TOMA DE DECISIONES ECONÓMICAS: EL APORTE COGNITIVO EN LA RUTA DE SIMON, ALLAIS Y TVERSKY Y KAHNEMAN
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22235/cp.v0i1.567Palabras clave:
psicología cognitiva, teorías económicas, toma de decisionesResumen
Desde sus comienzos como ciencia, la economía integró a sus proposiciones a la psicología. Esto fue particularmente notorio en el tema de la toma de decisiones económicas. Posteriormente, la economía se recuesta para elaborar sus construcciones científicas en el maximizador y omnisciente homo economicus y así se separa de la psicología. Empero, la explicación de la realidad de los modelos neoclásicos se fue tornando cada vez más imperfecta, mostrando las teorías numerosas anomalías. Prominentes científicos en la vena cognitiva comienzan, primero exponiendo las limitaciones a las teorías prevalecientes para luego continuar construyendo modelos alternativos enraizados en la psicología cognitiva. Los seminales aportes cognitivos de Herbert Simon y Maurice Allais, trazarían el camino a dos académicos pioneros, los psicólogos cognitivos Amos Tversky y Daniel Kahneman, que darían forma a un nuevo modelo que incorpora los avances de la psicología cognitiva a los modelos de toma de decisiones. El trabajo revisa este paradigmático ejemplo de interdisciplinariedad científica entre economía y psicología cognitiva, en la búsqueda de mejores explicaciones al proceso de toma de decisiones.
Descargas
Citas
Abdellaoui, M. (2000). Parameter-free elicitation of utility and probability weighting functions. Management Science, 46, 1497-1512.
Abdellaoui, M. (2002). A genuine rank-dependent generalization of the von Neumann- Morgenstern expected utility theorem. Econometrica, 70, 717-736
Allais, M. (1953). Le comportement de l’homme rationnel devant le risque; Critique des postulats et axiomes de l’École Américaine Econometrica 21, pp.503-54.
Arrow, K.J. (1978). The Future and the Present in Economic Life, Economic Enquiry, pp. 157-170.
Arrow, K. J. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Risk Bearing. Helsinski. Yrjo Hahnsson Foundation.
Baltussen, G., Post, T., Van Vliet, P. (2004). Violations of CPT in mixed gambles. Working Paper, July, 2004., Available from Pim van Vliet, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Barron, G., Erev, I. (2003). Small feedback based decisions and their limited correspondence to description based decisions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 16, 215-233.
Baucells, M., Heukamp, F. H. (2004). Stochastic dominance and cumulative prospect theory. Working paper, dated June, 2004., Available from Manel Baucells, IESE Business School, University of Navarra, Barcelona, SPAIN.
Bernoulli D. (1738). Specimen theoriae novae de mensurea sortis, Commentarii Academiae Scientiarum Imperialis Patropolitanae, vol. 5, pp. 175-192 (trad. ingl di L. Sommer, “Exposition of a New Theory on the Measurement of Risk”, Econometrica, 1954, vol. 22, pp. 23-36).
Brandstätter E, Gigerenzer G., Hertwig R, (2006). The priority heuristic: Choices without tradeoffs. Psychological Review, 113, 409-432.
Caliendo, Frank and Huang, Kevin X.D., (2007) Overconfidence in Financial Markets and Consumption Over the Life Cycle FRB of
Philadelphia Working Paper No. 07-3.
Camerer, C. F. (1989). An experimental test of several generalized utility theories. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 2, 61-104.
Camerer, C. F. (1992). Recent tests of generalizations of expected utility theory. In W. Edwards (Eds.), Utility theories: Measurements and applications (pp. 207-251). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Camerer C, Lovallo D, (1999)Overconfidence and Excess Entry: An Experimental Approach The American Economic Review, Vol. 89, No. 1 pp. 306-318.
Camerer C, Lowenstein G, Rabin M (2003) Advances in behavioral Economics. Princeton University Press.
Camerer, C (1998). Bounded rationality in individual decision making. Experimental Economics, 1, 163-183.
Camerer, C Lowenstein, G y Prelec, O (2005) “Neuroenconmics: how neuroscience can inform Economics” Journal of Economic Literature.
Diecidue E., Wakker P. P. (2001). On the intuition of rank-dependent utility. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 23, 281-298.
Fernández Álvarez, H (1992) Fundamentos de Modelo Integrativo en psicoterpia Paidos,
Gardner, H. (1988) La nueva ciencia de la mente, Paidos.
Gigerenzer G, Selten E. Eds, (2001) Bounded rationality: The adaptative toolbox. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA London.
Fox C. R., Hadar, L. (2006). Decisions from experience = sampling error + prospect theory: Reconsidering Hertwig, Barron, Weber & Erev
(2004). Judgment and Decision Making, 1, 159-161.
Friedman M, (1953). Essays in Positive Economics, Chicago University Press, Chicago (trad. It. In Método, consumo e moneta, Il Mulino, Bologna 1996, cap.1).
