The Consideration of Future Consequences Scale Among Malaysian Young Adults: A Psychometric Evaluation

Background: The consideration of future consequences (CFC) determines the extent to which individuals consider the potential future outcomes of their current behavior. The significance of assessing the CFC scale’s validation in different contexts has been acknowledged by the previous studies. While the majority of the studies have been conducted in western countries, no study has been conducted in Malaysia. The aim of the current study was to validate a Malaysian version of the CFC scale among Malaysian young adults.Methods: The methodological cross-sectional approach was adopted in this study. The study recruited 529 young adults (age range from 25 to 40) who fulfilled the inclusion criteria of the paper survey. Construct validity was assessed using content validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. Cronbach’s alpha, McDonald’s omega, and average inter-item correlation (AIC) were used to assess the scale’s internal consistency. Also, composite reliability (CR) and maximal reliability (MaxR) were used to assess the construct reliability. Measurement invariance was tested across gender.Results: The findings of the exploratory factor analysis indicated that the Malaysian version of the CFC scale has a two-factor structure (i.e., CFC-Future and CFC-Immediate) with 10-item explaining 61.682% of the total variance. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) supported the two-factor structure of the CFC scale with good construct validity. The internal consistency and CR were acceptable. [The Cronbach’s alpha, McDonald’s omega, and CR for CFC-I were 0.901 (CI 95%: 0.881–918), 0.901, and 0.887, respectively. Also, these parameters for CFC-F were 0.867 (CI 95%: 0.838–891), 0.868, and 0.867, respectively].Conclusion: We found acceptable psychometric evidence for the 10-item two-factors CFC scale used in the context of young adults in Malaysia. The validated instrument can be used in future studies to assess young adults’ CFC tendency and CFC-related behavior in Malaysia.

Future time perspective and trust in government: The mediation of the consideration of future consequences

Evidence suggests that college students’ future-related feelings and cognition may influence their trust in government. This study aims to explore whether the association between college students’ future time perspective and trust in government is mediated through the consideration of future consequences (CFC). A cross-sectional survey was used to collect data from 1,617 college students (86.6% women) aged 17 to 31 years in China via an online questionnaire. The results showed that the students’ positive, negative and confused future orientation was positively associated with their trust in government. The consideration of far- future consequences positively mediated the relationship between a positive future orientation and trust in government. These findings support the possibility to evaluate college students’ government trust level according to their future orientation, which will improve their positive political participation.

Delay Discounting and the Cost of Waiting

<p>If offered $50 now or $100 in a year, many of us will choose $50 now. This occurs because of delay discounting – the idea that reinforcers lose value over time. Individuals tend to display shallower discounting (self-controlled decision-making) in hypothetical discounting tasks, and steeper discounting (impulsive decision-making) in experiential discounting tasks. Hypothetical discounting tasks involve participants making a series of hypothetical monetary decisions (e.g. $50 now versus $100 in a year) over a range of delays. Experiential discounting tasks involve participants experiencing the delays and outcomes of their choices. A critical difference between hypothetical and experiential discounting tasks is the type of delay they use. Hypothetical discounting task delays typically involve postponing. This involves participants imagining the reward is delivered to them after the delay and that they are free to pursue other activities during the delay. Experiential task delays involve participants waiting out each delay before they receive their reward, (unable access any alternative reinforcement during the delay). Individuals discount more steeply when tested experientially than hypothetically. Experiment 1 investigated whether waiting and postponing are different discounting constructs. We achieved this via a 2 X 2 within-subjects design where both experiential and hypothetical discounting tasks had both Waiting and Postponing conditions. The hypothetical discounting task involved participants being instructed to imagine waiting for a reward after a delay (Waiting Condition), or imagine the reward would simply be delivered to them after the delay (Postponing Condition). The experiential task involved participants playing a video game that involved having to stop playing and wait for a larger number of points after a delay (Waiting Condition), or playing the game and getting the points delivered after the delay (Postponing Condition). We expected steeper discounting rates when waiting compared to postponing in both the experiential and hypothetical tasks. We found this effect only in the hypothetical task; however, this might be due to our procedure. We randomised the waiting and postponing trials in both tasks and this may have resulted in the participants being unable to discriminate between the interspersed trials. Experiment 2 investigated whether this methodological feature affected discounting in the experiential task, and we found that blocking the trials resulted in the anticipated effect. We found steeper discounting in both the experiential and hypothetical tasks for waiting compared to postponing after implementing this change, suggesting that waiting and postponing are different constructs. Experiment 3 investigated what drives the difference between waiting and postponing. We found that waiting has a greater effect on reward value than postponing due to the inability to access alternative reinforcement during the delay. We also investigated the relationships among our discounting measures and a measure of the consideration of future consequences, and a measure of delayed gratification. We found no correlation among discounting and these measures, and no consistent correlation between waiting and postponing. Overall, our results indicated that waiting and postponing are distinct constructs, and that the inability to access alternative reinforcement during a delay is the key difference between them.</p>

