不會演戲的經濟學家不是好股神，這位新晉諾獎得主有點意思

Peter Gardenfors, member of the committee for the Economics Prize said, Thaler's achievements successfully integrated economics and psychology, as he made economics "more human." And his theories "help people make better economic decisions."
諾貝爾經濟學獎委員會成員皮特•加登福斯稱，塞勒的研究成果成功地將經濟學和心理學整合在一起，讓經濟學更“人性化”。他的理論“幫助人們做出更好的經濟決策”。

塞勒1945年出生在美國，是行爲經濟學之父，現執教於芝加哥大學商學院，同時在國民經濟研究局主管行爲經濟學的研究工作。

塞勒還是一家基金公司的創始人，專注美國小企業股。在他的行爲經濟學理論下，公司替摩根大通管理的一隻基金表現優異，2015年基金規模激增1倍至37億美元，目前資產總規模已達60億美元。

不會演戲的經濟學家不是好股神，如果你看過獲得2016年奧斯卡最佳改編劇本獎的電影《大空頭》，一定會覺得這位新晉諾貝爾獎得主有些眼熟。

Thaler's work earned him a glamorous foray into the movie business when he made a cameo appearance, alongside Christian Bale, Steve Carell and Ryan Gosling, in the 2015 movie 'The Big Short' about the credit and housing bubble collapse that led to the 2008 global financial crisis.
塞勒曾憑藉其成就得到一個進軍電影業的機會，他在2015年的《大空頭》中客串了一個小角色，和克里斯蒂安•貝爾、史蒂夫•卡瑞爾、瑞恩•高斯林同框出鏡。這部電影講述的是引發2008年全球金融危機的信貸與房地產泡沫崩潰。

In his cameo, he appeared in a scene alongside pop star Selena Gomez to explain the 'hot hand fallacy,' in which people think whatever's happening now is going to continue to happen into the future.
在塞勒客串的一幕中，他出現在流行歌手賽琳娜•戈麥斯旁邊，解釋着“熱手效應”，這個理論說的是人們認爲現在發生的一切將來還會繼續發生。

用塞勒徒弟、中歐國際工商學院金融學副教授餘方的話來評價塞勒的學術風格，那就是有點“非主流”，“總跟別人做的研究不太一樣”。

作爲一位傳統學術理論的挑戰者，塞勒認爲：人們的行爲並不像傳統經濟學理論中認爲的那樣理性。

Thaler has incorporated psychologically realistic assumptions into analyses of economic decision-making. By exploring the consequences of limited rationality, social preferences, and lack of self-control, he has shown how these human traits systematically affect individual decisions as well as market outcomes.
塞勒將心理學上的現實假設整合進經濟決策分析中。通過探索“有限理性”、“社會偏好”和“自制力缺乏”等因素的影響，揭示了這些人性特徵對個體選擇和市場結果產生的系統性影響。

聽起來太高大上？下面我們將用盡量通俗的語言來介紹塞勒的主要理論：

Limited rationality
有限理性

Thaler developed the theory of mental accounting, explaining how people simplify financial decision-making by creating separate accounts in their minds, focusing on the narrow impact of each individual decision rather than its overall effect.
塞勒創建了“心理賬戶”理論，闡述了人們是如何通過在內心創建不同的賬戶來簡化經濟決策的：人們會聚焦於單個決策的狹隘影響，而不是它們的總體效果。

舉例說明：

We may have a “vacation” budget in our heads, and a “household maintenance” budget, and we tend not to mix them. If we get an unusually good deal on our airfare to Hawaii, we won’t use the savings to have the carpets cleaned; we’ll spend more at the bar on our vacation, keeping the money in the appropriate bucket.
我們腦海裏有一筆“度假預算”和一筆“家庭維護預算”，我們通常不會將兩者混在一起。如果我們能以特別划算的價格買到飛往夏威夷的機票，我們不會把省下的錢用來清潔地毯；我們度假時會在酒吧花得更多，讓這筆錢花在原本的預算上。

He also showed how aversion to losses can explain why people value the same item more highly when they own it than when they don’t, a phenomenon called the endowment effect.
塞勒還向我們介紹瞭如何用厭惡損失來解釋爲什麼人們擁有某件東西時，會比沒有的時候更高估其價值，即“稟賦效應”。

其實“稟賦效應”在生活中有很多體現，比如下面這個經典的擲硬幣打賭的例子：

In the first case, you are offered the chance to bet on the toss of a coin: You can win $10 if you call the coin toss correctly, or lose $10 if you call the toss incorrectly. Most people will decline the bet.
在第一種情況下，你有機會玩兒擲硬幣打賭：如果你猜對可以贏得10美元，如果你猜錯就會輸掉10美元。大多數人會放棄這個賭注。

