Review of Behavioral Economics > Vol 10 > Issue 1

Rationality and Emotionality Interplay and Economic Contributions: A Neuroeconomics Experiment

Ashutosh Sarker, Department of Economics, Faculty of Arts, University of Alberta, Canada, , Wai Ching Poon, Department of Management & Humanities, Faculty of Science & Information Technology, Universiti Teknologi Petronas, Malaysia, , Shamsul Haque, Department of Psychology, Jeffrey Cheah School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Monash University Malaysia, Malaysia, , Gamini Herath, Department of Economics, School of Business, Monash University Malaysia, Malaysia,
Suggested Citation
Ashutosh Sarker, Wai Ching Poon, Shamsul Haque and Gamini Herath (2023), "Rationality and Emotionality Interplay and Economic Contributions: A Neuroeconomics Experiment", Review of Behavioral Economics: Vol. 10: No. 1, pp 27-44.

Publication Date: 17 Apr 2023
© 2023 A. Sarker, W. C. Poon, S. Haque and G. Herath
Neuroeconomics,  Game theory,  Collective action,  Public economics: Public goods,  Public policy
JEL Codes: H41, C12, C71
Commonspublic goodsinstitutional economicsneuroeconomics


Download article
In this article:
1. Introduction 
2. Materials and Methods 
3. Results and Discussion 
4. Limitations 
5. Conclusions 
Appendix 1 


In non-neuroscience-based studies, economists demonstrate that humans make suboptimal economic contributions (between zero and the theoretical maximum) in collective-action scenarios. Using a neuroeconomics experiment that integrates economics and neuroscience, this study investigates why humans make such suboptimal economic contributions. In this study, 90 adult participants, divided into 15 smaller groups, collectively participated in a computer-based public goods game while wearing electroencephalography headsets that recorded their neural activities during the game. The results show that when participants modified institutional arrangements (such as face-to-face communication), their economic contributions increased, albeit suboptimally. Furthermore, simultaneously and suboptimally in the frontal and temporal lobes, the participants’ positive rationality and emotionality increased, whereas their negative rationality and emotionality decreased. We suggest that suboptimal rationality and emotionality may underlie suboptimal economic contributions. This study offers broad implications for collectively and sustainably managing local, regional, and global commons, including the atmosphere in which humans cause climate change.