A teoria da perspectiva e as mudanças de preferência no mainstream: um prospecto lakatoseano

Pessali, Huascar and Berger, Bruno (2010): A teoria da perspectiva e as mudanças de preferência no mainstream: um prospecto lakatoseano. Published in: Revista de Economia Politica , Vol. 2, No. 30 : pp. 340-356.

Abstract

For many decades over the 20th Century, the mainstream of economics adopted a normative and axiomatic theory of individual behavior in which maximizing procedures were carried out by rationally unbounded agents. This status has been challenged on many grounds and alternative views from fields like psychology have found a way into the core of economics research frontier. Prospect theory, developed by psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky since the 1970s, has provided a more empirical, inductive and descriptive theory of decision making. It has made significant inroads into mainstream microeconomics, shaking the habits of some of its practitioners. This paper first takes stock of its main developments and then uses a Lakatosian framework to draw out its negative and positive heuristics. In what follows, its heuristics are compared to those of traditional rational decision-making theories. The differences between them are highlighted, pointing to changes in the mainstream of the profession and to new opportunities for research.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Commentary on: Eprints 0 not found.
• English Title: Prospect theory and preference change in the mainstream of economics: a Lakatosian prospect
• Language: Portuguese
• Keywords: decision making; prospect theory; behavioral economics; experimental economics; expected utility theory.
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D0 - General > D03 - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles; B - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches > B2 - History of Economic Thought since 1925 > B21 - Microeconomics

References

BIANCHI, A. M. (2001). "Economistas de avental branco: uma defesa do método experimental na economia." Revista de Economia Contemporânea 5(2):129-54. [ Links ]

BINMORE, K. (1999). "Why experiment in economics?" Economic Journal 109: F16-24. [ Links ]

BOLAND, L. (1981). "On the futility of criticizing the neoclassical maximization hypothesis." American Economic Review 71:1031-6. [ Links ]

CAMERER, C. (1998). "Bounded rationality in individual decision making." Experimental Economics 1(2):163-83. [ Links ]

CAMERER, C. & HO, T. (1999). "Experience-weighted attraction learning in normal form games." Econometrica 67(4):827-74. [ Links ]

CARBONE, E. & STARMER, C. (eds) (2007). New developments in experimental economics. Farmington Hills: Edward Elgar, 2 volumes. [ Links ]

CARPENTER, J. & BURKS, S & VERHOOGEN, E. (2005). "Comparing students to workers: the effects of social framing on behavior in distribution games." In CARPENTER, J. & LIST, J. & HARRISON, G. (eds). Field experiments in economics. Greenwich: JAI Press, pp. 261-90. [ Links ]

COASE, R. (1994). Essays on Economics and economists. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [ Links ]

COLANDER, D. (2000). "The death of neoclassical economics." Journal of the History of Economic Thought 22(2):127-43. [ Links ]

COLANDER, D. & HOLT, R. & ROSSER JR, B. (2004). "The changing face of mainstream economics." Review of Political Economy 16(4):485-99. [ Links ]

DAVIS, J. B. (2006). "The turn in economics: neoclassical dominance to mainstream pluralism?" Journal of Institutional Economics 2:1-20. [ Links ]

DAVIS, J. B. (2008a). "The turn in recent Economics and return of orthodoxy." Cambridge Journal of Economics 32(3):349-66. [ Links ]

DAVIS, J. B. (2008b). "Psychology's recent challenge to economics: Rationality and the individual." Texto apresentado na History of Economics Society 2008 Annual Conference, Toronto. [ Links ]

DEQUECH, D. (2007). "Neoclassical, mainstream, heterodox, and orthodox economics." Anais do XXXV Encontro Nacional de Economia, Recife. [ Links ]

FRIEDMAN, D. (1998). "Evolutionary economics goes mainstream: a review of the theory of learning in games." Journal of Evolutionary Economics 8(4):423-32. [ Links ]

FRIEDMAN, M. (1953). Essays in positive economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [ Links ]

GLIMCHER, P. (2002). "Decisions, decisions, decisions: choosing a biological theory of choice." Neuron 36:323-32. [ Links ]

GUALA, F. (2002). "On the scope of experiments in economics: comments on Siakantaris." Cambridge Journal of Economics 26(2):261-7. [ Links ]

HANDS, D. W. (2007). "Economics, psychology, and the history of consumer choice theory." Manuscrito. Disponível em: <http://ssm.com/abstract=988125> Acesso em: 28 de agosto de 2007. [ Links ]

HODGSON, G. (2007a). "Evolutionary and institutional economics as the new mainstream?" Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review 4(1):7-25. [ Links ]

HODGSON, G. (2007b). "The revival of Veblenian Institutional Economics." Journal of Economic Issues 41(2):325-40. [ Links ]

HUTCHISON, T. W. (1938). The significance and basic postulates of economic theory. Londres: Macmillan. [ Links ]

KAGEL, J. & ROTH, A. (eds) (1995). The handbook of experimental economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press. [ Links ]

KAHNEMAN, D. & KNETSCH, J. & THALER, R. (1990). "Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem." Journal of Political Economy 98:1325-48. [ Links ]

KAHNEMAN, D. & KNETSCH, J. & THALER, R. (1991). "Anomalies: the endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias." Journal of Economic Perspectives 5(1):193-206. [ Links ]

KAHNEMAN, D. & TVERSKY, A. (1979). "Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk." Econometrica 47(2):263-91. [ Links ]

KAHNEMAN, D. & TVERSKY, A. (1986). "Rational choice and the framing of decisions." The Journal of Business 59(4):251-78. [ Links ]

KAHNEMAN, D. & TVERSKY, A. (2000). Choices, values, and frames. Nova Iorque: Cambridge University Press. [ Links ]

KLAES, M. (2008). "Rationality and its bounds: re-framing social framing." In Galavotti, M. &Suppes, P. & Scazzieri, R. (eds). Reasoning, rationality and probability. Chicago: Chicago University Press, pp. 211-32. [ Links ]

KUHN, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [ Links ]

KUHN, T. S. (1977). The essential tension. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [ Links ]

KUHN, T. S. (1979). "Lógica da descoberta ou psicologia da pesquisa?" In LAKATOS, I. & MUSGRAVE, A. (orgs). A crítica e o desenvolvimento do conhecimento. São Paulo: Cultrix, pp. 5-32. [ Links ]

LAKATOS, I. (1979). "O Falseamento e a metodologia dos programas de pesquisa científica." In LAKATOS, I. & MUSGRAVE, A. (orgs). A crítica e o desenvolvimento do conhecimento. São Paulo: Cultrix, pp. 109-243. [ Links ]

LEWIN, S. B. (1996). "Economics and Psychology: lessons for our own day from the early Twentieth Century." Journal of Economic Literature 34:1293-1323. [ Links ]

MONGIN, P. (1988). "Expected utility theory." In DAVIS, J. & HANDS, D. W. & MÄKI, U. (eds). Handbook of economic methodology. Londres: Edward Elgar, pp. 342-50. [ Links ]

MURAMATSU, R. (2009). "The death and resurrection of 'economics with psychology': remarks from a methodological standpoint." Revista de Economia Política 29(1). [ Links ]

PLOTT, C. (1991). "Will economics become an experimental Science?" Southern Economic Journal 57(4):901-19. [ Links ]

POPPER, K. (1975). A lógica da investigação científica. Coleção Os Pensadores. São Paulo: Abril Cultural. [ Links ]

PRESSMAN, S. (2006). "Kahneman, Tversky, and institutional economics" Journal of Economic Issues 40(2):501-6. [ Links ]

RABIN, M. (2008). ""Kahneman, Daniel (born 1934)." In DURLAUF, S. & BLUME, L. (eds). The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics Online. Second Edition. Palgrave Macmillan. Disponível em http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde 2008_K000065 . Acesso em: 20 de dezembro de 2008. [ Links ]

RSAS - THE ROYAL SWEDISH ACADEMY OF SCIENCES (2002). "Advanced Information on the Prize in Economic Sciences - Foundations of Behavioral and Experimental Economics: Daniel Kahneman and Vernon Smith." Disponível em: <http:// nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2002 /ecoadv02.pdf>. Acesso em: 05 de setembro de 2007. [ Links ]

SAMUELSON, P. & NORDHAUS, W. (1985). Economics. 12ª ed. Nova Iorque: McGraw-Hill. [ Links ]

SENT, E.-M. (2004). "Behavioral economics: how Psychology made its (limited) way back into Economics." History of Political Economy 36:735-60. [ Links ]

SIAKANTARIS, N. (2000). "Experimental economics under the microscope." Cambridge Journal of Economics 24(3):267-81. [ Links ]

SIMON, H. A. (1957). Models of man. New York: John Wiley. [ Links ]

SMITH, V. (1962). "An experimental study of competitive market behavior." Journal of Political Economy 70:111-37. [ Links ]

SMITH, V. L. (1982). "Microeconomic systems as an experimental science." American Economic Review 72(5):923-55. [ Links ]

SMITH, V. L. (1990). "Experimental economics." Aldershot: Edward Elgar. [ Links ]

SMITH, V. L. (2002). "Method in experiment: rhetoric and reality." Experimental Economics 5(2):91-110. [ Links ]

THALER, R. (2000). "From homo economicus to homo sapiens." Journal of Economic Perspectives 14(1):133-41. [ Links ]

THALER, R. & TVERSKY, A. & KAHNEMAN, D. & SCHWARTZ, A. (1997). "The effect of myopia and loss aversion on risk taking: an experimental test." Quarterly Journal of Economics 112:647-61. [ Links ]

TVERSKY, A. & KAHNEMAN, D. (1974). "Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases." Science 185(4157):1124-31. [ Links ]

TVERSKY, A. & KAHNEMAN, D. (1992). "Advances in Prospect Theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty." Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5(4):297-323. [ Links ]

VEBLEN, T. (1898). "Why is economics not an evolutionary science?" The Quarterly Journal of Economics 12(4):373-97. [ Links ]

VILLEVAL, M. C. (2007). "Experimental economics: contributions, recent developments, and new challenges." Working Paper 07-06: GATE-Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Économique. [ Links ].