Testing the Potential for Environmentally Friendly Behavior through Behavioral Economic Approaches : A Comparison among Variables in Behavioral Economics, Socio-Demography, and Environmental Psychology

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 71-98
Author(s):  
Tae-Hyoung Tommy Gim ◽  
Seung-hwan Chun ◽  
Su Kim ◽  
Juri Kim ◽  
Jiwon Lee
2013 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 704-705 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Andrew Westbrook ◽  
Todd S. Braver

AbstractIf cognitive effort indexes opportunity costs, it should be investigated like other cost factors including risk and delay. We discuss recent methodological advances in behavioral economics and neuroeconomics, highlighting our own work in measuring the subjective (economic) value of cognitive effort. We discuss the implications of Kurzban et al.'s proposal and how some of its predictions may be untestable without behavioral economic formalisms.


2020 ◽  
pp. 174569162095378
Author(s):  
Satoshi Kanazawa

I aver that standard economics as a model of human behavior is as incorrect in 2017 (after Thaler) as geocentrism was as a model of celestial behavior in 1617 (after Galileo). Behavioral economic studies that have exposed the paradoxes and anomalies in standard economics are akin to epicycles on geocentrism. Just as no amount of epicycles could salvage geocentrism as a model of celestial behavior because it was fundamentally incorrect, no amount of behavioral economic adjustments could salvage standard economics as a model of human behavior because it is fundamentally incorrect. Many of the cognitive biases exhibited by humans are shared by other species, so not only are human actors Humans (as opposed to Econs), but nonhuman animals as phylogenetically distant from humans as ants and locusts are also Humans. Evolutionary biology as a model of human behavior can explain many of the hitherto unexplained cognitive biases and provide a unifying model of human behavior currently lacking in behavioral economics.


2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 240-264
Author(s):  
Christoph K. Winter

AbstractThis Article analyzes the value of behavioral economics for EU judicial decision-making. The first part introduces the foundations of behavioral economics by focusing on cognitive illusions, prospect theory, and the underlying distinction between different processes of thought. The second part examines the influence of selected biases and heuristics, namely the anchoring effect, availability bias, zero-risk bias, and hindsight bias on diverse legal issues in EU law including, among others, the scope of the fundamental freedoms, the proportionality test as well as the roles of the Advocate General and Reporting Judge. The Article outlines how behavioral economic findings can be taken into account to improve judicial decision-making. Accordingly, the adaptation of judicial training concerning cognitive illusions, the establishment of a de minimis rule regarding the scope of the fundamental freedoms, and the use of economic models when determining the impact of certain measures on fundamental freedoms is suggested. Finally, an “unbiased jury” concentrating exclusively on specific factual issues such as causal connections within the proportionality test is necessary, if the hindsight bias is to be avoided. While it is of great importance to take behavioral economic findings into account, judicial decision-making is unlikely to become flawless based on natural intelligence. Despite bearing fundamental risks, artificial intelligence may provide means to achieve greater fairness, consistency, and legal certainty in the future.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven R. Hursh ◽  
Justin C. Strickland ◽  
Lindsay P. Schwartz ◽  
Derek D. Reed

This study was conducted to evaluate the impact of public perceptions of vaccine safety and efficacy on intent to seek COVID-19 vaccination using hypothetical vaccine acceptance scenarios. The behavioral economic methodology could be used to inform future public health vaccination campaigns designed to influence public perceptions and improve public acceptance of the vaccine. In June 2020, 534 respondents completed online validated behavioral economic procedures adapted to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine demand in relation to a hypothetical development process and efficacy. An exponential demand function was used to describe the proportion of participants accepting the vaccine at each efficacy. Linear mixed effect models evaluated development process and individual characteristic effects on minimum required vaccine efficacy required for vaccine acceptance. The rapid development process scenario increased the rate of decline in acceptance with reductions in efficacy. At 50% efficacy, 68.8% of respondents would seek the standard vaccine, and 58.8% would seek the rapid developed vaccine. Rapid vaccine development increased the minimum required efficacy for vaccine acceptance by over 9 percentage points, γ = 9.36, p < 0.001. Past-3-year flu vaccination, γ = −23.00, p < 0.001, and male respondents, γ = −4.98, p = 0.037, accepted lower efficacy. Respondents reporting greater conspiracy beliefs, γ = 0.39, p < 0.001, and political conservatism, γ = 0.32, p < 0.001, required higher efficacy. Male, γ = −4.43, p = 0.013, and more conservative, γ = −0.09, p = 0.039, respondents showed smaller changes in minimum required efficacy by development process. Information on the vaccine development process, vaccine efficacy, and individual differences impact the proportion of respondents reporting COVID-19 vaccination intentions. Behavioral economics provides an empirical method to estimate vaccine demand to target subpopulations resistant to vaccination.


