IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cuf/journl/y2016v17i2meyer.html

Is Homo Economicus a Universal Paradigm in Economic Theory?

Author

Listed:
  • Maciej Meyer

    (Gdynia Maritime University, Faculty of Entrepreneurship and Commodities, Department of Trade and Services)

Abstract

Homo economicus is a very well known concept but a question arises whether its omnipresence equals its real, not theoretical, universality. This paper touches on the problem of the role of the paradigm with reference to the rationality and self-interest principle as well as behavioural economics, cultural differences, social and biological aspects. Values are the common thread in these aspects but what is even more important is that values differ across the world in the same way cultures do. Therefore theories or models based on the aforementioned paradigm can not yield the same results if applied in culturally different countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Maciej Meyer, 2016. "Is Homo Economicus a Universal Paradigm in Economic Theory?," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 17(2), pages 433-443, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:cuf:journl:y:2016:v:17:i:2:meyer
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://down.aefweb.net/AefArticles/aef170208Meyer.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gowdy, John M., 2008. "Behavioral economics and climate change policy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(3-4), pages 632-644, December.
    2. Laibson, David & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1998. "Amos Tversky and the Ascent of Behavioral Economics," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 7-47, April.
    3. repec:feb:natura:0056 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    5. Steven Levitt & John List, 2008. "Homo economicus evolves," Artefactual Field Experiments 00095, The Field Experiments Website.
    6. Buchan, Nancy R. & Johnson, Eric J. & Croson, Rachel T.A., 2006. "Let's get personal: An international examination of the influence of communication, culture and social distance on other regarding preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 373-398, July.
    7. Chris Starmer, 2000. "Developments in Non-expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice under Risk," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 332-382, June.
    8. Ann-Renée Blais & Elke U. Weber, 2006. "A Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DOSPERT)Scale for Adult Populations," CIRANO Working Papers 2006s-24, CIRANO.
    9. Hirshleifer, J, 1978. "Competition, Cooperation, and Conflict in Economics and Biology," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 68(2), pages 238-243, May.
    10. repec:feb:framed:0077 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    12. Samuel Bowles, 1998. "Endogenous Preferences: The Cultural Consequences of Markets and Other Economic Institutions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 75-111, March.
    13. Ann-Renée Blais & Elke U. Weber, 2006. "A Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DOSPERT) scale for adult populations," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 1, pages 33-47, July.
    14. Katona, George, 1974. "Psychology and Consumer Economics," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 1(1), pages 1-8, June.
    15. Jon Elster, 1998. "Emotions and Economic Theory," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 47-74, March.
    16. repec:feb:artefa:0095 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Colin F. Camerer & Richard H. Thaler, 1995. "Anomalies: Ultimatums, Dictators and Manners," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 209-219, Spring.
    18. Jack Hirshleifer, 1976. "Economics and Sociobiology," UCLA Economics Working Papers 080, UCLA Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anna-Katharina Rieger, 2018. "‘Un-Central’ Landscapes of NE-Africa and W-Asia—Landscape Archaeology as a Tool for Socio-Economic History in Arid Landscapes," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-29, December.

    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. Graham Loomes & Ganna Pogrebna, 2014. "Testing for independence while allowing for probabilistic choice," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 189-211, December.
    2. Dohmen, Thomas, 2014. "Behavioral labor economics: Advances and future directions," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 71-85.
    3. Villacis, Alexis H. & Bloem, Jeffrey R. & Mishra, Ashok K., 2023. "Aspirations, risk preferences, and investments in agricultural technologies," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    4. Thomas, Ranjeeta & Galizzi, Matteo M. & Moorhouse, Louisa & Nyamukapa, Constance & Hallett, Timothy B., 2024. "Do risk, time and prosocial preferences predict risky sexual behaviour of youths in a low-income, high-risk setting?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    5. Schaewitz, Johannes & Wang, Mei & Rieger, Marc Oliver, 2022. "Culture and Institutions: Long-lasting effects of communism on risk and time preferences of individuals in Europe," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 785-829.
    6. Arbel, Yuval & Ben-Shahar, Danny & Gabriel, Stuart, 2014. "Anchoring and housing choice: Results of a natural policy experiment," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 68-83.
    7. Yildiz, Özgür, 2014. "Lehren aus der Verhaltensökonomik für die Gestaltung umweltpolitischer Maßnahmen [Lessons from behavioral economics for the design of environmental policy measures]," MPRA Paper 59360, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. James Alm & Antoine Malézieux, 2021. "40 years of tax evasion games: a meta-analysis," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(3), pages 699-750, September.
    9. Tamás Csermely & Alexander Rabas, 2016. "How to reveal people’s preferences: Comparing time consistency and predictive power of multiple price list risk elicitation methods," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 107-136, December.
    10. Renato Frey & Shannon M. Duncan & Elke U. Weber, 2023. "Towards a typology of risk preference: Four risk profiles describe two-thirds of individuals in a large sample of the U.S. population," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 1-17, February.
    11. Gary Charness & Thomas Garcia & Theo Offerman & Marie Claire Villeval, 2020. "Do measures of risk attitude in the laboratory predict behavior under risk in and outside of the laboratory?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 99-123, April.
    12. Zamri Ahmad & Haslindar Ibrahim & Jasman Tuyon, 2018. "Governance of Behavioural Biases in Asset Management Industry: Insights from Fund Managers in Malaysia," Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance (AAMJAF), Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia, vol. 14(2), pages 65-102.
    13. Gino, Francesca & Margolis, Joshua D., 2011. "Bringing ethics into focus: How regulatory focus and risk preferences influence (Un)ethical behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 145-156, July.
    14. Fehr, Ernst & Hoff, Karla, 2011. "Tastes, castes, and culture : the influence of society on preferences," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5760, The World Bank.
    15. Dhami, Sanjit & al-Nowaihi, Ali, 2013. "An extension of the Becker proposition to non-expected utility theory," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 10-20.
    16. Gerrit Antonides & Lies Hovestadt, 2021. "Product Attributes, Evaluability, and Consumer Satisfaction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-20, November.
    17. Klaus Wälde, 2016. "Emotion Research in Economics," CESifo Working Paper Series 5982, CESifo.
    18. Frey, Bruno S. & Gallus, Jana, 2014. "Aggregate effects of behavioral anomalies: A new research area," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy, vol. 8, pages 1-15.
    19. Jan Schnellenbach & Christian Schubert, 2019. "A note on the behavioral political economy of innovation policy," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(5), pages 1399-1414, November.
    20. Andreas Friedl & Katharina Lima de Miranda & Ulrich Schmidt, 2014. "Insurance demand and social comparison: An experimental analysis," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 97-109, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • A10 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - General
    • A12 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Other Disciplines
    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • Z13 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Economic Sociology; Economic Anthropology; Language; Social and Economic Stratification

    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:cuf:journl:y:2016:v:17:i:2:meyer. 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: Qiang Gao (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/emcufcn.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.