Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Article: Deal or No Deal?

Expand Messages
  • Martin Sewell
    [ source: http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2008/605/1 ] Deal or No Deal? By Constance Holden ScienceNOW Daily News 05 June 2008 What if your
    Message 1 of 7 , Jun 8, 2008
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      [ source: http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2008/605/1 ]

      Deal or No Deal?

      By Constance Holden
      ScienceNOW Daily News
      05 June 2008

      What if your friend had a large apple pie but gave you only a sliver?
      Would you throw the piece on the floor in protest? Maybe, depending on
      your brain chemistry. New research suggests that such emotional
      decisions can be influenced by a shortage of the neurotransmitter serotonin.

      Researchers have linked low levels of serotonin in the brain to various
      mental states, including depression and impulsive, irrational behavior.
      A team headed by neuroscience Ph.D. student Molly Crockett of the
      University of Cambridge in the U.K. wondered whether the
      neurotransmitter would affect how people play the ultimatum game, an
      experiment used by economists that shows how people's economic decisions
      are sometimes irrational.

      In the game, a "proposer" is given a sum of money, part of which he or
      she offers to share with a "responder." If a responder turns down the
      offer as too low, then neither player gets any money. What the ultimatum
      game reveals is that even though a responder would always gain by
      accepting the offered share, he will sometimes cut off his own nose to
      spite his face, as it were, punishing a proposer by rejecting an unfair
      offer.

      In the current study, the researchers recruited 20 volunteers and asked
      them to fast the evening before the game. The next morning, some of the
      volunteers were given a drink chock-full of every amino acid the body
      needs to make protein, save tryptophan, an amino acid from which
      serotonin is manufactured. The result, says Crockett, is that the amino
      acids rush to the brain, "crowding out" any residual tryptophan and
      creating a temporary shortage of tryptophan and therefore serotonin.
      Control subjects were given drinks that contained tryptophan.

      Both groups then played the ultimatum game as responders. The lack of
      tryptophan did not affect the subjects' general moods or their
      perceptions of the fairness of an offer, the team reports online today
      in Science. It did, however, appear to make people more likely to reject
      unfair offers. For example, when they knew that they were being offered
      only 20% of the pot, 82% of the acute tryptophan depletion group
      rejected the offer over multiple trials, whereas only 67% of the placebo
      group did.

      The research bolsters the view that rejection of an unfair offer is "an
      emotionally driven impulse," says Crockett. To heed more rational
      monetary considerations in the face of an unfair offer, she says,
      requires that you "swallow your pride"--or the sliver of pie--which is a
      form of emotional control.

      The new work is "a significant advance" in understanding the neural
      mechanisms of how emotions impact decision-making, says neuroscientist
      Michael Koenigs of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and
      Stroke in Bethesda, Maryland. Psychologist Ernst Fehr of the University
      of Zürich, Switzerland, cautions, however, that the paper doesn't really
      address which behavior is rational or irrational. Rejecting low offers,
      he says, could be the result of a rational calculation about the value
      of fairness rather than an angry impulse.
    • fabbro j
      The scenario described below sounds eerily similar to the Argentinian farming crisis currently playing out. Farmers refuse to ship extremely profitable crops
      Message 2 of 7 , Jun 9, 2008
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        The scenario described below sounds eerily similar to the Argentinian farming crisis currently playing out. Farmers refuse to ship extremely profitable crops because they think the tax structure is unfair, inflicting themselves and their country with some serious opportunity costs.
        Or is this the Laffer curve asserting itself - the farmers made enough money and now they don't have incentive to make more because too much goes to taxes?
        Either way the outcome appears to be the result of irrational decision-making.



        --- On Sun, 6/8/08, Martin Sewell <M.Sewell@...> wrote:

