Zusammenfassung
Die Moderne Verhaltensökonomik ist die natürliche Weiterentwicklung der neoklassischen Standardökonomik der 1980er Jahre. Sie nutzt Erkenntnisse aus benachbarten Sozial- und Verhaltenswissenschaften, um bessere Prognosen zu den Verhaltensänderungen zu erzielen und identifiziert vermeintlich irrelevante Faktoren, deren Berücksichtigung zu besseren Politikmaßnahmen führt. Sie wird in der gesamten Breite der ökonomischen Forschung, in der Wissenschaft und Praxis angewandt. Ihr Erfolg spricht für eine Konvergenz von Verhaltensökonomik und derzeitige Standardökonomik.
Abstract
Modern behavioral economics is a natural progression of the neoclassical standard economics of the 1980. It applies insights from neighboring social and behavioral sciences to improve predictions on behavioral change and to identify supposedly irrelevant factors that, if considered, will lead to better policy measures. Modern behavioral economics approaches are applied in all fields of economics, both in science and policy. Its success indicates a convergence of behavioral economics and current standard economics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
Wobei nur die Preise an Simon, Kahneman und Thaler explizit zur Würdigung ihrer verhaltensökonomischen Forschungsbeiträge vergeben wurden.
Sowohl Reinhard Selten (in 1999) als auch Werner Güth (in 2008) wurden vom Verein für Socialpolitik mit einer Einladung zum Halten der Johann-Heinrich-von-Thünen-Vorlesung geehrt. Beide bezogen sich in ihrem Vortrag (auch) auf die Beschränkte Rationalität in der Tradition von Herbert Simon (Selten 2000; Güth 2009).
Die nicht-Standardentscheidungsfindung der Modernen Verhaltensökonomik gründet auf die Heuristik (Tversky und Kahneman 1974) und Framing (Tversky und Kahneman 1981) Literatur. Im Gegensatz zur Satisficing-Heuristik der Alten Verhaltensökonomik soll mit den Heuristiken der Tversky und Kahneman Tradition eine Annäherung an das globale Optimum gegeben aller relevanter Information und Rechenkapazität des Entscheiders erreicht werden.
Eine ausführlichere Diskussion findet sich z. B. in Dhami (2016, Kap. 22).
Die Vorlesung wird auf der jährlichen Konferenz der AEA gehalten und in der American Economic Review publiziert.
So unterhalten z. B. sowohl McKinsey & Company als auch pwc in mehreren Ländern eigene verhaltensökonomische Abteilungen und veröffentlichen regelmäßig verhaltensökonomische Beiträge auf ihren Webseiten. Die schweizer Beratungsfirma FehrAdvice hat sich sogar ganz auf einen verhaltensökonomischen Ansatz spezialisiert; zu ihren Verwaltungsräten gehört Ernst Fehr, einer der erfolgreichsten Verhaltensökonomen im deutschsprachigen Raum.
Literatur
Akerlof, G. A. (2002). Behavioral macroeconomics and macroeconomic behavior. The American Economic Review, 92(3), 411–433. https://doi.org/10.2307/3083349.
Akerlof, G. A., & Kranton, R. E. (2011). Identity economics: how our identities shape our work, wages, and well-being. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Alm, J., & Sheffrin, S. M. (2016). Using behavioral economics in public economics. Public Finance Review, 45(1), 4–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1091142116661411.
Ames, P., & Hiscox, M. (2016). Guide to developing behavioural interventions for randomised controlled trials: nine guiding questions. Barton, ACT: Behavioural Economics Team of the Australian Government, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Commonwealth of Australia.
Angner, E. (2015). To navigate safely in the vast sea of empirical facts. Synthese, 192(11), 3557–3575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-014-0552-9.
Angner, E. (2016). A course in behavioral economics 2e. London: Macmillan International Higher Education.
Angner, E., & Loewenstein, G. (2012). Behavioral economics. In Handbook of the philosophy of science: philosophy of economics (S. 641–690). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Angrist, J., Azoulay, P., Ellison, G., Hill, R., & Lu, S. F. (2017). Economic research evolves: fields and styles. The American Economic Review, 107(5), 293–297. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20171117.
Ariely, D., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2003). „Coherent arbitrariness“: stable demand curves without stable preferences. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 73–106. https://doi.org/10.1162/00335530360535153.
