bathroom on the fact that people differently estimate the amount of remuneration depending
Most of the time at which they expect to receive it.
temporal discounting, i.e., the tendency to underestimate the subjective utility of remuneration
denia, if its receipt is delayed in time (Choice over time, 1992). In general, we will
Appreciate the amount of remuneration, if there is a high probability of receiving it in the near future.
Change, that is, we prefer to receive a reward "here and now." Usually the test
Chit 10 € today or 11 € tomorrow. It is shown that in such a situation, the subject is rather all
he would prefer to receive 10 €, but today. Let's change the conditions of the experiment: keep the same
amounts and the same time interval between their receipt, but we offer a postponement of the election
pa for one year: do you want to get 10 € in a year or 11 € in a year and one day? In such
case, it turns out that the subjects prefer a large amount, ignoring the difference
one day. It seems that such an obvious contradiction when choosing alternatives does not differ
by rationality.
Within the framework of the parallel processing hypothesis (dual-processing hypothesis)
put the existence of competition between the impulsive System 1 and the rational
System 2 in assessing the long-term perspective of the consequences of decision-making:
The system of quick, impulsive preferences obviously favors immediate
reward because it is insensitive to long-term prospects.
System 2, on the contrary, is able to evaluate the benefits of receiving a reward in the future.
The question arises: is it possible to explain the phenomenon of temporary discounting
neurobiological mechanisms? In one of the most famous neuroeconomic
research (McClure et al., 2004) the following model was proposed: suppose that
Our behavior is described by two parameters: β and δ. Let β be the specific weight
immediate or emotional result, and δ is the proportion of rational result
that on the whole time interval (t). Then the assumption that the parameter δ regulates
brain structures responsible for emotions (for example, the striatum), and the parameter δ is regulated by
structures that provide our cognitive functions (for example, DLPFC),
can be confirmed if there is a differential
rentirovanny activity of these two areas of a brain. Data neuroimaging research
implications indicate the existence of areas of the brain involved in making decisions about
receiving an award without delay (β-zones: striatum and orbitofrontal areas
bark, which are components of the emotional system of the brain). At the same time were
other areas, called δ-zones (including DLPFC), neuronal active
whose value does not depend on the duration of the time delay of the remuneration.
Comments
To leave a comment
Neuroeconomics
Terms: Neuroeconomics