        > From: Martin Sewell <M.Sewell@...>
        > Subject: [Behavioral-Finance] Article: Deal or No Deal?
        > To: "Behavioral-Finance" <Behavioral-Finance@yahoogroups.com>
        > Date: Sunday, June 8, 2008, 2:54 AM
        > [ source:
        > http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2008/605/1
        > ]
        >
        > Deal or No Deal?
        >
        > By Constance Holden
        > ScienceNOW Daily News
        > 05 June 2008
        >
        > What if your friend had a large apple pie but gave you only
        > a sliver?
        > Would you throw the piece on the floor in protest? Maybe,
        > depending on
        > your brain chemistry. New research suggests that such
        > emotional
        > decisions can be influenced by a shortage of the
        > neurotransmitter serotonin.
        >
        > Researchers have linked low levels of serotonin in the
        > brain to various
        > mental states, including depression and impulsive,
        > irrational behavior.
        > A team headed by neuroscience Ph.D. student Molly Crockett
        > of the
        > University of Cambridge in the U.K. wondered whether the
        > neurotransmitter would affect how people play the ultimatum
        > game, an
        > experiment used by economists that shows how people's
        > economic decisions
        > are sometimes irrational.
        >
        > In the game, a "proposer" is given a sum of
        > money, part of which he or
        > she offers to share with a "responder." If a
        > responder turns down the
        > offer as too low, then neither player gets any money. What
        > the ultimatum
        > game reveals is that even though a responder would always
        > gain by
        > accepting the offered share, he will sometimes cut off his
        > own nose to
        > spite his face, as it were, punishing a proposer by
        > rejecting an unfair
        > offer.
        >
        > In the current study, the researchers recruited 20
        > volunteers and asked
        > them to fast the evening before the game. The next morning,
        > some of the
        > volunteers were given a drink chock-full of every amino
        > acid the body
        > needs to make protein, save tryptophan, an amino acid from
        > which
        > serotonin is manufactured. The result, says Crockett, is
        > that the amino
        > acids rush to the brain, "crowding out" any
        > residual tryptophan and
        > creating a temporary shortage of tryptophan and therefore
        > serotonin.
        > Control subjects were given drinks that contained
        > tryptophan.
        >
        > Both groups then played the ultimatum game as responders.
        > The lack of
        > tryptophan did not affect the subjects' general moods
        > or their
        > perceptions of the fairness of an offer, the team reports
        > online today
        > in Science. It did, however, appear to make people more
        > likely to reject
        > unfair offers. For example, when they knew that they were
        > being offered
        > only 20% of the pot, 82% of the acute tryptophan depletion
        > group
        > rejected the offer over multiple trials, whereas only 67%
        > of the placebo
        > group did.
        >
        > The research bolsters the view that rejection of an unfair
        > offer is "an
        > emotionally driven impulse," says Crockett. To heed
        > more rational
        > monetary considerations in the face of an unfair offer, she
        > says,
        > requires that you "swallow your pride"--or the
        > sliver of pie--which is a
        > form of emotional control.
        >
        > The new work is "a significant advance" in
        > understanding the neural
        > mechanisms of how emotions impact decision-making, says
        > neuroscientist
        > Michael Koenigs of the National Institute of Neurological
        > Disorders and
        > Stroke in Bethesda, Maryland. Psychologist Ernst Fehr of
        > the University
        > of Zürich, Switzerland, cautions, however, that the paper
        > doesn't really
        > address which behavior is rational or irrational. Rejecting
        > low offers,
        > he says, could be the result of a rational calculation
        > about the value
        > of fairness rather than an angry impulse.
      • Arturo Gutierrez
        ¿ How would you like to work for the state without compensation? I do not think that you said is the case, because in every investment there  is an
        Message 3 of 7 , Jun 9, 2008
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment

          ¿ How would you like to work for the state without compensation?

          I do not think that you said is the case, because in every investment there  is an expected return to compensate for the risk above all the other costs. In the argentinian case, the farmers are being confiscated for the state and getting less that the required return for their  investment. In any economy the resources go were the espected return is higher adjusted by risk.

          --- El lun 9-jun-08, fabbro j <fabbroj@...> escribió:

          De: fabbro j <fabbroj@...>
          Asunto: Re: [Behavioral-Finance] Article: Deal or No Deal?
          A: Behavioral-Finance@yahoogroups.com
          Fecha: lunes, 9 junio, 2008, 4:48 am

          The scenario described below sounds eerily similar to the Argentinian farming crisis currently playing out. Farmers refuse to ship extremely profitable crops because they think the tax structure is unfair, inflicting themselves and their country with some serious opportunity costs.
          Or is this the Laffer curve asserting itself - the farmers made enough money and now they don't have incentive to make more because too much goes to taxes?
          Either way the outcome appears to be the result of irrational decision-making.

