Personal Statement · gemini-3-8-flash

What I learned about human behavior from an economic standpoint was that they were meant to optimize their life decisions and live in a world of no constraints. Obviously that was far from true. Whether it be panic buying during times of crisis or falling for the sunk cost fallacy when buying losing stocks. Humans fail at almost every aspect of decision making that is financially beneficial. This is what caught my interest in Behavioral Economics. I knew that there was something more that wasn't being addressed. Throughout my undergrad I questioned why humans were viewed as Homo economicus. I enjoyed using mathematics and quantitative ways to analyze problems but always felt something was missing. After reading about Richard Thaler's idea of mental accounting I instantly understood why certain behaviors occur when money is involved. To change our economy we have to understand human behavior instead of assuming what is best for them. My research interests lie in finding these ways to increase efficiency through choice. Whether it be helping people invest their 401k better or nudging people to take actions that are environmentally friendly. Behavioral economics takes all of the previous theories and allows us to look at humans and make economics relatable. At [School Name] I would love to further learn about the ways we can implement these theories into the real world. Perhaps find out how certain humans act when faced with wealth inequality and try to understand the cause. I want to understand what causes humans to act irrational and use that information to better the lives of others. By studying Behavioral economics in a graduate program I will be able to learn the tools necessary to help humans better understand there decisions.

I’ve learned that traditional economics is based on rational, utility-maximizing agents. This led me to believe that people are logical and derive their actions based on expected and fine-tuned trade-offs. Quite the opposite is true. For example, people hoard supplies during a recession. Investors hold on to losing investments. Employees forgo retention bonuses. All of these illustrate people’s propensity to take sub-optimal actions andderive utility in the short-run at the expense of the long-run. People often prefer to receive a small utility today over a larger utility tomorrow. Again, behavioral economics is rich with examples of these discrepancies and inequities. From an academic standpoint, behavioral economics fills gaps found in traditional economics. My interest in behavioral economics was sparked during my undergraduate years with my increasing frustration with economics being a science where assumptions could not be tested and validated. People aren’t perfect utility maximizers. Thaler’s mental accounting provides insights into individuals’ financial choices that are otherwise puzzling. People view financial wealth differently based on its source. A paycheck and tax refund are considered differently. In the same vein, if we are to understand, model and alleviate market inefficiencies, we must understand the true nature of people’s financial decisions as opposed to prescribing and projecting our preconceived notions. This interest has Deepened my analysis of integration of behavioral economics and policy. The usage of behavioral economics has the potential to help and benefit the public in several ways such as optimizing the level of financial savings and also altering public energy consumption to more sustainable sources. At your institution, my main objective will be to adopt several behavioral economics tools to assess public policy. I will particularly focus on public health and welfare policies. Your emphasis on experimental economics and field research will give me an opportunity to assess the role of behavioral economics and cognitive biases in public policy to reduce wealth inequality and promote financial accessibility. My main interest in economics is to look beyond the traditional assessment of public welfare and health. Behavioral economics is integrated with a number of allied sciences. Therefore, I believe that furthering my education in behavioral economics will help in understanding several unexplored public policies and benefits. Ultimately, behavioral economics will assist in public policy formulation to positively alter public welfare and health.

Throughout my undergraduate degree in Economics, I struggled with the Homo economicus assumption.Whilst I understood the utility of quantitative models and how accurate they can be at predicting behaviours, the lack of a human element made the numbers feel empty. My eureka moment was learning about Richard Thaler’s theory of mental accounting. Suddenly financial behaviours that previously seemed very abstract made sense. For example understanding why tax refunds are treated differently to income. I realised that in order to create solutions to economic inefficiencies we need to understand how people actually behave. I became fascinated by how choice architecture can be used within public policy. I became very interested in how small changes, or nudges, could have huge positive impacts on society. behavioural economics is a really useful way of making economics accessible to everyone. Using psychology, neuroscience and sociology, behavioural economics brings the human element back into data. At your institution I would like to apply my research to real world policy. I am very interested in your experimental economics focus and fieldwork. I would love to investigate how cognitive biases affect wealth inequality. I do not wish to study economics to simply understand how markets work from an outside perspective. I want to understand the psychology behind them. By gaining a graduate degree in behavioural economics I will gain the interdisciplinary skills needed to create policies, products and systems that work with human nature.

