D: Decreasing impatience: a criterion for Non-stationary time preference and “hyperbolic” discounting. Scand J Econ 2004, 106: 511–532. 10.1111/j.0347-0520.2004.00375.xCrossRef

12.

Takahashi T: A neuroeconomic theory of rational addiction and nonlinear time-perception.. 2011.

13.

Ida T, Goto R: Simultaneous measurement of time and risk preferences: stated preference discrete choice modeling analysis depending on smoking behavior. Int Econ Rev 2009, 50: 1169–1182. 10.1111/j.1468-2354.2009.00564.xCrossRef

14.

Ida T: Anomaly, impulsivity, and addiction. J Socio Econ 2010, 39: 194–203. 10.1016/j.socec.2009.10.005CrossRef

15.

Fiebig DG, Keane MP, Louviere J, Wasi N: The generalized multinomial logit model: accounting for scale and coefficient heterogeneity. Mark Sci 2010, 29: 393–421. 10.1287/mksc.1090.0508CrossRef

16.

Mitchell SH: Measures of impulsivity in cigarette smokers and non-smokers. Psychopharmacology 1999, 146: 455–464. 10.1007/PL00005491CrossRefPubMed

17.

Reynolds B, Karraker K, Horn K, Richards JB: Delay and probability discounting as related to different stages of adolescent smoking and Non-smoking. Behav Process 2003, 64: 333–344. 10.1016/S0376-6357(03)00168-2CrossRef

18.

Ohmura Y, Takahashi T, Kitamura N: Discounting delayed and probabilistic monetary gains and losses by smokers of cigarettes. Psychopharmacology 2005, 182: 508–515. 10.1007/s00213-005-0110-8CrossRefPubMed

19.

McKelvey RD, Zavoina W: A statistical model for the analysis of ordinal level dependent variables. J Math Sociol 1975, 4: 103–120. 10.1080/0022250X.1975.9989847CrossRef

20.

Mitchell SH, Wilson VB: Differences in delay discounting between smokers and nonsmokers remain when both rewards are delayed. Psychopharmacology 2012, 219: 549–562. 10.1007/s00213-011-2521-zPubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

21.

Bickel WK, Odum AL, Madden GJ: Impulsivity and cigarette smoking: delay discounting in current never, and ex-smokers. Psychopharmacology 1999, 146: 447–454. 10.1007/PL00005490CrossRefPubMed

22.

Odum AL, Madden GJ, Bickel WK: Discounting of delayed health gains and losses by current, never- and ex-smokers of cigarettes. Nicotine Tob Res 2002, 4: 295–303. 10.1080/14622200210141257CrossRefPubMed

23.

Baker F, Johnson MW, Bickel WK: Delay discounting in current and never-before cigarette smokers: similarities and differences across commodity, sign, and magnitude. J Abnorm Psychol 2003, 112: 382–392. 10.1037/0021-843X.112.3.382CrossRefPubMed

24.

Reynolds B, Richards JB, Horn K, Karraker K: Delay discounting and probability discounting as related to cigarette smoking status in adults. Behav Process 2004, 65: 35–42. 10.1016/S0376-6357(03)00109-8CrossRef

25.

Thaler RH, Sunstein CR: Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Yale University Press, New Haven: United States; 2008.

26.

Rachlin H, Raineri A, Cross D: Subjective probability and delay. J Exp Anal Behav 1991, 55: 233–244. 10.1901/jeab.1991.55-233PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

27.

Rachlin H, Siegel E: Temporal pattering in probabilistic choice. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 1994, 59: 161–176. 10.1006/obhd.1994.1054CrossRef

28.

Sozou PD: On hyperbolic discounting and uncertain hazard rates. Proceedings of the Royal Soc B: Biol Sci 1998, 265: 2015–2020. 10.1098/rspb.1998.0534CrossRef

29.

Andersen S, Harrison GW, Lau MI, Rutström EE: Eliciting risk and time preferences. Econometrica 2008, 76: 583–618. 10.1111/j.1468-0262.2008.00848.xCrossRef

30.

Green L, Myerson J: A discounting framework for choice with delayed and probabilistic rewards. Psychol Bull 2004, 130: 769–792. 10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.769PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

31.

Fehr E, Zych PK: Do addicts behave rationally? Scand J Econ 1998, 100: 643–661. 10.1111/1467-9442.00127CrossRef

32.

Becker GS, Murphy KM: A theory of rational addiction. J Polit Econ 1988, 96: 675–700. 10.1086/261558CrossRef

33.

Olson M, Bailey MJ: Positive time preference. J Polit Econ 1981, 89: 1–25. 10.1086/260947CrossRef

34.

Yuda M: The impacts of recent smoking control policies on individual smoking choice: the case of Japan. Heal Econ Rev 2013, 3(4):1–13.

35.

Train KE: Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: United Kingdom; 2003.CrossRef

36.

Louviere JJ, Hensher DA, Swait JD: Stated choice methods. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; 2000.CrossRef

37.

Bhat C: Quasi-random maximum simulated likelihood estimation of the mixed multinomial logit model. Transport Res 2001, 35: 677–693. 10.1016/S0191-2615(00)00014-XCrossRef

Title: A quasi-hyperbolic discounting approach to smoking behavior
Author: Takanori Ida
Publication date: 01-12-2014
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Health Economics Review / Issue 1/2014
Electronic ISSN: 2191-1991
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-014-0005-7

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Springer Medicine

A quasi-hyperbolic discounting approach to smoking behavior

Abstract

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2014

Preferences for health insurance in Germany and the Netherlands - a tale of two countries

Biologic TNF inhibiting agents for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: persistence and dosing patterns in Germany

Factors associated with geographic variation in cost per episode of care for three medical conditions

Effect of health insurance coverage on labor allocation: evidence from US farm households

Clinical outcome and cost of treatment and care for neonates less than 1000 grams admitted to Vali-e ASR Hospital

Macro-level factors impacting geographic disparities in cancer screening