Episodic future thinking and delay of gratification in children: Is imagining reward pay-off helpful?

Previous studies have failed to show an effect of episodic future thinking (EFT) on children's delay of gratification (DoG), contrasting strikingly with adult findings. Recent findings from a sample of 8-11-year-old children by Canning et al. (J. Exp. Child Psychol., 228, 2023, 105618) indicate that EFT cueing is not effective compared to a no-cue control even when it is reward related. Canning et al. suggest children's DoG performance, unlike that of adults, may be negatively affected by the cognitive load of cueing, but this leaves unexplained why EFT reward-related cueing produced significantly better performance than cueing that did not involve EFT in their study. The current study attempted to further delineate the importance of linking future thinking cues to rewards. A reward-related EFT condition was compared to a reward-unrelated EFT condition and a no-cue control on a delay choice task. No significant differences were observed between the three conditions. This suggests that even reward-related future thinking is ineffective at improving children's delayed gratification. Further research is needed to determine why children struggle to benefit from EFT cues.

Reward-related episodic future thinking and delayed gratification in children.

Cuing adults to imagine their personal futures enhances prudent choice in delay discounting tasks. However, it has not been established that such cueing also reduces discounting in children. We assessed the effect of episodic future thinking (EFT) on delay of gratification in children using EFT cues specifically related to the rewards on offer. One hundred and thirty-nine 8-12-year-olds were assigned to one of three conditions: (i) EFT (imagine spending money in the future), (ii) Imagine Place (imagine being in a certain place), or (iii) No Cue. They were cued on each trial of two tasks: a delay discounting task with hypothetical monetary rewards and a real delay choice task involving choices between real rewards over real delays (coins that could be swapped for treats). In the delay discounting task, the Imagine Place group showed significantly higher discounting than the other two groups. In the real delay choice task, the Imagine Place group made significantly fewer delayed choices than the EFT group. However, the EFT group did not differ from the No Cue group in either task. The lack of a difference between the EFT and No Cue conditions supports previous findings suggesting children struggle to benefit from EFT cues. Poorer performance of the Imagine Place group suggests that cued imagination is cognitively taxing for children, using up cognitive resources required to delay gratification.