Abstract
The ability to consider the future under the influence of an induced current state is known as induced-state episodic foresight. One study to date has examined adults’ induced episodic foresight and found that adults’ (like children’s) preferences for the future are related to their current state such that they predicted wanting water (vs. pretzels) in the future when experiencing a current state of thirst [1]. We attempted to replicate these findings in adults. In Study 1, adults (N = 198) in a laboratory selected pretzels for tomorrow at the same rate (around 20%) in an experimental condition (thirst induced) and a control condition (thirst not induced). In a lecture, 32% of adults preferred pretzels for tomorrow without thirst induction (Study 2, N = 63). Partially replicating Kramer et al. [1], we found that a minority of adults preferred pretzels (vs. water) when experiencing a current state of thirst. However, in contrast to their findings, our results showed that when thirst was not induced, a minority of adults also preferred pretzels for tomorrow. Thus, adults’ future preference was similar regardless of thirst induction. We also tested thirst as a mechanism for adults’ preference for the future and found that across conditions adults’ thirst predicted their choice of water (vs. pretzels) for the future. In sum, our results partially replicated Kramer et al. [1] by showing the current state, regardless of thirst induction, predicts adults’ choices for the future.
Highlights
In daily life, humans must often consider the future and make predictions about future events, such as what clothes might be needed on an upcoming vacation, how a family reunion might transpire, or how much food you might need to purchase for the week
Presentation order of pretzels or water was related to future preference choice, χ2(1) = 4.82, p = .03, φ = -.16, such that participants chose water more frequently when it was presented first (86% vs. 73.5% chose water when it was presented second) and pretzels more frequently when it was presented first (26.5% vs. 14% chose pretzels when it was presented second)
Results were similar when presentation order was included as a moderating factor: In a logistic regression model predicting future preference choice from condition, order of presentation, and their interaction, each predictive effect failed to reach significance
Summary
Humans must often consider the future and make predictions about future events, such as what clothes might be needed on an upcoming vacation, how a family reunion might transpire, or how much food you might need to purchase for the week. Because these situations have not yet occurred, humans must construct a mental representation of the future and consider what is likely to occur at a point in future time. Anticipating how one might feel, think, or act in the future can be quite challenging [4,5,6], when
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
