From the psychological point of view to explain the phenomenon of wealth

Document Sample
From the psychological point of view to explain the phenomenon of wealth Powered By Docstoc
					From the psychological point of view to explain the phenomenon of wealth


In 2003 the first phase of the "Fortune magazine" brings readers,
is a new perspective to explain the phenomenon of wealth - from a psychological
point of view of economics. This is the 2002 Nobel laureate in economics,
psychologists Kahneman has brought to people's "prospect
theory."
  ?Kahneman Nobel speech in doing, specifically referred to a Chinese
scholar's research results, he is a tenured professor, University of Chicago
Business School, China Europe International Business School, director of Behavioral
Sciences Professor Xi Kai Yuan. Xi professor of psychology to study economics,
marketing, and decision science discipline problems, is one of the leading scholars in
this field.
  ?Currently, Professor Xi Central Business School at Fudan University and delivered
a speech. Intercepted in this article is highlights of the speech. Thin reading, you will
find: small to personal shopping, business risk decisions, major national public policy
making, the wealth of phenomena in society are numerous, and psychology are
inextricably linked.
   Looks beautiful - the poor spend more money articles
  ?View a Professor Xi ice cream experiment published in 1998. There are two cups of
Haagen Dazs ice cream, a cup of ice cream A 7 ounce, 5 ounce cup mounted inside,
looked about to overflow to the; another cup of ice cream B is 8 ounces, but packed in
the 10 ounces in a cup, it seems not yet filled. Which you are willing to pay more for
an ice cream Chi's money?
  ?If people like ice cream, then 8 ounces of ice cream more than seven ounces, if
people like the cup, then the 10 oz cups are better than 5 ounces. However, results
show that the judge in each case (Comment: these two cups of ice cream also is
Buneng Fangzaiyiqi comparisons, of daily life decisions based on the reference
information is often inadequate), but people are willing to weight less ice cream to
pay more money. Experimental results show: On average, people are willing to spend
2.26 U.S. dollars to buy seven ounces of ice cream, but only willing to 1.66 U.S.
dollars to buy eight ounces of ice cream.
  ?This resonated with other psychologists Kahneman described: human reason is
limited. When people make decisions, not to calculate the true value of an item, but
with a relatively easy evaluation of clues to judge. For example, in ice cream
experiment, it is full of discontent under the ice cream in the end to decide how much
to pay for different ice cream money (Comment: People always believe their eyes, in
fact, the most unreliable visual. Smart businesses to exploit the people of this
mentality, to create "looks off" effect).
  ?Look at a professor's dinnerware Xi experiment. For example, is now a
shop clearance big sale, you see a set of cutlery, 8 Caidie, 8 soup bowls and 8 dessert
plates, 24 pieces, each piece is intact, then you are willing to pay How much does this
set of cutlery? If you see another package with 40 of them 24 and exactly the same as
just mentioned, but in good condition, there are another set of cutlery 8 cups and 8
saucers, 2 cups and 7 saucers are have been damaged. Tableware you willing to pay
this much for the money? The results showed that only know one set of cutlery in the
case, people are willing to pay 33 U.S. dollars with the first course, only willing to
pay 24 dollars for the second set of cutlery.
  ?Although the second set of dishes more than the first set of 6 cups and a good good
saucer, but the money people are willing to pay less. Because in the end 24 and 31 be
more or less, it is difficult to compare if you do not attract attention, but the full set of
cutlery in the end intact or has been damaged, it is very easy to judge. Look, people
are still relatively easy to judge based on the clues to judge, although this does not
cost (Comment: This is the "integrity" concept, a few more
pieces of cutlery, breaking a few seconds have to fall, people requirements, it was
cheaper for granted, in the saying to your guns Well. However, businesses often take
advantage of people that will be cheap mental defective, such as a Haohao De
furniture, chest of drawers on the block paint rubbing off, out of one original hand,
only as a disposal merchandise sold. Some businesses fast thinking, only then raise
the price twice, then play a big *, the following written on the pack is in effect or the
original price, but all of a sudden sales results out. and whether or not there is
suspicion of fraud, but the integrity of the concept still get a good application).
   Gamblers always empty pockets - money and money is not the same
  ?Money is money. Also 100, earned for work, or lottery winnings, or on the road
picked up, and for consumers, should be the same. But it is not. In general,
hard-earned money you will save up reluctant to spend, but if a windfall, may soon be
spent.
