Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/203079 
Year of Publication: 
2018
Series/Report no.: 
LEM Working Paper Series No. 2018/26
Publisher: 
Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Pisa
Abstract: 
This work challenges the very notion of bounded rationality as dangerously too near to some "unbounded rationality" used as a benchmark. Should we assume that there is an "unbounded" rationality as a benchmark? Should one start, in order to describe and interpret human behaviour, from a model which assumes that we, human beings, have complete and well-defined knowledge of our preferences, all possible states of the world, all possible actions (our "technologies"), the mappings among them, and then look for possible "bounds" and "biases"? Our answer is negative. Rather, the question should be: how do human agents and organizations thereof actually behave in complex and changing environments? Answering this question, we suggest, entails also a significant departure from what is now accepted as behavioural economics, often meant as the analysis of more or less significant deviations from the "Olympic rationality". On the contrary, we suggest, human beings and human organizations behave quite distinctively from the prescriptive model derived from the axioms of rationality.
Subjects: 
bounded rationality
heuristics
cognition
memory
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
248.69 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.