Why we should use animals to study economic decision making - a perspective

Tobias Kalenscher, Marijn van Wingerden

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

Despite the rich tradition in psychology and biology, animals as research subjects have never gained a similar acceptance in microeconomics research. With this article, we counter this trend of negligence and try to convey the message that animal models are an indispensible complement to the literature on human economic decision making. This perspective review departs from a description of the similarities in economic and evolutionary theories of human and animal decision making, with particular emphasis on the optimality aspect that both classes of theories have in common. In a second part, we outline that actual, empirically observed decisions often do not conform to the normative ideals of economic and ecological models, and that many of the behavioral violations found in humans can also be found in animals. In a third part, we make a case that the sense or nonsense of the behavioral violations of optimality principles in humans can best be understood from an evolutionary perspective, thus requiring animal research. Finally, we conclude with a critical discussion of the parallels and inherent differences in human and animal research.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)82
JournalFrontiers in Neuroscience
Volume5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Research Subjects
Economic Models
Malpractice

Cite this

@article{fb2e5530c3434187a2ee08577d927cfa,
title = "Why we should use animals to study economic decision making - a perspective",
abstract = "Despite the rich tradition in psychology and biology, animals as research subjects have never gained a similar acceptance in microeconomics research. With this article, we counter this trend of negligence and try to convey the message that animal models are an indispensible complement to the literature on human economic decision making. This perspective review departs from a description of the similarities in economic and evolutionary theories of human and animal decision making, with particular emphasis on the optimality aspect that both classes of theories have in common. In a second part, we outline that actual, empirically observed decisions often do not conform to the normative ideals of economic and ecological models, and that many of the behavioral violations found in humans can also be found in animals. In a third part, we make a case that the sense or nonsense of the behavioral violations of optimality principles in humans can best be understood from an evolutionary perspective, thus requiring animal research. Finally, we conclude with a critical discussion of the parallels and inherent differences in human and animal research.",
author = "Tobias Kalenscher and {van Wingerden}, Marijn",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.3389/fnins.2011.00082",
language = "English",
volume = "5",
pages = "82",
journal = "Frontiers in Neuroscience",
issn = "1662-453X",
publisher = "Frontiers Media S.A.",

}

Why we should use animals to study economic decision making - a perspective. / Kalenscher, Tobias; van Wingerden, Marijn.

In: Frontiers in Neuroscience, Vol. 5, 2011, p. 82.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Why we should use animals to study economic decision making - a perspective

AU - Kalenscher, Tobias

AU - van Wingerden, Marijn

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - Despite the rich tradition in psychology and biology, animals as research subjects have never gained a similar acceptance in microeconomics research. With this article, we counter this trend of negligence and try to convey the message that animal models are an indispensible complement to the literature on human economic decision making. This perspective review departs from a description of the similarities in economic and evolutionary theories of human and animal decision making, with particular emphasis on the optimality aspect that both classes of theories have in common. In a second part, we outline that actual, empirically observed decisions often do not conform to the normative ideals of economic and ecological models, and that many of the behavioral violations found in humans can also be found in animals. In a third part, we make a case that the sense or nonsense of the behavioral violations of optimality principles in humans can best be understood from an evolutionary perspective, thus requiring animal research. Finally, we conclude with a critical discussion of the parallels and inherent differences in human and animal research.

AB - Despite the rich tradition in psychology and biology, animals as research subjects have never gained a similar acceptance in microeconomics research. With this article, we counter this trend of negligence and try to convey the message that animal models are an indispensible complement to the literature on human economic decision making. This perspective review departs from a description of the similarities in economic and evolutionary theories of human and animal decision making, with particular emphasis on the optimality aspect that both classes of theories have in common. In a second part, we outline that actual, empirically observed decisions often do not conform to the normative ideals of economic and ecological models, and that many of the behavioral violations found in humans can also be found in animals. In a third part, we make a case that the sense or nonsense of the behavioral violations of optimality principles in humans can best be understood from an evolutionary perspective, thus requiring animal research. Finally, we conclude with a critical discussion of the parallels and inherent differences in human and animal research.

U2 - 10.3389/fnins.2011.00082

DO - 10.3389/fnins.2011.00082

M3 - Article

C2 - 21731558

VL - 5

SP - 82

JO - Frontiers in Neuroscience

JF - Frontiers in Neuroscience

SN - 1662-453X

ER -