Economic behavior and behavioral economics at times of COVID-19 pandemic

This article builds the argument that Bourdieu’s dispositional theory of practice can help integrate the sociological tradition with three prominent strands of behavioral economics: bounded rationality, prospect theory, and time inconsistency. I make the case that the habitus provides an alternative framework to show how social and mental structure constitute one another, where cognitive tendencies toward irrationality can be either curtailed or amplified based on one’s position in the economic field and a person’s corresponding set of dispositions, ranging from more rational doxic dispositions to irrational allodoxic tendencies. Bridging economic sociology and behavioral economics, this work also bears on issues of persistent financial inequality reproduced through self-defeating patterns of economic behavior inculcated into individuals who occupy dominated positions in the social structure. Bourdieu’s thought, and in particular his conception of field+habitus, can usefully be applied to the empirical findings of behavioral economics to understand deviations from rational action as not only cognitive but also socially structured.

Download Full-text

A Dual‐Process Model of Economic Behavior: Using Culture and Cognition, Economic Sociology, Behavioral Economics, and Neuroscience to Reconcile Moral and Self‐Interested Economic Action*

Sociological Forum ◽

10.1111/socf.12763 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Luis Antonio Vila‐Henninger

Keyword(s):

Behavioral Economics ◽

Process Model ◽

Economic Sociology ◽

Economic Behavior ◽

Dual Process ◽

Dual Process Model ◽

Economic Action ◽

Culture And Cognition

Download Full-text

Hope in Economics

Historical and Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Hope ◽

10.1007/978-3-030-46489-9_9 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 165-178

Author(s):

Emma Pleeging ◽

Martijn Burger

Keyword(s):

Behavioral Economics ◽

Subjective Experience ◽

Well Being ◽

Economic Behavior ◽

Consumer Confidence ◽

Economic Research ◽

Future Research ◽

Valuable Insight ◽

Self Interest ◽

The Difference

Abstract As a topic of research in economics, hope has not been very prevalent. Following the neo-classical paradigm, economists have tended to focus on rationality, self-interest, and universals. A normative and subjective experience such as hope was not believed to fit well with this perspective. However, the development of several heterodox economic approaches over the past decades, such as behavioral economics, has led to renewed attention being given to emotion, subjectivity, and normativity. Economic research on concepts related to hope, such as anticipatory feelings, (consumer) confidence, expectations and aspirations has consequently increased. In general, these studies find that hopeful feelings have a strong motivating power for (economic) behavior. By and large, the effects of hope seem to be positive, ranging from longevity and health to innovation and well-being. Nonetheless, there have also been indications that prompt caution, for example when it comes to false hopes, disappointment, or possible manipulation of societal hope. The field of economics has gained much valuable insight from existing research but we argue that it could gain from further definitional clarity. We discuss the difference between hope and related concepts such as optimism, in particular when it comes to economic research, and suggest topics for future research that could benefit from a focus on hope.

Download Full-text

Behavioral Economics of Religion

The Oxford Handbook of Christianity and Economics ◽

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199729715.013.027 ◽

2014 ◽

pp. 488-530

Author(s):

Jonathan H.W. Tan

Keyword(s):

Behavioral Economics ◽

Religious Affiliation ◽

Group Processes ◽

Religious Practice ◽

Economic Behavior ◽

Religious Institution ◽

Economics Of Religion ◽

Religious Background ◽

Behavioral Studies ◽

Different Dimensions

This chapter concerns the behavioral economics of religion. Themes considered include how religion potentially shapes individual preferences, the possible implications of religious affiliation for interaction within and between social groups, and the religious institution as a unit of the economy at large. This chapter is written with three main purposes in mind. The first is to consider different ways by which religion and economic behavior are potentially related. The second purpose of this chapter is to consider the research methods employed, especially issues regarding the identification of motives, and in turn the interpretation of results. The third purpose is to contemplate significance of results from behavioral studies for economic theory and religious practice, including ways by which different dimensions of religious background, such as religiosity and religious affiliation, relate to pro-sociality and group processes.

Download Full-text

COMPARATIVE FRAMES ANALYSIS IN INSTITUTIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL ECONOMICS: PRACTICAL CONCLUSIONS

Вестник Тверского государственного университета. Серия: Экономика и управление ◽

10.26456/2219-1453/2021.1.168-177 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 168-177

Author(s):

Наталья Александровна Шапиро ◽

Мария Юрьевна Курганская

Keyword(s):