          --- On Sun, 6/8/08, Martin Sewell <M.Sewell@cs. ucl.ac.uk> wrote:

          > From: Martin Sewell <M.Sewell@cs. ucl.ac.uk>
          > Subject: [Behavioral- Finance] Article: Deal or No Deal?
          > To: "Behavioral- Finance" <Behavioral-Finance@ yahoogroups. com>
          > Date: Sunday, June 8, 2008, 2:54 AM
          > [ source:
          > http://sciencenow. sciencemag. org/cgi/content/ full/2008/ 605/1
          > ]
          >
          > Deal or No Deal?
          >
          > By Constance Holden
          > ScienceNOW Daily News
          > 05 June 2008
          >
          > What if your friend had a large apple pie but gave you only
          > a sliver?
          > Would you throw the piece on the floor in protest? Maybe,
          > depending on
          > your brain chemistry. New research suggests that such
          > emotional
          > decisions can be influenced by a shortage of the
          > neurotransmitter serotonin.
          >
          > Researchers have linked low levels of serotonin in the
          > brain to various
          > mental states, including depression and impulsive,
          > irrational behavior.
          > A team headed by neuroscience Ph.D. student Molly Crockett
          > of the
          > University of Cambridge in the U.K. wondered whether the
          > neurotransmitter would affect how people play the ultimatum
          > game, an
          > experiment used by economists that shows how people's
          > economic decisions
          > are sometimes irrational.
          >
          > In the game, a "proposer" is given a sum of
          > money, part of which he or
          > she offers to share with a "responder." If a
          > responder turns down the
          > offer as too low, then neither player gets any money. What
          > the ultimatum
          > game reveals is that even though a responder would always
          > gain by
          > accepting the offered share, he will sometimes cut off his
          > own nose to
          > spite his face, as it were, punishing a proposer by
          > rejecting an unfair
          > offer.
          >
          > In the current study, the researchers recruited 20
          > volunteers and asked
          > them to fast the evening before the game. The next morning,
          > some of the
          > volunteers were given a drink chock-full of every amino
          > acid the body
          > needs to make protein, save tryptophan, an amino acid from
          > which
          > serotonin is manufactured. The result, says Crockett, is
          > that the amino
          > acids rush to the brain, "crowding out" any
          > residual tryptophan and
          > creating a temporary shortage of tryptophan and therefore
          > serotonin.
          > Control subjects were given drinks that contained
          > tryptophan.
          >
          > Both groups then played the ultimatum game as responders.
          > The lack of
          > tryptophan did not affect the subjects' general moods
          > or their
          > perceptions of the fairness of an offer, the team reports
          > online today
          > in Science. It did, however, appear to make people more
          > likely to reject
          > unfair offers. For example, when they knew that they were
          > being offered
          > only 20% of the pot, 82% of the acute tryptophan depletion
          > group
          > rejected the offer over multiple trials, whereas only 67%
          > of the placebo
          > group did.
          >
          > The research bolsters the view that rejection of an unfair
          > offer is "an
          > emotionally driven impulse," says Crockett. To heed
          > more rational
          > monetary considerations in the face of an unfair offer, she
          > says,
          > requires that you "swallow your pride"--or the
          > sliver of pie--which is a
          > form of emotional control.
          >
          > The new work is "a significant advance" in
          > understanding the neural
          > mechanisms of how emotions impact decision-making, says
          > neuroscientist
          > Michael Koenigs of the National Institute of Neurological
          > Disorders and
          > Stroke in Bethesda, Maryland. Psychologist Ernst Fehr of
          > the University
          > of Zürich, Switzerland, cautions, however, that the paper
          > doesn't really
          > address which behavior is rational or irrational. Rejecting
          > low offers,
          > he says, could be the result of a rational calculation
          > about the value
          > of fairness rather than an angry impulse.




          Yahoo! Deportes Beta
          ¡No te pierdas lo último sobre el torneo clausura 2008!
          Entérate aquí http://deportes.yahoo.com
        • Neil Stoloff
          ... farming crisis currently playing out. Farmers refuse to ship extremely profitable crops because they think the tax structure is unfair, inflicting
          Message 4 of 7 , Jun 9, 2008
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In Behavioral-Finance@yahoogroups.com, fabbro j <fabbroj@...> wrote:
            >
            > The scenario described below sounds eerily similar to the Argentinian
            farming crisis currently playing out. Farmers refuse to ship extremely
            profitable crops because they think the tax structure is unfair,
            inflicting themselves and their country with some serious opportunity
            costs.
            > Or is this the Laffer curve asserting itself - the farmers made enough
            money and now they don't have incentive to make more because too much
            goes to taxes?
            > Either way the outcome appears to be the result of irrational
            decision-making.


