Behavioural Economics, Neuroscience, and the Unfair Commercial Practises Directive

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Resumé

This article suggests how and to what extent insights from behavioural economics and neuroscience may be used for the interpretation of the 2005 Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. These disciplines provide useful insight in how the average consumer’s decisions are influenced by commercial information and conducts. As the Directive focuses on whether a commercial practise distorts the economic behaviour of consumers, arguments for whether a particular commercial practise should be considered unfair may be found within these disciplines. It is important to bear in mind that the assessment that courts are to make is normative, and that behavioural economics and neuroscience is of a more descriptive nature. Thus these disciplines may not help draw the fine line between the legitimate influence of commercial activities and the illegal distortion of the average consumer’s behaviour. However, the average consumer test is at least in principle flexible enough to allow the inclusion of research within human decision-making in order to apply a more realistic average consumer than the “Homo Economicus” applied by the European Court of Justice.
This article suggests how and to what extent insights from behavioural economics and neuroscience may be used for the interpretation of the 2005 Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. These disciplines provide useful insight in how the average consumer’s decisions are influenced by commercial information and conducts. As the Directive focuses on whether a commercial practise distorts the economic behaviour of consumers, arguments for whether a particular commercial practise should be considered unfair may be found within these disciplines. It is important to bear in mind that the assessment that courts are to make is normative, and that behavioural economics and neuroscience is of a more descriptive nature. Thus these disciplines may not help draw the fine line between the legitimate influence of commercial activities and the illegal distortion of the average consumer’s behaviour. However, the average consumer test is at least in principle flexible enough to allow the inclusion of research within human decision-making in order to apply a more realistic average consumer than the “Homo Economicus” applied by the European Court of Justice.
SprogEngelsk
TidsskriftJournal of Consumer Policy
Vol/bind34
Udgave nummer3
Sider377-392
ISSN0168-7034
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2011

Bibliografisk note

Link to full text through CBS Library remote access

Emneord

  • Behavioural economics
  • Neuroscience
  • Commercial practise
  • Informational advertising
  • Consumers

Citer dette

@article{911633054f5a40979aa9997842e690db,
title = "Behavioural Economics, Neuroscience, and the Unfair Commercial Practises Directive",
abstract = "This article suggests how and to what extent insights from behavioural economics and neuroscience may be used for the interpretation of the 2005 Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. These disciplines provide useful insight in how the average consumer’s decisions are influenced by commercial information and conducts. As the Directive focuses on whether a commercial practise distorts the economic behaviour of consumers, arguments for whether a particular commercial practise should be considered unfair may be found within these disciplines. It is important to bear in mind that the assessment that courts are to make is normative, and that behavioural economics and neuroscience is of a more descriptive nature. Thus these disciplines may not help draw the fine line between the legitimate influence of commercial activities and the illegal distortion of the average consumer’s behaviour. However, the average consumer test is at least in principle flexible enough to allow the inclusion of research within human decision-making in order to apply a more realistic average consumer than the “Homo Economicus” applied by the European Court of Justice.",
keywords = "Behavioural economics , Neuroscience, Commercial practise, Informational advertising , Consumers",
author = "Jan Trzaskowski",
note = "Link to full text through CBS Library remote access",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.1007/s10603-011-9169-2",
language = "English",
volume = "34",
pages = "377--392",
journal = "Journal of Consumer Policy",
issn = "0168-7034",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "3",

}

Behavioural Economics, Neuroscience, and the Unfair Commercial Practises Directive. / Trzaskowski, Jan.

I: Journal of Consumer Policy, Bind 34, Nr. 3, 2011, s. 377-392.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Behavioural Economics, Neuroscience, and the Unfair Commercial Practises Directive

AU - Trzaskowski,Jan

N1 - Link to full text through CBS Library remote access

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - This article suggests how and to what extent insights from behavioural economics and neuroscience may be used for the interpretation of the 2005 Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. These disciplines provide useful insight in how the average consumer’s decisions are influenced by commercial information and conducts. As the Directive focuses on whether a commercial practise distorts the economic behaviour of consumers, arguments for whether a particular commercial practise should be considered unfair may be found within these disciplines. It is important to bear in mind that the assessment that courts are to make is normative, and that behavioural economics and neuroscience is of a more descriptive nature. Thus these disciplines may not help draw the fine line between the legitimate influence of commercial activities and the illegal distortion of the average consumer’s behaviour. However, the average consumer test is at least in principle flexible enough to allow the inclusion of research within human decision-making in order to apply a more realistic average consumer than the “Homo Economicus” applied by the European Court of Justice.

AB - This article suggests how and to what extent insights from behavioural economics and neuroscience may be used for the interpretation of the 2005 Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. These disciplines provide useful insight in how the average consumer’s decisions are influenced by commercial information and conducts. As the Directive focuses on whether a commercial practise distorts the economic behaviour of consumers, arguments for whether a particular commercial practise should be considered unfair may be found within these disciplines. It is important to bear in mind that the assessment that courts are to make is normative, and that behavioural economics and neuroscience is of a more descriptive nature. Thus these disciplines may not help draw the fine line between the legitimate influence of commercial activities and the illegal distortion of the average consumer’s behaviour. However, the average consumer test is at least in principle flexible enough to allow the inclusion of research within human decision-making in order to apply a more realistic average consumer than the “Homo Economicus” applied by the European Court of Justice.

KW - Behavioural economics

KW - Neuroscience

KW - Commercial practise

KW - Informational advertising

KW - Consumers

U2 - 10.1007/s10603-011-9169-2

DO - 10.1007/s10603-011-9169-2

M3 - Journal article

VL - 34

SP - 377

EP - 392

JO - Journal of Consumer Policy

T2 - Journal of Consumer Policy

JF - Journal of Consumer Policy

SN - 0168-7034

IS - 3

ER -