Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T20:45:23.309Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE FUTILE SEARCH FOR TRUE UTILITY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 October 2013

Roberto Fumagalli
Roberto Fumagalli*
Affiliation:
University of Bayreuth, [email protected], [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In traditional decision theory, utility is regarded as a mathematical representation of preferences to be inferred from agents’ choices. In the recent literature at the interface between economics, psychology and neuroscience, several authors argue that economists could develop more predictive and explanatory models by incorporating insights concerning individuals’ hedonic experiences. Some go as far as to contend that utility is literally computed by specific neural areas and urge economists to complement or substitute their notion of utility with some neuro-psychological construct. In this paper, I distinguish three notions of utility that are frequently mentioned in debates about decision theory and examine some critical issues regarding their definition and measurability. Moreover, I provide various empirical and conceptual reasons to doubt that economists should base decision theoretic analyses on some neuro-psychological notion of utility.

Type
Articles
Information
Economics & Philosophy , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , November 2013 , pp. 325 - 347
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Alexandrova, A. 2005. Subjective well-being and Kahneman's Objective Happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies 6: 301–324.Google Scholar
Angner, E. 2011. Are subjective measures of well-being ‘direct’? Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (1): 115–130.Google Scholar
Bayer, H. M. and Glimcher, P. W.. 2005. Midbrain dopamine neurons encode a quantitative reward prediction error signal. Neuron 47: 129–141.Google Scholar
Bentham, J. 1789 [1907]. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernheim, B. D. 2009. On the potential of neuroeconomics: a critical (but hopeful) appraisal. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics 1 (2): 1–41.Google Scholar
Bernheim, B. D. and Rangel, A.. 2009. Beyond revealed preference: choice-theoretic foundations for behavioral welfare economics. Quarterly Journal of Economics 124 (1): 51–104.Google Scholar
Bhattacharyya, A., Pattanaik, K. and Xu, Y.. 2011. Choice, internal consistency and rationality. Economics and Philosophy 27: 123–149.Google Scholar
Bradley, R. Forthcoming. Decision Theory with a Human Face. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brandt, R. 1979. A Theory of the Good and the Right. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Broome, J. 1991. Utility. Economics and Philosophy 7: 1–12.Google Scholar
Bruni, L. and Sugden, R.. 2007. The road not taken: how psychology was removed from economics and how it might be brought back. The Economic Journal 117: 146–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camerer, C. F. 2005. What is Neuroeconomics? Available online at: http://www.hss.caltech.edu/~camerer/web_material/n.htmlGoogle Scholar
Camerer, C. F. 2006. Wanting, liking, and learning: neuroscience and paternalism. The University of Chicago Law Review 73: 87–110.Google Scholar
Camerer, C. F. 2007. Neuroeconomics: using neuroscience to make economic predictions. The Economic Journal 117: C26–C42.Google Scholar
Camerer, C. F. 2008 a. The case for mindful economics. In The Foundations of Positive and Normative Economics. A Handbook, ed. Caplin, A. and Schotter, A., 43–69. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Camerer, C. F. 2008 b. The potential of neuroeconomics. Economics and Philosophy 24: 369–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camerer, C. F., Loewenstein, G. and Prelec, D.. 2004. Neuroeconomics: why economics needs brains. Scandinavian Journal of Economics 106: 555–579.Google Scholar
Camerer, C. F., Loewenstein, G. and Prelec, D.. 2005. Neuroeconomics: how neuroscience can inform economics. Journal of Economic Literature 43: 9–64.Google Scholar
Caplin, A. and Dean, M.. 2008. Dopamine, reward prediction error, and economics. Quarterly Journal of Economics 123: 663–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caplin, A., Dean, M., Glimcher, P. W. and Rutledge, R. B.. 2010. Measuring beliefs and rewards: a neuroeconomic approach. Quarterly Journal of Economics 125: 923–960.Google Scholar
