Behavioral economics, gender economics, and feminist economics: friends or foes?

References

• Alcoff, L. (1995). Is the feminist critique of reason rational? Philosophical Topics, 23(2), 1–26.
   Google Scholar
• Altman, M. (2017a). Rational inefficiency: Smart thinking, bounded rationality and the scientific basis for economic failure and success. In M. Altman (Ed.), Handbook of behavioral economics and smart decision-making (pp. 11–42). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Altman, M. (2017b). Introduction to smart decision-making. In M. Altman (Ed.), Handbook of behavioral economics and smart decision-making (pp. 1–8). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, E. (1994). Feminist epistemology: An interpretation and a defense. Hypatia, 10(3), 50–84.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, E. (2002). Should feminists reject rational choice theory? In L. Antony & C. Witt (Eds.), A mind of one’s own (pp. 369–397). Boulder: Westview.
   Google Scholar
• Angner, E., & Loewenstein, G. (2012). Behavioral economics. In U. Mäki (Ed.), Handbook of the philosophy of science: Philosophy of economics (pp. 641–690). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Atherthon, M. (2002). Cartesian reason and gendered reason. In L. Antony & C. Witt (Eds.), A mind of one’s own (pp. 21–37). Boulder, CO: Westview.
   Google Scholar
• Austen, S. (2017). Feminist economics for smart behavioral economics. In M. Altman (Ed.), Handbook of behavioral economics and smart decision-making (pp. 173–187). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Austin, S., & Jefferson, T. (2008). Can behavioural economics contribute to feminist discussions? (WiSER Working Paper No. 53). Retrieved from https://espace.curtin.edu.au/bitstream/handle/20.500.11937/46114/20969_downloaded_stream_425.pdf?sequence=2
   Google Scholar
• Barker, D. (1995). Economists, social reformers and prophets: A feminist critique of economic efficiency. Feminist Economics, 1(3), 26–39.
   Google Scholar
• Barker, D. (1999). Neoclassical economics. In J. Peterson & M. Lewis (Eds.), The Elgar companion to feminist economics (pp. 570–577). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Barker, D., & Schumm, D. (2009). Feminism. In J. Pell & I. Van Staveren (Eds.), Handbook of economics and ethics (pp. 159–165). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Becker, G. (1976). The economic approach to human behavior. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Becker, G. (1981). A treatise on the family. Enlarged edition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beneria, L. (1995). Toward a greater integration of gender in economics. World Development, 23(11), 1839–1850.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg, N. (2003). Normative behavioral economics. Journal of Social-Economics, 32(4), 411–423.
   Google Scholar
• Berg, N. (2010). Behavioral economics. In R. Free (Ed.), 21th century economics: A reference handbook, vol. 2 (pp. 861–872). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Berg, N., & Gigerenzer, G. (2010). As-if behavioral economics: Neoclassical economics in disguise? History of Economic Ideas, 18(1), 133–165.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blau, F., Ferber, M., & Winkler, A. (2010). The economics of women, men, and work. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Boettke, P., Zachary, W., & Martin, A. (2013). Error is obvious, coordination is the puzzle. In R. Frantz, & R. Leeson (Eds.), Hayek and behavioral economics (pp. 90–110). New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Bohnet, I. (2016). What works: Gender equality by design. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bordo, S. (1987a). The flight to objectivity: Essays on Cartesianism and culture. Albany: SUNY Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bordo, S. (1987b). The Cartesian masculinization of thought. In S. Harding & J. O’Barr (Eds.), Sex and scientific inquiry (pp. 247–264). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bruni, L., & Sudgen, R. (2007). The road not taken: How psychology was removed from economics, and how IT might be brought back. Economic Journal, 117(216), 146–173.
   Google Scholar
• Butler, J. (2003). New perspectives on women Entrepreneurs. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Butos, W., & McQuade, T. (2015). The sensory order, neuroeconomics, and Austrian economics. In P. Boettke & C. Coyne (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Austrian economics (pp. 612–640). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Camerer, C. (2003). Behavioral game theory: Experiments on strategic interaction. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Camerer, C. (2006). Wanting, liking, and learning: Neuroscience and paternalism. The University of Chicago Law Review, 73(1), 87–110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cassar, A., & Katz, E. (2016). Gender, behavior, and women’s economic empowerment. CGD Background Paper, 1–29. Retrieved from http://www.womeneconroadmap.org/sites/default/files/Gender-Behavior-Womens-Economic-Empowerment.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Chibnik, M. (2011). Anthropology, economics, and choice. Austin: University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Coughlin, R. (1991). Morality, rationality and efficiency: New perspectives on Socio-economics: New perspectives on Socio-economics. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
   Google Scholar
• Croson, R., & Gneezy, U. (2009). Gender differences in preferences. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(2), 448–474.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cudd, A. (2002). Rational choice theory and the Lessons of Feminism. In L. Antony & C. Witt (Eds.), A mind of one’s Own (pp. 398–417). Boulder, CO: Westview.
