NEUROECONOMICS AND BEHAVIORAL ECONOMICS: SYNTHESIS SOURCES

Anastasiya V. Peskova
Lomonosov Moscow State University

Marina S. Kovalevskaya
Lomonosov Moscow State University


Abstract


The article is devoted to behavioral economics and neuroeconomics as recent trends in the framework
of experimental economics. The article considers the basic ideas of the followers of these two areas, basic
methodology problems connected with these areas. It also introduces the way of origin and development of a
new model of choice in behavioral economics when psychological and other factors begin to play special
role in analysis of economic experiments, and a new focus on human decision-making process emerges.
The interdisciplinary areas also appear to be in progress, including neuroeconomics originated at the
intersection of neuroscience and economics. The economic processes analysts face new opportunities related
to new data, new understanding of the nature of human decision-making process on the physical, biological
and chemical level.
Special attention is paid to the prospects of behavioral economics and neuroeconomics, as well as related
research of many scientists, which states the criticism of new and increasingly popular methods of research
on human behavior.
The article concludes that although neuroeconomics faces a lot of serious problems, its experiment and
research results bring new knowledge to economists about themselves, open up new horizons and represent
new approach to the study of human nature. But is this neurobiological human model essential for economics,
what are the benefits of using new model for science, will be the results of the analysis of biological and
chemical processes important to solving major economic problems? The science itself should define its directions
for the development, and only after that it will be clear, if neuroscience can be a part of economic
science or not.


Keywords


experimental economics, behavior economics, neuroeconomics, neurobiology, human model, decision-making process, interdisciplinary areas, interdisciplinary synthesis, economic research methodology, individual rationality

References


Саймон Г. Теория принятия решений в эко-

номической теории и науке о поведении // Вехи

экономической мысли. Том 2 / под ред. В.М. Галь-

перина. – СПб.: Экономическая школа, 1995.

С. 54–72.

Канеман Д., Тверски А. Рациональный вы-

бор, ценности и фреймы // Психологический жур-

нал. 2003. . 24, № 4. C. 31–42.

Rabin M. Psychology and Economics // Journal

of Economic Literature. 1998. Vol. 36, № 3.

Р. 11–46.

Ариели Д. Предсказуемо иррационален:

скрытые силы, влияющие на наши решения. – М.:

Манн, Иванов, Фербер. 2010. 296 c.

Thaler R. Toward a positive theory of consumer

choice // Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization.

№ 1, pp. 39–60.

Gul F., Pesendorfer W. Self-Control and the

Theory of Consumption // Econometrica. 2004. Vol.

№1, pp. 119–158.

Geanakoplos J., Pearce D., Stacchetti E. Psychological

games and sequential rationality // Games

and Economic Behavior. 1989. Vol. 1, № 1, pр. 60–

Бернстайн П. Против богов: Укрощение

риска. М.: ЗАО «Олимп-Бизнес». 2006. 400 c.

Kahneman D. Maps of bounded rationality:

Psychology for behavioral economics // The American

economic review. 2003. Vol. 93, № 5. pp. 1449–1475.

Celen B., Kariv S. An Experimental Test of

Observational Learning under Imperfect Information

// Economic Theory. 2005. Vol. 26. № 3. pp. 677–699.

Канеман Д., Словик П., Тверски А. Приня-

тие решений в неопределенности: Правила и пре-

дубеждения. Харьков: Институт прикладной пси-

хологии Гуманитарный Центр. 2005. 632 с.

Levitt S. D., List J. A. Viewpoint: On the generalizability

of lab behaviour to the field // Canadian Journal

of Economics. 2007. Vol. 40, № 2. pp. 347–370.

Forsythe R., Lundholm R. Information Aggregation

in an Experimental Market // Econometrica.

Vol. 58, № 2. pp. 309–347.

Bechara A., Damasio A.R., Damasio H. Anderson

S.W. Insensitivity to future consequences following

damage to human prefrontal cortex // Cognition.

Vol. 50, №1-3. pp. 7–15.

Sanfey A.G., Rilling J.K., Aronson J.A., Nystrom

L.E., Cohen J.D. The Neural Basis of Economic

Decision-Making in the Ultimatum Game // Science.

Vol. 300. Р. 1755–1758.

Camerer C., Loewenstein G., Prelec D. Neuroeconomics:

How Neuroscience Can Inform Economics

// Journal of Economic Literature. 2005. Vol.

XLIII. Р. 9–64.

Camerer C.F., Loewenstein G., Prelec, D.

Neuroeconomics: Why Economics Needs Brains //

Scandinavian Journal of Economics. 2004. Vol. 106,

№ 3. Р. 555–579.

Plassmann H., O’Doherty J., Shiv B., Rangel

A. Marketing actions can modulate neural representations

of experienced pleasantness // PNAS. 2008. Vol.

, № 3. Р. 1050–1054.

McClure S.M., Li J., Tomlin D., Cypert K.S.,

Montague L.M., Montague P.R. Neural correlates of

behavioral preference for culturally familiar drinks //

Neuron. 2004. Vol. 44. pp. 379–387.

De Martino B., Kumaran D., Seymour B.,

Dolan R.J. Frames, Biases, and Rational Decision-

Making in the Human Brain // Science. 2006. Vol.

Р. 684–687.

Dickhaut, J., McCabe K., Nagode J.C., Rustichini

A., Smith K., Pardo J.V. The Impact of the Certainty

Context on the Process of Choice // Proceedings

of the National Academy of Sciences. 2003. Vol. 100.

Р. 3536–3561.

Singer T., Fehr E. The Neuroeconomics of

Mind Reading and Empathy // American Economic

Review. 2005. Vol. 95, № 2. Р. 340–345.

Gul F., Pesendorfer W. The Case for Mindless

Economics, in: Caplin A., Shotter A. (eds.) The

Foundations of Positive and Normative Economics.

Oxford University Press. 2008. Р. 3–39.

Hudík M. Why economics is not a science of

behavior // Journal of Economic Methodology. 2011.

Vol. 18, № 2. Р. 147–162.

Раквиашвили А. Нейробиология и новые

возможности экспериментальной экономики //

Вопросы экономики. 2015. № 12. C. 124–137.

Hogarth R.M. The challenge of representative

design in psychology and economics // Journal of

Economic Methodology. 2005. Vol. 12, № 2. Р. 253–

Fumagalli R. Five theses on neuroeconomics

// Journal of Economic Methodology, [forthcoming].

Antonietti A., Iannello P. Social sciences and

neuroscience: a circular integration // International

Review of Economics. 2011. Vol. 58, № 3. Р. 307–




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14529/em160302

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.