In the second case, a bet is described differently: You are told that you are about to lose $10, but there’s a 50-50 chance you could come out with no loss—but with the prospect of a $20 loss if the coin toss works against you. That’s really the same bet as in the first example, but framed as loss avoidance rather than seeking a gain. People are much more likely to take the second bet; they will take larger risks to try to avoid a loss.
在第二種情況中，賭局的描述有所不同：你被告知將輸掉10美元，但有50%的機會不輸錢，不過如果猜錯的話將輸掉20美元。這和第一個賭局是相同的，但卻被視爲是在避免損失，而不是尋求利益的。人們更傾向於參加第二個賭局，冒更大的風險以盡力避免損失。

Social preferences
社會偏好

Thaler’s theoretical and experimental research on fairness has been influential. He showed how consumers’ fairness concerns may stop firms from raising prices in periods of high demand, but not in times of rising costs.
塞勒關於公平的理論和實驗研究很有影響力。他稱，消費者對公平的關注會阻止公司在需求增加的時候漲價，但卻不會阻止公司在成本上升時漲價。

還是用一個通俗易懂的例子來說明：

Let’s say you run a building supply company located in a hurricane warning area, and everyone is coming in to buy plywood. It would be bad practice to raise prices with a sign that says: “We have raised our prices so that plywood is only bought by those who really need it.”
假設你在颶風警報區開了一家建築用品公司，所有人都來買膠合板（一種裝修常用的板材）。錯誤的做法是將標語寫成：“爲了將膠合板賣給真正需要的人，我們漲價了。”

Good practice would be to raise prices with a sign that says “Our wholesale cost of plywood has increased, and we have to pass the cost along to you. But we have not raised our profit margin.”
要想漲價，正確的做法是將標語寫成：“我們的膠合板批發成本上漲了，不得不把成本轉嫁給你們。但是我們的利潤並沒有增加。”

Thaler and his colleagues devised the dictator game, an experimental tool that has been used in numerous studies to measure attitudes to fairness in different groups of people around the world.
塞勒和他的同事還設計了“獨裁者博弈”，這個實驗工具被應用在大量研究中，用於衡量世界各地的不同羣體對於公平的態度。

Lack of self-control
自制力缺乏

Thaler has also shed new light on the old observation that New Year’s resolutions can be hard to keep. He showed how to analyze self-control problems using a planner-doer model, which is similar to the frameworks psychologists and neuroscientists now use to describe the internal tension between long-term planning and short-term doing.
新年計劃難以執行是一個世紀難題，塞勒還爲解決這個問題提供了新線索。他向人們展示瞭如何通過“計劃者-執行者模型”分析自控問題，這個模型與當前心理學家和神經科學家用來解釋長期計劃與短期執行間的矛盾的理論類似。

Succumbing to short-term temptation is an important reason why our plans to save for old age, or make healthier lifestyle choices, often fail. In his applied work, Thaler demonstrated how nudging – a term he coined – may help people exercise better self-control when saving for a pension, as well in other contexts.
我們打算存養老金，想選擇更健康的生活方式，卻經常失敗，一個重要的原因就是我們會向短期誘惑屈服。在塞勒的應用研究中，他展示瞭如何通過“助推”（他自創的術語）來幫助人們更好地控制自己存下養老金，以及完成其他事情。

“助推理論”的原理：

缺少思考時間、習慣以及失敗的決策意味着即使事實分析擺在眼前，比如明知健康飲食的好處，我們仍然可能選擇漢堡和薯條。

We're hungry, we're in a hurry and burger and chips is what we always buy.
我們很餓，很着急，而漢堡薯條是我們一直購買的食物。

Nudge theory takes account of this, based as it is on the simple premise that people will often choose what is easiest over what is wisest.
助推理論考慮到了這點，人們往往會做出最容易的選擇，而不是最明智的選擇，該理論就是建立在這個簡單前提之上。

Tests have shown that putting healthier foods on a higher shelf increases sales.
測試表明，將更健康的食品擺放在更高的貨架上，銷量會增加。

The food is more likely to be in someone's eye line and therefore "nudge" that person towards the purchase - whether they had any idea about the obesity argument or not.
擺放在高層貨架上的食物更容易進入消費者的視線，因此會“助推”人們購買，不論他們是否瞭解關於肥胖症問題。