Biology & Philosophy

, Volume 26, Issue 5, pp 617–635 | Cite as

On the neural enrichment of economic models: tractability, trade-offs and multiple levels of description

Article

Abstract

In the recent literature at the interface between economics, biology and neuroscience, several authors argue that by adopting an interdisciplinary approach to the analysis of decision making, economists will be able to construct predictively and explanatorily superior models. However, most economists remain quite reluctant to import biological or neural insights into their account of choice behaviour. In this paper, I reconstruct and critique one of the main arguments by means of which economists attempt to vindicate their conservative position. Furthermore, I develop an alternative defense of the thesis that economists justifiably rely on a methodologically distinctive approach to the modelling of choice behaviour.

Keywords

Economic models Tractability Neuroeconomics Economic theory of choice Economic methodology 

References

  1. Anderson ML (2006) Evidence for massive redeployment of brain areas in cognitive function. Proc Cogn Sci Soc 28:24–29Google Scholar
  2. Anderson ML (2007) The massive redeployment hypothesis and the functional topography of the brain. Philos Psychol 21(2):143–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aydinonat NE (2010) Neuroeconomics: more than inspiration, less than revolution. J Econ Methodol 17(2):159–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barraza JA, Zak PJ (2009) Empathy toward strangers triggers oxytocin release and subsequent generosity. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1167:182–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Benhabib J, Bisin A (2008) Choice and process: theory ahead of measurement. In: Caplin A, Schotter A (eds) The foundations of positive and normative economics. A handbook, pp 320–335Google Scholar
  6. Bernheim BD (2009) On the potential of neuroeconomics: a critical (but hopeful) appraisal. Am Econ J Microecon 1(2):1–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cabeza R, Nyberg L (2000) Imaging cognition II: an empirical review of 275 PET and fMRI studies. J Cogn Neurosci 12:1–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Camerer CF (2008a) The case for mindful economics. In: Caplin A, Schotter A (eds) The foundations of positive and normative economics. a handbook, pp 43–69Google Scholar
  9. Camerer CF (2008b) The potential of neuroeconomics. Econ Philos 24:369–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Camerer CF, Loewenstein G (2004) Behavioral economics: past, present, future. Advances in behavioral economics. Princeton University Press, New York, pp 3–51Google Scholar
  11. Camerer CF, Loewenstein G, Prelec D (2004) Neuroeconomics: why economics needs brains. Scand J Econ 106(3):555–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Camerer CF, Loewenstein G, Prelec D (2005) Neuroeconomics: how neuroscience can inform economics. J Econ Lit 43(1):9–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cartwight N (1983) How the laws of physics lie. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cartwight N (1994) Nature’s capacities and their measurements. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Craver CF, Alexandrova A (2008) No revolution necessary: neural mechanisms for economics. Econ Philos 24:381–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fumagalli R (2010) The disunity of neuroeconomics: a methodological appraisal. J Econ Methodol 17(2):119–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gabaix X, Laibson D (2008) The seven properties of good models. In: Caplin A, Schotter A (eds) The foundations of positive and normative economics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 292–299Google Scholar
  18. Gibbard A, Varian HR (1978) Economic models. J Philos 75(11):664–677Google Scholar
  19. Glimcher PW, Dorris MC, Bayer HM (2005) Physiological utility theory and the neuroeconomics of choice. Games Econ Behav 52:213–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gul F, Pesendorfer W (2008) The case for mindless economics. In: Caplin A, Schotter A (eds) The foundations of positive and normative economics. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 1–40Google Scholar
  21. Guth W, Schmittberger R, Schwarze B (1982) An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. J Econ Behav Organ 3(4):367–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Harless DW, Camerer CF (1994) The predictive utility of generalized expected utility theories. Econometrica 62:1251–1289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Harrison G (2008a) Neuroeconomics: a critical reconsideration. Econ Philos 24:303–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Harrison G (2008b) Neuroeconomics: rejoinder. Econ Philos 24:533–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Harrison G, Ross D (2010) The methodologies of neuroeconomics. J Econ Methodol 17(2):185–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hindriks FA (2005) Unobservability, tractability and the battle of assumptions. J Econ Methodol 12(3):383–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hindriks FA (2006) Tractability assumptions and the Musgrave-Mäki typology. J Econ Methodol 13(4):401–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Houser D, Schunk D, Xiao E (2007) Combining brain and behavioral data to improve econometric policy analysis. Anal Kritik 29:86–96Google Scholar
  29. Jones RM (2005) Idealization and abstraction: a framework. In: Jones MR, Cartwright N (eds) Idealization XII: correcting the model. idealization and abstraction in the sciences. Rodopi, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  30. Kahneman D (2003) A psychological perspective on economics. Am Econ Rev 93(2):162–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Knutson B, Rick GS, Wimmer E, Prelec D, Loewenstein G (2007) Neural predictors of purchases. Neuron 53:147–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kosfeld M, Heinrichs M, Zak PJ, Fischbacher U, Fehr E (2005) Oxytocin increases trust in humans. Nature 435:673–676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kuorikoski J, Ylikoski P (2010) Explanatory relevance across disciplinary boundaries: the case of neuroeconomics. J Econ Methodol 17(2):219–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Landreth A, Bickle J (2008) Neuroeconomics, neurophysiology and the common currency hypothesis. Econ Philos 24:419–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Levins R (1966) The strategy of model building in population biology. In: Sober E (ed) Conceptual issues in evolutionary biology, 4th edn. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 18–27Google Scholar
