Delay discounting and substance use treatment outcomes: A systematic review focused on treatment outcomes and discounting methodology

Introduction Delay discounting—the tendency to choose small, immediate rewards over larger, delayed rewards—is robustly associated with substance use. Delay discounting may present challenges in treatment for substance use disorders, as individuals with elevated discounting may struggle to wait for the long-term rewards that come from abstinence, which may yield poorer treatment outcomes. However, evidence on the role of discounting in treatment outcomes has been inconsistent. The study conducted a systematic review of the literature to characterize the prospective effects of delay discounting measured pre-treatment on substance use treatment outcomes, with a focus on characterizing findings across: 1) type of treatment outcome and 2) methodology used to assess and characterize discounting. Method A systematic literature search identified N = 17 studies that examined the association between delay discounting at treatment entry (pre-treatment) and substance use treatment outcomes. Findings were reported across the following substance use treatment outcomes: abstinence, relapse, use frequency and related problems, and treatment adherence. Findings regarding discounting methodology were reported by type of discounting measure (adjusting choice task, fixed choice task, or experiential task) and parameter used to characterize discounting (k, log transformed k (lnk), and area under the curve). Results Delay discounting at treatment entry was not consistently associated with substance use treatment outcomes when examined across all studies overall (47 %) or by treatment outcome (0–40 % for most outcomes). The majority of studies (64 %) that used an adjusting choice, computer-based task reported a significant association between discounting and treatment outcomes, whereas few studies that used a fixed choice or experiential task reported significant associations with treatment outcomes (0–25 %). Most studies (71 %) that used the lnk parameter to characterize discounting reported significant associations between discounting and a range of treatment outcomes. In contrast, few studies that used k or AUC (25–33 %) reported significant associations between discounting and treatment outcomes. Conclusion When examined overall and by treatment outcome, evidence did not consistently indicate that delay discounting was prospectively associated with substance use treatment outcomes. However, delay discounting at treatment entry was more commonly associated with a variety of poorer treatment outcomes when researchers used more fine-grained methods to characterize discounting

Discounting of Hyper-Palatable Food and Money: Associations with Food Addiction Symptoms

Introduction: Delay discounting (DD), the tendency to prefer small, immediate rewards over larger, delayed rewards, is associated with health-risk behaviors. The study examined associations between DD for money and hyper-palatable foods (HPF) with food addiction (FA) symptoms among a general population sample. Methods: Participants (N = 296) completed an adjusting DD task that consisted of a single-commodity condition with HPF as the reward (HPF now vs. HPF later) and cross-commodity conditions comparing money and HPF (money now vs. HPF later; HPF now vs. money later). The Yale Food Addiction Scale 2.0 was used to assess FA symptoms. Zero-inflated negative binomial regression models tested whether discounting of HPF and money was associated with FA symptoms. Results: Findings indicated there were no significant associations between DD and FA symptoms in the single-commodity HPF condition (logit: OR = 1.02, p-value = 0.650; count: IRR = 1.04, p-value = 0.515). There were no significant associations among cross-commodity conditions comparing money now vs. HPF later (logit: OR = 0.96, p-value = 0.330; count: IRR = 1.02, p-value = 0.729) or conditions comparing HPF now vs. money later (logit: OR = 1.02, p-value = 0.682; count: IRR = 0.92, p-value = 0.128) and FA symptoms. Conclusions: Discounting HPF may not be a key behavioral feature among individuals who endorse FA symptoms