IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v104y2014i5p495-500.html

Stochastic Choice: An Optimizing Neuroeconomic Model

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Woodford

Abstract

A model is proposed in which stochastic choice results from noise in cognitive processing rather than random variation in preferences. The mental process used to make a choice is nonetheless optimal, subject to a constraint on available information-processing capacity that is motivated by neurophysiological evidence. The optimal information-constrained model is found to offer a better fit to experimental data on choice frequencies and reaction times than either a purely mechanical process model of choice (the drift-diffusion model) or an optimizing model with fewer constraints on feasible choice processes (the rational inattention model).

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Woodford, 2014. "Stochastic Choice: An Optimizing Neuroeconomic Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(5), pages 495-500, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:104:y:2014:i:5:p:495-500
    Note: DOI: 10.1257/aer.104.5.495
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/aer.104.5.495
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.aeaweb.org/aer/data/10405/P2014_1134_data.zip
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.aeaweb.org/aer/ds/10405/P2014_1134_ds.zip
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to AEA members and institutional subscribers.
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anton Cheremukhin & Anna Popova & Antonella Tutino, 2011. "Experimental evidence on rational inattention," Working Papers 1112, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
    2. John D. Hey, 2018. "Experimental investigations of errors in decision making under risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Experiments in Economics Decision Making and Markets, chapter 17, pages 381-388, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Ballinger, T Parker & Wilcox, Nathaniel T, 1997. "Decisions, Error and Heterogeneity," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(443), pages 1090-1105, July.
    4. Michael Woodford, 2014. "An Optimizing Neuroeconomic Model of Discrete Choice," NBER Working Papers 19897, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Sims, Christopher A., 2010. "Rational Inattention and Monetary Economics," Handbook of Monetary Economics, in: Benjamin M. Friedman & Michael Woodford (ed.), Handbook of Monetary Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 4, pages 155-181, Elsevier.
    6. Ernst Fehr & Antonio Rangel, 2011. "Neuroeconomic Foundations of Economic Choice--Recent Advances," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(4), pages 3-30, Fall.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michael Woodford, 2014. "An Optimizing Neuroeconomic Model of Discrete Choice," NBER Working Papers 19897, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Benjamin Hébert & Michael Woodford, 2017. "Rational Inattention and Sequential Information Sampling," NBER Working Papers 23787, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Benjamin Hébert & Michael Woodford, 2021. "Neighborhood-Based Information Costs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(10), pages 3225-3255, October.
    4. Hebert, Benjamin & Woodford, Michael, 2018. "Information Costs and Sequential Information Sampling," Research Papers 3751, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    5. Royi Jacobovic, 2022. "Regulation of a single-server queue with customers who dynamically choose their service durations," Queueing Systems: Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 101(3), pages 245-290, August.
    6. Bartosz Maćkowiak & Filip Matějka & Mirko Wiederholt, 2023. "Rational Inattention: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 226-273, March.
    7. Schmidt, Ulrich & Neugebauer, Tibor, 2003. "An Experimental Investigation of the Role of Errors for Explaining Violations of Expected Utility," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-279, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    8. Hébert, Benjamin & Woodford, Michael, 2023. "Rational inattention when decisions take time," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    9. Alejandro Hirmas & Jan B. Engelmann & Joël van der Weele, 2024. "Individual and contextual effects of attention in risky choice," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 27(5), pages 1211-1238, November.
    10. David Bruner, 2009. "Changing the probability versus changing the reward," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 12(4), pages 367-385, December.
    11. Anna Conte & John D. Hey & Peter G. Moffatt, 2018. "Mixture models of choice under risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Experiments in Economics Decision Making and Markets, chapter 1, pages 3-12, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    12. Christian Belzil & Tomáš Jagelka, 2024. "Separating Preferences from Endogenous Effort and Cognitive Noise in Observed Decisions," Working Papers 2024-13, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    13. Andersen, Steffen & Harrison, Glenn W. & Lau, Morten Igel & Rutström, Elisabet E., 2010. "Behavioral econometrics for psychologists," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 553-576, August.
    14. Jan Engelmann & Alejandro Hirmas & Joël van der Weele, 2021. "Top Down or Bottom Up? Disentangling the Channels of Attention in Risky Choice," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 21-031/I, Tinbergen Institute.
    15. Wilcox, Nathaniel T., 2011. "'Stochastically more risk averse:' A contextual theory of stochastic discrete choice under risk," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 162(1), pages 89-104, May.
    16. Henry Stott, 2006. "Cumulative prospect theory's functional menagerie," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 101-130, March.
    17. David M. Bruner, 2017. "Does decision error decrease with risk aversion?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(1), pages 259-273, March.
    18. Caplin, Andrew, 2014. "Rational inattention and revealed preference: The data-theoretic approach to economic modeling," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 295-305.
    19. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    20. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2012. "Probabilistic choice and stochastic dominance," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 50(1), pages 59-83, May.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D11 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Theory
    • D87 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Neuroeconomics

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:104:y:2014:i:5:p:495-500. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Michael P. Albert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.