  ?This proves that the person is another aspect of bounded rationality: the money did
not have the complete alternative, although the same is 100 yuan, but in the
consumer's head, the different origin of the money were set up two
different accounts earned money and windfall is not the same. This is the University
of Chicago Professor Thaler's "mental account"
concept.
  ?For example, tonight you are going to a concert Xin. Tickets are 200 yuan, you
immediately want to start, you find that you recently bought a telephone card worth
200 yuan lost. Will you listen to the concert? Experimental results show that the
majority of respondents still would go to Xin. But what if the situation changes,
assuming that yesterday you spent 200 dollars for a one night concert ticket today.
You immediately want to start, I suddenly find that you lost the ticket. If you want to
listen to the concert, they must spend money to buy 200 tickets, would you listen?
The result is, most people said not to go.
  ?Be considered carefully, the above two answers is self-contradictory. Whether lost
the calling card or concert tickets, a word is missing something worth 200 yuan, the
loss of money from the point of view, there is no difference, no justification for
throwing a phone card still go to concerts, but after losing the vote would not to
listening. The reason is that, in people's minds, phone cards and concert
tickets to go to a different account, so lost cards will not affect the concert where the
budget and expenditure accounts, most people still choose to Xin concert. But lost the
subsequent need to buy concert tickets and tickets have been classified in the same
account, it looks like to spend 400 yuan to listen to a concert. It certainly think that is
not worth the (Comment: the different money into different accounts, which is why
gamblers pocket money always the truth: of course there's really nothing
lost, won, anyway, doing nothing is easier Who wants to keep banks ah? from a
positive perspective, the concept of different accounts to help develop financial plans.
For example, a unit of employees, the main income from wages - with a bank card
payment, bonus - paid in cash form, holidays and every quarter are bonuses,
occasional speculation a stock, You Bika earn extra money, so he can pay the bank
card into a fixed installment savings, savings accounts, money for daily expenses,
quarterly award to purchase insurance, the rest cover human contact, extra money is
used to travel and leisure. because psychologically classified prior to the money 11
different accounts, the general would not have appropriated the idea).
  ?A similar concept can also help the Government in formulating policies. For
example, a government now wants to reduce taxes to stimulate consumption method.
It can have two approaches: one is the tax directly reduces the level of taxation; the
other is the tax rebate is returned to taxpayers over time as part of tax. Amount from
the money point of view, a 5% tax reduction and return of 5% of the tax is the same,
but the role in stimulating consumption is quite different. People think that part of the
tax reduction would have deserve their own, and earned their own, so no large
increase in power consumption; but the tax refund for people who like a windfall,
stimulate people to increase more consumption. Clearly, the Government, the effect of
tax policy to achieve much better than tax cuts.
   Painful memories are still fresh - they fear the risk, everyone is adventurer
  ?The face of risk decision-making, people will choose to avoid or move forward?
  ?Let us do two such experiments -
  ?First, there are two options, A is sure to win 1,000 yuan, B is 50% chance to win
2000 dollars, 50% chance of nothing. Which one do you choose? Most people choose
A, which shows people are risk aversion.
  ?Second, this two choices, A is the loss of 1,000 yuan you sure, B is 50% likely cost
you 2000 dollars, 50% chance you lost nothing. Result, most people choose B, which
shows that they are risk preferences.
  ?However, careful analysis of the two questions above, you will find that they are
exactly the same. Suppose you now to win a 2,000 yuan, 1,000 yuan less certain to
win, that is from winning the 2000 loss of 1,000 RMB yuan in the affirmative, 50% of
the winning 2000 dollars is a 50% chance of no loss of money, 50% of what also can
not get the equivalent of 50% on the possibility of loss of 2,000 yuan.
  ?It is thus concluded that: people in the face was often cautious, unwilling to take
risks; in the face of losses, all have become adventurers had. This is Kahneman,
"prospect theory" of the two "Law."
  ?"Prospect             Theory",             another         important
"rule" is: people get lost and the degree of sensitivity is
different, the pain of loss is much greater than the good feeling. Let's look
at a Sall raised question: Suppose you got a disease, there is one ten thousandth of the
risk of sudden death, there is a medicine to take the possibility of future deaths can be
reduced to zero, you are willing to spend How much money to buy such a pain? I
request you to imagine, assuming you are in good health, if pharmaceutical companies
are now looking for some people to test their newly developed a drug after taking this
drug will make you a slim possibility of sudden death, then you asked how much
money pharmaceutical companies to compensate you? In the experiment, many
people will say a few hundred dollars to buy medicine willing, but the pharmaceutical
companies spend tens of thousands of dollars even if they do not want to participate in
experimental drug trial. In fact, this is the loss aversion psychology. Cure disease after
disease is a relatively insensitive and will, increase their own health situation the
probability of death for people who find it difficult to accept the loss, obviously,
people request compensation for the loss, much higher than they willing to pay for the
treatment of money.
