March 5, 1934 |
Tel Aviv, Mandatory Palestine
|Nationality||United States, Israel|
|Institutions||Princeton University 1993–
University of California, Berkeley 1986–93
University of British Columbia 1978–86
Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences 1972–73
Hebrew University of Jerusalem 1961–77
|Alma mater||University of California, Berkeley Ph.D, 1961
Hebrew University B.A., 1954
|Thesis||An analytical model of the semantic differential (1962)|
|Doctoral advisor||Susan M. Ervin-Tripp|
|Doctoral students||Eldar Shafir, Avishai Henik|
|Known for||Cognitive biases
|Notable awards||APA Lifetime Achievement Award (2007)
Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (2002)
Tufts University Leontief Prize (2010)
APS Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award (1982)
University of Louisville Grawemeyer Award (2003)
We are very influenced by completely automatic things that we have no control over, and we don't know we're doing it.
One emphasis of my research has been on the question of how people spend their time. Time is the ultimate finite resource, or course, so the question of how people spend it would seem to be important.
If owning stocks is a long-term project for you, following their changes constantly is a very, very bad idea. It's the worst possible thing you can do, because people are so sensitive to short-term losses. If you count your money every day, you'll be miserable.
It's not a case of: 'Read this book and then you'll think differently. I've written this book, and I don't think differently.
Negotiations over a shrinking pie are especially difficult because they require an allocation of losses. People tend to be much more easygoing when they bargain over an expanding pie.
Friends are sometimes a big help when they share your feelings. In the context of decisions, the friends who will serve you best are those who understand your feelings but are not overly impressed by them.
When you analyze happiness, it turns out that the way you spend your time is extremely important.
We're blind to our blindness. We have very little idea of how little we know. We're not designed to know how little we know.
All of us roughly know what memory is. I mean, memory is sort of the storage of the past. It's the storage of our personal experiences. It's a very big deal.
So your emotional state really has a lot to do with what you're thinking about and what you're paying attention to.
Most of the time, we think fast. And most of the time we're really expert at what we're doing, and most of the time, what we do is right.
The idea that you can ask one question and it makes the point - well, that wasn't how psychology was done at the time.
I enjoy being active, but I look forward to the day when I can retire to the Internet.
It's nonsense to say money doesn't buy happiness, but people exaggerate the extent to which more money can buy more happiness.
We know that the French are very different from the Americans in their satisfaction with life. They're much less satisfied. Americans are pretty high up there, while the French are quite low - the world champions in life satisfaction are actually the Danes.
The average investor's return is significantly lower than market indices due primarily to market timing.
In a rising market, enough of your bad ideas will pay off so that you'll never learn that you should have fewer ideas.
The experiencing self lives its life continuously. It has moments of experience, one after the other.
Through some combination of culture and biology, our minds are intuitively receptive to religion.
Mental effort, I would argue, is relatively rare. Most of the time we coast.
Adaptation seems to be, to a substantial extent, a process of reallocating your attention.
If people are failing, they look inept. If people are succeeding, they look strong and good and competent. That's the 'halo effect.' Your first impression of a thing sets up your subsequent beliefs. If the company looks inept to you, you may assume everything else they do is inept.