On behavioral decision and game theory

The behavioral approach in the sense of studying decision-making in the light of observed choice behavior has a long tradition in psychology. Psychologists, for instance, proposed the idea of forming self-generated aspiration levels long before bounded rationality and satisfying behavior became topics in economics and considerably contributed to behavioral research. Most economists are still reluctant to question the – in economics traditional – rational choice assumption and refer to deviations of actual from optimal behavior as anomalies for which they account by slightly generalizing optimality in ways rendering observed behavior optimal. When the same ideas like reciprocity or fairness concerns seem to explain many deviations from what would be materially optimal, this is and has been very informative for behavioral research. Nevertheless, generalizing optimality neglects how actual human decision-makers cognitively perceive decision and game-playing tasks and are emotionally affected by them.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Review of Behavioral Economics
Published
2026-09-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1108/rbe-09-2024-1001
Primary Topic
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

On behavioral decision and game theory

Werner Gueth, Joyce Kaeser, Maxie Schulze
Review of Behavioral Economics
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
article

On behavioral decision and game theory

Werner Gueth, Joyce Kaeser, Maxie Schulze
article en

Abstract

The behavioral approach in the sense of studying decision-making in the light of observed choice behavior has a long tradition in psychology. Psychologists, for instance, proposed the idea of forming self-generated aspiration levels long before bounded rationality and satisfying behavior became topics in economics and considerably contributed to behavioral research. Most economists are still reluctant to question the – in economics traditional – rational choice assumption and refer to deviations of actual from optimal behavior as anomalies for which they account by slightly generalizing optimality in ways rendering observed behavior optimal. When the same ideas like reciprocity or fairness concerns seem to explain many deviations from what would be materially optimal, this is and has been very informative for behavioral research. Nevertheless, generalizing optimality neglects how actual human decision-makers cognitively perceive decision and game-playing tasks and are emotionally affected by them.

Review of Behavioral Economics
Max Planck Institute for Mathematics (DE)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

On behavioral decision and game theory — Werner Gueth, Joyce Kaeser, et al. · Review of Behavioral Economics (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS