empting fate” and “the Evil Eye” are concepts more usually associated with superstition than with science. 
Yet even these folklore memories are included in the wonderfully eclectic Human Nature/Human Potential research program being conducted by a team led by Professor Richard Thaler, the Ralph and Dorothy Keller Distinguished Service Professor of Behavioral Science and Economics at the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business.
Illuminating both everyday and exotic features of the human experience, this project is a rigorously scientific exercise being carried out by the Graduate School’s Center for Decision Research (CDR), of which Thaler is director. He has described the goal of the Human Nature/Human Potential program as to improve understanding of “fundamental human capabilities and tendencies, with an eye toward using those that are often recognized as shortcomings to improve human functioning.”
The program has three main objectives. It aims to identify basic features of human nature that suggest new avenues for human potential, to employ rigorous research to establish empirical grounds for positive behavioral outcomes, and to develop real-world applications of this information to promote human flourishing. A characteristic of the program is its strongly interdisciplinary structure.
“Our work already reflects the influence of experts in social psychology, cognitive science, economics, and law,” Thaler says. “By drawing on these diverse fields of expertise, we are able to strengthen not only the academic contribution of our work, but also the contribution we can make to current societal needs, ranging from improving families’ abilities to build up savings, to helping people deal with climate change.”
A favorite term of Thaler’s is “choice architecture,” which refers to the framework within which options for choice are presented. His book, co-authored with Professor of Law Cass Sunstein and entitled Nudge: The Gentle Power of Libertarian Paternalism (published in April 2008), addresses what he regards as the major focus of this field. “The central question,” explains Thaler, “is really whether by understanding human nature we can present choices to people in ways that help them to make good decisions for themselves.”
That aspiration reflects the delicate balance involved in the apparently oxymoronic concept of “libertarian paternalism.” The principle of basic freedom of choice should not be compromised, but opportunities to help people see their way to success will not be neglected. There will be no forceful impositions here—instead, just a gentle “nudge” towards decisions that best serve each individuals’ own goals.
Around the central theme, Thaler has set for the program, a team of distinguished collaborators have built a striking and multifaceted research agenda. Professor Christopher Hsee is contributing research on “Hedonomics: How to Optimize the Relationship between Objective Outcomes and Subjective Well-Being?” Thaler says Hsee’s work “has yielded intriguing initial evidence suggesting that we determine our happiness with having money by comparing ourselves to others, whereas our happiness in spending money comes from the absolute satisfaction we receive from whatever we have bought.”
Of another collaborator Thaler observes, “Professor Ayelet Fishbach’s work (on Goals and Aspirations) suggests that taking a long-term perspective on our consumption behaviors can increase moderation and economic frugality.” Fishbach has employed such homely analogies as eating one cookie to exemplify what she calls “relatively benign temptations,” a central concept from a rigorously researched study she recently conducted on self-control.
In her project on “Promoting Valued Behavior,” Professor Jane Risen has been researching whether the reputedly irrational notion of “tempting fate” can have the positive outcome of promoting prosocial behaviors such as humility, careful action, and moderation. In another study concerning folk beliefs, Professor Tanya Menon has been investigating whether people believe that friendly rivals who offer good wishes actually “jinx” the recipient, as a person with the “evil eye” personifies bad luck. Her conclusion is that friendly rivals may be better off building good will incrementally, through fair play in repeated competitive situations.
Allied to these endeavors is the Templeton Visiting Scholar Program, designed to bring two scholars with Templeton-relevant interests to the Center for Decision Research each year, for visits lasting from one week to one month. The first visitor—Professor Thomas Gilovich—was from the psychology department at Cornell University, and brought with him insights from his renowed work on the judgmental tendencies which guide human decision making. “That was wonderfully successful,” says Thaler.
How does Thaler envisage human potential best being channelled to promote human flourishing? “In all likelihood, there is no one channel through which human potential can best be achieved. Our hope is that the research we do will help us to understand the complex landscape of potential human behaviors, and to distinguish clearly the paths to fulfilment from the paths to disappointment.”