Delay Discounting and the Cost of Waiting

<p>If offered $50 now or $100 in a year, many of us will choose $50 now. This occurs because of delay discounting – the idea that reinforcers lose value over time. Individuals tend to display shallower discounting (self-controlled decision-making) in hypothetical discounting tasks, and steeper discounting (impulsive decision-making) in experiential discounting tasks. Hypothetical discounting tasks involve participants making a series of hypothetical monetary decisions (e.g. $50 now versus $100 in a year) over a range of delays. Experiential discounting tasks involve participants experiencing the delays and outcomes of their choices. A critical difference between hypothetical and experiential discounting tasks is the type of delay they use. Hypothetical discounting task delays typically involve postponing. This involves participants imagining the reward is delivered to them after the delay and that they are free to pursue other activities during the delay. Experiential task delays involve participants waiting out each delay before they receive their reward, (unable access any alternative reinforcement during the delay). Individuals discount more steeply when tested experientially than hypothetically. Experiment 1 investigated whether waiting and postponing are different discounting constructs. We achieved this via a 2 X 2 within-subjects design where both experiential and hypothetical discounting tasks had both Waiting and Postponing conditions. The hypothetical discounting task involved participants being instructed to imagine waiting for a reward after a delay (Waiting Condition), or imagine the reward would simply be delivered to them after the delay (Postponing Condition). The experiential task involved participants playing a video game that involved having to stop playing and wait for a larger number of points after a delay (Waiting Condition), or playing the game and getting the points delivered after the delay (Postponing Condition). We expected steeper discounting rates when waiting compared to postponing in both the experiential and hypothetical tasks. We found this effect only in the hypothetical task; however, this might be due to our procedure. We randomised the waiting and postponing trials in both tasks and this may have resulted in the participants being unable to discriminate between the interspersed trials. Experiment 2 investigated whether this methodological feature affected discounting in the experiential task, and we found that blocking the trials resulted in the anticipated effect. We found steeper discounting in both the experiential and hypothetical tasks for waiting compared to postponing after implementing this change, suggesting that waiting and postponing are different constructs. Experiment 3 investigated what drives the difference between waiting and postponing. We found that waiting has a greater effect on reward value than postponing due to the inability to access alternative reinforcement during the delay. We also investigated the relationships among our discounting measures and a measure of the consideration of future consequences, and a measure of delayed gratification. We found no correlation among discounting and these measures, and no consistent correlation between waiting and postponing. Overall, our results indicated that waiting and postponing are distinct constructs, and that the inability to access alternative reinforcement during a delay is the key difference between them.</p>

Co-created Future Scenarios as a Tool to Communicate Sustainable Development in Coastal Communities in Palawan, Philippines

Scenarios can be used to communicate potential future changes and engage and connect different audiences in exploring sustainable solutions. Communicating scenarios using creative visualisation, co-creation and a focus on local contexts are especially promising. This research is conducted on the island of Palawan in the Philippines as part of the GCRF Blue Communities project. With a quasi-experimental design, we investigate the psychological and emotional effects of the engagement with future scenarios as a tool for communicating sustainability. Together with local stakeholders and community members, three distinct, locally relevant scenario narratives (Business as Usual, Best Case, and Worst Case) have been co-created. Subsequently, a sample of N = 109 local high school students was asked to creatively engage with these scenario narratives. Intentions to engage in sustainable behaviour, perceived behavioural control, ascription of responsibility, consideration of future consequences, six basic emotions and connectedness to place were assessed before and after the activity via paper-pencil administrated questionnaires. A mixed-model analysis showed significant increases in intentions to engage in sustainable behaviour, however, this increase disappeared when consideration of future consequences was added as a covariate, suggesting a mediating effect. The level of consideration of future consequences also increased significantly after engaging with any of the future scenarios, which questions the common interpretation of consideration of future consequences as a trait variable. Perceived behavioural control significantly increased following the engagement with each of the scenarios whereas ascription of responsibility and connectedness to place did not show any changes. Overall, the two most emotion-evoking scenarios, Best Case Scenario and Worst Case Scenario, turn out as superior over the Business as Usual Scenario, which points to the relevance of emotional framing for effective messaging in our sample. This is the first systematic, quantitative assessment of the effects of future scenarios as a communication tool.

Be Still and You Will Know: A Mixed-Method Study on Solitude and Consideration of Future Consequences Among Youth in Rehabilitation

Although solitude is found to be undesirable to many, systematic practice of it can yield positive psychological outcomes. This mixed-method study explored the process and influence of solitude as a behavioral intervention among youths in a therapeutic community in Hong Kong. Qualitative interviews with 43 youths (67.4% male, mean age = 18.3) revealed that solitude facilitated growth in their sense of personal responsibility, increased perspective-taking, increased respect for rules, change in life attitudes, and growth in consideration of future consequences. A two-wave prospective study ( n = 79, 82.3% male, mean age = 17.4) further demonstrated perceived meaningfulness in solitude predicted an increase in consideration of future consequences, but not in other types of behavioral intervention. This study preliminarily demonstrated solitude has beneficial outcomes among high-risk youths, and meaning-making can facilitate this relationship.

