What does this research mean for the field?

Traditional rational decision-making models, such as Expected Utility Theory, are systematically flawed in accounting for human cognitive biases, necessitating a shift to a new Adaptive Neurobiological Rationality (ANR) framework. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.CONTRADICTORY. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.CHALLENGES_CONSENSUS.

What question did this study set out to answer?

To critically assess the core assumptions of classical rational decision-making models and present a neurobiologically informed theoretical framework of human choice.

September 2, 2026Open Access

Are Our Current Rational Decision-Making Models Truly Rational? A Critical Analysis and a New Neurobiological Framework

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

KTKwan Hong TANUniversity of Suffolk

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Critical review reveals systematic flaws in classical rational choice models in human decision-makers, indicating a need for neurobiologically grounded frameworks.

Key Points

To critically assess the core assumptions of classical rational decision-making models and present a neurobiologically informed theoretical framework of human choice.
Conducted a synthesis of empirical evidence from behavioral economics and cognitive neuroscience.
Developed the Adaptive Neurobiological Rationality (ANR) framework integrating dual-system processing, cognitive variance, and adaptive learning.
Evaluated the proposed framework against classical behavioral anomalies, including the Allais paradox, framing effects, and loss aversion.
Traditional choice frameworks like Expected Utility Theory systematically fail to capture human cognitive limitations and neurological processing constraints.
The proposed Adaptive Neurobiological Rationality framework successfully explains behavioral deviations from standard rationality, including loss aversion and framing effects.

Cite This Study

Kwan Hong TAN (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a97e318c562ede874ec7b9b https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22210689

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Implication

Critical review reveals systematic flaws in classical rational choice models in human decision-makers, indicating a need for neurobiologically grounded frameworks.

Are Our Current Rational Decision-Making Models Truly Rational? A Critical Analysis and a New Neurobiological Framework

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Cite This Study

Are Our Current Rational Decision-Making Models Truly Rational? A Critical Analysis and a New Neurobiological Framework

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider