Cultural Neuroeconomics of Intertemporal Choice--论文代写范文精选

我们初步分析的时间贴现收益和损失，美国和日本确认的文化神经理论预测。未来的研究方向,采用通过神经网络计算模型,简要概述和讨论。下面的paper代写范文进行详述。

Abstract 
According to theories of cultural neuroscience, Westerners and Easterners may have distinct styles of cognition (e.g., different allocation of attention). Previous research has shown that Westerners and Easterners tend to utilize analytical and holistic cognitive styles, respectively. On the other hand, little is known regarding the cultural differences in neuroeconomic behavior. For instance, economic decisions may be affected by cultural differences in neurocomputational processing underlying attention; however, this area of neuroeconomics has been largely understudied. In the present paper, we attempt to bridge this gap by considering the links between the theory of cultural neuroscience and neuroeconomic theory of the role of attention in intertemporal choice. 

We predict that (i) Westerners are more impulsive and inconsistent in intertemporal choice in comparison to Easterners, and (ii) Westerners more steeply discount delayed monetary losses than Easterners. We examine these predictions by utilizing a novel temporal discounting model based on Tsallis’ statistics (i.e. a q-exponential model). Our preliminary analysis of temporal discounting of gains and losses by Americans and Japanese confirmed the predictions from the cultural neuroeconomic theory. Future study directions, employing computational modeling via neural networks, are briefly outlined and discussed. Keywords: Cultural neuroscience, neuroeconomics, intertemporal choice, attention allocation, Tsallis’ statistics, neural networks.

Introduction 
People discount future events both by preferring to obtain an immediate gain (even if it is smaller than the one that may be obtained in the future), and by trying to avoid an immediate loss, even if it is smaller than the one that may incur in the future (Frederick, Loewenstein, & O’ Donoghue, 2002). In this paper we propose that this phenomenon is likely to take different forms across cultures because of cultural biases in attention allocation. Consistent with recent work on cultural psychology (Markus & Kitayama, 1991; Masuda & Nisbett, 2001), we assume that people engaging in Western cultures (Westerners) tend to focus their attention on the magnitude of a reward in lieu of its context, including both a delay until receipt and a distant object. Accordingly, these individuals may be much more strongly affected by a proximal object than by the distant one with respect to the near future. 

Moreover, they may be relatively impervious to the exact length of the time interval between the two objects, because they may tend to focus on each temporal fragment (a divided portion of the time interval between more delayed rewards) separately, rather than focusing on the undivided time-interval between rewards. In contrast, individuals engaging in Eastern cultures (Easterners) tend to allocate their attention more holistically to both an immediate and a distant object, as well as to the time interval between them. When compared to Westerners, Easterners may then be expected to discount the future less, and moreover, even when they do it, they may do so as a steady function of the length of the time interval. In the present paper, we first formulate these conceptual predictions in terms of a mathematical model of future discounting based on Tsallis’ statistics, and we report a cross-cultural experiment designed to test the specific derivations of the model. Finally, we propose future directions in cultural neuroeconomics employing neurocomputational models based on Tsallis’ statistics.

Intertemporal choice model based on Tsallis’ statistics and psychophysics of time 
When given a choice between two possible times at which an outcome can occur, people usually prefer to receive it earlier if it is a good outcome, and later if it is a bad one (Frederick et al., 2002). This phenomenon of temporal discounting has been the subject of much research in neuroeconomics and neuropsychopharmacology, which has revealed how the strength of the preference for earlier outcomes over later ones is influenced by factors including the magnitude and sign of the outcomes (Frederick et al., 2002) and temporal cognition (Takahashi, 2005, 2006; Wittmann & Paulus, 2008). 

Specifically, (i) people are patient with respect to the distant future but impulsive with respect to the near future, when they choose between smaller sooner rewards and larger later ones (preference reversal due to ”hyperbolic discounting”, also referred to as ”present bias”; for details see Soman et al., 2005), and (ii) people make more impulsive choice when the length of delay is perceived as a sum of shorter timeintervals (”subadditive discounting”; see Read & Roelofsma, 2003). We provide examples of time-inconsistency and impulsivity in temporal discounting in Appendix A. These inconsistencies in intertemporal choice cannot be accounted for by a conventional model of temporal discounting in microeconomic theory (”exponential discounting”; see Frederick et al., 2002). As a consequence, both impulsivity (strong discounting) and inconsistency in temporal discounting (i.e., hyperbolic and subadditive discounting) have extensively been investigated in neuroeconomic studies by employing neuroimaging techniques (Boettiger et al., 2007; Hariri et al., 2006; Kable & Glimcher, 2007; McClure et al., 2004; McClure et al., 2007; Monterosso et al., 2007; Wittmann, Leland, & Paulus, 2007), stimulating thereby much further research and debate.

