About this Research Topic
The animal kingdom provides useful insights to understand humans. A non-human ancestor may have had to decide whether a movement in the woods was from a gush of wind or a hungry predator - mistaking a lurking predator for a harmless gush of wind (type 2 error) was costlier than mistaking the wind for a predator (type-1 error). A strategy to always assume the worst and run for life would explain observed risk-aversion and present-bias among humans. Non-human entities frequently face trade-offs in relation to their survival. Each cell in a beehive is an almost perfectly-shaped hexagon - a form of perfection that mud-dauber wasps do not worry about since the input (mud) needed by the latter is abundant in nature in comparison to that (wax) available for a bee-hive. The perfect-hexagon solves a problem that interested greats like Johannes Kepler. Migratory moths have evolved a simple heuristic (maintaining a constant acute angle with respect to a celestial body) to move in straight lines and minimize distance.
We invite papers from scientific fields in addition to economics - including evolutionary biology, primatology, microbiology, entomology, and psychology. Theoretical papers could include approaches to understand why certain heuristics have evolved among certain species - for example, the use of mixed-strategies observed among what are now nicknamed as 'rock-paper-scissors lizards'. Empirical and causal studies that examine the comparative statics and transitional dynamics in relation to observations that appear puzzling. For example, moths do not spiral their way to sources of fire to commit suicide - it is a consequence of the heuristic discussed above - this equilibrium was only suitable for a world without artificial lights.
This project aims to establish a collaborative platform for economists and biological and natural scientists to explore the intersection of economic intuition and biological systems. By fostering interdisciplinary dialogue, we seek to:
• Integrate economic intuition into the biological sciences.
• Provide behavioral economists with a deeper understanding of biological system complexities.
• Identify and analyze common heuristics employed by both humans and animals.
• Develop a comparative framework for human and animal economic psychology.
• Ultimately, advance knowledge in both economics and biology through the application of interdisciplinary approaches to shared challenges.
We invite papers from scientific fields in addition to economics - including evolutionary biology, primatology, microbiology, entomology, and psychology. Theoretical papers could include approaches to understand why certain heuristics have evolved among certain species - for example, the use of mixed-strategies observed among what are now nicknamed as 'rock-paper-scissors lizards'. Empirical and causal studies that examine the comparative statics and transitional dynamics in relation to observations that appear puzzling. For example, moths do not spiral their way to sources of fire to commit suicide - it is a consequence of the heuristic discussed above - this equilibrium was only suitable for a world without artificial lights.
This project aims to establish a collaborative platform for economists and biological and natural scientists to explore the intersection of economic intuition and biological systems. By fostering interdisciplinary dialogue, we seek to:
• Integrate economic intuition into the biological sciences.
• Provide behavioral economists with a deeper understanding of biological system complexities.
• Identify and analyze common heuristics employed by both humans and animals.
• Develop a comparative framework for human and animal economic psychology.
• Ultimately, advance knowledge in both economics and biology through the application of interdisciplinary approaches to shared challenges.
Keywords: Heuristics, thumb-rules, trade-offs, comparative statics
Important Note: All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.