Arnsperger, C., & Varoufakis, Y. (2006). What Is Neoclassical Economics? The three axioms responsible for its theoretical oeuvre, practical irrelevance and, thus, discursive power. Panoeconomicus, 53(1), 5–18.
Ashraf, N., Camerer, C. F., & Loewenstein, G. (2005). Adam smith, behavioral economist. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(3), 131–145. https://doi.org/10.1257/089533005774357897.
Backhouse, R. E., & Cherrier, B. (2017). The age of the applied economist: the transformation of economics since the 1970s. History of Political Economy, 49(Supplement), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1215/00182702-4166239.
Backhouse, R. E., & Medema, S. G. (2009). Retrospectives: on the definition of economics. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23(1), 221–233. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.23.1.221.
Bartolini, S., Bilancini, E., Bruni, L., & Porta, P. L. (2016). Policies for happiness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
van Bavel, R., Herrmann, B., Esposito, G., & Proestakis, A. (2013). Applying behavioural sciences to EU policy-making. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2788/4659.
Benartzi, S., Beshears, J., Milkman, K. L., Sunstein, C. R., Thaler, R. H., Shankar, M., Tucker-Ray, W., Congdon, W. J., & Galing, S. (2017). Should governments invest more in nudging? Psychological Science, 28(8), 1041–1055. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617702501.
Berg, N., & Gigerenzer, G. (2010). As-if behavioral economics: neoclassical economics in disguise? History of Economic Ideas, 18(1), 1000–1033.
Bernheim, B. D. (2009). Behavioral welfare economics. Journal of the European Economic Association, 7(2-3), 267–319. https://doi.org/10.1162/JEEA.2009.7.2-3.267.
Bernheim, B. D. (2016). The good, the bad, and the ugly: a unified approach to behavioral welfare economics. Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, 7(1), 12–68. https://doi.org/10.1017/bca.2016.5.
Bernheim, B. D., & Rangel, A. (2007). Behavioral public economics: Welfare and policy analysis with nonstandard decision-makers. In P. Diamond & H. Vartiainen (Hrsg.), Behavioral economics and its applications (S. 7–84). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Beshears, J., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., & Madrian, B. C. (2008). How are preferences revealed? Journal of Public Economics, 92(8-9), 1787–1794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2008.04.010.
Bhargava, S., & Loewenstein, G. (2015). Behavioral economics and public policy 102: beyond nudging. The American Economic Review, 105(5), 396–401. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20151049.
Bruns, H., Kantorowicz-Reznichenko, E., Klement, K., Luistro Jonsson, M., & Rahali, B. (2018). Can nudges be transparent and yet effective? Journal of Economic Psychology, 65, 41–59.
Camerer, C. (1999). Behavioral economics: reunifying psychology and economics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 96(19), 10575–10577.
Camerer, C. F. (2003). Behavioral game theory: experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Camerer, C. F., & Ho, T. H. (2015). Behavioral game theory experiments and modeling. In H. P. Young & S. Zamir (Hrsg.), Handbook of game theory with economic applications (Bd. 4, S. 517–573). Amsterdam: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-53766-9.00010-0.
Camerer, C. F., & Loewenstein, G. (2004). Behavioral economics: past, present, future. In C. F. Camerer, G. Loewenstein & M. Rabin (Hrsg.), Advances in behavioral economics (S. 3–51). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Camerer, C., Issacharoff, S., Loewenstein, G., O’Donoghue, T., & Rabin, M. (2003). Regulation for conservatives: behavioral economics and the case for „asymmetric paternalism“. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 151(3), 1211–1254. https://doi.org/10.2307/3312889.
Chabé-Ferret, S. (2018). The empirical revolution in economics: taking stock and looking ahead. https://tseconomist.com/2018/03/24/the-empirical-revolution-in-economics-taking-stock-and-looking-ahead/. Zugegriffen: 26. März 2016.
Chetty, R. (2015). Behavioral economics and public policy: a pragmatic perspective. The American Economic Review, 105(5), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20151108.
Colander, D., Holt, R., & Rosser, B. (2004). The changing face of mainstream economics. Review of Political Economy, 16(4), 485–499. https://doi.org/10.1080/0953825042000256702.
Datta, S., & Mullainathan, S. (2014). Behavioral design: a new approach to development policy. Review of Income and Wealth, 60(1), 7–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/roiw.12093.
Davis, J. B. (2006). The turn in economics: neoclassical dominance to mainstream pluralism? Journal of Institutional Economics, 2(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137405000263.
