IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpceem/hal-02956441.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Neuroeconomics: reliable, scientifically legitimate and useful knowledge for economists?

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Serra

    (CEE-M - Centre d'Economie de l'Environnement - Montpellier - UM - Université de Montpellier - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro - Montpellier SupAgro - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement)

Abstract

Thanks to the joint collaboration of economics, psychology, and neuroscience from the late 1990s, "neuroeconomics" sheds new light on decision-making analysis. As with any emerging discipline, however, neuroeconomics raises many practical and methodological questions resulting in debates and controversies that this article discusses by addressing three major issues concerning the contribution made so far to knowledge: Is it reliable? Is it scientifically legitimate? Is it useful for the economist? Without claiming to be exhaustive, this analytical framework enables understanding of the thrust of the major criticisms of neuroeconomics and at the same time the nature of the likely responses.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Serra, 2020. "Neuroeconomics: reliable, scientifically legitimate and useful knowledge for economists?," CEE-M Working Papers hal-02956441, CEE-M, Universtiy of Montpellier, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpceem:hal-02956441
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02956441
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02956441/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brocas, Isabelle & Carrillo, Juan D., 2014. "Dual-process theories of decision-making: A selective survey," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 45-54.
    2. Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde, 2010. "Is neuroeconomics doomed by the reverse inference fallacy?," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 9(2), pages 229-249, December.
    3. B. Douglas Bernheim, 2009. "On the Potential of Neuroeconomics: A Critical (but Hopeful) Appraisal," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(2), pages 1-41, August.
    4. Colin F. Camerer & George Loewenstein & Drazen Prelec, 2004. "Neuroeconomics: Why Economics Needs Brains," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 106(3), pages 555-579, October.
    5. Colin F. Camerer, 2007. "Neuroeconomics: Using Neuroscience to Make Economic Predictions," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(519), pages 26-42, March.
    6. Camerer, Colin F., 2008. "The Potential Of Neuroeconomics," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(3), pages 369-379, November.
    7. N. Emrah Aydinonat, 2010. "Neuroeconomics: more than inspiration, less than revolution," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 159-169.
    8. Becker, Gary S, 1976. "Altruism, Egoism, and Genetic Fitness: Economics and Sociobiology," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 817-826, September.
    9. Ernst Fehr & Antonio Rangel, 2011. "Neuroeconomic Foundations of Economic Choice--Recent Advances," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(4), pages 3-30, Fall.
    10. Aydogan, Gokhan & Furtner, Nadja C. & Kern, Bianca & Jobst, Andrea & Müller, Norbert & Kocher, Martin G., 2017. "Oxytocin promotes altruistic punishment," Munich Reprints in Economics 49933, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    11. John A Clithero & Dharol Tankersley & Scott A Huettel, 2008. "Foundations of Neuroeconomics: From Philosophy to Practice," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(11), pages 1-6, November.
    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. Daniel Serra, 2019. "La neuroéconomie en question : débats et controverses," CEE-M Working Papers halshs-02160911, CEE-M, Universtiy of Montpellier, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro.
    2. Daniel Serra, 2021. "Decision-making: from neuroscience to neuroeconomics—an overview," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 91(1), pages 1-80, July.
    3. Daniel Serra, 2019. "Neuroeconomics and modern neuroscience," CEE-M Working Papers halshs-02160907, CEE-M, Universtiy of Montpellier, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro.
    4. Alexandre Truc, 2023. "Neuroeconomics: Hype or Hope? An Answer," Post-Print hal-04719266, HAL.
    5. Brocas, Isabelle & Carrillo, Juan D., 2019. "A neuroeconomic theory of (dis) honesty," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 4-12.
    6. Halko, Marja-Liisa & Lappalainen, Olli & Sääksvuori, Lauri, 2021. "Do non-choice data reveal economic preferences? Evidence from biometric data and compensation-scheme choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 87-104.
    7. Cary Frydman & Nicholas Barberis & Colin Camerer & Peter Bossaerts & Antonio Rangel, 2014. "Using Neural Data to Test a Theory of Investor Behavior: An Application to Realization Utility," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 69(2), pages 907-946, April.
    8. Nicolas Brisset & Dorian Jullien, 2019. "Models as Speech Acts: A Restatement and a new Case Study," GREDEG Working Papers 2019-09, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    9. Alvino, Letizia & Constantinides, Efthymios & Franco, Massimo, 2018. "Towards a better understanding of consumer behavior : Marginal utility as a parameter in neuromarketing research," Other publications TiSEM b3e61951-9032-4cb4-b075-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Letizia Alvino & Efthymios Constantinides & Massimo Franco, 2018. "Towards a Better Understanding of Consumer Behavior: Marginal Utility as a Parameter in Neuromarketing Research," International Journal of Marketing Studies, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(1), pages 90-106, March.
    11. Ryan Webb & Paul W. Glimcher & Kenway Louie, 2021. "The Normalization of Consumer Valuations: Context-Dependent Preferences from Neurobiological Constraints," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(1), pages 93-125, January.
    12. Mohr, Peter N. C. & Heekeren, Hauke R., 2012. "The aging investor: Insights from neuroeconomics," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2012-038, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    13. Beugré, Constant D., 2009. "Exploring the neural basis of fairness: A model of neuro-organizational justice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 110(2), pages 129-139, November.
    14. Ardalan, Kavous, 2018. "Neurofinance versus the efficient markets hypothesis," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 170-176.
    15. B. Douglas Bernheim, 2009. "On the Potential of Neuroeconomics: A Critical (but Hopeful) Appraisal," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(2), pages 1-41, August.
    16. Massimiliano Affinito & Ludovica Galotto & Francesco Privitera, 2024. "The case for mindful customer protection: a review and some thoughts on neuroeconomics and neurofinance," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 888, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    17. Borawska Anna, 2017. "Cognitive Neuroscience Tools in Economic Experiments Investigating the Decision Making Process," Folia Oeconomica Stetinensia, Sciendo, vol. 17(1), pages 159-169, June.
    18. Baddeley, M. & Burke, C. & Schultz, W. & Tobler, P., 2012. "Herding in Financial Behaviour: A Behavioural and Neuroeconomic Analysis of Individual Differences," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1225, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    19. Henrik Cronqvist & Florian Münkel & Stephan Siegel, 2014. "Genetics, Homeownership, and Home Location Choice," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 79-111, January.
    20. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2012-038 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Constant D. Beugré, 2010. "Brain and Human Behavior in Organizations: A Field of Neuro-Organizational Behavior," Chapters, in: Angela A. Stanton & Mellani Day & Isabell M. Welpe (ed.), Neuroeconomics and the Firm, chapter 15, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    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:hal:wpceem:hal-02956441. 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: Laurent Garnier (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lamplfr.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.