It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Machine learning has the potential to facilitate the development of computational methods that improve the measurement of cognitive and mental functioning. In three populations (college students, patients with a substance use disorder, and Amazon Mechanical Turk workers), we evaluated one such method, Bayesian adaptive design optimization (ADO), in the area of delay discounting by comparing its test–retest reliability, precision, and efficiency with that of a conventional staircase method. In all three populations tested, the results showed that ADO led to 0.95 or higher test–retest reliability of the discounting rate within 10–20 trials (under 1–2 min of testing), captured approximately 10% more variance in test–retest reliability, was 3–5 times more precise, and was 3–8 times more efficient than the staircase method. The ADO methodology provides efficient and precise protocols for measuring individual differences in delay discounting.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
; Gu Hairong 2 ; Shen Yitong 3 ; Haines, Nathaniel 2 ; Hahn, Hunter A 2 ; Teater, Julie E 4 ; Myung, Jay I 2
; Pitt, Mark A 2 1 Seoul National University, Department of Psychology, Seoul, Korea (GRID:grid.31501.36) (ISNI:0000 0004 0470 5905); The Ohio State University, Department of Psychology, Columbus, USA (GRID:grid.261331.4) (ISNI:0000 0001 2285 7943)
2 The Ohio State University, Department of Psychology, Columbus, USA (GRID:grid.261331.4) (ISNI:0000 0001 2285 7943)
3 Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, Indianapolis, USA (GRID:grid.257413.6) (ISNI:0000 0001 2287 3919)
4 The Ohio State University, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Health, Columbus, USA (GRID:grid.261331.4) (ISNI:0000 0001 2285 7943)