Davis, J. B. (2013). Economics imperialism under the impact of psychology: the case of behavioral development economics. OEconomia, 2013(01), 119–138. https://doi.org/10.4074/s2113520713011055.
De Grauwe, P., & Ji, Y. (2018). Behavioural economics is useful also in macroeconomics: the role of animal spirits. Comparative Economic Studies, 60, 203–216.
Dhami, S. (2016). The foundations of behavioral economic analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dohmen, T. (2014). Behavioral labor economics: advances and future directions. Labour Economics, 30, 71–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2014.06.008.
Dold, M. F. (2018). Back to buchanan? explorations of welfare and subjectivism in behavioral economics. Journal of Economic Methodology, 25(2), 160–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2017.1421770.
Edwards, W. (1954). The theory of decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 51(4), 380–417.
Ellison, G. (2006). Bounded rationality in industrial organization. In R. Blundell, W. Newey & T. Persson (Hrsg.), Advances in economics and Econometrics: theory and applications, ninth world congress of the econometric society (Bd. 2, S. 142–174). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2012). The use of happiness research for public policy. Social Choice and Welfare, 38(4), 659–674. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-011-0629-z.
Friedman, M. (1953). The methodology of positive economics. In M. Friedman (Hrsg.), Essays in positive economics (S. 3–43). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Friedman, M., & Savage, L. J. (1948). The utility analysis of choices involving risk. The Journal of Political Economy, 56(4), 279–304. https://doi.org/10.1086/256692.
Fudenberg, D. (2006). Advancing beyond advances in behavioral economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 44(3), 694–711. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.44.3.694.
Gabaix, X. (2017). Behavioral Inattention. Tech. Rep. 24096. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24096.
Gabaix, X., & Laibson, D. (2008). The seven properties of good models. In A. Caplin & A. Schotter (Hrsg.), The foundations of positive and normative economics (S. 292–299). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195328318.003.0012.
Geiger, N. (2017). The rise of behavioral economics: a quantitative assessment. Social Science History, 41(3), 555–583. https://doi.org/10.1017/ssh.2017.17.
Gigerenzer, G. (1991). How to make cognitive illusions disappear: beyond „heuristics and biases“. European Review of Social Psychology, 2(1), 83–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779143000033.
Gigerenzer, G. (1993). From metaphysics to psychophysics and statistics. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16(1), 139–140. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00029319.
Gigerenzer, G. (1996). On narrow norms and vague heuristics: a reply to Kahneman and Tversky. Psychological Review, 103(3), 592–596.
Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1996). Reasoning the fast and frugal way: models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review, 103(4), 650–669.
Gigerenzer, G., & Selten, R. (Hrsg.). (2001). Bounded rationality: the adaptive toolbox (1. Aufl.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P. M., & ABC Research Group (2000). Simple heuristics that make us smart (1. Aufl.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gode, D. K., & Sunder, S. (1993). Allocative efficiency of markets with zero-intelligence traders: market as a partial substitute for individual rationality. The Journal of Political Economy, 101(1), 119–137. https://doi.org/10.1086/261868.
Grether, D. M., & Plott, C. R. (1979). Economic theory of choice and the preference reversal phenomenon. The American Economic Review, 69(4), 623–638.
Grether, D. M., & Plott, C. R. (1982). Economic theory of choice and the preference reversal phenomenon: reply. The American Economic Review, 72(3), 575.
Grubb, M. D. (2015). Behavioral consumers in industrial organization: an overview. Review of Industrial Organization, 47(3), 247–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-015-9477-9.
Guala, F. (2016). Experimental economics, history of. In The new Palgrave dictionary of economics (S. 1–7). London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95121-5_2184-1.
Güth, W. (1995). On ultimatum bargaining experiments—a personal review. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 27(3), 329–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(94)00071-L.
Güth, W. (2008). (non)behavioral economics: a programmatic assessment. Zeitschrift für Psychologie/Journal of Psychology, 216(4), 244–253. https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.216.4.244.
Güth, W. (2009). Optimal gelaufen, einfach zufrieden oder unüberlegt gehandelt? Zur Theorie (un)eingeschränkt rationalen Entscheidens. Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, 10, 75–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2516.2009.00307.x.
Güth, W. (2010). Satisficing and (un)bounded rationality—a formal definition and its experimental validity. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 73(3), 308–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2010.01.003.