            Rejecting an unfair situation, even at some material cost to oneself, is
            not an irrational act. To the extent that our emotions play a role in
            that decision, hey -- sometimes our emotions point us in the right
            direction (see the last two sentences of Martin's article)....

            Cheers,

            Neil


            >
            >
            >
            > --- On Sun, 6/8/08, Martin Sewell M.Sewell@... wrote:
            >
            > > From: Martin Sewell M.Sewell@...
            > > Subject: [Behavioral-Finance] Article: Deal or No Deal?
            > > To: "Behavioral-Finance" Behavioral-Finance@yahoogroups.com
            > > Date: Sunday, June 8, 2008, 2:54 AM
            > > [ source:
            > > http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2008/605/1
            > > ]
            > >
            > > Deal or No Deal?
            > >
            > > By Constance Holden
            > > ScienceNOW Daily News
            > > 05 June 2008
            > >
            > > What if your friend had a large apple pie but gave you only
            > > a sliver?
            > > Would you throw the piece on the floor in protest? Maybe,
            > > depending on
            > > your brain chemistry. New research suggests that such
            > > emotional
            > > decisions can be influenced by a shortage of the
            > > neurotransmitter serotonin.
            > >
            > > Researchers have linked low levels of serotonin in the
            > > brain to various
            > > mental states, including depression and impulsive,
            > > irrational behavior.
            > > A team headed by neuroscience Ph.D. student Molly Crockett
            > > of the
            > > University of Cambridge in the U.K. wondered whether the
            > > neurotransmitter would affect how people play the ultimatum
            > > game, an
            > > experiment used by economists that shows how people's
            > > economic decisions
            > > are sometimes irrational.
            > >
            > > In the game, a "proposer" is given a sum of
            > > money, part of which he or
            > > she offers to share with a "responder." If a
            > > responder turns down the
            > > offer as too low, then neither player gets any money. What
            > > the ultimatum
            > > game reveals is that even though a responder would always
            > > gain by
            > > accepting the offered share, he will sometimes cut off his
            > > own nose to
            > > spite his face, as it were, punishing a proposer by
            > > rejecting an unfair
            > > offer.
            > >
            > > In the current study, the researchers recruited 20
            > > volunteers and asked
            > > them to fast the evening before the game. The next morning,
            > > some of the
            > > volunteers were given a drink chock-full of every amino
            > > acid the body
            > > needs to make protein, save tryptophan, an amino acid from
            > > which
            > > serotonin is manufactured. The result, says Crockett, is
            > > that the amino
            > > acids rush to the brain, "crowding out" any
            > > residual tryptophan and
            > > creating a temporary shortage of tryptophan and therefore
            > > serotonin.
            > > Control subjects were given drinks that contained
            > > tryptophan.
            > >
            > > Both groups then played the ultimatum game as responders.
            > > The lack of
            > > tryptophan did not affect the subjects' general moods
            > > or their
            > > perceptions of the fairness of an offer, the team reports
            > > online today
            > > in Science. It did, however, appear to make people more
            > > likely to reject
            > > unfair offers. For example, when they knew that they were
            > > being offered
            > > only 20% of the pot, 82% of the acute tryptophan depletion
            > > group
            > > rejected the offer over multiple trials, whereas only 67%
            > > of the placebo
            > > group did.
            > >
            > > The research bolsters the view that rejection of an unfair
            > > offer is "an
            > > emotionally driven impulse," says Crockett. To heed
            > > more rational
            > > monetary considerations in the face of an unfair offer, she
            > > says,
            > > requires that you "swallow your pride"--or the
            > > sliver of pie--which is a
            > > form of emotional control.
            > >
            > > The new work is "a significant advance" in
            > > understanding the neural
            > > mechanisms of how emotions impact decision-making, says
            > > neuroscientist
            > > Michael Koenigs of the National Institute of Neurological
            > > Disorders and
            > > Stroke in Bethesda, Maryland. Psychologist Ernst Fehr of
            > > the University
            > > of Zürich, Switzerland, cautions, however, that the paper
            > > doesn't really
            > > address which behavior is rational or irrational. Rejecting
            > > low offers,
            > > he says, could be the result of a rational calculation
            > > about the value
            > > of fairness rather than an angry impulse.
            >
          • leif_ericssen
            I agree. The Argentinian farmers are being quite rational and their actions are what I would do if I was more land rich than cash rich. What is government
            Message 5 of 7 , Jun 10, 2008
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              I agree. The Argentinian farmers are being quite rational and their
              actions are what I would do if I was more land rich than cash rich.
              What is government going to do, send soldiers to confiscate the ranch
              and manage it with bureaucrats?

