I do less hyperbolic discounting. A few years ago, if I was given the choice between playing flash games and studying, I would choose games, but if the choice was to be made a month in advance I would have chosen studying. Now I always choose studying.
I still value the same things over the long term, but now my short-term and long-term values are mostly the same. Hyperbolic discounting / akrasia does not affect my judgments as much.
If I was given the ability to force my future self of one month later (or my past self, if that were possible) to study, I would. But at any given time I would usually choose not to study.
This is like a study I read about where people were given a choice between a bag of chocolates and a bag of fruit. If they were told they would immediately be given the food, most chose chocolate, but if they were told it would be delivered a few days later, most chose fruit.
I still don’t know I quite get it. So, if I asked you what you’d like to do in one month’s time, study or play a game, you’d say study?
I was thinking you were going along the lines of timeless decision theory, and perhaps that’s why I’m confused. I’d assumed that were comparing whether to study or play games now based on the immediate but momentary reward of games now vs. the longer lasting and more deeply satisfying future rewards of studying.
In other words, I’d always thought that TDT/hyperbolic discounting were about remedying the postponing of actions because of far-mode perception of rewards. Thus, your statement of having decreased your hyperbolic discounting made me think you meant that you were better about seeing the far-mode rewards of studying and thus chose to study now rather than postponing.
Instead, you’ve discussed what you would decide to do in the future, and thus I’m confused...
I do less hyperbolic discounting. A few years ago, if I was given the choice between playing flash games and studying, I would choose games, but if the choice was to be made a month in advance I would have chosen studying. Now I always choose studying.
I still value the same things over the long term, but now my short-term and long-term values are mostly the same. Hyperbolic discounting / akrasia does not affect my judgments as much.
That makes sense, but I don’t understand this:
Could you clarify that? I don’t understand “if the choice was to be made a month in advance”—you planned to study in one month’s time?
If I was given the ability to force my future self of one month later (or my past self, if that were possible) to study, I would. But at any given time I would usually choose not to study.
This is like a study I read about where people were given a choice between a bag of chocolates and a bag of fruit. If they were told they would immediately be given the food, most chose chocolate, but if they were told it would be delivered a few days later, most chose fruit.
Huh. I think I’d choose chocolate now or later :)
I still don’t know I quite get it. So, if I asked you what you’d like to do in one month’s time, study or play a game, you’d say study?
I was thinking you were going along the lines of timeless decision theory, and perhaps that’s why I’m confused. I’d assumed that were comparing whether to study or play games now based on the immediate but momentary reward of games now vs. the longer lasting and more deeply satisfying future rewards of studying.
In other words, I’d always thought that TDT/hyperbolic discounting were about remedying the postponing of actions because of far-mode perception of rewards. Thus, your statement of having decreased your hyperbolic discounting made me think you meant that you were better about seeing the far-mode rewards of studying and thus chose to study now rather than postponing.
Instead, you’ve discussed what you would decide to do in the future, and thus I’m confused...