   Google Scholar
• Dewan, R. (1995). Gender in neoclassical economics. Economic and Political Weekly, 30(17), WS46–WS48.
   Google Scholar
• Di Iorio, F. (2015). Cognitive autonomy and methodological individualism. The interpretative foundations of social life. Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, Y., & Miller, S. (2015). Availability bias can improve women’s propensity to negotiate. International Journal of Business Administration, 6(2), 86–95.
   Google Scholar
• Duflo, E. (2012). Women empowerment and economic development. Journal of Economic Literature, 50(4), 1051–1079.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dworkin, G. (2006). Paternalism. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/paternalism/
   Google Scholar
• England, P. (1989). A feminist critique of rational choice theory: Implications for Sociologists. The American Sociologist, 20(1), 14–28.
   Google Scholar
• Fabre, E. F., Causse, M., Pesciarelli, F., & Cacciari, C. (2015). Sex and the money: How gender stereotypes modulate economic decision-making: An ERP study. Neuropsychologia, 75, 221–232.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferber, M. (1995). The study of economics: A feminist critique. The American Economic Review, 85(2), 357–361.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferber, M., & Nelson, J. A. (2003). Introduction. In M. Ferber, & J. A. Nelson (Eds.), Feminist economics Today: Beyond economic Man (pp. 1–31). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ferber, M., & Nelson, J. (Eds.). (1993). Beyond economic man. Feminist theory and economics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Folbre, N. (1994). Who pays for the kids? Gender and the structure of constraint. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Folbre, N. (2006). Chicks, hawks, and patriarchal institutions. In M. Altman (Ed.), Handbook of contemporary behavioral economics (pp. 499–516). New York, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
   Google Scholar
• Folbre, N. (2008). Valuing children: Rethinking the economics of the family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Folbre, N. (2009). Greed, Lust, and gender: A history of economic Ideas. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Folbre, N. (2012). The political economy of human capital. Review of Radical Political Economics, 44(3), 281–292.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraser, N. (2013). Fortunes of feminism: From state-managed capitalism to neoliberal crisis. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, M. (1953). Essays in positive economics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, M. (2000). Feminism in ethics: Concept of autonomy. In M. Fricker, & J. Hornsby (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to feminism in philosophy (pp. 205–224). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gaus, G. (2011). The order of public reason: A theory of freedom and morality in a diverse and bounded world. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer, G. (2015). Simply rational: Decision making in the real world. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer, G., Fiedler, K., & Olsson, H. (2012). Rethinking cognitive biases as environmental consequences. In P. M. Todd, G. Gigerenzer, & the ABC Research Group (Ed.), Ecological rationality: Intelligence in the world (pp. 80–110). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer, G., & Gaissmaier, W. (2011). Heuristic decision making. The Annual Review of Psychology, 62(1), 451–482.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer, G., & Todd, P. (1999). Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gintis, H. (2017). Rational choice in public and private spheres. In M. Altman (Ed.), Handbook of behavioral economics and smart decision-making (pp. 543–556). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Grapard, U. (1995). Robinson Crusoe: The quintessential economic man?!. Feminist Economics, 1(1), 33–32.
   Google Scholar
• Guerin, B. (1992). Behavior analysis and the social construction of knowledge. American Psychologist, 47(11), 1423–1432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hands, D. W. (2001). Reflection without rules: Economic methodology and contemporary science theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harding, S. (1982). Is gender a variable in conceptions of rationality? A survey of issues. Dialectica, 36(2-3), 215–232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harding, S. (1993). Rethinking standpoint epistemology: What is strong objectivity? In L. Alcoff, & E. Potter (Eds.), Feminist Epistemologies (pp. 49–82). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Harding, S. (1995). Strong objectivity: A response to the new objectivity Question. Synthese, 104(3), 331–349.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayek, F. (1937). Economics and knowledge. Economica, 4(13), 33–54.
   Google Scholar
• Hayek, F. (1948). Individualism and economic order. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hayek, F. (1952). The Sensory order. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hayek F. (1979) [1952] The counter-revolution of science. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hayek, F. (1988). The Fatal Conceit. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Heikes, D. (2010). Rationality and feminist philosophy. New York, NY: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Heikes, D. (2012). The Virtue of feminist rationality. New York, NY: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Heilman, R., & Kusev, P. (2017). The gender pay gap: Can behavioral economics provide useful Insights? Frontiers in Psychology, 95(8), 1–3.
   Google Scholar
• Herfeld, C. (2013). The many Faces of rational choice theory. Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics, 6(2), 117–121.
   Google Scholar
• Jaggar, A. (1992). Feminist ethics. In L. Becker & C. Becker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of ethics (pp. 363–364). New York, NY: Garland Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, K. (2004). Gender and rationality. In A. Mele & P. Rawling (Eds.), The Oxford handboook of rationality (pp. 301–319). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kabeer, N. (2005). Gender equality and women’s empowerment: A critical analysis of the third millennium development goal. Gender and Development, 13(1), 13–24.