According to traditional economics, a human being is an individual who operates in an ideal world based on the principles of a perfect rational optimizer who always makes decisions that would maximize his well-being in a frictionless market where supply meets the demand. However, observing the world around me, especially under economic distress of the last decade, proved quite the opposite to be true – people panic buy, commit to sunk costs in bad investments and opt for instant satisfaction rather than long term savings and planning. This gap between elegance of classic model and its practical application was what sparked my interest in behavioral economics. The question regarding the assumption of *Homo economicus* has been one of the main topics of discussion throughout my undergraduate economics studies. Although being fond of quantitative models and its predictive capacity, one could not ignore that these numbers lack a human element. Finally I came to understanding the idea of "mental accounting" of Richard Thaler and suddenly those strange and hard-to-explain behaviors in finance (such as treating tax refund checks and normal paycheck differently) became clear to me. I came to a conclusion that in order to improve the flaws of economics system and solve some inefficiencies, one should take into account not only how people *should* act, but also how people actually behave. My current interest is researching choice architecture and public policy. Being very interested in how simple manipulations could result in great social benefit (whether it is increased rate of people saving on retirement, or increased usage of sustainable energy) made me want to pursue a behavioral economics graduate program. Being interested in research and experimental work, especially in experimental economics and empirical field research, I find your institution extremely appealing due to its emphasis on studying influence of cognitive biases on wealth inequality and financial inclusion. Economics is not simply a tool for interpreting the market processes – it is more than that, and a good economic theory should include a deep understanding of the psychological mechanisms behind these processes. Thus, the behavioral economics graduate degree would allow me to use an array of tools needed to apply behavioral economic models to policy designs, products, and systems.

My intellectual curiosity in behavioral economics developed long before my academic entry to the economics program at the university. In light of recent economic turn-downs, it was shocking to see that the so-called “rational” human beings, in fact, panic buy in stock market crises. Most importantly, people lock vast sums of money in failing ventures and opt for instant gratification over delayed rewards in economic decisions. Having seen these economic fallacies first-hand, I began to question the conventional theory of economics that views human beings as the rational optimizers in a perfectly competitive market. Of course, during my studies in economics I often grumbled at the Homo economicus assumption. On the one hand, quantitative models to describe economic behavior are very convincing and are a huge step forward in economic research. On the other hand, they are far from perfect as they lack a very important aspect – human behavior. It was not before I stumbled upon Richard Thaler’s mental accounting concept that economic behavior suddenly became very clear to me. In a sense, all financial behaviors are treated differently, not just tax refunds versus salary payments. In order to fix economic inefficiencies, one has to study how people actually behave instead of how they are supposed to behave. As I delved deeper into studying choice architecture and how public policy can make use of it to improve society, I found that even the smallest change could have a tremendous impact. Making sure that people are filling out the right tax forms to receive their maximum refund can encourage people to save for retirement. This is particularly important when looking to make sustainable energy consumption “default” in the United States. The facilities at your university would allow me to focus on combining economic theory with application. I am especially interested in the concentration of experimental economics and the possibility of extended amounts of empirical field work. My desire to explore the way in which cognitive bias impacts on wealth distribution and financial inclusion would, I am confident, be well-served by a graduate program in behavioral economics. My intention in studying economics is not to analyze markets, from a distance, in a cold and abstract manner, but to better understand the psychological mechanisms that drive them. With a graduate degree in behavioral economics, I shall acquire a set of new interdisciplinary tools that will enable me to design more effective public policies, to develop more responsible products and to establish more efficient systems, all of which are in line with human behavior.

