Behaviouralists like Kahneman, Tversky, Thaler et al have demonstrated using field experiments that the economic decisions we make will vary depending on how their potential outcome is framed. In other words, the idea of loss and gain affects us differently. Essentially, we are loss averse, so if an outcome is framed as a potential loss we will chose differently than if it is described as a profit. Neuroscience, according to the Economist this week, appears to confirm these findings, demonstrating that patterns of activity show different parts of the brain are at work, depending on this framing of loss or gain.

Ultimately, the pressing question is why, despite a wealth of human experience to the contrary, economists have persisted with such a rationalist model of economic behaviour, when every one from Plato (as the Economist observes) to your everyday marketing manager knows that is not the way people think and act.

What further compounds this paradox is, despite classical economists famously’ disastrous record for forecasting, their levels of employment show no signs of declining; likewise our readiness to cling to the certainties they produce. No doubt a simple matter of supply and demand, as they would have it.

Donate and help me buy back my Fender ('About' tells you why)

Share This No tag for this post.

the knackered hack

Tim Penn
Alltop, confirmation that I kick ass

free updates by email

t-shirts for tired writers

Support This Site

knackered eye view
This is a Flickr badge showing public photos from knackeredhack. Make your own badge here.

Kino’s Viktor Tsoi

Kino's Tsoi
E-mail It
Socialized through Gregarious 42
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported
This work by Tim Penn is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported.
make PrestaShop themes