Behavioral Economics ◽

Economic Behavior ◽

Control Measures ◽

Rational Behavior ◽

Practical Relevance ◽

Economic Policies ◽

The Individual ◽

And Control ◽

The Impact ◽

Oriented Approach

Цель исследования состоит в практической актуализации концепции новой поведенческой экономики, потому что практико-ориентированная направленность новой поведенческой экономики, по мнению её автора Р. Талера, ориентирована на принятие решений в сложных, редких, с недостаточной связью ситуациях, где последствия отложены, а результаты не определяемы. Пандемия covid-19 является тем фактором, который сделал последствия применения большинства известных экономических стратегий и мер регулирования слабо предсказуемыми по времени и содержанию. В качестве метода обоснования практической актуализации новой поведенческой экономики взят сравнительный анализ поведенческих концепций новой институциональной и поведенческой экономики с гипотезой рационального поведения ортодоксальной неоклассики и критика этой гипотезы в теориях новой институциональной и поведенческой экономики. Принципиальное разграничение концепций видится во фрейме (специальный термин новой поведенческой экономики), учете в нем влияния, оказываемого на решения, которые принимают экономические субъекты-индивидуумы. Констатация отличий в трактовках экономического поведения приводит авторов статьи к выводу о важности применения методов подталкивания в условиях неопределенности. Акцент на индивидуальном поведении субъектов, как правило, оправдан, а исследование актуально, когда институциональная структура экономики и традиционные макроэкономические инструменты утрачивают свою продуктивность в связи с ростом неопределенности, вызванным, как в настоящее время, пандемией covid-19. The purpose of the study is to practically actualize the concept of a new behavioral economy as the practice-oriented approach of the new behavioral economy is focused on making decisions in difficult and rare situations with insufficient communication, when the consequences are postponed, and the results can’t be detected (according to its author R. Thaler). The covid-19 pandemic as the factor has made poorly predictable the impact of most of the known economic policies and control measures in terms of time and content. The author uses the comparative analysis of the behavioral concepts of the new institutional and behavioral economics with the hypothesis of rational behavior of orthodox neoclassicism and the theories of the new institutional and behavioral economics as a method to argue the practical relevance of the new behavioral economics. The fundamental differentiation of concepts is seen in the term of frame (a special term of the new behavioral economy), that includes the influence on the decisions made by economic subjects - individuals. The statement of the differences in the interpretations of economic behavior makes the authors of the article conclude that it is important to apply the methods of nudge while dealing with the conditions of uncertainty. Paying attention to the individual behavior of the subjects is mostly adequate and the study is relevant when the institutional structure of the economy and traditional macroeconomic instruments lose their productivity because of the growing uncertainty like today during the covid-19 pandemic.

Download Full-text

Evolutionary Behavioral Economics

Complexity and Evolution ◽

10.7551/mitpress/9780262035385.003.0008 ◽

2016 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Terence C. Burnham ◽

Stephen E. G. Lea ◽

Adrian V. Bell ◽

Herbert Gintis ◽

Paul W. Glimcher ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Economic Theory ◽

Behavioral Economics ◽

Evolutionary Theory ◽

Behavioral Science ◽

Interdisciplinary Approach ◽

Economic Behavior ◽

Complex Systems Theory ◽

Core Concepts ◽

Insight Into ◽

Considerable Insight

This chapter explores how the economic model of individual behavior can be improved by incorporating a number of insights from evolutionary theory and complex systems theory. Insights from psychology, the neurosciences, and the behavioral strand of economics may be better understood from an evolutionary and complexity perspective. It takes an integrated interdisciplinary approach to economic phenomena. Core concepts in economic theory (preference and choice) are clarified and Tinbergen’s “four questions” about the origins of behavior are used to provide a framework. Informed by Tinbergen, areas from behavioral science are presented which may be useful for understanding economic behavior: some are directly evolutionary, while others come from scientific contexts informed by evolutionary theory. Each area has yielded well researched ideas that provide considerable insight into human nature. It concludes with a review of where research stands today and where it could be directed in the future.

Download Full-text

Social Economics: Current and Emerging Avenues

Social Economics ◽

10.7551/mitpress/9780262035651.003.0001 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Joan Costa-Font ◽

Mario Macis

Keyword(s):

Political Economy ◽

Behavioral Economics ◽

Subsequent Development ◽

Economic Behavior ◽

Social Economics ◽

Social Changes ◽

Economic Changes ◽

Social Conventions ◽

Central Tenet ◽

Lasting Influence

The separation of economics and sociology as distinct disciplines can be traced back to at least the so-called “ordinal revolution” (Pareto 1900, 1909) and the subsequent development of ‘marginalism’ and modern economics. Pareto’s division between ‘political economy’ (as the science of the economic system driven by rational factors like interests and appetites) and ‘sociology’ (or the science of the sociological system determined by ‘irrational’ forces such as sentiments/residues and derivations) had a profound and lasting influence on both disciplines. In spite of the separation and the different methodological approaches, the conversation and cross-pollination between economics and sociology never stopped, and has been often fruitful. Major early examples include Veblen’s study of institutions and of the interaction of economic changes and cultural and social changes (Veblen, 1899), Polanyi’s “embeddedness” argument and the idea that non-economic factors (e.g., social conventions) act as constraints on people’s economic behavior. More generally, the interactions between economics and other disciplines (e.g., psychology) have been more intense than it might seem at first sight. For instance, Herbert Simon’s idea that human choice is often best explained as being the result of “satisficing” as opposed to “maximizing” behavior (Simon 1955, 1956, 1957) is today a central tenet of behavioral economics, which, it can be argued, has obtained mainstream status.

Download Full-text

Behavioral Economics and the Food Consumer

The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Food Consumption and Policy ◽

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199569441.013.0005 ◽

2011 ◽

pp. 98-118 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

David R. Just

Keyword(s):

Behavioral Economics ◽

Food Consumption ◽

Food Choice ◽

Economic Behavior ◽

Behavioral Theory ◽

Future Research ◽

Food Behavior ◽

Behavioral Economic ◽

Psychological Phenomena ◽

New Concepts

Behavioral theory suggests a myriad other policy options that can have substantial impacts without restricting choices in any real sense. This article focuses on three general areas of research: food choice, food consumption volume, and the evaluation of foods. It discusses two primary literatures of behavioral economics and food consumption. One of these literatures seeks to apply general behavioral economic models to food consumption, while the other seeks to identify and incorporate known food psychological phenomena into models of economic behavior. It introduces many new concepts to the field of behavioral economics, and provides some promising areas for future research. Finally, it mentions that much remains to be done in terms of incorporating the important elements of food behavior, and creating and using suitable individual data to calibrate these models for policy purposes.

Download Full-text