For years, I thought that I wanted to go into economics, because economics attempts to answer questions about human decisions. Then I realized that it wasn't really about human decisions, it was all about the phenomenon of supply and demand. Supply and demand are really helpful to understand how markets work, but they can't really answer questions about why humans decide anything at all. Yet, the study of economics is so pervasive and successful, that I wondered if there could be a way to incorporate "how we make decisions" into a system. In my undergraduate studies, I delved into the burgeoning literature around decision theory, the psychology of how people view risk and reward, and the simple mathematical models that ascribe numbers to the former and the latter. Then I encountered actual people, who proved to be stubborn and messy, consistently making decisions that did not adhere to the models. Rather than assuming people are rational and that they only need more and better information, I found the best way to understand people's decisions is to put them under the microscope. That curiosity brought me into the world of behavioral economics, where economics and psychology meet in a quest to understand and explain human behaviors that, at first glance, seem strange and irrational. Such subtle nudges affect how we save for the future, spend our money, and make choices in our day-to-day life. Behavioral economics brings about a new theoretical model of how people behave. Behavioral economics appeals to me because it steps beyond the imaginary blue box of traditional economics. I hope to study human behavior because each individual is more than a statistic, existing in a complex web of cultural and social realities that traditional economics neglects. A graduate degree, I believe, will train me to measure and predict behaviors and then translate my research into solutions. That lets me respond to fundamental questions: In which contexts do these behaviors arise?

Throughout history, people have behaved in ways that defy conventional economic thinking. They make emotional and illogical decisions about their finances, cling to investments that are failing (fall victim to the sunk-cost fallacy), and choose immediate gratification over financial stability. Conventional economic theory paints a picture of a world without friction, in which supply and demand are governed by logical optimizers. But I’ve seen first-hand how far reality strays from theory’s predictions, and this discrepancy is what first attracted me to the field of behavioral economics. My undergraduate studies in economics provided me with a solid grounding in quantitative modeling, but I was left wanting a deeper understanding of the motivations and decision-making processes of the humans represented by the numbers. Then I came across Richard Thaler’s notion of “mental accounting,” and suddenly disparate concepts came together, and it made sense why people spend tax refunds differently than their paychecks, for example. Instead of simply accepting the Homo economicus assumption, I wanted to delve deeper to better understand the psychology of individual behavior, because in order to devise more efficient economies, we need to understand how people actually behave, not just how we think they should behave. I am particularly interested in choice architecture and its potential applications in the public policy space. There are a host of applications for “nudges” that can have a dramatic effect on society, increasing retirement savings and encouraging more sustainable energy consumption, for example. Behavioral economics is a field that can truly democratize economics by contextualizing it with insights from other disciplines, including sociology, psychology, and neuroscience. Rather than studying economics with an arm’s-length understanding of the market, I hope to investigate the psychological forces that give rise to it. With a graduate degree in behavioral economics, I could learn to apply an interdisciplinary understanding of human behavior to the design of policies, systems, and products. Your emphasis on experimental economics and empirical field research would provide me with an opportunity to investigate the impact of cognitive biases on topics such as financial inclusion and wealth inequality.

At the time I was introduced to the usual wisdom of economists, which was that man is a rational maximiser, a cold calculating machine that exists in a world of frictionless supply and demand. But when I looked around me in this world around me especially in the very arduous times that we have endured economically in recent years, I saw a very different world. During a crisis people go on a buying spree, behave as if to pull out of bad investments is the sunk cost fallacy, and constantly opt for immediate benefits over the prospect of long-term financial stability. This discrepancy between the beauty of classical models and ugliness of human decision making struck me early and kindled my first interest in behavioral economics. As an undergraduate economist, I was always asking myself about the assumption of Homo economicus. I saw the numbers behind the modelling and didn't like ignoring the human stories. The intellectual moment when I realized I was gearing toward my first article came when I read about the idea of "mental accounting" and Richard Thaler. All a sudden, abstract financial actions like treating tax returns distinct from other paychecks made good sense. I realized that we can't just take for granted that people would act a certain way in approaching an economic inefficiency; it must be learned. As a result, I became interested in the field of choice architecture and public policy. I was fascinated by the possibility that small nudges could be devised that would have a huge impact on society as a whole - from raising the rate of people saving for retirement to influencing the use of sustainable energy. Behavioral economics is the popularization of economics, where data is humanized from a psychological, neurological and social perspective. In my institution, I want to harmonize a theoretical research with a policy design for application. I'm especially interested in your work on experimental economics and empirical field studies; I want to explore cognitive biases and their effects on wealth, inequality and/or financial inclusion. Not only do I not wish to know the market through blind sight, I want to know the psychological infrastructure of it as well. For me, earning a graduate degree in behavioral economics offers the interdisciplinary tools I need to think about how to “work with the grain of behavior”, as opposed to fighting it, when designing policies, products, and systems.