   Google Scholar
• Kabeer, N. (2013). Esther Duflo on ‘women’s empowerment and economic development’: a must-read for feminist economists?. Retrieved from http://feministeconomicsposts.iaffe.org/2013/12/19/esther-duflo-on-womens-empowerment-and-economic-development-a-must-read-for-feminist-economists/#more
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D. (2003). Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics. American Economic Review, 93(5), 1449–1475.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahneman D. (2011) Thinking, fast and Slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keller, E. (1985). Reflections on gender and science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Laibson, D., & Zeckhauser, R. (1998). Amos Tversky and the Ascent of behavioral economics. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 16(1), 7–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leibbrandt, A., & List, J. A. (2014). Do women avoid salary negotiations? Evidence from a large-scale natural field experiment. Management Science, 61(9), 2016–2024.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lloyd, G. (1984). The Man of reason: ‘Male’ and ‘female’ in Western philosophy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Longino, H. (1990). Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Luker, K. (1991). Taking chances. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• MacKinnon, C. (1987). Feminism unmodified. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Moller Okin, S. (1989). Justice, gender, and the family. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Mousavi, S. (2015). Ecological rationality. In M. Altman (Ed.), Real-world decision making: An encyclopedia of behavioral economics (pp. 105–106). Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood.
   Google Scholar
• Mullainathan, S., & Thaler, R. (2001). Behavioral economics. In N. Smelser & P. Baltes (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 1094–1110). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, J. A. (1996). Feminism, objectivity and economics. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, J. A. (2003). Once more, with feeling: Feminist economics and the ontological question. Feminist Economics, 9(1), 109–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson, J. A. (2006). Economics for humans. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, J. (1995). Feminism and economics. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(2), 131–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson, J. (2009). Rationality and humanity: A view from feminist economics. Occasion: Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities, 1(1), 1–19.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, J. (2014). The power of stereotyping and confirmation bias to overwhelm accurate assessment: The case of economics, gender, and risk aversion. Journal of Economic Methodology, 21(3), 211–231.
   Google Scholar
• Nida-Rümelin, J. (1997). Economic rationality and practical reason. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Oliver, P. (1991). ‘What do girls know anyway?'; Rationality, gender, and social control. Feminism & Psychology, 1(3), 339–360.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearse, R., & Connell, R. (2016). Gender norms and the economy: Insights from social research. Feminist Economics, 22(1), 30–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollak, R. (2003). Gary Becker’s contributions to family and household economics. Review of Economics of the Household, 1(1), 111–141.
   Google Scholar
• Pujol, M. (1992). Feminism and anti-feminism in early economic thought. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Rabin, M. (1998). Psychology and economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 36(1), 11–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rizzo, M. (2017). Rationality – what? Misconceptions of neoclassical and behavioral economics. Retrieved from SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2927443 or doi:10.2139/ssrn.2927443
   Google Scholar
• Ross Smith, A., & Kronberger, M. (2004). Gendered rationality? A Genealogical Exploration of the Philosophical and sociological conceptions of rationality, masculinity and Organization. Gender, Work, and Organization, 11(3), 280–305.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sahakian, V. (2012). Neuroeconomics: The Odyssey: Female brain unearths the neoclassical economics “Macho” biases and anomalies. Bloomington, IN: Xlibris Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Savage, L. J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Schönpflug, K. (2008). Feminism, economics, and Utopia. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1977). Rational Fools: A critique of the behavioral Foundations of economic theory. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 6(4), 317–344.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon, H. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69(1), 99–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon, H. (1957). Models of Man. New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. (2001). Science seeks parsimony, not simplicity. In A. Zellner, H. Keuzenkamp, & M. McAleer (Eds.), Simplicity, inference and modelling: Keeping it sophisticatedly simple (pp. 32–72). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, V. (2003). Constructivist and ecological rationality in economics. American Economic Review, 93(3), 465–508.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, V. (2005). Behavioral economics research and the Foundations of economics. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 34(1), 135–150.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, V. (2008). Rationality in economics: Constructivist and ecological forms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Solnick, S. (2001). Gender differences in the ultimatum game. Economic Inquiry, 39(2), 189–200.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soloveitchik, J. (1992). The lonely man of faith. New York, NY: Doubleday.
   Google Scholar
• Thaler, R. (1991). Quasi rational economics. New York, NY: Russel Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Thaler, R., & Sunstein, C. (2003). Libertarian paternalism. American Economic Review, 93(2), 175–179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thaler, R., & Sunstein, C. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Todd, P., & Gigerenzer, G. (2003). Bounding rationality to the world. Journal of Economic Psychology, 24(2), 143–165.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Todd, P., & Gigerenzer, G. (2007). Environments that make us smart: Ecological rationality. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(3), 167–171.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Todd, P. M., Gigerenzer, G., & the ABC Research Group. (2012). Ecological rationality: Intelligence in the world. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitman, G., & Rizzo, M. (2015). The problem welfare standards of behavioral paternalism. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 6(3), 410–425.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolley, F. (1993). The feminist challenge to neoclassical economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 17(4), 485–500.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar