Personality, Relationships, and Decision Making with Relational Dynamics

Within the field of Economics there is great interest in predicting the future. In creating Economic Models the rationale has been to create fixed equations that can account for all variables associated with the issues of capital, labor, wages, prices, tariffs and taxes but few models explored the human variable. Probability Statistics bases decision making models upon mathematical predictions. Game Theory is an economic model that begins to explain the rationale of human decision making, but fails to account for flawed thinking and pathology. Relational Dynamics attempts to provide a means of understanding the strategies used in communication and decision making. Within humanity, not all decisions are made rationally and to account for illogical choices, psychology has provided theories of pathology to explain human idiosyncrasies. This paper will explore personality disorders as described by the DSM V and Relational Dynamics in an attempt to understand how pathology influences relationships, decision making and behavioral economics.

Download Full-text

Behavioral Decision Theory

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics ◽

10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.958 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Kazuhisa Takemura

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Decision Theory ◽

Behavioral Economics ◽

Behavioral Finance ◽

Utility Theory ◽

Normative Theory ◽

Behavioral Decision Theory ◽

Behavioral Decision ◽

Descriptive Theory ◽

Human Decision

Behavioral decision theory is a descriptive psychological theory of human judgment, decision making, and behavior that can be applied to political science. Behavioral decision theory is closely related to behavioral economics and behavioral finance. Behavioral economics is an attempt to understand actual human economic behavior, and behavioral finance studies human behavior in financial markets. Research on people’s decision making represents an important part of these fields, in which various aspects overlap with the scope of behavioral decision theory. Behavioral decision theory focuses on the decision-making phenomena that are broadly divisible into those under certainty, those under risk, and others under uncertainty that includes ambiguity and ignorance. What are the theoretical frameworks that could be used to explain the decision-making phenomenon? Although numerous theories related to decision making have been developed, they are, in essence, often broadly divided into two types: normative theory and descriptive theory. The former is intended to support rational decision making. The latter describes how people actually make decisions. Both normative and descriptive theories reflect the nature of actual human decision making to a degree. Even descriptive theory seeks a certain level of rationality in actual human decision making. Consequently, the two are mutually indistinguishable. Nonetheless, a major example of normative theory is regarded as the system of utility theory that is widely used in economics. A salient example of descriptive theory is behavioral decision theory. Utility theory has numerous variations, such as linear and nonlinear utility theories. Most theories have established axioms and mathematically developed principles. In contrast, behavioral decision theory covers a considerably wide range of variations of theoretical expressions, including theories that have been developed mathematically (such as prospect theory) and those expressed only with natural language (such as multiattribute decision-making process models). Behavioral decision theory has integrated the implications of the normative theory, descriptive theory, and prescriptive theory that help people to make better decisions.

Download Full-text

Behavioral Economics and Public Policy 102: Beyond Nudging

The American Economic Review ◽

10.1257/aer.p20151049 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 105 (5) ◽

pp. 396-401 ◽

Cited By ~ 55

Author(s):

Saurabh Bhargava ◽

George Loewenstein

Keyword(s):

Climate Change ◽

Public Policy ◽

Decision Making ◽

Health Insurance ◽

Behavioral Economics ◽

Policy Instruments ◽

Design And Implementation ◽

Alternative Approach ◽

Human Decision ◽

Policy Problems

Policymakers have recently embraced Behavioral Economics as an alternative approach which recognizes the limits and consequences of human decision-making. Early applications of BE (“nudges”) produced notable successes and helped to set the stage for more aggressive applications aimed at the deeper causes of policy problems. We contend that policies that aspire to simplify products and incentives, rather than choice environments, aggressively protect consumers from behavioral exploitation, and leverage BE to enhance the design and implementation of traditional policy instruments offer solutions commensurate with contemporary challenges. Case studies in health insurance, privacy, and climate change illustrate the application of these ideas.

