IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/col/000129/003802.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

¿El consenso sobre la racionalidad económica?

Author

Listed:
  • Natalia Gonzalez Gómez.

Abstract

Este artículo examina la robustez que sostiene el núcleo teórico ortodoxo, más específicamente, los supuestos de información y racionalidad perfectas. Se hace alusión a un modelo de toma de decisiones bajo racionalidad acotada y perfecta información como alternativa teórica.

Suggested Citation

  • Natalia Gonzalez Gómez., 2000. "¿El consenso sobre la racionalidad económica?," Estudios Gerenciales, Universidad Icesi, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:col:000129:003802
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dspace.icesi.edu.co/dspace/bitstream/item/248/1/ngonzalez_consenso-racionalidad.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Smith, Vernon L, 1989. "Theory, Experiment and Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 151-169, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wilfred Amaldoss & Richard Staelin, 2010. "Cross-Function and Same-Function Alliances: How Does Alliance Structure Affect the Behavior of Partnering Firms?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(2), pages 302-317, February.
    2. Starmer, Chris, 1999. "Experimental Economics: Hard Science or Wasteful Tinkering?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(453), pages 5-15, February.
    3. Chian Jones Ritten & Christopher Bastian & Owen Phillips, 2021. "The relative effectiveness of law enforcement policies aimed at reducing illegal trade: Evidence from laboratory markets," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(11), pages 1-20, November.
    4. Buda, Rodolphe, 1999. "Market Exchange Modelling Experiment, Simulation Algorithms, and Theoretical Analysis," MPRA Paper 4196, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2000.
    5. Morten Søberg, 2002. "The Duhem-Quine thesis and experimental economics. A reinterpretation," Discussion Papers 329, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    6. Claudia M. Landeo & Kathryn E. Spier, 2009. "Naked Exclusion: An Experimental Study of Contracts with Externalities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1850-1877, December.
    7. Schnizler, Björn & Neumann, Dirk & Veit, Daniel & Napoletano, Mauro & Catalano, Michele & Gallegati, Mauro & Reinicke, Michael & Streitberger, Werner & Eymann, Torsten, 2005. "Environmental analysis for application layer networks," Bayreuth Reports on Information Systems Management 1, University of Bayreuth, Chair of Information Systems Management.
    8. Herbert Simon, 2000. "Bounded rationality in social science: Today and tomorrow," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 1(1), pages 25-39, March.
    9. Ashok Chakravarti, 2012. "Institutions, Economic Performance and the Visible Hand," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14751.
    10. Buda, Rodolphe, 1999. "Quantitative Economic Modeling vs Methodological Individualism ?," MPRA Paper 4004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano, 2021. "Microfoundations, behaviour, and evolution: Evidence from experiments," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 372-385.
    12. Szabó, Katalin, 2003. "Kornai János születésnapjára [For János Kornai’s birthday]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 1-5.
    13. De Figueiredo, John M. & De Figueiredo, Rui J. P. Jr., 2002. "Managerial Decision-Making in Non-Market Environments: A Survey Experiment," Working papers 4246-02, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    14. Engel, Christoph & Weber, Elke U., 2007. "The impact of institutions on the decision how to decide," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(3), pages 323-349, December.
    15. Lata Gangadharan & Tarun Jain & Pushkar Maitra & Joe Vecci, 2022. "Lab-in-the-field experiments: perspectives from research on gender," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 73(1), pages 31-59, January.
    16. Angelino Viceisza, 2007. "An experimental inquiry into the effect of yardstick competition on corruption," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2007-09, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    17. Yuecheng Yu & Alexander Pelaez & Karl R. Lang, 2016. "Designing and evaluating business process models: an experimental approach," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 767-789, November.
    18. Guilhem Lecouteux, 2013. "Reconciling behavioural and neoclassical economics," Working Papers hal-00819763, HAL.
    19. Friedman, Daniel & Habib, Sameh & James, Duncan & Crockett, Sean, 2018. "Varieties of risk elicitation," Discussion Papers, Research Professorship Market Design: Theory and Pragmatics SP II 2018-501, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    20. Guth, Werner & Muller, Wieland & Spiegel, Yossi, 2006. "Noisy leadership: An experimental approach," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 37-62, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Problemas cognitivos; Incertidumbre; modelos determinísticosy estocásticos.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:col:000129:003802. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Coordinador ICESI (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fciceco.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.