Güth, W. (2013). Satisficing players. Research in World Economy, 4(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.5430/rwe.v4n1p1.
Güth, W., & Kliemt, H. (2003). Experimentelle Ökonomik: Modell-Platonismus in neuem Gewande? In M. Held, G. Kubon-Gilke & R. Sturn (Hrsg.), Experimente in der Ökonomik, Jahrbuch Normative und institutionelle Grundfragen der Ökonomik (Bd. 2, S. 315–342). Marburg: Metropolis.
Halpern, D. (2016). Inside the nudge unit: How small changes can make a big difference. London: WH Allen.
Halpern, D., & Sanders, M. (2016). Nudging by government: progress, impact, & lessons learned. Behavioral Science & Policy, 2(2), 52–65. https://doi.org/10.1353/bsp.2016.0015.
Hamermesh, D. S. (2013). Six decades of top economics publishing: who and how? Journal of Economic Literature, 51(1), 162–172. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.51.1.162.
Hansen, F., Anell, A., Gerdtham, U. G., & Lyttkens, C. H. (2015). The future of health economics: the potential of behavioral and experimental economics. Nordic Journal of Health Economics, 3(1), 68–86. https://doi.org/10.5617/njhe.660.
Haucap, J. (2014). Implikationen der Verhaltensökonomik für die Wettbewerbspolitik. In C. Müller & N. Otter (Hrsg.), Behavioral Economics und Wirtschaftspolitik (S. 175–194). Stuttgart: Lucius & Lucius.
Hausman, D. M., & Welch, B. (2010). Debate: to nudge or not to nudge. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 18(1), 123–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2009.00351.x.
Henrich, J., Boyd, R., Bowles, S., Camerer, C. F., Fehr, E., & Gintis, H. (2004). Foundations of human Sociality: economic experiments and ethnographic evidence from fifteen small-scale societies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Henrich, J., McElreath, R., Barr, A., Ensminger, J., Barrett, C., Bolyanatz, A., Cardenas, J. C., Gurven, M., Gwako, E., Henrich, N., & Lesorogol, C. (2006). Costly punishment across human societies. Science, 312(5781), 1767–1770. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1127333.
Heukelom, F. (2014). Behavioral economics: a history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hirshleifer, D. (2015). Behavioral finance. Annual Review of Financial Economics, 7(1), 133–159. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-financial-092214-043752.
Infante, G., Lecouteux, G., & Sugden, R. (2016). Preference purification and the inner rational agent: a critique of the conventional wisdom of behavioural welfare economics. Journal of Economic Methodology, 23(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2015.1070527.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (2000). Choices, values, and frames. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Klein, P. A. (1988). Of paradigms and politics. Journal of Economic Issues, 22(2), 435–441. https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.1988.11504773.
Klick, J., & Mitchell, G. (2006). Government regulation of irrationality: moral and cognitive hazards. Minnesota Law Review, 90, 1620–1663.
Koch, A., Nafziger, J., & Nielsen, H. S. (2015). Behavioral economics of education. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 115, 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2014.09.005.
Kőszegi, B., & Rabin, M. (2007). Mistakes in choice-based welfare analysis. The American Economic Review, 97(2), 477–481.
Kőszegi, B., & Rabin, M. (2008). Choices, situations, and happiness. Journal of Public Economics, 92(8), 1821–1832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2008.03.010.
Laibson, D. (1997). Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2), 443–478. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355397555253.
Lichtenstein, S., & Slovic, P. (1971). Reversals of preference between bids and choices in gambling decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 89(1), 46–55.
Lichtenstein, S., & Slovic, P. (1973). Response-induced reversals of preference in gambling: an extended replication in Las vegas. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 101(1), 16–20.
Lindman, H. R. (1971). Inconsistent preferences among gambles. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 89(2), 390–397.
Loewenstein, G., Bryce, C., Hagmann, D., & Rajpal, S. (2015). Warning: You are about to be nudged. Behavioral Science & Policy, 1(1), 35–42. https://doi.org/10.1353/bsp.2015.0000.
Loewenstein, G. F., Thompson, L., & Bazerman, M. (1989). Social utility and decision making in interpersonal contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(3), 426–441.
Loomes, G., Starmer, C., & Sugden, R. (2003). Do anomalies disappear in repeated markets? Economic Journal, 113(486), C153–C166. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00108.
