Publication: Bireysel iktisadi kararların nöroekonomik çerçevesi : deneysel araştırma örneklerinin değerlendirilmesi
Abstract
İktisat biliminin bütün dönemlerinde bireylerin karar ve davranışları önemli bir konu olmuştur. Yerleşik iktisat, rasyonel insan olarak tanımladığı homoeconomicus modelini, bireysel ve ekonomik kararlar alınırken, duygulardan ve diğer dış faktörlerden etkilenmeyen bir nevi makine insan olarak tanımlamıştır. Ancak rasyonel insan varsayımının bireylerin gerçek yapısına uyumu, iktisat dünyasında birçok tartışmaya neden olmuştur. Buradan hareketle davranışsal iktisadın, analizlere psikolojiyi dahil etmesiyle birlikte yerleşik iktisadın rasyonel insanına olan güven zayıflamış, nöroekonomi ile birlikte homoeconomicusun duygusal yönü, karar ve davranışların yöneticisi olan beyin ve beynin çalışma prensipleri ile bağdaştırılarak açıklanmaya çalışılmıştır.Bu çalışmada, yerleşik iktisat varsayım ve teorileri sorgulanmış, davranışsal iktisat, deneysel iktisat ve son olarak nöroekonomi kapsamında bireylerin davranış ve kararları deneysel araştırma örnekleriyle incelenmiştir. Bireylerin basite indirgenemeyecek kadar komplike bir yapıda olması ve karar mekanizması olan beynin bireylerin çoğu zaman kontrol edemediği yönlendirmeler yapması, bireylerin karar ve davranışlarının sınırlı rasyonalite varsayımı çerçevesinde incelenmesini gerekli kılmıştır.
The decisions and behaviors of individuals have been an important issue in all periods of economic science. Established economics has defined the homoeconomicus model, which it defines as rational human, as a kind of machine human being who is not affected by emotions and other external factors when making individual and economic decisions. However, the compatibility of rational human assumption with the true structure of individuals has caused a lot of controversy in the economic world. From this point of view, the trust in the rational person of the established economic system has weakened with the introduction of psychology in the analysis of behavioral economicity, and the emotional direction of the homoeconomics along with neuroeconomics has been tried to be explained in connection with the working principles of the brain and brain, which are the managers of decisions and behaviors. In this study, established economic assumptions and theories were questioned, behavioral economics, experimental economics and finally the behavior and decisions of individuals within the scope of neuroeconomics were examined with experimental research examples. The inability of individuals to be too complete to be simplistic and the Decision-making mechanism of the brain, which individuals often cannot control, required the examination of individuals'decisions and behaviors within the framework of the assumption of limited rationality.
The decisions and behaviors of individuals have been an important issue in all periods of economic science. Established economics has defined the homoeconomicus model, which it defines as rational human, as a kind of machine human being who is not affected by emotions and other external factors when making individual and economic decisions. However, the compatibility of rational human assumption with the true structure of individuals has caused a lot of controversy in the economic world. From this point of view, the trust in the rational person of the established economic system has weakened with the introduction of psychology in the analysis of behavioral economicity, and the emotional direction of the homoeconomics along with neuroeconomics has been tried to be explained in connection with the working principles of the brain and brain, which are the managers of decisions and behaviors. In this study, established economic assumptions and theories were questioned, behavioral economics, experimental economics and finally the behavior and decisions of individuals within the scope of neuroeconomics were examined with experimental research examples. The inability of individuals to be too complete to be simplistic and the Decision-making mechanism of the brain, which individuals often cannot control, required the examination of individuals'decisions and behaviors within the framework of the assumption of limited rationality.
