Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bounded Rationality in Individual Decision Making

  • Published:
Experimental Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The main objectives of this paper are: (i) To give a pithy, opinionated summary of what has been learned about bounded rationality in individual decision making from experiments in economics and psychology (drawing on my 1995 Handbook of Experimental Economics chapter); and (ii) mention some promising new directions for research which would be included if that chapter were written today.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ainslie, G. (1975). “Specious Reward: A Behavioral Theory of Impulsiveness and Impulse Control.” Psycholoical Bulletin.82, 463-509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G.S. and Murphy, K.M. (1988). “A Theory of Rational Addiction.” Journal of Political Economy.96, 675-700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benartzi, S. and Richard, T. (1995). “Myopic Loss Aversion and the Equity Premium Puzzle.” Quarterly Journal of Economics.101, 73-92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, D., Minehart, D., and Rabin, M. (1996). “Loss Aversion in a Savings Model.” Berkeley Working Paper, University of California.

  • Buschena, D. and Zilberman, D. (1995). “Performance of the Similarity Hypothesis Relative to Existing Models of Risky Choice.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. 11, 233-254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camerer, C.F. (1987). “Do Biases in Probability Judgment Matter in Markets? Experimental Evidence?” American Economic Review.77, 981-997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camerer, C.F. (1989). “An Experimental Test of Several Generalized Utility Theories.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty.2, 61-104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camerer, C.F. (1992). “Recent Tests of Generalized Utility Theories.” In W. Edwards (ed.), Utility Theories: Measurement and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camerer, C.F. (in press). “Behavioral Economics in the Wild: Field Evidence for Prospect Theory.” In D. Kahneman and A. Tversky (eds.), Choices, Values and Frames.

  • Camerer, C.F., Babcock, L., Loewenstein, G., and R. Thaler (1997). “Labor Supply of New York City Cab Drivers: One day at a Time.” Quarterly Journal of Economics.103, 407-441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camerer, C.F. and Ho., T.H. (in press). “Experience-Weighted Attraction Learning in Normal-Form Games.” Econometrica.

  • Camerer, C.F. and Weber, M.W. (1992). “Recent Developments in Modeling Preferences: Uncertainty and Ambiguity.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty.5, 325-370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Canning, D. (1997). “Evolution, Preferences, and Choice Under Uncertainty.” Queen's University of Belfast Working Paper.

  • Chew, S.H. and MacCrimmon, K.R. (1979). “Alpha Utility Theory, Lottery Composition and the Allais Paradox.” University of British Columbia Faculty of Commerce and Business Administration #686.

  • Chew, S.H. and Waller, W.S. (1986). “Empirical Tests of Weighted Utility Theory.” Journal of Mathematical Psychology.30, 55-72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciccheti, C. and Dubin, J. (1994). “A Microeconometric Analysis of Risk-Aversion and the Decision to Self-Insure.” Journal of Political Economy.102, 169-186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. and Knetsch, J.L. (1992). “Judicial Choice and Disparities Between Measure of Economic Values.” Osgoode Hall Law Journal.30, 737-792.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, P.J. and Clotfelter, C.T. (1993). “The Peculiar Scale Economies of Lotto.” American Economic Review.83, 634-643.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cubitt, R. and Sugden, R. (in press). “The Selection of Preferences Through Imitation.” Review of Economics Studies.

  • Frisch, D. and Baron, J. (1988). “Ambiguity and Rationality.” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making.1, 149-157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ganguly, A., Kagel, J.H., and Moser, D.V. (1998). “Do Asset Market Prices Reflect Traders' Judgment Biases?” Working Paper, University of Pittsburgh.

  • Ghirardato, P. (1997). “On Independence for Non-Additive Mtasures, with a Fubini Theorem.” Journal of Economic Theory.73, 261-291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilboa, I. and Schmeidler, D. (1995). “Case-Based Decision Theory.” Quarterly Journal of Economics.110, 605-640.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardie, B.G.S., Johnson, E.J., and Fader, P.S. (1993).” Modeling Loss Aversion and Reference Dependence Effects on Brand Choice.” Marketing Science.12, 378-394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harless, D. and Camerer, C.F. (1994). “The Predictive Utility of Generalized Expected Utility Theories.” Econometrica.62, 1251-1290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hey, J.D. and Orme, C. “Investigating Generalizations of Expected Utility Theory Using Experimental Data.” Econometrica.62 (November), 1291-.

  • Jullien, Bruno and Salanié, Bernard. (1997). “Estimating Preferences Under Risk: The Case of Racetrack Bettors.” IDEI and GREMAQ Toulouse University working paper.

  • Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1979). “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk.” Econometrica.47, 263-291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1992). “Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty.5, 297-324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Sarin, R., and Wakker, P.P. (1997). “Back to Bentham? Explorations of Experienced Utility.” Quarterly Journal of Economics.112, 375-406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laibson, D.I. (1996). “A Cue Theory of Consumption.” Harvard University Manuscript.

  • Laibson, D.I. (1997). “Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting.” Quarterly Journal of Economics.112, 443-478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lattimore, P.K., Baker, J.R., and Witte, A.D. (1992). “The Influence of Probability on Risky Choice: A Parametric Investigation.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization.17, 377-400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leland, J. (1991). “A Theory of Approximate Expected Utility Maximization.” Carnegie-Mellon Department of Social and Decision Sciences.

  • Loewenstein, G. (1987). “Anticipation and the Valuation of Delayed Consumption.” Economic Journal.97, 666- 684.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein, G. (1992). “The Fall and Rise of Psychological Explanation in the Economics of Intertemporal Choice.” In G. Loewenstein and J. Elster (eds.), Choice Over Time.New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein, G. (1996). “Out of Control: Visceral Influences on Behavior.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.65, 272-292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein, G. and Schkade, D. (in press). “Wouldn't it be Nice? Predicting Future Feelings.” In E. Diener, D. Kahneman, and N. Schwarz (eds.), Foundations of hedonic psychology: Scientific perspectives on enjoyment and suffering.New York: Russell Sage Foundation Press.

  • Machina, M.J. (1982). “‘Expected Utility’ Analysis Without the Independence Axiom.” Econometrica.50, 277- 323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgenstern, O. (1979). “Some Reflections on Utility Theory.” In M. Allais and O. Hagen (eds.), The Expected Utility Hypothesis and the Allais Paradox.Dordrecht: D. Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myagkov, M. and Plott, C.R. (1997). “Exchange Economies and Loss Exposure: Experiments Exploring Prospect Theory and Competitive Equilibria in Market Environments.” American Economic Review.87, 801-828.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odean, Terrance. (in press). “Are Investors Reluctant to Realize Their Losses?” Journal of Finance.

  • O'Donoghue, T. and Rabin, M. (in press). “Doing it Now, or Later.” American Economic Review.

  • Phelps, E.S. and Pollak, R.A. (1968). “On Second-Best National Saving and Game-Equilibrium Growth.” Review of Economic Studies.35, 201-208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prelec, D. (in press). “The Probability Weighting Function.” Econometrica.

  • Quiggin, J. (1982). “A Theory of Anticipated Utility.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization.3, 323- 343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rabin, M. and Schrag, J. (1997). “Confirmation Bias.” Berkeley Department of Economics Working Paper, University of California (unpublished).

  • Read, D. and Loewenstein, G. (1995). “The Diversification Bias: Explaining the Difference Between Prospective and Real-Time Taste for Variety.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied.1, 34-49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubinstein, A. (1988). “Similarity and Decision-Making Under Risk (Is There a Utility Theory Resolution to the Allais Paradox?).” Journal of Economic Theory.46, 145-153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubinstein, A. (1997). Modeling Bounded Rationality.Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sargent, T.J. (1994). Bounded Rationality in Macroeconomics.New York: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmeidler, D. (1989). “Subjective Probability and Expected Utility Without Additivity.” Econometrica.57, 571- 587.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shea, J. (1995). “Union Contracts and the Life-Cycle/Permanent-Income Hypothesis.” American Economic Review.85, 186-200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shizgal, P. (1997). “Neural Basis of Utility Estimation.” Current Opinion in Neurobiology.7, 198-206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Starmer, C. (in press). “Developments in Non-Expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice Under Risk.” Journal of Economic Literature.

  • Sunstein, C. (1997). “Behavioral Analysis of Law.” University of Chicago Law Review.64, 1175-1189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, R.H. (in press). “Mental Accounting Matters.” In D. Kahneman and A. Tversky (eds.), Choices, Values and Frames.

  • Thaler, R.H. (ed.). (1995). Advances in Behavioral Finance.New York: Russell Sage Foundation Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Neumann, J. and Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of Games and Economic Behavior.Princeton: Princeton University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Weibull, J.W. (1995). Evolutionary Game Theory.Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Humanities and Social Sciences, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, 91125. E-mail

    Colin Camerer

Authors
  1. Colin Camerer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Camerer, C. Bounded Rationality in Individual Decision Making. Experimental Economics 1, 163–183 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009944326196

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009944326196

Keywords

Search

Navigation