Collaborative Research: Experiments on Procedures and Prediction in Economic Decision Making

该项目对行为经济学的研究做出了贡献。我们知道，个人行为的标准经济模型往往不能准确描述人们在特定情况下的行为。另一种说法是，这些模型不具有描述性。然而，这些模型是建立在假设的基础上的，人们可能认为这些假设包括应该指导行为的宝贵原则。如果是这样，那么这些标准的规范模型将指导人们应该如何行为。这样的模式将是规范性的，因为它规定了人们应该选择遵循这一原则的行为。这个项目检验标准经济模型在实验室决策实验中是否具有规范性。这项研究的结果将进一步加深我们对个人行为的经济模型是否以及如何指导政策干预的理解。这个项目将开发两种新的实验方法来评估预期效用的规范性(规定性)，贴现预期效用和主观预期效用。第一种方法将公理视为代表个人作出选择的程序。个人将看到公理以一种视觉上简单的方式表示，并将报告他们是否希望自己的选择与公理一致。然后，个人将从与公理相关的决策问题中做出选择，并将有机会调和他们相对于公理的偏好和选择之间的任何差异。这种方法论将测试个人是否将公理视为决策中的规范，即使在他们最初违反公理的情况下也是如此。我们将在时间选择和风险和歧义下的选择领域使用这种方法。第二种方法将直接得出个人是否更喜欢模型预测的建议。这将通过评估预测来揭示模型本身是否被视为标准化，而不需要向实验参与者解释模型。我们将使用这种方法来研究预期效用理论的规范性吸引力。总而言之，这项研究议程将表明，个人是否希望自己的选择与规范的经济模型保持一致。如果他们这样做了，那么经常观察到的违反这些模型的行为可能更好地被认为是错误，而不是反映潜在的偏好。这一裁决反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的智力价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

This project contributes to research in behavioral economics. We know that standard economic models of individual behavior often do not accurately describe how people behave in specific situations. Another way to say this is that these models are not descriptive. However, these models are built on assumptions that people may think include valuable principles that should guide behavior. If this is the case, then these standard canonical models would instruct people on how they should behave. Such a model would be prescriptive, because it prescribes the behavior that people should choose to follow the principle. This project examines whether or not standard economic models are prescriptive in laboratory decision making experiments. The results of this research will further our understanding of whether and how economic models of individual behavior can guide policy interventions. This project will develop two novel experimental methods to assess the normative (prescriptive) nature of expected utility, discounted expected utility, and subjective expected utility. The first methodology will treat axioms as procedures that make a choice on behalf of the individual. Indi- viduals will see axioms represented in a visually simple manner and will report whether they want their choices to be consistent with the axiom. Then, individuals will make choices from decision problems related to the axiom, and will be given the opportunity to reconcile any discrepancies between their preference over axioms and choices. This methodology will test whether individuals treat the axioms as normative in decision-making, even in situations where they originally violated the axiom. We will employ this methodology in the domains of temporal choice and choice under risk and ambiguity. The second methodology will directly elicit whether individuals prefer recommendations that are predicted by a model. This will reveal whether the model itself is viewed as normative by evaluating predictions, without needing to explain the model to experimental participants. We will employ this methodology to study the normative appeal of expected utility theory. Together, this research agenda will show whether individuals want their choices to be consistent with canonical economic models. If they do, then the frequently observed violations of these models might be better thought of as mistakes rather than reflecting underlying preferences.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.