close
最近在Financial Times看到一篇有趣的文章，跟大家分享！這篇文章主要討論的問題是：大家看完節目之後，鼓掌到底代表什麼意義？為什麼大家會鼓掌鼓個不停？英國金融時報採用賽局論(Game Theory)觀點來解釋這個情況，請看下文分曉！
<讀者去文詢問函>
Dear Economist,
At the end of concerts the performers leave the stage to the sound of applause. I prefer to save my energy, especially when many of my fellow concert-goers are applauding on my behalf.
From a strictly economic viewpoint I believe that my behaviour is rational but why do others not behave as I do? Please do not fob me off with the explanation that the applause is thanks for an excellent performance.
I bought my ticket in the expectation of an excellent performance and the delivery of that is the performers living up to their side of the bargain.
Kind regards,
S.C. Li, via e-mail
<金融時報回應>
Dear S.C. Li,
What can I say? People do not always behave rationally. Perhaps the trendy behavioural economists will strap audiences into brain scanners and produce an explanation; I do not know.
One thing of which we can be sure is that rational audiences do not applaud. The renowned economist Avinash Dixit(有名的賽局論經濟學家), perhaps fearing that his students will be all-too-rational after his course of game theory, offers an incentive payment of $40 to the last person to stop clapping at the end of his lecture series.
Research by Jeremy Bulow and Paul Klemperer shows that in such circumstances, the rational strategy is for all but two to stop applauding almost immediately. As long as there are several others clapping, one extra clap is so unlikely to deliver you victory that you should give up before bothering to clap it. Only if just one opponent is clapping should you persist. Recently, however, six of Professor Dixit's students clapped for over two hours before agreeing to share the prize. Perhaps they did not understand his material after all.
(By Tim Harford Friday, May 18, 2007)
個人見解：金融時報想強調：人非理性！過去傳統經濟學常假設：人是理性，這個觀點並沒有辦法用來詮釋很多實際的生活現象..(不過這也刺激的行為經濟學的發展！)
<讀者去文詢問函>
Dear Economist,
At the end of concerts the performers leave the stage to the sound of applause. I prefer to save my energy, especially when many of my fellow concert-goers are applauding on my behalf.
From a strictly economic viewpoint I believe that my behaviour is rational but why do others not behave as I do? Please do not fob me off with the explanation that the applause is thanks for an excellent performance.
I bought my ticket in the expectation of an excellent performance and the delivery of that is the performers living up to their side of the bargain.
Kind regards,
S.C. Li, via e-mail
Dear S.C. Li,
What can I say? People do not always behave rationally. Perhaps the trendy behavioural economists will strap audiences into brain scanners and produce an explanation; I do not know.
One thing of which we can be sure is that rational audiences do not applaud. The renowned economist Avinash Dixit(有名的賽局論經濟學家), perhaps fearing that his students will be all-too-rational after his course of game theory, offers an incentive payment of $40 to the last person to stop clapping at the end of his lecture series.
Research by Jeremy Bulow and Paul Klemperer shows that in such circumstances, the rational strategy is for all but two to stop applauding almost immediately. As long as there are several others clapping, one extra clap is so unlikely to deliver you victory that you should give up before bothering to clap it. Only if just one opponent is clapping should you persist. Recently, however, six of Professor Dixit's students clapped for over two hours before agreeing to share the prize. Perhaps they did not understand his material after all.
(By Tim Harford Friday, May 18, 2007)
個人見解：金融時報想強調：人非理性！過去傳統經濟學常假設：人是理性，這個觀點並沒有辦法用來詮釋很多實際的生活現象..(不過這也刺激的行為經濟學的發展！)
全站熱搜
留言列表
{{ article.title }}