              Re the ultimatum game, the neuroeconomic component is quite
              interesting. That scenario is popular and has been considered by
              economists and game theorists. I disagree with the assumption that it
              is a matter of pride and think it is a matter of framed social
              expectations of equity. We tend to measure gains by comparison to the
              others nearest us.

              Saying 'well, something is always better than nothing' is a normative
              statement but it is a value judgement itself, not an irrefreutably
              rational statement.

              I don't know if it is a reliable guide to ultimatum situations in
              real life, even in labour markets.

              By the way, I would refuse the 20% offer too if it is a double-edged
              sword where the proposer also stands to lose, yes out of spite. And
              where there is negotiation, I'd make him sweat!

              Jan


              --- In Behavioral-Finance@yahoogroups.com, Arturo Gutierrez
              <argujo@...> wrote:
              >
              > ¿ How would you like to work for the state without compensation?
              > I do not think that you said is the case, because in every
              investment there  is an expected return to compensate for the
              risk above all the other costs. In the argentinian case, the farmers
              are being confiscated for the state and getting less that the
              required return for their  investment. In any economy the
              resources go were the espected return is higher adjusted by risk.
              >
              > --- El lun 9-jun-08, fabbro j fabbroj@... escribió:
              >
              > De: fabbro j fabbroj@...
              > Asunto: Re: [Behavioral-Finance] Article: Deal or No Deal?
              > A: Behavioral-Finance@yahoogroups.com
              > Fecha: lunes, 9 junio, 2008, 4:48 am
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > The scenario described below sounds eerily similar to the
              Argentinian farming crisis currently playing out. Farmers refuse to
              ship extremely profitable crops because they think the tax structure
              is unfair, inflicting themselves and their country with some serious
              opportunity costs.
              > Or is this the Laffer curve asserting itself - the farmers made
              enough money and now they don't have incentive to make more because
              too much goes to taxes?
              > Either way the outcome appears to be the result of irrational
              decision-making.
              >
              > --- On Sun, 6/8/08, Martin Sewell M.Sewell@cs. ucl.ac.uk> wrote:
              >
              > > From: Martin Sewell M.Sewell@cs. ucl.ac.uk>
              > > Subject: [Behavioral- Finance] Article: Deal or No Deal?
              > > To: "Behavioral- Finance" <Behavioral-Finance@ yahoogroups.
              com>
              > > Date: Sunday, June 8, 2008, 2:54 AM
              > > [ source:
              > > http://sciencenow. sciencemag. org/cgi/content/ full/2008/
              605/1
              > > ]
              > >
              > > Deal or No Deal?
              > >
              > > By Constance Holden
              > > ScienceNOW Daily News
              > > 05 June 2008
              > >
              > > What if your friend had a large apple pie but gave you only
              > > a sliver?
              > > Would you throw the piece on the floor in protest? Maybe,
              > > depending on
              > > your brain chemistry. New research suggests that such
              > > emotional
              > > decisions can be influenced by a shortage of the
              > > neurotransmitter serotonin.
              > >
              > > Researchers have linked low levels of serotonin in the
              > > brain to various
              > > mental states, including depression and impulsive,
              > > irrational behavior.
              > > A team headed by neuroscience Ph.D. student Molly Crockett
              > > of the
              > > University of Cambridge in the U.K. wondered whether the
              > > neurotransmitter would affect how people play the ultimatum
              > > game, an
              > > experiment used by economists that shows how people's
              > > economic decisions
              > > are sometimes irrational.
              > >
              > > In the game, a "proposer" is given a sum of
              > > money, part of which he or
              > > she offers to share with a "responder." If a
              > > responder turns down the
              > > offer as too low, then neither player gets any money. What
              > > the ultimatum
              > > game reveals is that even though a responder would always
              > > gain by
              > > accepting the offered share, he will sometimes cut off his
              > > own nose to
              > > spite his face, as it were, punishing a proposer by
              > > rejecting an unfair
              > > offer.
              > >
              > > In the current study, the researchers recruited 20
              > > volunteers and asked
              > > them to fast the evening before the game. The next morning,
              > > some of the
              > > volunteers were given a drink chock-full of every amino
