To blow hot and cold under stress - neurohormonal moderators of revealed preferences

揭示偏好理论提供了一个从可观察的选择中推断消费者偏好的正式框架。它可以在假设偏好在观察期间是稳定的前提下，从过去显示的偏好中预测样本外的选择。然而，在心理神经内分泌学文献中有证据表明，经济偏好取决于消费者的神经激素状态，而这种状态是动态的、灵活的、随时间变化的，但对外部观察者来说是不可见的，部分是无法通过内省获得的。例如，在之前的几轮融资中，我们已经表明，社会心理压力，或应激神经调节剂皮质醇（CORT）和去甲肾上腺素（NA）的精神药理学操作，以一种系统的、可预测的、但高度依赖时间的方式改变了利他主义的、与他人有关的偏好。因此，由于偏好可能会随着荷尔蒙的波动而迅速而剧烈地改变，选择可能会变得不一致；也就是说，在一个时间点上显示的偏好可能无法预测一个有压力的消费者未来的偏好，即使在偏好最初显示几分钟后。然而，这绝不是确定的知识，同样合理的是，压力只是短暂地导致更大的选择可变性，这仅仅被归类为增加的决策噪音，通过显示的偏好标记（模糊手）-这种现象不会对显示的偏好理论构成严重挑战。本基金提案的目的是评估，在两性参与者中，心理社会压力（实验1）或CORT和NA的心理药理学调节（实验2）对利他性给予的影响是否会导致显着的不一致选择。选择一致性将通过揭示偏好理论提供的理性（即选择一致性）的严格概念和定量基准来衡量。为此，我们将采用一个改进的独裁者博弈，参与者在自己和另一个人之间做出资源分配决策。我们操纵预算（要分享的捐赠）和捐赠成本（参与者必须支付的“交易成本”）。我们预测，在心理社会压力或心理药理学挑战之后，做出的决定比在控制操纵之后更加不一致。我们进一步预计，这种内部不一致性的增加不仅是由于决策噪音的放大，而且是由于社会偏好的真正变化，如在压力或药物作用之前与之后分别通过改变效用函数来衡量的。我们的研究结果将对我们理解荷尔蒙状态变化的作用，特别是压力对经济理性的影响产生影响。

Revealed preference theory provides a formal framework to infer consumer preferences from observable choices. It can predict out-of-sample choices from past revealed preferences under the assumption that preferences are stable over the time period of observation. However, there is evidence in the psychoneuroendocrinological literature that economic preferences depend, among others, on the neurohormonal state of the consumer, which is dynamic, flexible, and time-varying, but non-visible for an external observer, and partly inaccessible by introspection. For example, in the previous funding rounds, we have shown that psychosocial stress, or psychopharmacological manipulation of the stress neuromodulators cortisol (CORT) and noradrenaline (NA), altered altruistic, other-regarding preferences in a systematic, predictable, yet highly time-dependent way. By consequence, since preferences may change rapidly and drastically with hormonal fluctuations, choices may become inconsistent; i.e., a revealed preference at one point in time may not serve to predict a stressed consumer’s future preference even minutes after the preference has been initially revealed. However, this is by no means assured knowledge, it is equally plausible that stress only transiently results in larger choice variability that would merely be classified as increased decision noise by revealed preference markers (fuzzy hands) – a phenomenon that would not pose a serious challenge to revealed preference theory. The aim of this grant proposal is to evaluate, in participants of both genders, whether the effects of psychosocial stress (experiment 1) or psychopharmacological modulation of CORT and NA (experiment 2) on altruistic giving induce significantly inconsistent choice. Choice (in)consistency will be measured with the rigorous conceptual and quantitative benchmark of rationality (i.e., choice consistency) provided by revealed preference theory. To this end, we will adopt a modified dictator game in which participants make resource allocation decisions between themselves and another person. We manipulate the budget (the endowment to be shared) and the costs of giving (a “transaction cost” that participants have to pay to give money to the other). We predict that giving decisions are more inconsistent after psychosocial stress, or psychopharmacological challenge respectively, than after control manipulations. We furthermore expect that this increase in internal inconsistency is not (only) due to amplified decision noise, but due to genuine changes in social preferences, as measured by altered utility functions before vs. after stress, or drug action respectively. Our results will have implications for our understanding of the role of hormonal state changes in general, and stress effects in particular, on economic rationality.