Chalmers, D. J. 2004. How can we construct a science of consciousness? In The Cognitive Neurosciences III, ed. Gazzaniga, M., 1111–1119. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cisek, P. 2012. Making decisions through a distributed consensus. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 22: 927–936.Google Scholar
Colander, D. 2007. Edgeworth's Hedonimeter and the quest to measure utility. Journal of Economic Perspectives 21: 215–225.Google Scholar
Dayan, P. and Yu, A. J.. 2006. Phasic norepinephrine: a neural interrupt signal for unexpected events. Network: Computation in Neural Systems 17: 335–350.Google Scholar
Dolan, P. and Kahneman, D.. 2008. Interpretations of utility and their implications for the valuation of health. The Economic Journal, 118: 215–234.Google Scholar
Dorris, M. C. and Glimcher, P. W.. 2004. Activity in posterior parietal cortex is correlated with the relative subjective desirability of action. Neuron 44: 365–378.Google Scholar
Edgeworth, F. Y. 1881 [1967]. Mathematical Psychics: an Essay on the Application of Mathematics to the Moral Sciences. New York: Kelley.Google Scholar
Feldman, F. 1988. Two questions about pleasure. In Philosophical Analysis, ed. Austin, D., 59–81. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Feldman, F. 1997. On the intrinsic value of pleasures. Ethics 107: 448–466.Google Scholar
Fisher, I. 1918. Is ‘Utility’ the most suitable term for the concept it is used to denote? American Economic Review 8: 335–337.Google Scholar
FitzGerald, T. H., Seymour, B. and Dolan, R. J.. 2009. The role of human orbitofrontal cortex in value comparison for incommensurable objects. Journal of Neuroscience 29: 8388–8395.Google Scholar
Frederick, S. and Loewenstein, G.. 1999. Hedonic adaptation. In Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology, Kahneman, D., Diener, E. and Schwarz, N., 302–329. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Fredrickson, B. L. and Kahneman, D.. 1993. Duration neglect in retrospective evaluations of affective episodes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology LXV: 45–55.Google Scholar
Fumagalli, R. 2011. On the neural enrichment of economic models: tractability, trade-offs and multiple levels of description. Biology and Philosophy 26: 617–635.Google Scholar
Gigerenzer, G., Todd, M. and the ABC Research Group. 1999. Simple Heuristics that make us Smart, 119–140. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Glimcher, P. W. 2009. Choice: towards a standard back-pocket model. In Neuroeconomics: Decision Making and the Brain, ed. Glimcher, P. W., Camerer, C., Fehr, E. and Poldrack, R., 503–521. London: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Glimcher, P. W. 2011. Foundations of Neuroeconomic Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Glimcher, P. W. and Rustichini, A.. 2004. Neuroeconomics: the consilience of brain and decision. Science 306 (5695): 447–452.Google Scholar
Glimcher, P. W., Dorris, M. C., and Bayer, H. M.. 2005. Physiological utility theory and the neuroeconomics of choice. Games and Economic Behavior 52: 213–256.Google Scholar
Gul, F. and Pesendorfer, W.. 2008. The case for mindless economics. In The Foundations of Positive and Normative Economics: A Handbook, ed. Caplin, A. and Schotter, A., 3–42. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hare, T. A., O'Doherty, J., Camerer, C. F., Schultz, W. and Rangel, A.. 2008. Dissociating the role of the orbitofrontal cortex and the striatum in the computation of goal values and prediction errors. Journal of Neuroscience 28 (22): 5623–5630.Google Scholar
Hausman, D. M. 2010. Hedonism and welfare economics. Economics and Philosophy 26: 321–344.Google Scholar
Hausman, D. M. and McPherson, M. S. 2009. Preference satisfaction and welfare economics. Economics and Philosophy 25: 1–25.Google Scholar
Hektner, J. M., Schmidt, J. A. and Csikszentmihalyi, M.. 2006. Experience Sampling Method: Measuring the Quality of Everyday Life. New York: Sage.Google Scholar