Download Full-text

A behavioral economics perspective on the COVID-19 vaccine amid public mistrust

Translational Behavioral Medicine ◽

10.1093/tbm/ibaa147 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Jessica Londeree Saleska ◽

Kristen R Choi

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Side Effects ◽

Behavioral Economics ◽

Cognitive Biases ◽

Vaccine Development ◽

Vaccine Uptake ◽

Public Health Professionals ◽

Human Decision ◽

Vaccine Decision Making ◽

To Receive

Abstract The COVID-19 vaccine development, testing, and approval processes have moved forward with unprecedented speed in 2020. Although several vaccine candidates have shown promising results in clinical trials, resulting in expedited approval for public use from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, recent polls suggest that Americans strongly distrust the vaccine and its approval process. This mistrust stems from both the unusual speed of vaccine development and reports about side effects. This article applies insights from behavioral economics to consider how the general public may make decisions around whether or not to receive a future COVID-19 vaccine in a context of frequent side effects and preexisting mistrust. Three common cognitive biases shown to influence human decision-making under a behavioral economics framework are considered: confirmation bias, negativity bias, and optimism bias. Applying a behavioral economics framework to COVID-19 vaccine decision-making can elucidate potential barriers to vaccine uptake and points of intervention for clinicians and public health professionals.

Download Full-text

OF ALCOHOL, APES, AND TAXES: GÜNTER SCHMÖLDERS AND THE REINVENTION OF ECONOMICS IN BEHAVIORAL TERMS

10.31219/osf.io/vyarx ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Rüdiger Graf

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Behavioral Economics ◽

Economic Models ◽

Human Beings ◽

Historical School ◽

Lecture Notes ◽

German Economist

The article examines an early and idiosyncratic version of behavioral economics or “empir-ical socio-economics,” which the German economist and taxation expert Günter Schmölders developed in the postwar decades. Relying on both his published papers and his lecture notes and correspondence, it scrutinizes Schmölders’ intellectual upbringing in the tradition of the Historical School of Economics (Historische Schule der Nationalökonomie) and his relation to the emerging ordoliberalism, demonstrating that the roads that led to dissatisfaction with the emerging neoclassical mainstream and the unrealistic behavioral assumptions of macro-economic models were manifold. Accordingly, it shows that behavioral economics is compati-ble with various intellectual and political backgrounds and convictions. Yet, it still forms a dis-tinct entity: Comparing Schmölders with contemporary and later behavioral economists, I will show that they shared essential methodological assumptions as well as an understanding of human beings as decision-making organisms.

Download Full-text

Decision Making: Rational Choice or Hyper-Rational Choice

Statistics Optimization & Information Computing ◽

10.19139/soic-2310-5070-638 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 8 (2) ◽

pp. 583-589

Author(s):

Gholamreza Askari ◽

Madjid Eshaghi Gordji

Keyword(s):

Game Theory ◽

Decision Making ◽

Rational Choice ◽

Decision Makers ◽

Decision Making Process ◽

Game Analysis ◽

Individual Preferences ◽

Human Decision ◽

Insight Into ◽

Rational Players

In this paper, we provide an interpretation of the rationality in game theory in which player consider the profit or loss of the opponent in addition to personal profit at the game.‎ ‎‎The goal of a game analysis with two hyper-rationality players is to provide insight into real-world situations that are often more complex than a game with two rational players where the choices of strategy are only based on individual preferences. The hyper-rationality does not mean perfect rationality but an insight toward how human decision-makers behave in interactive decisions. ‎‎The findings of this research can help to enlarge our understanding of the psychological aspects of strategy choices in games and also provide an analysis of the decision-making process with cognitive economics approach at the same time.‎ ‎‎‎

Download Full-text

Consumer Decisions as a Central Research Topic in Economic Psychology

Zeitschrift für Psychologie ◽

10.1027/2151-2604/a000080 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 219 (4) ◽

pp. 253-254

Author(s):

Erik Hoelzl ◽

Erich Kirchler

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Behavioral Economics ◽

Scientific Community ◽

International Association ◽

Research Topic ◽

Economic Research ◽

Central Research ◽

Economic Psychology ◽

Consumer Decisions ◽

Human Decision

This section outlines the increasing interest of the scientific community in economic psychology and behavioral economics as a means to answer questions about human decision making in an economic/consumer context. It gives a quick overview of the activities of important societies in the field, such as the International Association for Research in Economic Psychology and the Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics, as well as periodicals devoted to psycho-economic research, including a categorization of papers published in the Journal of Economic Psychology in the period 1981–2010.

