Search results

George Loewenstein, a prominent behavioral economist, recalls thatIn 1994, when Thaler, Camerer, Rabin, Prelec and I spent the year at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, we had a meeting to make a kind of final decision about what to call what we were doing. Remarkably, at that time, the name behavioral economics was not yet well established. I actually advocated “psychological economics,” and Thaler was strong on behavioral economics. I'm kind of glad that he prevailed; I think it's a better, catchier, label, although it creates confusion due to association with Behaviorism. (G. Loewenstein, personal email to author, June 16, 2008)

The purpose of this paper is to propose an integrative framework bringing together results from neuroplasticity and decision-making from a neuroscience perspective with those from market plasticity, i.e. with which practices market actors shape markets.

Provided that developments in neuroscience indicate that training the brain for orientation toward efficient decision-making processes under uncertainty is possible, an in-depth analysis can be conducted by using the integrative framework, which was set up by the authors for advancing research efforts in neuroeconomics and neurofinance on these lines.

Markets have a plastic character; they can change shape and form and remain in that way thereafter. The marketers have always been causing this change to succeed in their marketing strategies and efforts. Plasticity, hitherto considered by marketing, market sociology and evolutionary economics, has a potential in financial decision-making processes, especially regarding its role in training the brain for stable financial decisions.

The theoretical approach can be incorporated for delivering an alternative representation of the knowledge processes associated with financial decisions.

The practical approach can be used for improving the practical aspects of financial decision-making processes.

The contribution is the first of its kind which integrates neuroscience approaches of plasticity and decision-making with the concept of market plasticity from the literature on economics and management, showing their similarities and opening a new front of discussion on how these two approaches can learn from each other to increase the explanatory power of financial decision-making processes and to gain new insights for financial decision makers on how to make more efficient financial decisions in the times of uncertainty.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the main measures of inconsistency in the context of intertemporal choice and to identify the relationships between them (more specifically, the measures by Prelec, Takahashi and Rohde). In effect, Thaler (1981), awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics 2017, argued that when a preference must be expressed between two reward options, some people may reverse their original preference when a significant delay is introduced before the reward is to be received. This anomaly is known as inconsistency in intertemporal choice.

After a revision of the existing literature and by using the methods from mathematical calculus, the authors have derived the logical relationships between the measures presented in this paper.

The main contribution of this paper is the proposal of a novel parameter, the so-defined ratio of two instantaneous discount rates, which the authors call the instantaneous variation rate, which allows relating some other measures of inconsistency, namely the measures described by Prelec and Rohde. A limitation of this paper is the unavailability of empirical information about the inconsistency measures needed to substantiate the theoretical findings. Indeed, this paper has social implications because recent behavioral and neuroeconomic studies have shown the existence of preference reversal or time inconsistency in other areas. The authors’ models can be implemented in these fields in order to better analyze the situations of inconsistency.

The originality of this paper lies in the authors’ aim to bring some order to the proposed measures of inconsistency which have arisen as a result of the different approaches adopted.

Purpose – To recognize the comments made by Horwitz (2010) and Koppl (2010) in their attempts to reply to D'Amico and Boettke (forthcoming), “Making Sense out of The Sensory Order.” Furthermore, this paper hopes to explain what role D'Amico and Boettke do see for cognitive neuroscience in the study of Austrian economics.

Methodology/approach – Some brief summary comments are presented about Horwitz (2010) and Koppl (2010). Then a general framework of individual learning and its effects upon social institutions and economic processes is described by referring to Cowan and Rizzo (1996) and Denzau and North (1994).

Findings – Hayek was a political economist first and foremost. Whatever the status of his research in theoretical psychology attains, it does not change the fact that we as economists would do well (especially young economists) to focus on his substantive contributions to economics and political economy.

Research limitations/implications – Though space and time constraints did not afford this at present, further research would benefit from an intensive survey of the empirical findings available in the neuroscience and neuroeconomics literatures. How do such findings map onto the proposed frameworks of Hayekian economics provided by Koppl compared to D'Amico and Boettke.

Originality/value of paper – This paper takes notice of the historical linkage between Cowan and Rizzo's (1996) cognitive model of individual learning within the broader tradition of subjectivist/Hayekian/Austrian economics.

