Deposit? Yes, please! The effect of different modes of assigning reward-and deposit-based financial incentives on effort 285 9 respectively. We will henceforth refer to these conditions as low (€8)/medium (€12)/high (€20) payment. Respondents were informed about their payment condition simultaneously with their randomisation status. The online experiment consisted of three time points, T0, T1, and T2. Note that, as can be seen from Figure 1, the experiment mimics the effort-reward trade-off that typically occurs for behaviour change, i.e., effort allocation at T1 leads to a delayed reward at T2. T0: Baseline session At T0, 228 respondents were recruited to take part in the study (after providing informed consent), completed a set of baselines measures (used for nudged assignment), practiced the tedious task and were informed about the incentives used in the study as well as the condition they were assigned to. The informed consent and first pages of the experiment also included details about the delayed payments this study used and the chance of potentially not earning anything if the experiment was not completed. Median completion time for session T0 was 18 minutes. Baseline measures Respondents completed a series of questions collecting demographics (age, sex, income and educational attainment), as well as measures of delay discounting, demand for commitment, and loss aversion. Delay discounting, in line with Boderie et al.1 was measured with the 27-item monetary choice questionnaire (MCQ) developed by Kirby and Maraković2, a standard and widely used measure of delay discounting (Kaplan et al., 2016). In the MCQ respondents are asked to make a series of decisions between a smaller monetary amount paid out sooner (e.g., €54 today) or a larger amount paid out later (e.g., €55 in 117 days). Smaller-sooner amounts would be paid out today and ranged between €14 and €80, while larger-later rewards ranged between €25 and €85 and would be paid out between 7 and 186 days. Respondents with a stronger tendency to choose the immediate reward would display stronger delay discounting. The MCQ was developed to estimate discount rate in a hyperbolic discount function3. That is, the present value of a delayed reward V can be expressed as , where A is the amount, and D is the delay. In this study we used the automated scoring developed by Kaplan et al.4 to estimate . Furthermore, a non-parametric measure of discounting was used, i.e., the proportion of largerlater responses, which is derived as X/27 where X is the number of larger later responses. Note that all rewards and delays were hypothetical.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw