Contractual formalities, such as handwritten signatures, have long been viewed as serving a cautionary function that protects individuals from entering ill-considered agreements. With the rise of digital contracting, it is uncertain whether online forms of assent can play the same role. In an incentivized laboratory experiment, four modes of contract confirmation were compared: clicking “OK,” typing one’s name, entering a PIN code (analogous to a qualified e-signature), and handwritten signing. The study examined how these methods affect choices between smaller–sooner and larger–later rewards. Results show that participants were more impulsive when confirming by clicking “OK” or typing their name than when signing by hand, while no significant difference was found between handwritten signatures and entering a PIN. These findings suggest that common digital confirmations fail to reproduce the cautionary effect of handwritten signatures, highlighting the need for more effective online mechanisms.