A Quote by Alexander Nix

The idea of applying psychology or behavioural sciences to communication is not a new one. It's very old behavioural economics. If it gives you some additional insights - so be it.
Interestingly, human irrationality is a hot topic in economics at the moment. Behavioural economics it's called, on the cusp of economics and psychology.
Personally, I don't see old economics and behavioural economics as opposed. It is useful to assume people are rational as a good approximation to their long term behaviour, but it would be unwise not to think how in practice their behaviour may deviate from that simplifying assumption.
The great thing about behavioural psychology and economics is that they help us to see that there are actually pretty good reasons why human beings swing from greed to fear, and why we're not really calculating machines or utility-maximisers.
I've learned that leadership requires a number of qualities. It's behavioural, tactical, technical, about communication... everyone has these to varying degrees. I try to encourage players to show theirs.
Most disciplines invite us to more mindfulness, and more contentment. Not by consuming more externally, but by harvesting more from within, and by sharing more without. Neurosciences and behavioural sciences increasingly corroborate this ancient wisdom - joy can come from giving, and unlimited happiness from bonhomie.
Here's a bunch of people practising a new set of behavioural norms. Apparently it didn't work because a lot of them got sick. That's the conclusion. You don't necessarily know why it happened. But you start there.
International law in its counter-hegemonic uses is very important in any domain where issues of legitimacy are significant, but is rarely able to have a corresponding behavioural impact.
How should the best parts of psychology and economics interrelate in an enlightened economist's mind?... I think that these behavioral economics...or economists are probably the ones that are bending them in the correct direction. I don't think it's going to be that hard to bend economics a little to accommodate what's right in psychology.
Cats - a standing rebuke to behavioural scientists . . . least human of all creatures.
I've had a lot of cognitive behavioural therapy, and am having a family now.
Put simply, behavioural economics argues that human beings' decision-taking is guided by the evolutionary baggage which we bring with us to the present day. Evolution has made us rational to a point, but not perfectly so. It has given us emotions, for example, which programme us to override our rational brain and act more instinctively.
I do sense, as compared with let's say the early '50s, there's somewhat more of a careerism. I don't think it's anything special to economics; it's equally true with physics or biology. A graduate education has become a more career-oriented thing, and part of that is because of the need for funding. In fact, that's a much worse problem in the natural sciences than it is in economics. So you can't even do your work in the natural sciences, particularly, and even to some extent in economics, without funding.
The study of economics has been again and again led astray by the vain idea that economics must proceed according to the pattern of other sciences.
I think what television and video games do is reminiscent of drug addiction. There's a measure of reinforcement and a behavioural loop.
My behavioural problems are non-existent because all my freakiness, I guess, is manifested in a visual way. And I never have come unravelled.
I have been in a youth hostel...You are put in a kitchen with seventeen venture scouts with behavioural difficulties and made to wash swedes.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!