Two Paradigms Explaining Cognitive Bias in Decision-Making: "Behavioral Economics" and "Ecological Rationality"

被引:2
作者
Polsek, Darko [1 ]
Bokulic, Marko [2 ]
机构
[1] Filozofski Fak, Zagreb, Croatia
[2] Sveuciliste Regensburgu, Regensburg, Germany
来源
DRUSTVENA ISTRAZIVANJA | 2013年 / 22卷 / 02期
关键词
behavioral economics; heuristics; bias; fast-and-frugal heuristics; Kahneman; Tversky; Gigerenzer;
D O I
10.5559/di.22.2.05
中图分类号
D58 [社会生活与社会问题]; C913 [社会生活与社会问题];
学科分类号
摘要
In this paper the authors review a variety of empirical findings, research directions and tenets of two paradigms in heuristics and bias research: of behavioral economics (following Kahneman and Tversky's findings), and of the "less-is-more", i.e. ecological rationality research (which follows findings by G. Gigerenzer). While explaining empirical research in behavioral economics (BE), the authors describe a "classical economic" model of rationality, the rational choice theory, which is contradicted by results in behavioral economics. BE researchers use rational choice theory as a norm, so their findings are typically explained or documented by "insufficient adjustment" to, or by a bias from the rational norm. The second paradigm, however, typically documents "sufficiently good" decisions made while using "simple, frugal and smart" heuristics, such as "take-the-best". It claims that "irrationality" in decision-making stems from the inappropriate application of the given heuristics in ecologically unsuitable situations.
引用
收藏
页码:303 / 323
页数:21
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Individual differences in decision-making: A test of a one-factor model of rationality
    Berthet, Vincent
    Autissier, David
    de Gardelle, Vincent
    PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES, 2022, 189
  • [42] Social science goes quantum: explaining human decision-making, cognitive biases and Darwinian selection from a quantum perspective
    Holtfort T.
    Horsch A.
    Journal of Bioeconomics, 2023, 25 (2) : 99 - 116
  • [43] The management of bias and noise in public sector decision-making: experimental evidence from healthcare
    Belle, Nicola
    Cantarelli, Paola
    Wang, Sophie Y.
    PUBLIC MANAGEMENT REVIEW, 2024, 26 (11) : 3246 - 3269
  • [44] Heuristic decision-making and behavioral heterogeneity in the Chinese stock market
    Huang, Ping
    Chin, Phaik Nie
    Hooy, Chee-Wooi
    APPLIED ECONOMICS LETTERS, 2024, : 1183 - 1191
  • [45] Behavioral Economic Insights into Physician Tobacco Treatment Decision-Making
    Leone, Frank T.
    Evers-Casey, Sarah
    Graden, Sarah
    Schnoll, Robert
    ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN THORACIC SOCIETY, 2015, 12 (03) : 364 - 369
  • [46] Bounded rationality of economic man: Decision making under ecological, social, and institutional constraints
    Landa J.T.
    Wang X.T.
    Journal of Bioeconomics, 2001, 3 (2-3) : 217 - 235
  • [47] First- and Second-Level Bias in Automated Decision-making
    Franke U.
    Philosophy & Technology, 2022, 35 (2)
  • [48] Marital privilege: Bias against divorced patients in medical decision-making
    Marotta, Satia A.
    Ladin, Keren
    GROUP PROCESSES & INTERGROUP RELATIONS, 2020, 23 (04) : 612 - 639
  • [49] Fetal aortic valvuloplasty: investigating institutional bias in surgical decision-making
    Kovacevic, A.
    Roughton, M.
    Mellander, M.
    Ohman, A.
    Tulzer, G.
    Dangel, J.
    Magee, A. G.
    Mair, R.
    Ghez, O.
    Schmidt, K. G.
    Gardiner, H. M.
    ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2014, 44 (05) : 538 - 544
  • [50] Bibliometric analysis on the association between behavioral finance and decision making with cognitive biases such as overconfidence, anchoring effect and confirmation bias
    Costa, Daniel Fonseca
    Carvalho, Francisval de Melo
    de Melo Moreira, Bruno Cesar
    do Prado, Jose Willer
    SCIENTOMETRICS, 2017, 111 (03) : 1775 - 1799