RATIONALITY IN DECISION MAKING The effect of economic

SUMMARY • OBJECTIVE • PROBLEM • JUSTIFICATION • MAIN DISCUSSIONS • METHODOLOGY • RESULTS

OBJECTIVE Analyze the political and economic assumptions of rationality in decision making in order

PROBLEM People, in the most part, do not make decisions taking into account all

JUSTIFICATION Use of experiments to analyze the results of economic phenomena; Use of cognitive

MAIN DISCUSSIONS R A C I O N A L I T Y HOM

HIPOTHESIS 1. Through the analysis of an unfavorable economic scenario, the voters will choose

METHODOLOGY Economic experiments applied in Political Sciences: • Based on decision‐making in an election;

METHODOLOGY 1. Submission of the work to the ethics and research committee of the

METHODOLOGY PROCEDURES: Procedure 1: No option of communication between students and candidate for questioning;

RESULTS ANALYSES The experiment was carried out with: For data analysis, it was considered:

RESULTS ANALYSES Confidence Interval of Proposition ‐ 5% significance Proposition 1 : 0, 3679

RESULTS ANALYSES Synthesis: • Proposition 2 (pessimistic): concentration of votes; obtained the highest •

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS • Expected sample (300 participants) • Obtained sample (446 participants); • Help

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS POSSIBLE FUTURE DISCUSSIONS • Perform with different undergraduate courses; • Perform with

Slides: 22

Download presentation

RATIONALITY IN DECISION – MAKING: The effect of economic scenarios on voters’ decisions MSc. Ingrid Rafaele Rodrigues Leiria Prof. Ph. D. Tiago Wickstrom Alves July, 2018

SUMMARY • OBJECTIVE • PROBLEM • JUSTIFICATION • MAIN DISCUSSIONS • METHODOLOGY • RESULTS ANALYSES • FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

OBJECTIVE Analyze the political and economic assumptions of rationality in decision making in order to verify by the experimental method the impact of economic scenarios on the voting decisions of voters in a presidential election.

SUMMARY • OBJECTIVE • PROBLEM • JUSTIFICATION • MAIN DISCUSSIONS • METHODOLOGY • RESULTS ANALYSES • FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

PROBLEM People, in the most part, do not make decisions taking into account all the costs and benefits of their choices. Relevance about bias presence in decision making: Loss aversion and heuristics (shortcuts). Do economic scenarios have influence on voters’ decision to choose a presidential candidate?

SUMMARY • OBJECTIVE • PROBLEM • JUSTIFICATION • MAIN DISCUSSIONS • METHODOLOGY • RESULTS ANALYSES • FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

JUSTIFICATION Use of experiments to analyze the results of economic phenomena; Use of cognitive biases to benefit the political area beyond economic. Benefit through insights of behavioral economics; Need to enrich the basic model of rational choice, with premises coming from psychology and political sciences.

SUMMARY • OBJECTIVE • PROBLEM • JUSTIFICATION • MAIN DISCUSSIONS • METHODOLOGY • RESULTS ANALYSES • FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

MAIN DISCUSSIONS R A C I O N A L I T Y HOM O ECO N O M ICUS BEHAVIOURAL ECONOMICS EXPERIMENTAL METHOD

HIPOTHESIS 1. Through the analysis of an unfavorable economic scenario, the voters will choose the proposition to avoid losses; 2. The presence of heuristics in decision‐ making: the decision‐maker in deciding to decide quickly, suffers the influence of shortcuts, making better decisions in a short time of analysis; 3. Decision makers will be more critical in their decision‐making as they have more information.

SUMMARY • OBJECTIVE • PROBLEM • JUSTIFICATION • MAIN DISCUSSIONS • METHODOLOGY • RESULTS ANALYSES • FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

METHODOLOGY Economic experiments applied in Political Sciences: • Based on decision‐making in an election; • Alternatives are already clear and in limited numbers; • These alternatives, predetermined as the candidates, ENDEAVOR to get the votes of the voters.

METHODOLOGY 1. Submission of the work to the ethics and research committee of the University in the case of an economic experiment; 2. Realization of the Protocol of the Experiment; 3. Selection of the participants: Undergraduate students of the School of Management and Business of the University; 4. Candidates: Economics; Undergraduate students or Masters of 5. Sessions: Taken in classes with the prior authorization of teachers.

METHODOLOGY PROCEDURES: Procedure 1: No option of communication between students and candidate for questioning; Procedure 2: With the option of communication between students, without option of communication between students and candidates; Procedure 3: With the option of communication between students and candidates. PROPOSITION: Proposition 1: Optimistic Proposition 2: Pessimistic

SUMMARY • OBJECTIVE • PROBLEM • JUSTIFICATION • MAIN DISCUSSIONS • METHODOLOGY • RESULTS ANALYSES • FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

RESULTS ANALYSES The experiment was carried out with: For data analysis, it was considered: • 21 Classes; • 446 Students; • 10 different candidates; • Throughout the month of September and October 2015. • 20 Classes; • 434 Students

RESULTS ANALYSES Confidence Interval of Proposition ‐ 5% significance Proposition 1 : 0, 3679 ‐ 0, 4631 ‐ 0, 5582 Proposition 2: 0, 4301 ‐ 0, 5265 ‐ 0, 6228 Proposition with the highest concentration of votes: Proposition 2 with 52. 65%. There is a possibility that the values could cross and have a reversal of the winning proposition.

RESULTS ANALYSES Synthesis: • Proposition 2 (pessimistic): concentration of votes; obtained the highest • Influence of shortcuts; • The higher the level of communication between voters and candidates, the more likely it is for people to make more rational decisions.

SUMMARY • OBJECTIVE • PROBLEM • JUSTIFICATION • MAIN DISCUSSIONS • METHODOLOGY • RESULTS ANALYSES • FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS • Expected sample (300 participants) • Obtained sample (446 participants); • Help of different volunteer candidates; • Difference of concentration of votes between genders; • Difference of votes concentration in relation with the different procedures: Procedure 1 Procedure 2 Procedure 3

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS POSSIBLE FUTURE DISCUSSIONS • Perform with different undergraduate courses; • Perform with different levels of schooling; • Apply the discussion in high school, to begin developing students' critical sense before entering the academic environment.

RATIONALITY IN DECISION – MAKING: The effect of economic scenarios on voters’ decisions MSc. Ingrid Rafaele Rodrigues Leiria‐ ingridleiria@gmail. com Prof. Ph. D. Tiago Wickstrom Alves – twa@unisinos. br Thank you! July, 2018