Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 1 – uploaded by Georgios Dimitropoulos

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
anchoring, representativeness, and present-bias, exploring how these influence decision-making. LYPIVALLY stdlls Wil dil HMITLOGULULLOT AUUOUL CUUDOUHY THIStOLyY ala KRUy COMUOPs UL Uldssitdl dh HEOrUldssltdl economics. It presents the traditional (normative) economic models of decision-making, then transitions into descriptive behavioral models that are better able to predict how individuals make judgements, decisions, and choices. Students learn about Kahneman and Tversky’s seminal work on prospect theory (1979, 1992) along with other theories of decisions under risk and uncertainty; anomalies in inter-temporal choice and time discounting (e.g. hyperbolic and quasi-hyperbolic discounting), and mental accounting (Thaler, 1985). Class discussions cover dual system thinking in addition to a number of heuristics and biases such as loss aversion, anchoring, representativeness, and present-bias, exploring how these influence decision-making.

Table 1 anchoring, representativeness, and present-bias, exploring how these influence decision-making. LYPIVALLY stdlls Wil dil HMITLOGULULLOT AUUOUL CUUDOUHY THIStOLyY ala KRUy COMUOPs UL Uldssitdl dh HEOrUldssltdl economics. It presents the traditional (normative) economic models of decision-making, then transitions into descriptive behavioral models that are better able to predict how individuals make judgements, decisions, and choices. Students learn about Kahneman and Tversky’s seminal work on prospect theory (1979, 1992) along with other theories of decisions under risk and uncertainty; anomalies in inter-temporal choice and time discounting (e.g. hyperbolic and quasi-hyperbolic discounting), and mental accounting (Thaler, 1985). Class discussions cover dual system thinking in addition to a number of heuristics and biases such as loss aversion, anchoring, representativeness, and present-bias, exploring how these influence decision-making.

Related Figures (4)

Instructors expose students to well-known lab and field experiments that demonstrate how psychological mechanisms may influence behavior and violate the concept of economic rationality. For example, to illustrate the anchoring effect, instructors replicate the study conducted by Strack & Mussweiler (1997) in which different groups of participants were exposed to low and high anchors, and then asked to guess Mahatma Gandhi’s age when he died. Results from two of the university courses are shown in Table 2.
Instructors expose students to well-known lab and field experiments that demonstrate how psychological mechanisms may influence behavior and violate the concept of economic rationality. For example, to illustrate the anchoring effect, instructors replicate the study conducted by Strack & Mussweiler (1997) in which different groups of participants were exposed to low and high anchors, and then asked to guess Mahatma Gandhi’s age when he died. Results from two of the university courses are shown in Table 2.
Exercises in two universities Effect | Summary of Anchoring | TABLE 2.
Exercises in two universities Effect | Summary of Anchoring | TABLE 2.
Lessons Learned uring practical “lab” sessions, students work in groups to design, implement and evaluate their own field xperiment. Typically, instructors divide students into three to five groups depending on class size (ideally 15 0 20 students), with one member of the local behavioral insights’ unit serving as a coach or mentor roup. Students learn to engage with stakeholders, develop a behavioral map of the underlying c lesign an intervention and an appropriate impact evaluation method, implement the intervention, co nd analyze findings of the intervention. The timeline and milestones for designing, implemen for each hallenge. lect date ing, and valuating the field experiments are developed according to B4Development and Nudge Lebanon’s IDIAS nethodology (See Figure 1 for more details). At the end of the course, students compile their resu inal research paper and present to their peers and faculty members. ts into a final research paper and present to their peers and faculty members. important issues universities should keep in mind when replicating similar courses.
Lessons Learned uring practical “lab” sessions, students work in groups to design, implement and evaluate their own field xperiment. Typically, instructors divide students into three to five groups depending on class size (ideally 15 0 20 students), with one member of the local behavioral insights’ unit serving as a coach or mentor roup. Students learn to engage with stakeholders, develop a behavioral map of the underlying c lesign an intervention and an appropriate impact evaluation method, implement the intervention, co nd analyze findings of the intervention. The timeline and milestones for designing, implemen for each hallenge. lect date ing, and valuating the field experiments are developed according to B4Development and Nudge Lebanon’s IDIAS nethodology (See Figure 1 for more details). At the end of the course, students compile their resu inal research paper and present to their peers and faculty members. ts into a final research paper and present to their peers and faculty members. important issues universities should keep in mind when replicating similar courses.
Related topics:
Experiential Education
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved