IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uto/cesmep/200206.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Mind and choice in economics

Author

Abstract

This paper holds that the criteria of rational behavior, so far assumed in behavioral models, are not dufficiently realistic. The point of view here presented lies upon contemporary neurobiology that teaches how individual behavior responds to more complex and efficient criteria than the ones so far utilized in the decision making models. Following Simon's and Hayek's institutions, the paper takes the view that knowledge is the fruit of a process of "endogenous construction" and that perception represents the source of the unpredictability of behavior, and the cornerston of economic change. A relevant part of contemporary neurobiology has later confirmed these intuitions, and it can probably help us understand the role of emotions in the processes of choice. The development of this approach may have an influence on economic theory, especially with reference to economic behavior, theory of games, procedural rationality models, and pathdependent processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Rizzello Salvatore, 2002. "Mind and choice in economics," CESMEP Working Papers 200206, University of Turin.
  • Handle: RePEc:uto:cesmep:200206
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cesmep.unito.it/WP/6_WP_Cesmep.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simonson, Itamar, 1989. "Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(2), pages 158-174, September.
    2. Fudenberg, Drew & Levine, David, 1998. "Learning in games," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 631-639, May.
    3. George J. Mailath, 1998. "Corrigenda [Do People Play Nash Equilibrium? Lessons from Evolutionary Game Theory]," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(4), pages 1941-1941, December.
    4. Ellison, Glenn, 1993. "Learning, Local Interaction, and Coordination," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(5), pages 1047-1071, September.
    5. Erev, Ido & Roth, Alvin E, 1998. "Predicting How People Play Games: Reinforcement Learning in Experimental Games with Unique, Mixed Strategy Equilibria," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(4), pages 848-881, September.
    6. Sonsino, Doron, 1997. "Learning to Learn, Pattern Recognition, and Nash Equilibrium," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 286-331, February.
    7. Ulrich Witt, 1992. "Evolutionary Concepts in Economics," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 18(4), pages 405-419, Fall.
    8. Lachmann, Ludwig M, 1976. "From Mises to Shackle: An Essay on Austrian Economics and the Kaleidic Society," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 54-62, March.
    9. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    10. Fishburn, Peter C., 1983. "Transitive measurable utility," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 293-317, December.
    11. Herbert A. Simon, 1996. "The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262691914, December.
    12. Colin F. Camerer, 1997. "Progress in Behavioral Game Theory," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 167-188, Fall.
    13. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    14. Salvatore Rizzello, 2000. "Economic Change, Subjective Perception and Institutional Evolution," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 127-150, May.
    15. Cecilia Chaing & Lindsay McSweeney, 2010. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 6.
    16. George J. Mailath, 1998. "Do People Play Nash Equilibrium? Lessons from Evolutionary Game Theory," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(3), pages 1347-1374, September.
    17. Huber, Joel & Payne, John W & Puto, Christopher, 1982. "Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 9(1), pages 90-98, June.
    18. Simon, Herbert A, 1979. "Rational Decision Making in Business Organizations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(4), pages 493-513, September.
    19. Jon Elster, 1998. "Emotions and Economic Theory," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 47-74, March.
    20. George A. Akerlof, 1970. "The Market for "Lemons": Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500.
    21. Amos Tversky & Itamar Simonson, 1993. "Context-Dependent Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(10), pages 1179-1189, October.
    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. Paolo Crosetto & Alexia Gaudeul, 2011. "Do consumers prefer offers that are easy to compare? An experimental investigation," Jena Economics Research Papers 2011-044, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    2. Crosetto, Paolo & Gaudeul, Alexia, 2012. "Do consumers prefer offers that are easy to compare? An experimental investigation," MPRA Paper 41462, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Sent, Esther-Mirjam, 2004. "The legacy of Herbert Simon in game theory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 303-317, March.
    4. Jacob K. Goeree & Charles A. Holt, 2001. "Ten Little Treasures of Game Theory and Ten Intuitive Contradictions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1402-1422, December.
    5. Boris Salazar, 2001. "¿Qué tan racional es el principio de racionalidad de Popper?," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 3(5), pages 52-77, July-Dece.
    6. Tassos Patokos, 2014. "Introducing Disappointment Dynamics and Comparing Behaviors in Evolutionary Games: Some Simulation Results," Games, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-25, January.
    7. Paolo Crosetto & Alexia Gaudeul, 2014. "Choosing whether to compete: Price and format competition with consumer confusion," Jena Economics Research Papers 2014-026, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    8. Paolo Crosetto & Alexia Gaudeul, 2017. "Choosing not to compete: Can firms maintain high prices by confusing consumers?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 897-922, December.
    9. Troy Tassier, 2013. "Handbook of Research on Complexity, by J. Barkley Rosser, Jr. and Edward Elgar," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 39(1), pages 132-133.
    10. Hannah Josepha Rachel Altman & Morris Altman & Benno Torgler & Stephen Whyte, 2021. "Beauty and Preferences Formation Exemplified in the Sports Market," CREMA Working Paper Series 2021-10, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    11. Duffy, John, 2006. "Agent-Based Models and Human Subject Experiments," Handbook of Computational Economics, in: Leigh Tesfatsion & Kenneth L. Judd (ed.), Handbook of Computational Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 19, pages 949-1011, Elsevier.
    12. Benndorf, Volker & Martínez-Martínez, Ismael & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2021. "Games with coupled populations: An experiment in continuous time," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    13. Teck H. Ho & Xin Wang & Colin F. Camerer, 2008. "Individual Differences in EWA Learning with Partial Payoff Information," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 37-59, January.
    14. Upravitelev, A., 2023. "Neoclassical roots of behavioral economics," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 58(1), pages 110-140.
    15. Tilman Slembeck, 2000. "Learning in Economics: Where Do We Stand?," Microeconomics 0004007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Antonio Doria, Francisco, 2011. "J.B. Rosser Jr. , Handbook of Research on Complexity, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK--Northampton, MA, USA (2009) 436 + viii pp., index, ISBN 978 1 84542 089 5 (cased)," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 78(1-2), pages 196-204, April.
    17. Jonathan C. Pettibone, 2012. "Testing the effect of time pressure on asymmetric dominance and compromise decoys in choice," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 7(4), pages 513-523, July.
    18. Siegfried Berninghaus & Werner Güth & M. Vittoria Levati & Jianying Qiu, 2006. "Satisficing in sales competition: experimental evidence," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2006-32, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    19. Michaël Lainé, 2014. "Vers une alternative au paradigme de la rationalité ? Victoires et déboires du programme spinoziste en économie," Post-Print hal-01335618, HAL.
    20. Nasim Mousavi & Panagiotis Adamopoulos & Jesse Bockstedt, 2023. "The Decoy Effect and Recommendation Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 1533-1553, December.

    More about this item

    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:uto:cesmep:200206. 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: Piero Cavaleri or Marina Grazioli (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cmtorit.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.