The present study sought to determine if episodic future thinking (EFT) can decrease delay discounting (DD) and demand for fast food under simulations of economic scarcity in adults at risk for diabetes (i.e., overweight/obese and with hemoglobin A1c values in, or approaching, the prediabetic range). Across two sessions, participants completed assessments of DD and food demand at baseline and while prompted to: (1) engage in either EFT or control episodic recent thinking, and (2) while reading a brief narrative describing either economic scarcity or neutral income conditions. Results showed that EFT significantly reduced DD, whereas the economic scarcity narrative significantly increased DD; no significant interaction between EFT and scarcity was observed. No significant effect of either EFT or scarcity was observed on food demand. We conclude that EFT decreases DD even when challenged by simulated economic scarcity in adults at risk for diabetes. The absence of a significant interaction between EFT and scarcity suggests that these variables operate independently to influence DD in opposing directions. Effects of EFT and economic scarcity on food demand require further study. The present study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03664726).

本研究旨在确定在有糖尿病风险的成年人（即超重/肥胖和血红蛋白 A1c 值在或接近，前驱糖尿病范围）。在两次会议中，参与者在基线时完成了对 DD 和食品需求的评估，同时被提示：（1）参与 EFT 或控制近期的偶发性思维，以及（2）在阅读描述经济稀缺或中性收入条件的简短叙述时。结果表明，EFT 显着降低了 DD，而经济稀缺性叙述显着增加了 DD；没有观察到 EFT 和稀缺性之间的显着交互作用。没有观察到电子转帐或稀缺对粮食需求的显着影响。我们得出结论，即使在面临糖尿病风险的成年人模拟经济匮乏的挑战时，EFT 也会降低 DD。EFT 和稀缺性之间缺乏显着的交互作用表明这些变量独立运作以在相反的方向上影响 DD。EFT 和经济稀缺对粮食需求的影响需要进一步研究。本研究已在临床试验.gov (NCT03664726) 上注册。