Talk:Neuroeconomics

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Economics Mid‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Neuroscience Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

ramifications link[edit]

I noticed that link [1] in the ramifications section does not work? Anyone know where it should lead?

pseudoscience[edit]

Taking a pseudoscience and turning it into a pseudopseudoscience? Wonderful!

Pseudocomment?

I don't see what is pseudoscientific about applying to economics the observations possible with the instrumentation that neuroscience provides. Traditional economics makes assumptions about the way people behave in markets. Neuroeconomics helps us to validate or falsify those assumptions. With such knowledge there is likely to be wider impact on our understanding of human behaviour in an economic context. Surely a worthwhile endeavour. Matt Stan 10:14, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Another reference[edit]

Here's another reference to add, if someone wants to format it appropriately.

Mind games. (2005, Janurary 15). In The Economist, 374, 71.

—Vespristiano 06:40, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Link to commercial firm ?[edit]

The first link ("Applied Neuroscience, Austria") at the external links goes to a kind of advertising for a company.

Is this desired ?

awehring —Preceding unsigned comment added by Awehring (talk • contribs) 13:49, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As Wikipedia is not a directory, I have removed the following: Applied Neuroscience, Austria. If the company itself is notable enough to have its own article at Wikipedia, then it would be a reasonable and desirable link. Otherwise, it's out. This is one of the few remaining advantages that universities still have (?) over other research centres... --Technopat (talk) 10:13, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Understanding Neuroeconomics[edit]

Why did you remove the link the the article about understanding Neuroeconomics. This article no doubtly added value to the Neuroeconomics value.

A contradiction[edit]

There is an apparent contradiction in the article between the last sentence in the "Intertemporal choice" subsection and the second paragraph in the "Neurobiological research techniques" subsection. Does the higher level of blood cortisol correlate with heightened impulsiveness and future discounting, or perhaps doesn't?

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

George Loewenstein (2012).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:32, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]