We present and expand existing theories about why individuals may assess positive outcomes differently from negative outcomes in intertemporal choices. All of our theories—based on utility or cost considerations – predict a conventional magnitude effect for positive outcomes, that is, a negative relation between outcome size and subjective discount rates. For negative outcomes, however, implications are different for utility- and cost-based approaches. We argue that the relevance of utility-based aspects is strengthened in a money frame, leading to a conventional magnitude effect even for negative outcomes, whereas cost-based considerations gain in importance in an interest rate frame, implying, in contrast, a “reverse” magnitude effect, that is, higher discount rates for (absolutely) higher outcome size. A web-based experiment with 676 participants confirms our theoretical findings: the conventional magnitude effect prevails for positive outcomes in the money and the interest rate frame and negative outcomes in the money frame. However, there is a reverse magnitude effect for negative outcomes in the interest rate frame. Our results might help to better understand prevailing magnitude effects in practical applications and might also be apt to derive suggestions for better designing of intertemporal decision problems.

中文翻译：

---

负面结果的常规效应或反向效应：框架问题

我们提出并扩展了关于为什么个体在跨期选择中对积极结果和消极结果的评估不同的现有理论。我们所有的理论——基于效用或成本考虑——预测积极结果的传统规模效应，即结果规模和主观贴现率之间的负相关关系。然而，对于负面结果，基于效用和基于成本的方法的影响是不同的。我们认为，基于效用方面的相关性在货币框架中得到加强，即使对于负面结果也会产生传统的规模效应，而基于成本的考虑因素在利率框架中变得越来越重要，这意味着，相反，“反向”规模效应，即（绝对）更高的结果规模具有更高的贴现率。一项有 676 名参与者参与的网络实验证实了我们的理论发现：货币和利率框架中的积极结果普遍存在传统的量级效应，而货币框架中的消极结果普遍存在传统的幅度效应。然而，利率框架中的负面结果存在相反的幅度效应。我们的结果可能有助于更好地理解实际应用中普遍存在的量级效应，也可能有助于为更好地设计跨期决策问题提供建议。