Cultural neuroscience of attention and thought 
In recent years, cultural psychologists have begun to show that there are systematic cultural variations in human (neuro)psychological processes (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). These researchers assume that neuropsychological processes are by nature socially driven. According to their theories, the neuropsychological processes are shaped through their interaction with cultural, social and environmental factors. Based on this assumption, it has often been examined how particular cognitive processes (e.g., attention allocation) could be manifested in particular cultural contexts and how different cultural environments in turn lead to the development of different patterns of ability. 

These studies reported that East Asians’ patterns of attention were in general ”context dependent”, whereas Westerners’ patterns of attention were ”context independent”. Accordingly, Westerners are more likely to focus on some salient objects or contents (”analytic” attention), whereas East Asians are more likely to attend to the global context (”holistic” attention) of an object, and its broad spectrum of perceptual and conceptual fields, in addition to its local characteristics (see e.g. Masuda & Nisbett, 2001; Kitayama, Duffy, Kawamura, & Larsen, 2003; Chua, Boland, & Nisbett, 2005). Chiao & Ambady (2007) have recently proposed a ”cultural neuroscience” approach in order to integrate biological perspectives into endeavors of cultural psychology. 

This approach employs both biological (e.g., neurophysiological, neurogenetic, and neuroendocrinological methods) and cultural psychological experiments, in a manner similar to neuroeconomics unifying biopsychology and economics (Glimcher & Rustichini, 2004; Lee, 2005; Loewenstein et al., 2008; Sanfey et al., 2006; Zak, 2004). Furthermore, a recent neuroimaging study (Hedden et al., 2008) identified neural correlates of cultural differences in attention control in simple visual attention tasks. Therefore, it is highly important for further neuroeconomic investigations to incorporate neurocomputational processes mediating attention in order to establish neuroeconomically plausible models of decision-making.

Attention and perception in neural valuation of delayed rewards 
In neuroeconomic studies of the valuation of delayed rewards, it has been reported that (i) immediate rewards activate midbrain regions (McClure et al., 2004, 2007), and (ii) subjective value of the delayed reward is encoded as the midbrain dopaminergic activities (Kable & Glimcher, 2007). Regarding the role of temporal cognition in intertemporal choice, Wittmann and colleagues reported that the psychological time is represented in the striatum (Wittmann et al., 2007); while no neuroimaging study to date examined the neural correlates of attention allocation during intertemporal choice. 

Recent behavioral economics studies (Ebert & Prelec, 2007; Zauberman et al., 2008) have demonstrated that modulation of attention to time perspectives (time-sensitivity) changes the human intertemporal choice behavior by shifting the functional form of the psychophysical time-perception from a logarithmic to a linear function. This is consistent with the psychophysical account of hyperbolic discounting (Takahashi, 2005, 2006). Together, these studies suggest that control of attention allocation to time explains both hyperbolic and subadditive discounting. Specifically, (i) if a subject pays more attention to the delayed reward but less attention to the time-length of delay (”time-insensitivity”), her/his temporal discounting may be inconsistent due to non-linearly distorted time-perception (i.e., hyperbolic discounting), and (ii) if a subject focuses her/his attention on each temporal ”segment” along the future time (i.e., ”analytic” temporal cognition) rather than overviews the future time perspective as a whole (i.e., ”holistic” temporal cognition), her/his temporal discounting may be exaggerated (i.e., subadditive discounting). In both cases, it can be predicted that narrower allocation of attention should be associated with more impulsive and inconsistent temporal discounting behavior.(论文代写)

51Due网站原创范文除特殊说明外一切图文著作权归51Due所有；未经51Due官方授权谢绝任何用途转载或刊发于媒体。如发生侵犯著作权现象，51Due保留一切法律追诉权。
更多论文代写范文欢迎访问我们主页 www.51due.com 当然有论文代写需求可以和我们24小时在线客服 QQ:800020041 联系交流。-X(论文代写)