Approval of the basic principles of behavioral economy

Andrievska Yevgeniya
PhD (Economics), Art. lecturer at the Department of Economics, Law and Business Management, Odessa National University of Economics, Odessa, E-mail: e.andrievskaja2010@gmail.com

Cite this article:

Andrievska Y. (2021) Approval of the basic principles of behavioral economy. Ed.: V.V. Kovalenko (ed.-in-ch.) and others [Zatverdzhennya osnovnih principiv povedinkovoyi ekonomiki; za red.: V.V. Kovalenko (gol. red.)], Scientific Bulletin of the Odessa National Economic University (ISSN 2313-4569), Odessa National Economics University, Odessa, No. 11-12 (288-289), pp. 110-115.

Abstract

Modern neoclassical economic theory (fundamentalism) has been imprecise in a number of its basic concepts. This was especially evident in the belief in the rationality of a person (as a participant in economic activity). Behavioral economics has become an alternative theory. One of the most famous behavioral economists, K. Kamarer, wrote in his study: “Behavioral economics is based on the belief that increasing the reality of psychological foundations in economic analysis will improve economic theory on its own, providing insight into processes. , make better predictions about real phenomena and propose better policies "[1, p. 3]. Behavioral economics was based on the study of human behavior in relation to the economic environment. These studies made it possible to consider the behavior of individuals using complex and meaningful models, which neoclassicism could not do. Thanks to behavioral economics, they began to consider issues of economic policy in a new way, in particular, such as the degree of participation of the state in the economy and its interference in the lives of citizens. Behavioral economics has gone beyond the scope of economic theory. Here they began to consider important socio-economic problems, while using new approaches and methods. Behavioral economics is a relatively young science, its practical conclusions are relevant in the modern world. Scientists are still ambiguous about it - some believe that behavioral economics contains disparate theories that are not practical in nature, while others speak enthusiastically about it and believe that it will forever change the idea of economic theory. Also, the relevance of research on behavioral economics is emphasized by the high achievements of scientists who are developing this topic, namely: Nobel Prize winners in economics George Akerlof, Daniel Kahneman, Robert Schiller, Richard Thaler. These authors not only answer complex questions of economic theory, but also raise new problems that are extremely important for understanding economic reality and building effective economic policy. Summarizing all of the above, we can conclude that behavioral economics plays an important role in modern economic theory, and the analysis of the ways of its development is relevant and practically significant.

Keywords

behavioral economics, human behavior, decision making.

JEL classification: A120, A140, B120, B130

UD classification:330.821

References

1. Camerer C.F. (2004). Behavioral Economics: Past, Present, Future. Princeton University Press, 3-52.
2. Neumann, J. (1970) Game theory and economic behavior. Moscow, Nayka [in Ukrainian].
3. Friedman, M. (1994). Methodology of positive economics. THESIS, 4, 20–52. [in Russian].
4. Maurice, Allais (1953). Le comportement de l'homme rationnel devant le risque: critique des postulats et axiomes de l'école américaine. Econometrica, 21, 2, 503–549. DOI: https://doi. org/10.2307/1907921
5. Simon, H. A. (1957) Models of Man. Economica, 24 (96), 382.
6. Kahneman, D. (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263–291.
7. Angner, A. A (2012) Course in Behavioral Economics. Palgrave Macmillan, 272.
8. Holden, S. (2012) Implications of insights from behavioral economics for macroeconomic models. Norges Bank’s working papers, 12, 33.
9. Thaler, R. (1980). Toward a positive theory of consumer choice. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 1 (1), 39–60.
10. Thaler, R. (1982) Public Policy toward Life Saving: Should Consumer Preferences Rule? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 1 (2), 223.
11. Thaler, R. (2008) Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice. Marketing Science, 27, 1, 15–25.
12. Mental Accounting. Retrieved from: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/ mentalaccounting.asp (accessed November, 29, 2021)
13. De Bondt. Does the Stock Market Overreact? (1985) Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, 40 (3), 793–805.
14. Thaler, R. H. (ed.) Advances in Behavioral Finance. Volume II. Retrieved from: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1515/9781400829125 (accessed November, 30, 2021)
15. Shefrin, H. M. (1988) The behavioral life-cycle hypothesis. Economic Inquiry, 26 (4), 609–643.
16. Journal of Economic Perspectives. Retrieved from: https://www.aeaweb.org/journals/ jep#JEPinfo (accessed November, 30, 2021)
17. Kahneman, D. (2003) Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics. American Economic Review, 93 (5), 1449– 1475.
18. Ariely, D. (2013) Behavioral Economics. Moscow. Mann, Ivanov and Farber [in Ukrainian].
19. Thaler, R. (1981) Some empirical evidence on dynamic inconsistency. Economics Letters, 8 (3), 201–207.
20. Loewenstein, G. (1992) Anomalies in Intertemporal Choice: Evidence and an Interpretation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107 (2), 573–597.
21. Green, L. (1994) Discounting of delayed rewards: A life span comparison. Psychological Science, 5 (1), 33–36.
22. Van den Bos, W. (2012) Towards a general model of temporal discounting. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 99 (1), 58–73.