Lunn, P. (2014). Regulatory policy and Behavioural economics. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264207851-en.
McQuillin, B., & Sugden, R. (2012). Reconciling normative and behavioural economics: the problems to be solved. Social Choice and Welfare, 38(4), 553–567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-011-0627-1.
Mullainathan, S., & Thaler, R. H. (2015). Behavioral economics. In J. D. Wright (Hrsg.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (2. Aufl. S. 437–442). Oxford: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.71007-5.
Nakamura, R., Suhrcke, M., & Zizzo, D. J. (2017). A triple test for behavioral economics models and public health policy. Theory and Decision, 83(4), 513–533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-017-9625-9.
von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Odermatt, R., & Stutzer, A. (2018). Subjective well-being and public policy. In E. Diener, S. Oishi & L. Tay (Hrsg.), Handbook of well-being. Lake City: DEF Publishers.
OECD (2017). Behavioural insights and public policy: lessons from around the world. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Rabin, M. (2002). A perspective on psychology and economics. European Economic Review, 46(4), 657–685. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-2921(01)00207-0.
Rebonato, R. (2012). Taking liberties: a critical examination of libertarian paternalism. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Reisch, L. A., & Sunstein, C. R. (2016). Do Europeans like nudges? Judgment and Decision Making, 11(4), 310–326.
Saint-Paul, G. (2011). The tyranny of utility: behavioral social science and the rise of paternalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Samson, A. (Hrsg.). (2015). The behavioral economics guide 2015. London: Behavioral Science Solutions Ltd.
Samson, A. (Hrsg.). (2016). The Behavioral Economics Guide 2016. London: Behavioral Science Solutions Ltd.
Samson, A. (Hrsg.). (2017). The Behavioral Economics Guide 2017. London: Behavioral Science Solutions Ltd.
Samuelson, P. A. (1938). A note on the pure theory of consumer’s behaviour. Economica, 5(17), 61–71.
Samuelson, P. A. (1948). Consumption Theory in Terms of Revealed Preference. Economica, 15(60), 243–253. https://doi.org/10.2307/2549561.
Samuelson, P. A., & Nordhaus, W. D. (1985). Economics. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Sauermann, H., & Selten, R. (1962). Anspruchsanpassungstheorie der Unternehmung. Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft / Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 118(4), 577–597.
Savage, L. J. (1951). The theory of statistical decision. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 46(253), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.2307/2280094.
Savage, L. J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Schmalensee, R. (1978). A model of advertising and product quality. The Journal of Political Economy, 86(3), 485–503. https://doi.org/10.1086/260683.
Schnellenbach, J. (2014). Neuer Paternalismus und individuelle Rationalität: Eine ordnungsökonomische Perspektive. List Forum für Wirtschafts- und Finanzpolitik, 40(3), 239–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03373071.
Schnellenbach, J. (2016). A constitutional economics perspective on soft paternalism. Kyklos, 69(1), 135–156. https://doi.org/10.1111/kykl.12106.
Selten, R. (1990). Bounded rationality. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics / Zeitschrift fur die gesamte Staatswissenschaft, 146(4), 649–658.
Selten, R. (2000). Eingeschränkte Rationalität und ökonomische Motivation. Schriften des Vereins für Socialpolitik, 274, 129–157.
Sent, E. M. (2004). Behavioral economics: how psychology made its (limited) way back into economics. History of Political Economy, 36(4), 735–760.
Sent, E. M. (2008). Rationality, history of the concept. In S. N. Durlauf & L. E. Blume (Hrsg.), The new Palgrave dictionary of economics (2. Aufl. S. 895–902). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Simon, H. A. (1947). Administrative behavior: a study of decision-making processes in administrative organization. Oxford: Macmillan.
Simon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69(1), 99–118. https://doi.org/10.2307/1884852.
Simon, H. A. (1957). Models of man: social and rational, mathematical essays on rational human behavior in a social setting. New York, NY: Wiley & Sons.
Simon, H. A. (1959). Theories of decision-making in economics and behavioral science. The American Economic Review, 49(3), 253–283.
Simon, H. A. (1963). Economics and psychology. In S. Koch (Hrsg.), Psychology: a study of a science (Bd. 6, S. 685–723). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Simon, H. A. (1986). The Failure of Armchair Economics. Challenge, 29(5), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/05775132.1986.11471113.
Slovic, P. (1975). Choice between equally valued alternatives. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human perception and performance, 1(3), 280–287.