1996 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 578-579 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edmund Fantino

AbstractHeyman's target article makes a strong case for a behavioral approach to addiction, yet some important assumptions require justification, and promising behavioral alternatives to the author's melioration approach should be considered. In particular, the behavioral economic approach to addiction appears well developed and comprehensive. How does the melioration approach complement or improve on a behavioral economic account?


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 505-510
Author(s):  
Barry Granek ◽  
Aja Evans ◽  
Jorge Petit ◽  
Mary Crawford James ◽  
Yixuan (Matt) Ma ◽  
...  

AbstractCoordinated Behavioral Care’s (CBC) Pathway Home™ (PH) program partnered with Wellth, Inc., a mobile health platform grounded in behavioral economics theory, to help individuals with behavioral health conditions build and reinforce health habits by providing daily reminders to take medication, requiring tasks (photos demonstrating remembrance), and providing financial incentives tied to behaviors. CBC made Wellth, Inc. available to individuals enrolling in its PH program for the purpose of demonstrating the feasibility of implementing a novel mobile technology grounded in behavioral economic theory to increase habits of health activities, such as taking medication, among adults with behavioral health conditions.


2020 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 181-196
Author(s):  
Elmar Nass ◽  

Catholic social ethics with its understanding of humanity challenges social and economic science models to uncover the underlying image of man and thus the underlying idea of ethics. It can take on a pioneering role in areas lacking such discussions so far. This is why I question the understanding of the fundamental cohesiveness of ethical and economical thinking that is challenged by behavioral economics. The article seeks to spark the discussion, outlining several essential behavioral-economic challenges in the process. The encounter with Catholic Social Doctrine identifies areas of conflict and opens a new chapter on the ethics of Behavioral Economics.


2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Warren K. Bickel ◽  
Derek A. Pope ◽  
Lara N. Moody ◽  
Sarah E. Snider ◽  
Liqa N. Athamneh ◽  
...  

Dysfunctional health behavior is a contemporary challenge, exemplified by the increasingly significant portion of health problems stemming from people’s own behavior and decision making. The challenge not only includes the direct consequences of unhealthy behavioral patterns but also their origins and the creation of policies that effectively decrease their frequency. A framework rooted in behavioral economics identifies the processes and mechanisms underlying poor health. Two behavioral economic processes, economic demand and delay discounting, are discussed in detail. Through continued development, this behavioral economic framework can guide improved outcomes in treatment and policies related to dysfunctional health behavior. Approaches are evolving to alter demand and discounting. Current and prospective policies aimed at decreasing unhealthy behavior may profit from such research.


Ekonomika ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 98 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Constantinos Challoumis

[full article and abstract in English] This paper is about the classic methods used in the analysis of economics. More precisely, the R.B.Q. (Rational, Behavioral, and Quantified) model is about rational economics and behavioral economic analysis in conjunction with the quantification procedure (Q.E. method). Therefore, in this work are submitted the most common methodological approaches used in economics including a form of their combination. What follows is a critical examination that extendedly scrutinizes the terminology of axiomatic methods. One of the aims of this paper to represent the special characteristics of rational economics in comparison to the case of behavioral economics. Then provided is an analysis wherein the issues relevant to this are represented, and on the basis of which the main differences between the two concepts are showed. Hence, the aim here is to show the crucial attributes of these concepts. This study also uses a quantification method to show the behavior of these two economic theories within their relation to one another, demonstrating a complete view of them in a single economic model.


Author(s):  
David R. Just

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document