              > > acid the body
              > > needs to make protein, save tryptophan, an amino acid from
              > > which
              > > serotonin is manufactured. The result, says Crockett, is
              > > that the amino
              > > acids rush to the brain, "crowding out" any
              > > residual tryptophan and
              > > creating a temporary shortage of tryptophan and therefore
              > > serotonin.
              > > Control subjects were given drinks that contained
              > > tryptophan.
              > >
              > > Both groups then played the ultimatum game as responders.
              > > The lack of
              > > tryptophan did not affect the subjects' general moods
              > > or their
              > > perceptions of the fairness of an offer, the team reports
              > > online today
              > > in Science. It did, however, appear to make people more
              > > likely to reject
              > > unfair offers. For example, when they knew that they were
              > > being offered
              > > only 20% of the pot, 82% of the acute tryptophan depletion
              > > group
              > > rejected the offer over multiple trials, whereas only 67%
              > > of the placebo
              > > group did.
              > >
              > > The research bolsters the view that rejection of an unfair
              > > offer is "an
              > > emotionally driven impulse," says Crockett. To heed
              > > more rational
              > > monetary considerations in the face of an unfair offer, she
              > > says,
              > > requires that you "swallow your pride"--or the
              > > sliver of pie--which is a
              > > form of emotional control.
              > >
              > > The new work is "a significant advance" in
              > > understanding the neural
              > > mechanisms of how emotions impact decision-making, says
              > > neuroscientist
              > > Michael Koenigs of the National Institute of Neurological
              > > Disorders and
              > > Stroke in Bethesda, Maryland. Psychologist Ernst Fehr of
              > > the University
              > > of Zürich, Switzerland, cautions, however, that the paper
              > > doesn't really
              > > address which behavior is rational or irrational. Rejecting
              > > low offers,
              > > he says, could be the result of a rational calculation
              > > about the value
              > > of fairness rather than an angry impulse.
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              ______________________________________________________________________
              ______________
              > Yahoo! Deportes Beta
              > ¡No te pierdas lo último sobre el torneo clausura 2008! Entérate
              aquí http://deportes.yahoo.com
              >
            • Martin Sewell
              ... Absolutely. Rational man is too short-sighted. Emotions enable us to bring to the present what otherwise would have been a distant cost that would not
              Message 6 of 7 , Jun 11, 2008
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Neil Stoloff wrote:
                > Rejecting an unfair situation, even at some material cost to oneself, is
                > not an irrational act. To the extent that our emotions play a role in
                > that decision, hey -- sometimes our emotions point us in the right
                > direction (see the last two sentences of Martin's article)....

                Absolutely. Rational man is too short-sighted. Emotions enable us to
                bring to the present what otherwise would have been a distant cost that
                would not have featured in a 'rational' calculation.

                Martin
              • pgreenfinch
                Exactly, emotional is not *always* irrational As a French author said: L amour a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît pas (love has its reasons that reason
                Message 7 of 7 , Jun 11, 2008
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  Exactly, emotional is not *always* irrational
                  As a French author said:
                  "L'amour a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît pas"
                  (love has its reasons that reason doesn't know").
                  Peter

                  --- In Behavioral-Finance@yahoogroups.com, Martin Sewell
                  <M.Sewell@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Neil Stoloff wrote:
                  > > Rejecting an unfair situation, even at some material cost to
                  oneself, is
                  > > not an irrational act. To the extent that our emotions play a
                  role in
                  > > that decision, hey -- sometimes our emotions point us in the right
                  > > direction (see the last two sentences of Martin's article)....
                  >
                  > Absolutely. Rational man is too short-sighted. Emotions enable us
                  to
                  > bring to the present what otherwise would have been a distant cost
                  that
                  > would not have featured in a 'rational' calculation.
                  >
                  > Martin
                  >
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.