Sublime
An inspiration engine for ideas
If people were perfectly rational agents, if the brain weren't so bounded, then writing down the last two digits of their Social Security numbers should have no effect on their auction bids. In other words, a student whose Social Security number ended with a low-value figure (such as 10) should be willing to pay roughly the same price as someone
... See moreJonah Lehrer • How We Decide
Daniel Kahneman, Jack L. Knetsch, and Richard H. Thaler, “Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias,” Journal of Economic Perspective 5, no. 1 (1991): 193– 206, http://users.tricity.wsu.edu/~achaudh/kahnemanetal.pdf
Greg Mckeown • Essentialism: The Disciplined Pursuit of Less
The point of these studies is that moral judgment is like aesthetic judgment. When you see a painting, you usually know instantly and automatically whether you like it. If someone asks you to explain your judgment, you confabulate. You don’t really know why you think something is beautiful, but your interpreter module (the rider) is skilled at
... See moreJonathan Haidt • The Happiness Hypothesis: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom
But in real life, most things aren’t logical – they are psycho-logical.
Rory Sutherland • Alchemy: The Dark Art and Curious Science of Creating Magic in Brands, Business, and Life
If people were perfectly rational—if they made decisions solely by crunching the numbers—then subjects would always choose to invest, since the expected overall value on each round is higher if one invests ($1.25, or $2.50 multiplied by the 50 percent chance of getting tails on the coin toss) than if one does not ($1). In fact, if a person invests
... See moreJonah Lehrer • How We Decide
The different choices in the two frames fit prospect theory, in which choices between gambles and sure things are resolved differently, depending on whether the outcomes are good or bad. Decision makers tend to prefer the sure thing over the gamble (they are risk averse) when the outcomes are good. They tend to reject the sure thing and accept the
... See moreDaniel Kahneman • Thinking, Fast and Slow
They were the economist Amos Tversky and the psychologist Daniel Kahneman. Together, the two launched the field of behavioral economics—and Kahneman won a Nobel Prize—by showing that man is a very irrational beast. Feeling, they discovered, is a form of thinking.
Tahl Raz • Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It
I]t is self-evident that people are neither fully rational nor completely selfish, and that their tastes are anything but stable.”
Chris Voss • Never Split the Difference: Negotiating as if Your Life Depended on It
2. Loss Aversion Creates Permanent Programs: Once you give people something (a perk, a feature, a benefit), it’s nearly impossible to take back. The founder... See more