According to standard economic theory, humans are rational optimizers cold, calculating machines that operate in a frictionless world of supply and demand. But, looking around me, I saw what the world was like during the turmoil of the economy in the years past. When a crisis occurs, people tend to panic buy. When they are losing money on a bad investment, they succumb to the sunk cost fallacy. And, on a day-to-day basis, people systematically pick short-term gratification over long-term financial security. The contradiction between the elegance of classical models and the messy reality of human decision-making was what first drew me towards behavioral economics. While studying Economics during my undergraduate life, I always questioned the *Homo economicus* assumption. I have always appreciated the predictive power of quantitative modeling; however, without the ‘human’ the numbers are hollow. My moment of intellectual enlightenment was when I was introduced to Richard Thaler’s idea of “mental accounting” which made sense of otherwise abstract financial behaviours, for example, treating a tax refund differently from one’s pay cheque. To change how people behave, you must not adopt the approach of how they; *should *behave but study how they *actually *behave (23 words) This very interest led me to study the intersection of choice architecture and public policy. I became fascinated by how small “nudges,” can make a world of difference, like getting people to save more for retirement and use less energy. Behavioral Economics is simply economic theory; it has socialized data through a vast range of fields including psychology and neuroscience. Your institution wants to help bridge the gap between theoretical research and policy design. I am especially interested in your focus on experimental economics and empirical field research, through which I hope to study how cognitive biases influence wealth inequality and financial inclusion. I don’t want to study economics just to see the markets from afar; I want to understand their psychological architecture. A graduate degree in behavioral economics will equip me with the interdisciplinary tools to design policies, products, and systems that work with rather than against the grain of human nature.

According to standard economic theory, I was taught that humans are rational optimizers: cold, calculating machines operating in a frictionless world of supply and demand. Watching the world around me, especially over the last couple of years with the economic troubles, I witnessed the opposite. People panic buy during a crisis, fall for the sunk cost fallacy regarding failing investments and consistently prefer immediate gratification to long-term financial well being. The exceptional elegance of classical models versus the filthy human decision making that had me experiencing cognitive dissonance is what first aroused my interest in behavioral economics. When I studied economics as an undergraduate, I always questioned the idea of the homo economicus. Although I had great respect for quantitative modeling and its predictive power, the numbers did not appeal to me as much as humanity did. My intellectual awakening took place when I read Richard Thaler’s idea of “mental accounting.” I was suddenly able to make sense of abstract behaviours around money, like treating a tax refund differently than paycheque. I understood that correcting economic inefficiencies would not just require us to assume how people *should* behave, but to also observe how they *actually* behave. My research was inspired by the intersection of choice architecture and public policy. I became fascinated by how small interventions or “nudges” could lead to big societal changes, like boosting retirement savings or motivating energy conservation. Behavioral economics is opening up economic theory it’s putting humanity behind the data by analyzing our psychology, neuroscience, and sociology. I would like to help bridge the gap between academic research and practical policy design at your school. I am particularly attracted to the experimental economics and empirical field research being done in your School, where I hope to study the way cognitive biases affect wealth inequality and financial inclusion. I long to study economics, but not to be an outsider watching markets unfold. I want to study economics to understand the psychological architecture driving them. A graduate degree in behavioral economics will give me interdisciplinary tools that can be employed to create policies, products, and systems that move with rather that against human nature.