  ?However, the loss of and access is not absolute. When people get in the face of risk
aversion, and preference in the face of loss, when the risk of loss and access to it is
relative to the reference point for the purposes. Things change when people used in
the evaluation of the view, you can change people's attitude towards risk.
  ?Kahneman and Tversky see a famous experiment: Suppose the United States to
prevent the outbreak of a rare disease in preparation for expected 600 people will die
of this disease. There are two options: use X program, you can save 200 people; by Y
program, a third could save 600 people, the possibility of a two-thirds could not save.
Clearly, saving is a get, so people do not want to take risks, more willing to choose X
program.
  ?Now look at another description, there are two options: X program makes 400
people were killed: The Y program 1 / 3 of the possibility of no deaths, 2 / 3
probability 600 people dead. Death is a loss, so people are more inclined to take risks,
option Y.
  ?In fact, the result of two situations are exactly alike. Save 200 people killed equals
400: l / 3 may save 600 is equal to 1 / 3 may be a no death. Thus, the different way of
expression just change the reference point 11 is to take the death, or save as a
reference point, the result is completely different.
  ?Professor Xi, this is the new economics of the micro-economics is an important
content of 11 amendments to the risk of decision theory. Traditional economics is a
normative economics, which is to educate people what to do. The affected by
psychological, economics should be descriptive, it mainly describes how people
actually do. The evolution of risk theory through three stages: from the earliest
expected value theory, expected utility theory to the later, to the latest prospect theory.
Which prospect theory is a description of the most powerful theory.
  ?In general, the prospect theory has the following basic principles:
  ?(A) acquired most of the time in the face of risk aversion;
  ?(B) the loss of most of the time in the face of risk preferences;
  ?(C) people to be more sensitive than the loss.
  ?Prospect theory has many applications. In addition to the examples discussed above,
the Xi professor talked about the other applications: how to publish good news and
bad news. Release of information can even affect how the stock market. If a company
to its shareholders released a good news, then in what way it announced the good
news to have the most positive effect? If you want to publish is a bad news, the
company set to do what you can do to reduce the negative impact of the news then?
 ?Professor Xi spoke of the first four principles proposed by the Sall:
 ?(A) If you have some good news to be released, they should be published separately.
For example assumes that your boss rewards you today 1000 dollars, and you draw
today, when a department store has drawn 1,000 dollars, then you should be good
news for these two complaints in two control your wife, so she be happy twice.
According to prospect theory, respectively, brought about by the experience of
two-degree of pleasure, and greater than the two get together to experience the
pleasure brought about the total extent.
 ?(B) If you have some bad news to be announced, they should be released together.
For example, if you today purse l000 dollars lost, do not care to 1,000 yuan your
wife's phone broke, then you should put the two together to tell her the bad
news. According to prospect theory, the two losses brought about by the combination
of the pain experience to be less than the two losses were caused by pain and.
 ?(C) If you have a great good news and a little bad news, should tell people with
these two sources. In this case, bad news bring good news to bring the pain will be
tempered by the joy, the negative effect of also much smaller.
 ?(D) If you have a big bad news and a little good news, two messages should be
published separately. In this case, the good news brought joy not just have been bad
news for the pain that did not flow, people can still enjoy the pleasure brought good
news.
 ?Professor Xi not only the individual can apply these principles to influence their
level of concern of people happy, the company can use these principles also affect the
investment behavior of the stock holders.
 ?Everyone has a happy - to maximize people's happiness
 ?Want to work for a higher wage?
 ?Of course.
 ?Why should the pursuit of more wages? In order to more prosperous life.
 ?More prosperous life for what?
 ?. . . . . .
 ?After all, it is ultimately the pursuit of happiness of life. Rather than more money.
Because, from the "utility maximization" starting the biggest
effect on the man himself is not wealth, but happiness itself.
 ?In conventional economics, to increase people's wealth is to increase the
level of people's well-being of the most effective means. However,
Professor Xi, wealth can bring happiness is only a small factor, people are happy, and
absolute wealth largely depends on many unrelated factors. For example, in the past
few decades, the U.S. per capita GDP doubling itself, but many studies found that
happy people are not much changes in pressure are increased. This raises a very
interesting question: We spent so much energy and resources to increase the wealth of
the whole society, but the extent of people's happiness has not changed. Is
this why?
