Decisions on when to act are critical in many health care, safety and security situations, where acting too early or too late can both lead to huge costs or losses. In this paper, impatience is investigated as a bias affecting timing decisions, and is successfully manipulated and moderated. Experiment 1 (N = 123) shows that in different tasks with the same duration, participants perform better when acting early is advantageous, as compared to when acting late is. Experiment 2 (N = 701) manipulates impatience and shows that impatience induced by delays (a) affects timing decisions in the subsequent tasks, (b) increases a tendency to receive information faster, only for a few seconds, with cost and no gain, and (c) reduces satisfaction in the subsequent task. Furthermore, impatience is significantly moderated by showing fast countdowns during the delays. Experiment 3 (N = 304) shows that the mechanism behind this impatience moderation is altered time perception and presents trade-offs between duration perception and duration recall.
BotellaP.BoschF.RomeroF. J. & ParraA. (2001). Sex differences in estimation of time intervals and in reaction time are removed by moderate but not high doses of caffeine in coffee. Hum. Psychopharmacol.16533–540.
DelwadiaV.MarshallS. & WelchI. (2010). The effect of user interface delay in thin client mobile games. In Proceedings of the eleventh Australasian conference on user interface. volume 106 Australian Computer Society Inc. (pp. 5–13).
GhafurianM. & ReitterD. (2014). Impatience, risk propensity and rationality in timing games. In Proceedings of the 36th annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci), Quebec, Canada (pp. 2841–2846).
GhafurianM. & ReitterD. (2016). Impatience induced by waiting: An effect moderated by the speed of countdowns. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM conference on designing interactive systems Brisbane Australia (pp. 556–564).
GrossklagsJ. & ReitterD. (2014). How task familiarity and cognitive predispositions impact behavior in a security game of timing. In Computer Security Foundations Symposium (CSF) Vienna Austria (pp. 111–122).
HarrisonC.AmentoB.KuznetsovS. & BellR. (2007). Rethinking the progress bar. In Proceedings of the 20th annual ACM symposium on user interface software and technology (pp. 115–118). New York, NY, USA: ACM.
MaisterD. H. (1985). The psychology of waiting lines. In CzepielJ. A.SolomonM. R. & SurprenantC. F. (Eds) The service encounter: Managing employee/customer interaction in service businesses. Lexington, MA, USA: D. C. Heath and Company, Lexington Books.
ManziniP. & MariottiM. (2007). Choice over time. IZA Discussion Paper No. 2993.
In AnandP.PattanaikP. and PuppeC. (Eds) Oxford handbook of rational and social choice (pp. 239–270). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
MazurJ. E. (1987). An adjusting procedure for studying delayed reinforcement. In CommonsM. L.MazurJ. E.NevinJ. A. & RachlinH. (Eds) Quantitative analyses of behavior Vol. 5: The effect of delay and of intervening events on reinforcement value (pp. 55–73). New York, NY, US: Psychology Press.
MormannM. M.MalmaudJ.HuthA.KochC. & RangelA. (2010). The drift diffusion model can account for the accuracy and reaction time of value-based choices under high and low time pressure. Judgm. Decis. Mak.5437–449.
PettyR. E.BriñolP.LoerschC.McCaslinM. J.LearyM. & HoyleR. (2009). The need for cognition. In LearyM. R. & HoyleR. H. (Eds.) Handbook of individual differences in social behavior (pp. 318–329). New York, NY, USA: Guilford Press.
StineM. M. O’Connor R. J. YatkoB. R.GrunbergN. E. & Cousino KleinL. (2002). Evidence for a relationship between daily caffeine consumption and accuracy of time estimation. Hum. Psychopharmacol.17361–367.
Van RijnH.GuB.-M. & MeckW. H. (2014). Dedicated clock/timing-circuit theories of time perception and timed performance. In H. Merchant, & V. de Lafuente (Eds), Neurobiology of interval timing (pp. 75–99). New York, NY, USA: Springer-Verlag Wittmann, M. & Paulus, M. P. (2008). Decision making, impulsivity and time perception. Trends Cogn