Hunt, L. T., Kolling, N., Soltani, A., Woolrich, M. W., Rushworth, M. F. and Behrens, T. E.. 2012. Mechanisms underlying cortical activity during value-guided choice. Nature Neuroscience 15: 470–476.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackson, F. 1982. Epiphenomenal qualia. Philosophical Quarterly 32: 127–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kable, J. W. and Glimcher, P. W.. 2009. The neurobiology of decision: consensus and controversy. Neuron 63: 733–745.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. 1999. Objective happiness. In Well-Being: the Foundations of Hedonic Psychology, ed. Kahneman, D., Diener, E. and Schwarz, N.. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. 2000 a. Experienced utility and objective happiness: a moment-based approach. In Choices, Values, and Frames, ed. Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D., ch. 37. New York: Cambridge University Press and Russell Sage Foundation. Available at http://www.cepr.org/meets/wkcn/3/3503/papers/kahneman.pdfGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D. 2000 b. New challenges to the rationality assumption. In Choices, Values, and Frames, ed. Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D., ch. 42. New York: Cambridge University Press and Russell Sage Foundation. Available at http://www.cepr.org/meets/wkcn/3/3503/papers/kahneman.pdfGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Krueger, A.. 2006. Developments in the measurement of subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Perspective 20: 3–24.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Snell, J.. 1990. Predicting utility. In Insights in Decision Making, ed. Hogarth, R., 295–311. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Sugden, R.. 2005. Experienced utility as a standard of policy evaluation. Environmental and Resource Economics 32: 161–181.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Thaler, R. H.. 2006. Anomalies utility maximization and experienced utility. Journal of Economic Perspectives 20: 221–234.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Varey, C.. 1991. Notes on the psychology of utility. In Interpersonal Comparisons of Well-Being, ed. Elster, J. and Roemer, J., 127–163. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., Slovic, P. and Tversky, A., A. 1982. Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., Wakker, P. and Sarin, R.. 1997. Back to Bentham? Explorations of experienced utility. Quarterly Journal of Economics 112: 375–406.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., Kreuger, A., Schkade, D., Schwarz, N. and Stone, A.. 2004. A survey method for characterizing daily life experience: the day reconstruction method. Science 306: 1776–1780.Google Scholar
Kelman, M. 2005. Hedonic psychology and the ambiguities of ‘welfare’. Philosophy and Public Affairs 33: 391–412.Google Scholar
Knutson, B., Adams, C. M., Fong, G. W. and Hommer, D.. 2001 a. Anticipation of increasing monetary reward selectively recruits nucleus accumbens. Journal of Neuroscience 21: RC159.Google Scholar
Knutson, B., Fong, G. W., Adams, C. M., Varner, J. L. and Hommer, D.. 2001 b. Dissociation of reward anticipation and outcome with event-related FMRI. NeuroReport 12: 3683–3687.Google Scholar
Knutson, B., Fong, G. W., Bennett, S. M., Adams, C. M. and Hommer, D.. 2003. A region of mesial prefrontal cortex tracks monetarily rewarding outcomes: characterization with rapid event-related FMRI. NeuroImage 18: 263–272.Google Scholar
Landreth, A. and Bickle, J.. 2008. Neuroeconomics, neurophysiology and the common currency hypohtesis. Economics and Philosophy 24: 419–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, D. J. and Glimcher, P. W.. 2012. The root of all value: a neural common currency for choice. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 22: 1–12.Google Scholar
Lichtenstein, S. and Slovic, P.. 1971. Reversals of preference between bids and choices in gambling situations. Journal of Experimental Psychology 89: 46–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loewenstein, G. and Haisley, E.. 2008. The economist as therapist: methodological ramifications of ‘light’ paternalism. In Perspectives on the Future of Economics: Positive and Normative Foundations, ed. Caplin, A. and Schotter, A., 210–245. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loomes, G., Starmer, C. and Sugden, R.. 1991. Observing violations of transitivity by experimental methods. Econometrica 59: 425–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machina, M. 1982. Expected utility analysis without the independence axiom. Econometrica 50: 277–323.Google Scholar
Mitchell, D. G. 2011. The nexus between decision making and emotion regulation: a review of convergent neurocognitive substrates. Behavioural Brain Research 217: 215–231.Google Scholar
Montague, R. and Berns, G. S.. 2002. Neural economics and the biological substrates of valuation. Neuron 36: 265–284.Google Scholar
Nagel, T. 1974. What is it like to be a bat? Philosophical Review 83: 435–450.Google Scholar