Smith, A. (1759) The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Printed for A. Millar, in the Strand; and A. Kincaid and J. Bell, in Edinburgh.
Spiegler, R. (2011). Bounded rationality and industrial organization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Steffel, M., Williams, E. F., & Pogacar, R. (2016). Ethically deployed defaults: transparency and consumer protection through disclosure and preference articulation. Journal of Marketing Research, 53(5), 865–880. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.14.0421.
Sugden, R. (2004). The opportunity criterion: consumer sovereignty without the assumption of coherent preferences. The American Economic Review, 94(4), 1014–1033. https://doi.org/10.1257/0002828042002714.
Sugden, R. (2008). Why incoherent preferences do not justify paternalism. Constitutional Political Economy, 19(3), 226–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10602-008-9043-7.
Sugden, R. (2010). Opportunity as mutual advantage. Economics & Philosophy, 26(1), 47–68. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266267110000052.
Sugden, R. (2013). The Behavioural economist and the social planner: to whom should behavioural welfare economics be addressed? Inquiry, 56(5), 519–538. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2013.806139.
Sugden, R. (2017a). Characterising competitive equilibrium in terms of opportunity. Social Choice and Welfare, 48(3), 487–503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-016-1015-7.
Sugden, R. (2017b). Do people really want to be nudged towards healthy lifestyles? International Review of Law and Economics, 64(2), 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12232-016-0264-1.
Sunstein, C. R. (2017). Nudges that fail. Behavioural Public Policy, 1(1), 4–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2016.3.
Sunstein, C. R. (2018). Misconceptions about nudges. Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, 2(1), 61–67.
Sunstein, C. R., & Thaler, R. H. (2003). Libertarian paternalism is not an oxymoron. The University of Chicago Law Review, 70(4), 1159–1202.
Sunstein, C. R., Reisch, L. A., & Rauber, J. (2018). A worldwide consensus on nudging? Not quite, but almost. Regulation & Governance, 12(1), 3–22.
Svorenčík, A. (2015). The experimental turn in economics: a history of experimental economics. Doctoral Dissertation series, University of Utrecht. Utrecht: Utrecht school of economics.
Svorenčík, A. (2016). The Sidney Siegel tradition: the divergence of behavioral and experimental economics at the end of the 1980s. History of Political Economy, 48(suppl 1), 270–294. https://doi.org/10.1215/00182702-3619310.
Thaler, R. H. (1980). Toward a positive theory of consumer choice. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 1(1), 39–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(80)90051-7.
Thaler, R. H. (1992). The winner’s curse: paradoxes and anomalies of economic life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Thaler, R. H. (1994). Quasi rational economics. New York, NY: SAGE.
Thaler, R. H. (2016a). Behavioral economics: past, present, and future. The American Economic Review, 106(7), 1577–1600.
Thaler, R. H. (2016b). Misbehaving: the making of behavioral economics. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2003). Libertarian paternalism. The American Economic Review, 93(2), 175–179. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282803321947001.
Todd, P. M., & Gigerenzer, G. (2012). Ecological rationality: intelligence in the world (evolution and cognition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453–458.
Weimann, J. (2016). Entscheidungstheoretische Instrumente für die Politikberatung? Wirtschaftsdienst, 96(8), 620–624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10273-016-2025-x.
White, M. (2013). The manipulation of choice: ethics and libertarian paternalism. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan
Whitehead, M., Jones, R., Howell, R., Lilley, R., & Pykett, J. (2014). Nudging all over the world. Swindon, Edinburgh: Tech. rep., Economic and Social Research Council.
Whitman, D. G., & Rizzo, M. J. (2015). The problematic welfare standards of behavioral paternalism. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 6(3), 409–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-015-0244-5.
Wilkinson, N., & Klaes, M. (2017). An introduction to behavioral economics. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wisman, J. D. (1980). Values and modes of rationality in economic science. International Journal of Social Economics, 7(3), 137–148. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb013862.
World Bank (2015). World Development Report 2015: Mind, Society, and Behavior. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dittrich, D.A.V. Verhaltensökonomik als Gegenprogramm zur Standardökonomik?. List Forum 44, 841–859 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41025-019-00141-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41025-019-00141-8
Schlüsselwörter
- Verhaltensökonomik
- Beschränkte Rationalität
- Empirische Wende
- Neoklassische Reparatur
- Experiment
- Pragmatisches Modellieren