Friedman M, e Savage L.J, (1952). The Expected Utility Hypotesis and the Measurability of Utility, Journal of Political Economy, 60,6 (trad. it. In Metodo, consumo e moneta, Il Mulino, Bologna 1996, cap.11).
Federick S, Lowenstein G, O´Domoghue T (2002) “Time discontinuing and time preference: a critical review” Journal of Economic Literature.
Gonzalez R, Wu G. (1999). On the shape of the probability weighting function. Cognitive Psychology, 38, 129-166.
Gonzalez R, Wu G. (2003). Composition rules in original and cumulative prospect theory. Working Manuscript dated 8-14-03.
González-Vallejo, C. (2002). Making trade-offs: A probabilistic and context-sensitive model of choice behavior. Psychological Review, 109, 137-155.
Harless, D. W., & Camerer, C. F. (1994). The predictive utility of generalized expected utility theories. Econometrica, 62, 1251-1290.
Hertwig, R., Barron, G., Weber, E. U., & Erev, I. (2004). Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events in risky choices. Psychological
Science, 15, 534-539.
Humphrey, S. J. (1995). Regret aversion or eventsplitting effects? More evidence under risk and uncertainty. Journal of risk and uncertainty, 11, 263-274.
James, W (1890) Principios de Psicología México FCE 1989.
Kahneman, D,. E Tversky A. (1973). On the Psychology of prediction. Psychological Review 80 237-251.
Kahneman, D. Tversky, A (1986) Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions Journal of Business.
Kahneman, D,. E Tversky A. (1979). Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decisions Under Risk, Econometrica, 47, pp. 313-327.
Kahneman D. Frederick, S (2002) Representativeness revisited: attribute subsitution on intutitive judgment, New York, Cambridge University Press.
Kahneman, D Knetsch, L y Thaler, R. (1991) Anomalies: Endowment effect, loss aversion, and statu quo distortion. Journal of Economic
Perspectives.
Kahneman, D (2002) Maps of Bounded Rationality: A perspective on intuitive judgment and choice. Prize Lecture. Nobel Foundation.
Karni, E., Safra, Z. (1987). Preference reversal and the observability of preferences by experimental methods. Econometrica, 55, 675-685.
Kuhn, J. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Levy, M., Levy, H. (2002). Prospect Theory: Much ado about nothing. Management Science, 48, 1334-1349.
Lopes, L. L., Oden, G. C. (1999). The role of aspiration level in risky choice: A comparison of cumulative prospect theory and SP/A theory. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 43, 286-313.
Luce, R. D. (2000). Utility of gains and losses: Measurement-theoretical and experimental approaches. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Luce, R. D. (2001). Reduction invariance and Prelec’s weighting functions. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 45, 167-179.
Luce, R. D., Fishburn, P. C. (1991). Rank- and signdependent linear utility models for finite first order gambles. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 4, 29-59.
Luce, R. D., Fishburn, P. C. (1995). A note on deriving rank-dependent utility using additive joint receipts. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 11, 5-16.
Luce, R. D., Narens, L. (1985). Classification of concatenation measurement structures according to scale type. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 29, 1-72.
Machina, M. J. (1982). Expected utility analysis without the independence axiom. Econometrica, 50, 277-323.
Marley, A. A. J., Luce, R. D. (2005). Independence properties vis-à-vis several utility representations. Theory and Decision, 58, 77-143.
McConnell, A. R., & Leibold, J. M. (2001).Relations among the implicit association test discriminatory behavior and explicit measures radical attitudes. Journal of experimental Social psychology.
Newell, A., Shaw, J. C. y Simon, H. A. (1958). Elements of a theory of human problem solving. Psychological Review, 65.
Neilson, W., Stowe, J. (2002). A further examination of cumulative prospect theory parameterizations. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 24(1), 31-46.
Neisser, U (1999) Psicología cognoscitiva, México:
Trillas
Payne, J. W. (2005). It is whether you win or lose: The importance of the overall probabilities of winning or losing in risky choice. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 30, 5-19.
Pratt, J. W. (1964). “Risk Aversion in the Small and in the Large”. Econometrica, Vol. 32, p. 22-36.
Prelec, D. (1998). The probability weighting function. Econometrica, 66, 497-527.
Quiggin, J. (1982). A theory of anticipated utility. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 3, 324-345.
Quiggin, J. (1985). Subjective utility, anticipated utility, and the Allais paradox. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 35, 94-101.
Quiggin, J. (1993). Generalized expected utility theory: The rank-dependent model. Boston: Kluwer.
Rieger, M. O., Wang, M. (in press). What is behind the priority heuristic: A mathematical analysis and comment on Brandstätter, Gigerenzer, and Hertwig (2006). Psychological Review, in press.
Robbins L.C. (1932). An Essay on the Nature and significance of Economic Science, Macmillan, New York (2nd. Ed. Rivista ed estesa, 1935; trad it. Saggio sul la natura e il significato della scienza economica, Utet, Torino 1953).