Nagel, T. 1979. Mortal Questions. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nozick, R. 1974. Anarchy, State and Utopia. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Okasha, S. 2000. The underdetermination of theory by data and the ‘strong programme’ in the sociology of knowledge. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 14: 283–297.Google Scholar
Padoa-Schioppa, C. 2011. Neurobiology of economic choice: a good-based model. Annual Review of Neuroscience 34: 333–359.Google Scholar
Papineau, D. 2002. Thinking about Consciousness. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Papineau, D. 2003. Could there be a science of consciousness? Nous 13: 205–220.Google Scholar
Pareto, V. 1909 [1971]. Manual of Political Economy, ed. Schwier, A. S. and Page, A. N., Translated by Schwier, A. S.. New York: A. M. Kelley.Google Scholar
Park, J. W. and Zak, J.. 2007. Neuroeconomic studies. Analyse & Kritik 29: 47–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Passingham, R. 2009. How good is the macaque monkey model of the human brain? Current Opinion in Neurobiology 19: 6–11.Google Scholar
Perry, D. 1967. The Concept of Pleasure. The Hague: Mouton & Co.Google Scholar
Pigou, A. C. 1920 [2002]. The Economics of Welfare London. New Brunswick, NJ: Transactions Press.Google Scholar
Platt, M. L. and Huettel, S. A.. 2008. Risky business: the neuroeconomics of decision making under uncertainty. Nature Neuroscience 11: 398–403.Google Scholar
Quartz, S. R. 2008. From cognitive science to cognitive neuroscience to neuroeconomics. Economics and Philosophy 24: 459–471.Google Scholar
Rangel, A. and Hare, T.. 2010. Neural computations associated with goal-directed choice. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 20: 262–270.Google Scholar
Read, D. 2007. Experienced utility: utility theory from Jeremy Bentham to Daniel Kahneman. Thinking and Reasoning 13: 45–61.Google Scholar
Redgrave, P. and Gurney, K. N.. 2006. The short-latency dopamine signal: a role in discovering novel actions? Nature Reviews Neuroscience 7: 967–975.Google Scholar
Ross, D. 2008 a. Two styles of neuroeconomics. Economics and Philosophy 24: 473–483.Google Scholar
Ross, D. 2008 b. Economics, cognitive science and social cognition. Journal of Cognitive Systems Research 9: 125–135.Google Scholar
Rubinstein, A. 2008. Comments on neuroeconomics. Economics and Philosophy 24: 485–494.Google Scholar
Rubinstein, A. and Salant, Y.. 2012. Eliciting welfare preferences from behavioral datasets. Review of Economic Studies 79: 375–387.Google Scholar
Rushworth, M. F., Kolling, N., Sallet, J. and Mars, R. B.. 2012. Valuation and decision-making in frontal cortex: one or many serial or parallel systems? Current Opinion in Neurobiology 22: 946–955.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P. A. 1938. A note on the pure theory of consumer's behavior. Economica, New Series 5 (17): 61–71.Google Scholar
Savage, L. 1954. The Foundations of Statistics. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Schultz, W. 2000. Multiple reward signals in the brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 1: 189–207.Google Scholar
Sebastian, C. L., Fontaine, N. M., Bird, G., Blakemore, S. J., Brito, S. A., McCrory, E. J. and Viding, E.. 2012. Neural processing associated with cognitive and affective theory of mind in adolescents and adults. Social Cognitive Affective Neuroscience 7: 53–63.Google Scholar
Sen, A. 1991. Utility. Ideas and terminology. Economics and Philosophy 7: 277–283.Google Scholar
Sidgwick, H. 1874. The Methods of Ethics, 1st Edn. London: Macmillan & Co. Ltd.Google Scholar
Smith, D. V., Hayden, B. Y., Truong, T. K., Song, A. W., Platt, M. L., and Huettel, S. A., 2010. Distinct value signals in anterior and posterior ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Journal of Neuroscience 30: 2490–2495.Google Scholar
Sugden, R. 1991. Rational choice: a survey of contributions from economics and philosophy. The Economic Journal 101: 751–785.Google Scholar
Sugden, R. 2004. The opportunity criterion: consumer sovereignty without the assumption of coherent preferences. American Economic Review 94: 1014–1033.Google Scholar
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D.. 1981. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211 (4481): 453–458.Google Scholar
Vromen, J. 2010. On the surprising finding that expected utility is literally computed in the brain. Journal of Economic Methodology 17: 17–36.Google Scholar
Vromen, J. 2012. Review of Foundations of Neuroeconomic Analysis, by P. W. Glimcher. Oxford University Press, 2010. Economics and Philosophy 28: 108–113.Google Scholar