This study aims to investigate how brand love and brand loyalty for three brands evolved during critical moments of the 2020 pandemic, and how they performed in the long run up to 2022.

An online longitudinal study, including a survey and Twitter data for three brands: Corona Extra, with a direct semantic association with the word coronavirus; Virus Vodka, with an indirect association; Modelo Especial, with no association with the virus name but from the same company as Corona Extra.

Despite external data indicating a harmful association between Corona Extra and coronavirus, this study's findings revealed that the brand maintained its brand love in the long run and increased brand loyalty during the critical moments of the pandemic. This study's data suggest that brand love and brand loyalty may be the underlying reasons for the increase in Corona Extra's brand equity during the pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic created a highly stressful situation for consumers and brands. Some brands' names had unfortunate semantic similarities with the virus terminology, which became an additional stressor during that time. This study harnessed the opportunity to investigate brand love and brand loyalty during the pandemic at four points in 2020 and one in 2022. The authors also examined relevant Twitter data during 2020.

This chapter overviews organizational neuroscience (ON), covering the past, present, and future of this growing field of inquiry. First, we define ON and clarify the boundaries of the field. Second, we describe the evolution of ON by starting with early papers that tended to discuss the potential of ON to benefit both research and practice. Throughout its development, debates have abounded about the value of ON. Such debates are often related to challenges in collecting, integrating, interpreting, and using information from the brain-level of analysis. It is time for the field to move beyond these debates to focus on applying neuroscience to further theory development and reveal more comprehensive answers to research questions of importance to both academics and practitioners. Third, we propose and describe future research directions for ON. The research directions that we propose are merely a sample of the many paths along which ON inquiry can move forward. Fourth, we outline potential practical implications of ON, including: training and development, job design, high-performance assessment, motivating communications, and conflict prevention. Finally, we draw conclusions about ON as it stands today, address challenges in developing ON, and point out opportunities. We conclude with takeaways and highlight the importance of ON for both academics and practitioners.

The purpose of this paper is to present a review as well as a synthesis of the extant literature in the field of Neurofinance. The paper has been divided into eight parts. The first and second parts introduce the paper and dwell upon the brain functions in financial decisions. Part three presents the origin of Neurofinance and part four explains the difference between traditional finance, behavioural finance and neurofinance. Part five and six of the paper look into the research studies in Neurofinance and their application. Part seven gives a brief discussion on the limitations of neurofinance studies and part eight gives the conclusion.

The existing body of academic literature pertinent to the domain of Neurofinance was reviewed so as to provide an integrated portrayal and synthesis of the current level of knowledge in this field. This paper covers the insights on the subject for developing a deeper understanding of the investor's psychology.

Neurofinance is a very young discipline. It tries to relate the brain processes to the investment behaviour. Most of the researches in the domain of neurofinance focus on trading behaviour. It would be interesting to explore the workings of the brain for other investment behaviours too like personal financial planning decisions, etc.

Neurofinance is emerging as an alternate field of study and practice and this paper is an attempt to look at the development of Neurofinance and its role in developing a better understanding of the investor behaviour.

Economic choice theory is built on utilitarian foundations. The purpose of this paper is to explore whether a foundation of virtue ethics might be more consistent with human nature.

The paper focuses on utilitarianism vs virtue ethics as foundations of economic choice theory.

Economic choice theory describes consumer choice in terms that are inconsistent with findings from recent research in behavioral economics, neuroeconomics, and psychology. The consumers' dynamic optimization problem, as outlined by traditional theory, is unsolvable in the sense that it contains too many unknowns. This means that the consumer must approach the problem in a different manner than is usually suggested by the literature. Moreover, new psychological theories of well‐being suggest that we can, to some extent, choose what we want to want and that true happiness is based on our character as much as it is based on our consumption of goods.

The idea that human choices may not be based on consistent preferences calls into question the policy suggestions of the literature on revealed preference and welfare economics. In particular, we cannot rely on past choices to draw inferences on people's preferences.

To maximize social welfare, society must value and promote the development of virtue and character.

The paper highlights some of the differences between utilitarian and the virtue ethics perspectives on choice.