|
on Cognitive and Behavioural Economics |
|
Issue of 2026–03–23
five papers chosen by Marco Novarese, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale |
| By: | Conti, Alice; Di Matteo, Fabio Lokwani; Candeloro, Giulia; Lancisi, Lorenzo; Sacco, Pier Luigi |
| Abstract: | Most economic models of decision-making assume that individuals maintain comprehensive mental representations of possible world states and compute expected utilities across these representations. The cognitive demands of such exhaustive state-space evaluation appear difficult to reconcile with known constraints on working memory, attention, and neural computation, motivating alternative accounts of how humans navigate complex choice environments. This review examines the hypothesis that neural systems supporting narrative processing contribute substantially to real-world decision-making. We synthesize evidence from three converging lines of research: hierarchical temporal processing in the cortex, the integrative functions of the default mode network, and inter-brain synchronization during naturalistic communication. We acknowledge the ongoing debates about the interpretation of these findings, but we argue that the neural architecture supporting narrative comprehension and generation offers cognitive efficiency advantages relevant to decision-making, including dimensionality reduction through causal structuring, integration of emotional and contextual information, and facilitation of social coordination through shared mental models. Rather than claiming that narrative processing constitutes the exclusive mechanism for decision-making, we propose that it represents one important component of a broader cognitive toolkit that also includes heuristic strategies, model-based planning, and habitual responses. We examine how this perspective relates to phenomena in cognitive economics, including context-dependent preferences, framing effects, and the propagation of economic beliefs through populations. By integrating findings from cognitive neuroscience with decision science, we aim to contribute toward a more biologically informed understanding of human choice behavior and identify key questions for future empirical investigation. |
| Date: | 2026–02–28 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:socarx:zxcvg_v1 |
| By: | Theresa Huebsch (University of Bonn); Robert Mahlstedt (Department of Economics, University of Copenhagen); Pia Pinger (University of Cologne); Sonja Settele (University of Cologne); Helene Willadsen (National Research Centre for the Working Environment) |
| Abstract: | Using surveys with Danish students transitioning to secondary education, we study mental models of how gender and parental education shape academic performance. Students hold heterogeneous beliefs about performance gaps by gender and parental background, which appear to be shaped by within-family transmission and broader social environments. Open-text responses reveal that respondents link strong performance by girls and less socioeconomically privileged students to effort, while attributing privileged students success to external advantages. Mental models matter: beliefs about performance gaps predict enrollment in upper secondary education by gender and parental education and causally affect students’ self-assessments, intended effort, and educational aspirations, as shown in an information experiment with girls. We highlight two mechanisms: updating about the returns to effort and about gender-specific effort costs in response to observed gender performance gaps. Our findings advance the understanding of education choices and shed light on the determinants and effects of mental models in a high-stakes setting. |
| Keywords: | Beliefs, Education, Inequality |
| JEL: | D83 D84 I24 |
| Date: | 2026–03–20 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:kud:kucebi:2603 |
| By: | Vitellozzi, Sveva; Savadori, Lucia; Davis, Kristin E.; Azzarri, Carlo; Kinuthia, Dickson; Ronzani, Piero |
| Abstract: | In several countries and settings, especially in low- and middle-income countries, men are expected to act as primary economic providers for their households, bearing the psychological and social burdens associated with this role. Despite its potential consequences, the effects of the breadwinner role on economic decision-making are understudied, particularly among poor households. This study investigates how gendered breadwinner expectations shape economic behavior in rural Kenya. Using a lab-in-the-field experiment among 400 smallholder farmers in Vihiga County, we test how psychological and social pressures associated with being the breadwinner of the family influence decision-making in both individual work choices and collective decisions. Participants completed a real-effort task choosing either a high-effort, high-reward option or a low-effort, low-reward alternative, followed by a public goods game framed around communal seed bank contributions. Results reveal that the heightened strain of the main breadwinner led male participants to reduce contributions to the communal seed bank by 0.2 standard deviations, while it did not affect their productivity in the real-effort task. These behavioral shifts suggest that the psychological consequences of breadwinner strain can undermine cooperation and the adoption of sustainable agriculture practices. Addressing the pressures of breadwinning can foster both economic resilience and social cohesion. |
| Keywords: | gender; gender norms; decision making; poverty; households; intrahousehold relations; Kenya; Africa; Sub-Saharan Africa; Eastern Africa |
| Date: | 2025–12–31 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:fpr:gsspwp:180329 |
| By: | Vitellozzi, Sveva; Savadori, Lucia; Davis, Kristin E.; Azzarri, Carlo; Kinuthia, Dickson; Ronzani, Piero |
| Abstract: | In several countries and settings, especially in low- and middle-income countries, men are expected to act as primary economic providers for their households, bearing the psychological and social burdens associated with this role. Despite its potential consequences, the effects of the breadwinner role on economic decision-making are understudied, particularly among poor households. This study investigates how gendered breadwinner expectations shape economic behavior in rural Kenya. Using a lab-in-the-field experiment among 400 smallholder farmers in Vihiga County, we test how psychological and social pressures associated with being the breadwinner of the family influence decision-making in both individual work choices and collective decisions. Participants completed a real-effort task choosing either a high-effort, high-reward option or a low-effort, low-reward alternative, followed by a public goods game framed around communal seed bank contributions. Results reveal that the heightened strain of the main breadwinner led male participants to reduce contributions to the communal seed bank by 0.2 standard deviations, while it did not affect their productivity in the real-effort task. These behavioral shifts suggest that the psychological consequences of breadwinner strain can undermine cooperation and the adoption of sustainable agriculture practices. Addressing the pressures of breadwinning can foster both economic resilience and social cohesion. |
| Keywords: | gender; gender norms; decision making; poverty; households; intrahousehold relations; Kenya; Eastern Africa |
| Date: | 2025–12–31 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:fpr:ifprid:180329 |
| By: | Mathieu Chevrier (Université Côte d'Azur, CNRS, GREDEG, France); Sébastien Massoni (Université de Lorraine, Université de Strasbourg, CNRS, BETA, Nancy, France) |
| Abstract: | Confidence often accompanies advice, but its usefulness depends on what confidence actually reveals. This paper distinguishes between two dimensions of confidence quality: discrimination, that is, whether confidence tracks correctness at the decision level, and calibration, that is, whether average confidence matches average accuracy. In a controlled advice-taking experiment comparing human and algorithmic advisors, discrimination is the main driver of both advice adoption and post-advice accuracy, whereas calibration plays a more limited role. Source matters only in a specific case: when discrimination is high, participants are more likely to follow overconfident algorithmic advice than equally overconfident human advice. Advice taking also varies with participants’ own metacognitive characteristics. Higher discrimination ability is associated with more conservative advice taking, while better-calibrated participants rely more on stated confidence, benefiting when advisor confidence has high discrimination and performing worse when it is miscalibrated. |
| Keywords: | Algorithm; Advice; Overconfidence; Discrimination; Laboratory experiment |
| JEL: | C92 D91 |
| Date: | 2026–03 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:gre:wpaper:2026-09 |