Talk:Behavioral economics

Latest comment: 1 year ago by Rosewater238 in topic History and Awards
Former good articleBehavioral economics was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 1, 2004Featured article candidateNot promoted
December 18, 2005Good article nomineeListed
May 10, 2007Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article


Nic for econ (talk) 13:20, 1 November 2020 (UTC)Hi all, I'm a student editor. I just made some changes and added some more on heuristics. I felt some of the information in behavioural finance wasn't as relevant to behavioural economics and condensed it down. The information in this article is well referenced and accurate but in parts doesn't read with total clarity so that was the focus of my edits :))Reply

'Failed' FAC edit

Well, this failed the FAC because no one really seemed to comment on it. I'll re-nominate it when I have addressed to some extent the only somewhat valid criticism - many of the sub-pages are incomplete. From the FAC page:

Partial self-nom - I added to pgreenfinch's original behavioural finance page. I think it's a good and well referenced article on a fairly interesting subset of finance/economics. But I might be biased :) Psychobabble

  • Support - yeh its interesting AlbinoMonkey 12:38, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Object for now. Wiki needs definetly much more work on economic subjects and I am happy to see activity in this field, but this article is far from ready from featured status. Did you notice there are two 'Criticisms' sections?? I fixed various minor problems, but this needs more interlinks and expansion, especially where there are lists like 'Behavioral economics topics' or 'Key Figures'. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 20:16, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The outline of the article is split between behavioral finance and behavioral economics, the two criticism sections are specific to each of those sub-sections. I realise more needs to be done in the sub-topics, I wasn't sure if that was a criterion for having the main page (which is a broad outline of the field) featured. A lot of that stuff I'll fill in when I finish exams. Psychobabble
  • Comment on the picture: The only picture is a picture of Daniel Kahneman. The picture had no source/license information, but I've added a probable source and assumed the picture is fair use. Because of that I don't think we should use the picture in the article -- unless I'm mistaken about the license -- because I don't think we should use it as fair use outside Daniel Kahneman. ✏ Sverdrup 23:17, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I don't know much about this sort of stuff. I assumed if it was OK for the Kahnenman wikipedia articke, it was OK for this one.Psychobabble

I've gone and made a seperate page for Behavioural economics - I'm an Aussie so I spell the word with a U and didn't realise a redirect had been set up from behavoral economics to here. If people who know about this stuff can go look at the page I made and give some opinions as to whether we should merge the info on these two pages that'd be greatly appreciated. Finance and economics are obviously different fields, but the two movements are fairly closely related so it might be worth merging. I'd just like a 2nd opinion before doing so :)

Psychobabble


EoT: it seemed to me that the "See also law and economics" didnt belong on the graph with criticisms. Feel free to try it someplace else.


BF/BE is one of my pet fields, as you might see in my user's page. Imo, you made a very good job in your behavioural economics page. What is true is that BE and BF are studying more or less the same cognitive and emotional, individual and collective phenomena. But the anomalies that those biases create are a bit different if they take place in financial assets or in goods and services.

Thus the two texts would enrich each other, I think, if merged, with a common section about the human biases at play, and separate sections about the applications in finance and in economics. Btw, I think those biases and anomalies are found not only in markets, but also in public choice.

I suggest that the first of us who find the time to make this combination just do it, or at least start it, but I see no hurry as I think it would need a careful job to make something consistent and comprehensive for the readers.

Btw, not being an English speaker, I have no preference about how to spell behavio(u)ral), even if I use the American spelling that I found more common in the web. Funny thing from a froggy, isn'it ? ;-)--Pgreenfinch 15:35, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

  • Ok, i've got some down time at work, I'm going to make a start on a merger. Thanks for your input. Psychobabble
    • Done. I copied the history section from the other page almost wholesale, expanded the methodology section and created seperate topics/criticisms sections for finance and economics. I added some stuff in the finance section on the equity premium puzzle cause I've looked at it a bit. I'd appreciate feedback :) Psychobabble

Satisfice edit

Editing "behavioral economics":

2nd paragraph of the "History" section - original sentence: "...reference should be made to the theory of Bounded Rationality by Nobel Laureate Herbert Simon who explained how people irrationally tend to be satisfied, instead of maximizing utility, as generally assumed."

the phrase "tend to be satisfied" is incorrect; it should be "tend to satisfice". The word "satisfice" was specifically coined by Herbert Simon to describe a type of quasi-optimizing behavior, in contrast to "utility maximizing". This is, it is a new technical term, not an ordinary English word.

What Nobel prizes? edit

This science area is not for any kind of a Nobel right now? --Bgeditor12234234 (talk) 12:45, 9 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Wiki Education assignment: Public Writing Fall 2022 E1 edit

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 September 2022 and 12 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rosewater238 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Jcwhrda, NameOtherThanReal, MeltingIce34, Gochicago091899.

— Assignment last updated by NameOtherThanReal (talk) 18:28, 6 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

History and Awards edit

Some parts of History were difficult to verify, and some were found to be paraphrases of source. I edited and added to History, attempted to make it more verifiable with sources and more exhaustive.

Reformatted Nobel Prize section into "Honors and Awards", added sub-sub headings for clarity, included more awards other than Nobel prizes. Rosewater238 (talk) 15:17, 8 October 2022 (UTC)Reply