Inconsistent Planning and the Allocation of Tasks Over Time

We test the hypothesis of inconsistent planning proposed by Strotz (1955). In the laboratory, participants allocated time between ‘work’ and ‘leisure’ tasks, and were offered a commitment device. Original plans tended to delay leisure, and to involve a moderate degree of spreading between work and leisure tasks. Most participants preferred commitment over flexibility. Although most were denied commitment, few altered their plans. Those that did make changes tended to further postpone leisure. We find limited evidence of discounting or impatience, contrary to the predictions of most theoretical models of inconsistent planning. Instead, our results imply a preference for improving sequences.

Cultural Differences in “Saving the Best for Last”

We examined cross-cultural differences in preferences for sequences of realistic stimuli. Prior research on predominantly European American (EA) samples has found that people typically show a preference for improving sequences (i.e., saving the most positive or least intense stimuli for last). Based on cultural differences in ideal affect, regulatory focus, and dialecticism, we predicted that East Asians/East Asian Americans (AA) would prefer more balanced sequences, and intersperse stimuli of different intensities. EA and AA students ( n = 170) were asked to select the order in which they wanted to experience a series of realistic stimuli (emotional pictures, aversive sounds, and physical effort) over the course of a short time interval. Compared with AAs, EAs showed a stronger preference for improving sequences and were more likely to group similar stimuli together. As hypothesized, sequence preferences were associated with affective goals, but we only found this effect among AAs and not among EAs. Regulatory focus and dialecticism were not associated with sequence preferences. Further research is required to examine the mechanisms behind cultural differences and their potential implications for time management and other real-life outcomes.