The conventional theory of economics leads us to believe that individuals work as machines efficiently optimizing each rational choice in an optimal world defined by supply and demand. The reality we see around us is different from the theory presented. Evidence of panic buying in difficult times, the existence of sunk costs in bad investments, and an inclination to opt for instant gratification shows a conflict between the classical models used and the actual state of humans’ decision making. The contradiction between the beauty of classical models and the complex state of economics was what propelled my interest in behavioral economics. During my undergraduate studies in economics, the assumption of *Homo economicus*, the standard theory of economics, led me to question many things. The power of predictions stemming from quantitative modeling is unquestionable; however, there is no humanity there. My epiphany was the time when I found out about Richard Thaler's theory of *mental accounting*, which explains behaviors that seem strange from an economic perspective, like the treatment of taxes, in a simple manner. This interest led me to the sphere of choice architecture in public policy. I have realized how small nudges can lead to large social effects by making people invest more money in retirement funds and consume energy sustainably. Behavioral economics is democratizing economic theory and, making it a "humane" one, using the principles of psychology, neuroscience, and sociology. I want to learn about using the knowledge for practical purposes, in particular, I would like to do my research in the experimental economics department, where cognitive biases will be studied. The main objective of studying economics that drives me is to learn about the psychology behind correct and incorrect decisions, and the issues of economics do not interest me in themselves. Realizing this goal will enable me to develop systems, rules, policies, etc. which will work according to the principles of behaviorism.

According to classic economic theories that were taught in my textbooks, humans are rational, optimizing agents. In a perfect, frictionless world of supply and demand, people are essentially cool and calculating computers. Yet, as I looked out at the world – especially over the last few years – this idealized portrait of human decision-making seemed less and less plausible. Panic-buying during supply-chain disruptions, irrational behavior towards investments that have suffered losses, and the clear preference for immediate, yet inferior, financial gains in spite of their long-term interests all seem at odds with that classic view. The disconnect between those neat mathematical models and the somewhat 'messy' reality was the spark that first attracted me to the world of behavioral economics. As a university economics student, I was always a bit sceptical of the theory of Homo economicus. While I was capable of mathematical modeling and could see the merit and potential the calculations held for predicting economic outcomes, it seemed to me that a vital element – human beings themselves – was entirely absent from the equations. The moment of clarity for me was when I was introduced to Richard Thaler's concept of 'mental accounting'. It was quite fascinating to learn about how people compartmentalize their income, spending their tax rebates differently to their monthly salary, for instance. I understood that to tackle real-world economic problems, it isn't sufficient to hypothesize how people ought to act; we have to observe how they truly do act. It is for these reasons that I began to research 'choice architecture' – the influence exerted over the choices we make, and the public policy potential of what are commonly known as 'nudges'. This field of economics has the power to transform people's lives – potentially encouraging them to save for their retirement, reduce consumption, or switch to greener forms of energy. It is an egalitarian, inclusive and perhaps most notably, a much more accurate way of thinking about how humans act within their own economic spheres, incorporating principles of psychology, neurobiology, and sociology to add context and human elements to economic data. I see this institution's economics department as the ideal location for me to develop my skills as a graduate researcher and policy maker, bridging the chasm between research and action. I am especially interested in experimental economics and the use of empirical field research and am particularly keen on exploring the ways in which human cognitive biases can contribute to exacerbating income inequality and exclusion within the economy. My objective as an economics scholar is not to sit comfortably in an ivory tower and theorise, but to better understand the machinery at play behind modern-day economies. I am confident that a graduate qualification from your institution in behavioral economics is the perfect next step for me to understand human psychology and to design policies, services, and environments that align with it rather than resist it.

