Abstract
Temporal discounting (TD) tasks measure the preference for immediate rewards over larger delayed rewards and have been widely used to study impulsivity in children and adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Relatively impulsive individuals tend to show high inconsistency in their choices, which makes it difficult to determine commonly used TD outcome measures (e.g., area under the curve, AUC). In this study, we leveraged two published datasets to compare four methods to compute TD outcome measures in children and adolescents (8-17 years) with (n = 107) and without ADHD (n = 128): two predetermined rules methods, a proportion method, and logistic regression. In both datasets, when using the two predetermined rules methods and the proportion method, TD outcomes were highly correlated and group differences in TD were similar. When using logistic regression, a large proportion of AUCs (95% in dataset 1; 33% in dataset 2) could not be computed due to inconsistent choice patterns. These findings indicate that predetermined rules methods (for studies with small sample sizes and experienced raters) and a proportion method (for studies with larger sample sizes or less experienced raters) are recommended over logistic regression when determining subjective reward values for participants with inconsistent choice patterns.