Uncovering the Longitudinal and Physiological Associations between Self-Control, Delay of Gratification and Future Thinking

<p>High self-control, better delay of gratification, and future thinking have long been linked theoretically and, more recently, empirically, yet evidence of the causal relationships between them is non-existent. The present research aimed firstly to elucidate the nature of the relationships between self-control, delay of gratification and future thinking, and secondly to investigate whether they are rooted in our physiology. In Study 1, a sample of 174 undergraduates completed a self-report survey three times with 2-month intervals in between. Longitudinal mediation path models were constructed to determine whether and how self-control would function as a mediator between delay of gratification at Time 1 and consideration of future consequences at Time 3. Results showed that delay of gratification predicted higher self-control, which in turn predicted higher concern for future consequences (CFC-F) and a lower concern for immediate consequences (CFC-I). Study 2 further explored this relationship by investigating whether temporal orientation grouping – high- vs. low-CFC – would predict subsequent levels of self-control and delay of gratification in a study of 71 undergraduates. Heart rate variability and cortisol were also examined. Results showed that by grouping participants in terms of CFC it was possible to predict subsequent levels of self-control and gratification delay abilities as expected. While there were no between-groups physiological differences, the methodology allowed for the novel discovery that cortisol was related to cognitive facets of self-control, while HRV was related to emotional functions associated with low self-control (i.e., worry and rumination). These results further highlight the importance of self-control in both our psychological and physiological functioning.</p>

Uncovering the Longitudinal and Physiological Associations between Self-Control, Delay of Gratification and Future Thinking

<p>High self-control, better delay of gratification, and future thinking have long been linked theoretically and, more recently, empirically, yet evidence of the causal relationships between them is non-existent. The present research aimed firstly to elucidate the nature of the relationships between self-control, delay of gratification and future thinking, and secondly to investigate whether they are rooted in our physiology. In Study 1, a sample of 174 undergraduates completed a self-report survey three times with 2-month intervals in between. Longitudinal mediation path models were constructed to determine whether and how self-control would function as a mediator between delay of gratification at Time 1 and consideration of future consequences at Time 3. Results showed that delay of gratification predicted higher self-control, which in turn predicted higher concern for future consequences (CFC-F) and a lower concern for immediate consequences (CFC-I). Study 2 further explored this relationship by investigating whether temporal orientation grouping – high- vs. low-CFC – would predict subsequent levels of self-control and delay of gratification in a study of 71 undergraduates. Heart rate variability and cortisol were also examined. Results showed that by grouping participants in terms of CFC it was possible to predict subsequent levels of self-control and gratification delay abilities as expected. While there were no between-groups physiological differences, the methodology allowed for the novel discovery that cortisol was related to cognitive facets of self-control, while HRV was related to emotional functions associated with low self-control (i.e., worry and rumination). These results further highlight the importance of self-control in both our psychological and physiological functioning.</p>

Implications of tax audit risk, consequences, aggressive behavior and ethics for compliance

Purpose This study investigates whether consideration of future consequences (CFC), Machiavellianism (MACH) and the perceived role of ethics and social responsibility (PRESOR) enhance understanding of the impact of tax audit risk on compliance. Design/methodology/approach A between-subjects experiment is conducted to test the hypotheses. A hypothetical tax audit case (or lack thereof) is used to create a high (low) perceived tax audit risk. The usable responses of 144 participants representing the general taxpayer population are analyzed. Findings The results suggest that taxpayers with lower CFC, MACH or PRESOR scores are more compliant when tax audit risk is high than low. In contrast, taxpayers with higher CFC, MACH or PRESOR scores are indifferent toward high or low tax audit risk. Research limitations/implications Research can elicit consideration of future consequences of being detected for taxpayers with lower CFC scores to increase compliance. Additionally, increased saliency of tax audit risk and detection of noncompliance in a tax audit can enhance the compliance of taxpayers with lower MACH scores. Dissemination of information via social media on the value of ethical and social responsibility of compliance can also increase the compliance of taxpayers with higher PRESOR scores. Practical implications This study helps researchers and the tax authority better understand the complexities of compliance and the ethical dilemmas that taxpayers face, especially when a considerable amount of cash income is involved. To deter underreporting of cash income, the tax authority can use social media to explain how data analytics tools can facilitate the analysis and integration of multiple sources of a taxpayer’s income and expenses. Originality/value Prior studies present participants with objective tax audit rates, such as 5, 25 and 30 (Cullis et al., 2006; Maciejovsky et al., 2007; Trivedi et al., 2003) or 50% (Maciejovsky et al., 2012) to investigate tax compliance. However, the actual tax audit rate is very low (about 1%) due to the limited resources of the tax authority (Alm and Torgler, 2011). To attenuate perceptions of unrealistic tax audit rates, this study operationalizes high (low) tax audit risk via a hypothetical tax audit case (or lack thereof) to examine the impact of tax audit risk on compliance.