Samuelson, Paul A. y Nordhaus W.(1985). Economics Mc Graw-Hill, New York.
Schwartz H, (1998) rationality gone awry? Decision making inconsistency with Economic and Financial Theory. Praeger westfort CT London.
Schmeidler, D. (1989). Subjective probability and expected utility without additivity. Econometrica, 57, 571-587.
Simon, H. A. (1947). Administrative Behavior, New York, Macmillan.
Simon, H.A. (1957). Models of Man, Wiley, New York.
Simon, H.A. (1969). The Sciences of the Artificial (Carl Taylor Compton Lectures), Mit Press, Cambridge (Ma.) (trad. it. Le scienze dell’artificialle, Il Mulino, Bologna 1988).
Simon, H.A. (1971). Theories of Bounded Rationality, in McGuire B. E Radner R. (a cura di) Decision and Organization, North-Holland, Amsterdam.
Simon H.A. (1979). Rational Decision Making in Business Organization, American Economic Review, vol. LXIX, pp. 493-513.
Simon, H.A. (1991a). Models of My Life, Basic Books, New York (trad it. Modelli per la mia vita, Rizzoli, Milano 1992).
Simon, H.A. (1991b). Bounded Rationality and Organizational Learning, Organization Science, 2, pp. 125-134.
Simon H.A., Newell A. (1972). Human Problem Solving, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (N.J.).
Starmer, C. (1999). Cycling with rules of thumb: An experimental test for a new form of non-transitive behavior. Theory and Decision, 46, 141-158.
Starmer, C. (2000). Developments in non-expected utility theory: The hunt for a descriptive theory of choice under risk. Journal of Economic Literature, 38, 332-382.
Starmer, C., Sugden, R. (1989). Violations of the independence axiom in common ratio problems: An experimental test of some competing
hypotheses. Annals of Operations Research, 19, 79-101.
Sternberg, R (2005) Cognitive Psychology. Thomson Thaler, R. (2000) From homo Economicus to homo Sapiens. Journal of Economic Perspective. Vol 14
Thaler, R (1992) The Winner´s Curse. Princeton University Press.
Tull, A (1967) The relationship of actual and predicted sales and profits in the new-product introductions. Journal of Business.
Tversky A., Kahneman D. (1987). “Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions, in Hogart R.M. e Reder M.” Rational Choice -The Contrast between
Economics and Psychology, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago (trad. it. In Egidi M. E Turvani M. (a cura di), Le ragioni delle organizzazioni economiche, Rosenberg & Sellier, Torino 1994).
Tversky, A., Wakker, P. (1995). Risk attitudes and decision weights. Econometrica, 63, 1255-1280.
Von Neumann J. Morgenstern O. (1944). Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, Princeton University Press, Princeton (N.J.).
Von Winterfeldt, D. (1997). Empirical tests of Luce’s rank- and sign-dependent utility theory. In A. A. J. Marley (Eds.), Choice, decision, and measurement: Essays in honor of R. Duncan Luce (pp. 25-44). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wakker, P. (1994). Separating marginal utility and probabilistic risk aversion. Theory and decision, 36, 1-44.
Wakker, P. (1996). The sure-thing principle and the comonotonic sure-thing principle: An axiomatic analysis. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 25, 213-227.
Wakker, P. (2001). Testing and characterizing properties of nonadditive measures through violations of the sure-thing principle. Econometrica, 69, 1039-1075.
Wakker, P., Erev, I., Weber, E. U. (1994). Comonotonic independence: The critical test between classical and rank-dependent utility theories. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 9, 195-230.
Weber, E. U., Kirsner, B. (1997). Reasons for rankdependent utility evaluation. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 14, 41-61.
Wenstein, N, (1980) unrealistic optimism about future life events Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 39.
Wu, G. (1994). An empirical test of ordinal independence. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 9, 39-60.
Wu, G., Gonzalez, R. (1996). Curvature of the probability weighting function. Management Science, 42, 1676-1690.
Wu, G., Gonzalez, R. (1998). Common consequence conditions in decision making under risk. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 16, 115-139.
Wu, G., Gonzalez, R. (1999). Nonlinear decision weights in choice under uncertainty. Management Science, 45, 74-85.
Wu, G., Markle, A. B. (2005). An empirical test of gain-loss separability in prospect theory. Working Manuscript, Available from George.
Wu, University of Chicago, Graduate School of Business, 1101 E. 58 th Street, Chicago, IL 60637.
Wu, G., Zhang, J., Abdelloui, M. (2005). Testing prospect theories using probability tradeoff consistency. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 30, 107-131.
Yaari, M. E. (1987). The dual theory of choice under risk. Econometrica, 55, 95-115.
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2007 Universidad Católica del Uruguay
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
Se ceden los derechos de reproducción del artículo según la Licencia Creative Commons Atribución 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0), sistema de acceso abierto.