Download Full-text

Towards a Sociology of Regret

Sotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review ◽

10.17323/1728-192x-2019-4-9-46 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 18 (4) ◽

pp. 9-46

Author(s):

Mikhail Sokolov

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Behavioral Economics ◽

Expected Utility ◽

Regret Theory ◽

Anticipated Regret ◽

Collective Actions ◽

Sunk Cost ◽

Human Decision ◽

Future Self ◽

Anticipate Regret

The paper looks into sociological implications of two discussions currently developing in behavioral economics and organizations theory: (1) regret theory, exploring the proposition that human decision making is governed by avoiding anticipated regret, rather than maximizing expected utility, and (2) studies of sunk cost fallacy, consisting in making decisions aimed at justifying previous decisions. We argue that these two areas of theorizing, presently isolated, are dealing with essentially the same phenomenon. This becomes evident if we recognize that choices are organized in sequences, with the merits of each particular choice being evaluated in the light of outcomes of the whole sequence. We then explore some general conditions of the ability to anticipate regret: interaction with one’s future Self and sequential organizations of states an individual find him/herself. We then discuss some widely spread forms of individual adaptations to the threat of experiencing regret: dissonance avoidance, prospective rationalization, cultivation of prescience, de-sequencing and open endings. We further explore various forms of collective actions involving regret avoidance, using the development of the sociological discipline as an example.

Download Full-text

Game Theory

Advances in Psychology, Mental Health, and Behavioral Studies - Neuroeconomics and the Decision-Making Process ◽

10.4018/978-1-4666-9989-2.ch014 ◽

2016 ◽

pp. 262-286

Author(s):

William Amone

Keyword(s):

Game Theory ◽

Decision Making ◽

Mating Strategies ◽

Strategic Decision ◽

Competitive Bidding ◽

Strategic Choices ◽

Human Decision ◽

Decision Making Processes ◽

High Level ◽

Key Aspects

Economists, political scientists, and military analysts widely apply game theory techniques to analyze strategic decision making of players. The model is often adopted to analyze oligopolistic firms' actions, legal, and political negotiations, dating and mating strategies by couples, and competitive bidding in auctions. As a facet of neuroeconomics, game theory can highly complement the comprehension of human decision making processes. Although the model has been somewhat difficult for many readers, this chapter presents game theory with a high level of precision for easy understanding. The discourse presented in this chapter covers the different types of games, the approaches applied to predict games' outcomes, and general analysis of strategic choices. In its final section, the chapter underscores key aspects of auction and competitive bidding.

Download Full-text

The brain and the law

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences ◽

10.1098/rstb.2004.1545 ◽

2004 ◽

Vol 359 (1451) ◽

pp. 1727-1736 ◽

Cited By ~ 15

Author(s):

S. Zeki ◽

O. R. Goodenough ◽

Terrence Chorvat ◽

Kevin McCabe

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Social Welfare ◽

Cognitive Processes ◽

Economic Models ◽

Neural Mechanisms ◽

Neuroscience Research ◽

Legal Regimes ◽

Human Decision ◽

The Law ◽

The Brain

Much has been written about how law as an institution has developed to solve many problems that human societies face. Inherent in all of these explanations are models of how humans make decisions. This article discusses what current neuroscience research tells us about the mechanisms of human decision making of particular relevance to law. This research indicates that humans are both more capable of solving many problems than standard economic models predict, but also limited in ways those models ignore. This article discusses how law is both shaped by our cognitive processes and also shapes them. The article considers some of the implications of this research for improving our understanding of how our current legal regimes operate and how the law can be structured to take advantage of our neural mechanisms to improve social welfare.

Download Full-text