Economy of the Mind 英文参考文献.docVIP

Feature is that if he rejects the offer, neither player gets any money. Economy of the Mind Although rational-decision theory predicts that the ?rst player should make a low offer and the second player should accept because it would maximize how much each player leaves with, the results were resoundingly irrational. Most ?rst players offered close to half of the money and most second players rejected sums lower than half. Economists were stumped when their models fell far short of explaining human decision-making. “Standard economic theory uses models where players are calculating complicated numbers, thinking far ahead to ?gure out what the other person will do, and there are no temptations,” explains Colin Camerer, a behavioral economist at the Kendall Powell F experiments and others blend neurobiologists’ ability to track rans de Waal’s laboratory monkeys won’t work for unequal pay. If a partner monkey gets behavior and brain processes with economists’ models of the cost–bene?t analyses behind every decision made by an animal. The two ?elds have each been working toward explaining decision-making behavior, using widely different approaches for decades. Recently, researchers in both ?elds have recognized that using tools from the other trade might speed their own work along, resulting in the emerging ?eld of neuroeconomics. a grape (big bucks) for little or no work (trading a token), a monkey will reject her measly cucumber pay from her human “boss.” And she makes her disdain known, hurling her cucumber or token out of her cubicle—even though she would happily gobble down cucumbers in other circumstances. De Waal’s work at the Yerkes Primate Center at Emory University in Atlanta has shown an aversion to inequality in non-human primates (Figure 1), drawing an evolutionary link between how humans and monkeys make decisions. Humans reject inequality, too, even if it means walking away empty-handed. This behavior cannot be explained by classical economic theory that