  ?Professor Xi pointed out that people in the end is not happiness, and absolute
wealth depends on many unrelated factors. The basis of previous research, Professor
Xi is currently developing a new, rigorous theory to study how to maximize
people's happiness. And the corresponding economics, Professor Xi to this
science is called "happy school." The theory: Our ultimate goal
is not to maximize wealth, but to maximize people's happiness.
  ?In addition to wealth, then definitely, there are factors which affect our happiness?
  ?Temporal comparison and comparison of the community can bring people
happiness. For example, you recently in Shanghai, bought a house downtown, you
feel very happy. But in fact only a small part of you feel happy because you live in
this house brings you more because it is more generated. From the temporal
comparison, if you used to live in the attic, so now you will be very happy living
villas. If you've lived in a garden house, then you will not feel particularly
happy. From the social comparison, if you and the people around you, your friends
and colleagues compared found that other people are still living in ordinary public
housing, and you now have your own villa, you will certainly be very happy. If people
around you now live in a better place, you even feel comfortable living in the villa,
you will not be very happy.
  ?Another source of happiness is the pulse caused by the changes. If a person has
lived a privileged life and does not change, he will not be happy than the average
person. That is, comfort is not an important factor in happiness. If a person is not a
particularly high standard of living itself, but he will have some ups and downs from
time to time, such as tourism, adventure, etc., these pulse can people feel more happy
happy (Comment: Americans are the world's richest However, according to
survey Europeans generally happy than Americans, Europeans, although smaller than
Americans living in the house, opened the car smaller than the Americans, but they
save the money for vacation. not the same lifestyle, resulting in different sense of
happiness. This is a very good lesson, the company may wish to encourage employees
to make good use of annual leave, employees are happy at the same time, the
company's identity will also be upgrading).
  ?By the same token remuneration of staff persons is very useful. Suppose you are a
company CEO, you have two ways to pay employee compensation: one is that you
can get paid a fixed salary; Another way you can give a relatively lower wage
employees, but from time to time to give them Some reward. Objectively speaking,
your company in the first way to spend more money, but Professor Xi, your
employees will be happier in the second way, but this time the company paying the
money spent less (Comment: Of course, if your company has now taken the first
payment is similar to the way of fixed salary, now converted into a second payment to
be too late, because of lower wages for employees are always very happy). We can
not deny this reality: the pursuit of wealth is human instinct. Everyone hopes to
become rich purse made everyone want to be rich one day.
  ?But we also can not ignore the fact that the total amount of social resources are
limited, at least at this stage, we can not expect everyone to be rich. Affluent and
disadvantaged groups, the gap between rich and poor can not completely disappear.
  ?In this sense, the "ultimate goal is the maximization of
happiness," thesis, as we open a new window. Absolute wealth gap can not
be filled, and well-being is likely to be owned by everyone. We are concerned about
the wealth of life, and hope that when the increase of wealth, happiness also
increasing. We are equally concerned about the vulnerable groups, ordinary people
wish to have every happiness. Increase the happiness of the whole society, it is
government's responsibility, and should become a member of every
spontaneous pursuit. Of course, social progress, satisfaction and non-satisfaction is
relative, not sweeping, new economics can lead people to look at the bright side of
things, not the bad side of amplification, to allow people to get happiness.
Extended reading:
Kahneman and Prospect Theory
  ?The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, said Kahneman because "will
come from the psychological research applied a comprehensive insight among
economics, especially in the human judgments under uncertainty and decision-making
have made outstanding contributions," Summary of 2002 Nobel Prize
Laureate.
  ?For a long time, orthodox economics has been "rational man"
as the theoretical basis, through a sophisticated mathematical models were built from
the perfect theoretical system. And Kahneman and others, Professor of Behavioral
Economics from the evidence, and from one's own psychological
characteristics, behavioral characteristics starting to reveal the irrational choice
behavior affect the psychological factors, its directed at a formal logical basis of
economics One reason people assume.
  ?In fact, as early as 50 years in the 20th century, people began to study behavioral
economics, but early studies have happened. 70 years until the 20th century, before
the Kahneman and Tversky in this area had extensive and systematic study.
Behavioral economics stressed the interests of people's behavior is driven
not only by but also by a variety of psychological factors. Prospect theory, psychology
and economics to study effective integrated, revealed in the Bu decision-making
under uncertainty, pioneering the field of a new of. In this sense,
Kahneman's award-winning, it is possible to change the future direction of
development economics.
Source: Jiefang Daily

				
DOCUMENT INFO