  36. Levins R (1968) Evolution in changing environments. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  37. Loewenstein G, Rick S, Cohen JD (2008) Neuroeconomics. Annu Rev Psychol 59:647–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mäki U (1988) On the problem of realism in Economics. Fundamenta Scientiae 9:353–373Google Scholar
  39. Mäki U (1990) Friedman and realism. Res Hist Econ Thought Methodol 10:171–198Google Scholar
  40. Mäki U (1992) On the method of isolation in economics. In: Dilworth C (ed) Intelligibility in science IV. Rodophi, Amsterdam, pp 317–351Google Scholar
  41. Mäki U (1996) Two portraits of economics. J Econ Methodol 3(1):1–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mäki U (2010) When economics meets neuroscience: hype and hope. J Econ Methodol 17(2):107–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Matthewson J, Weisberg M (2009) The structure of tradeoffs in model building. Synthese 170:169–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. May RM (2001) Stability and complexity in model ecosystems. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  45. McCabe K (2008) Neuroeconomics and the economic sciences. Econ Philos 24:345–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. McMullin E (1985) Galilean idealization. Stud Hist Philos Sci XVI:247–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Morgan M, Morrison M (eds) (1999) Models as mediators. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  48. Moscati I (2006) Epistemic virtues and theory choice in economics. London School of Economics-Centre for Philosophy of Natural and Social Science, discussion paper 79/06Google Scholar
  49. Nobel Press Release (2002) Psychological and experimental economics. Daniel Kahneman and Vernon Smith. http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2002/press.html
  50. Nowak L (1972) Laws of science, theories, measurement. Philos Sci XXXIX:533–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Odenbaugh J (2003) Complex systems, trade-offs and mathematical modeling: a response to Sober and Orzack. Philos Sci LXX:1496–1507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ortmann A (2008) Prospecting neuroeconomics. Econ Philos 24:431–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Orzack SH (2005) What, if anything, is ‘The strategy of model building in population biology’? A comment on Levins (1966) and Odenbaugh (2003). Philos Sci 72:479–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Orzack SH, Sober E (1993) A critical assessment of Levins’s ‘The strategy of model building in population biology’ (1966). Q Rev Biol 68(4):533–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Park JW, Zak PJ (2007) Neuroeconomic studies. Anal Kritik 29:47–59Google Scholar
  56. Price CJ, Friston KJ (2005) Functional ontologies for cognition: the systematic definition of structure and function. Cogn Neuropsychol (3&4):262–275Google Scholar
  57. Putnam H (1975) Philosophy and our mental life. In: Beakley B, Ludlow P (eds) The philosophy of mind, Ch. 13. The MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 91–99Google Scholar
  58. Rabin M (1998) Psychology and economics. J Econ Lit 36(1):11–46Google Scholar
  59. Ross D (2008) Two styles of neuroeconomics. Econ Philos 24:473–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Roughgarden J (1979) Theory of population genetics and evolutionary ecology: an introduction. Macmillan Publishing Co, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  61. Rubinstein A (2008) Comments on neuroeconomics. Econ Philos 24:485–494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Rustichini A (2003) Brain experts now follow the money. Interview by Sandra Blakeslee, New York Times, June 17, 2003Google Scholar
  63. Rustichini A (2005) Neuroeconomics: present and future. Games Econ Behav 52:201–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Schotter A (2008) What’s so informative about choice? In: Caplin A, Schotter A (eds) The foundations of positive and normative economics: a handbook, Ch. 3. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 70–94Google Scholar
  65. Schultz W (1998) Predictive reward signal of dopamine neurons. J Neurophysiol 80:1–27Google Scholar
  66. Schultz W, Dayan P, Montague PR (1997) A neural substrate of prediction and reward. Science 275:1593–1599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Starmer C (2000) Developments in nonexpected utility theory: the hunt for a descriptive theory of choice under risk. J Econ Lit 38:332–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sugden R (2000) Credible worlds: the status of theoretical models in economics. J Econ Methodol 7(1):1–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Vercoe M, Zak PJ (2010) Inductive modeling using causal studies in neuroeconomics: brains on drugs. J Econ Methodol 17(2):133–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Vul E, Harris C, Winkielman P, Pashler H (2009) Puzzlingly high correlations in fMRI studies of emotion, personality, and social cognition. Perspect Psychol Sci 4(3):274–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Weisberg M (2004) Qualitative theory and chemical explanation. Philos Sci 71:1071–1081CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Weisberg M (2007a) Three kinds of idealization. J Philos 104(12):639–659. Available at: http://www.phil.upenn.edu/%7Eweisberg/documents/threekindsfinal.pdf Google Scholar
  73. Weisberg M (2007b) Who is a modeler? Br J Philos Sci 58:207–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Wimsatt W (1987) False models as a means to truer theories. In: Nitecki M, Hoffmann A (eds) Neutral models in biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 23–55Google Scholar
  75. Zak PJ (2004) Neuroeconomics. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 359:1737–1748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Zak PJ, Kurzban R, Matzner WT (2004) The neurobiology of trust. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1032:224–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy, Logic and Scientific MethodLondon School of EconomicsLondonUK

Personalised recommendations