According to standard economic theory, humans are seen as rational optimizers—cold and calculating machines functioning in a world of supply and demand that has no friction. Yet, when I observed the world around me, especially during the economic upheavals of the last few years, I found a completely different picture: people panic-buy when there's a crisis, fall prey to the sunk cost fallacy in the case of failing investments, and consistently prefer short-term gratification to long-term financial security. It was this obvious gap between the elegance of the classical models and the messy actuality of how people make decisions that first sparked my interest in behavioural economics. While I was studying economics at university I always found myself doubting the idea of *Homo economicus*. Even though I acknowledged the forecasting ability of quantitative models, the figures seemed empty when the human aspect was missing. The moment when my thinking changed was when I came across Richard Thaler's idea of "mental accounting". At that point, abstract financial behaviours—like treating a tax refund differently from a regular paycheck—became completely understandable to me. I came to the conclusion that if we are to really deal with economic inefficiencies we cannot simply assume how people *should* behave; we have to examine how they *actually* behave. Because of this fascination I carried out some research into the connection between choice architecture and public policy. I became very interested in the way that small interventions, or 'nudges', could produce great societal benefits, such as raising retirement savings rates or promoting sustainable energy use. Behavioural economics is the democratization of economic theory since it applies the insights of psychology, neuroscience, and sociology to make data more relevant to human beings. At your institution I would like to overcome the gap between theoretical research and the design of applied policy. I am especially attracted to your emphasis on experimental economics and empirical field research, as I intend to examine the way in which cognitive biases affect wealth inequality and financial inclusion. I don't want to study economics just so as to interpret markets from a detached point of view; instead, I would like to gain an understanding of the psychological structure that underlies them. Obtaining a graduate degree in behavioral economics will give me the interdisciplinary tools necessary for designing policies, products, and systems that are in harmony with human nature rather than opposing it.

Standard economic theory taught me that humans are rational optimizers—cold, calculating machines acting in an environment with no friction from supply and demand. But, watching the world around me, especially during the economic turmoil of the last few years, showed me something completely different. People panic-buy during crisis; they fall into the "sunk cost fallacy" when they continue to invest in a losing proposition; and people consistently opt for immediate gratification instead of long term financial security. That obvious disconnect between the beauty of classical economics models and the messiness of how humans make decisions is what first sparked my interest in behavioral economics. As an economics major during my undergraduate years, I spent much time questioning the Homo economicus model. Although I appreciated the predictive capability of quantitative modeling, the quantitative models seemed empty because there was no human component. The defining moment in my academic career occurred when I read Richard Thaler’s theory of "mental accounting." This theory provided a logical explanation for many seemingly irrational financial actions, such as treating tax refunds as though they were different from regular paychecks. It became clear to me that if we wish to reduce or eliminate inefficiencies within the economy, it will be necessary to examine how individuals act and react to various stimuli rather than simply assuming what individuals would do under ideal conditions. The interest I developed for the intersection of choice architecture and public policy prompted me to study the potential of minor interventions (nudges) to result in significant positive impacts on society, such as increasing retirement savings and promoting the use of renewable energy sources. Behavioral economics is the democratization of economic theory, humanizing data through the lenses of psychology, neuroscience and sociology. I wish to help close the divide at your institution between the theoretical aspects of research and developing policy designs based on that research. What specifically appeals to me is that you have a focus on experimental economics and empirical field research; therefore, I would like to study how cognitive biases affect wealth inequality and financial inclusion. I want to study economics not only so that I can look at how markets operate from a distance, but also to learn about the psychological framework behind those operations. A graduate degree in behavioral economics will provide me with the cross-disciplinary skills necessary to create programs, products, and systems which are designed in accordance with human behavior as opposed to counter to human behavior.

The gap is so great between the abstract model of the economist (as described by Stigler) and the real-world behavior of most people. In my observations of recent events – specifically in light of the financial crisis of 2008 — it has become increasingly clear that most individuals make irrational decisions based upon emotions and personal experiences. The fact that many individuals buy up large quantities of supplies during a crisis, invest money in failed endeavors because of “sunk costs,” and generally favor immediate rewards over future financial well-being demonstrate just how much of an error standard economic theories have made regarding the rationality of human beings. My interest in behavioral economics was sparked by the obvious differences between the elegant models developed by economists and the way that real people make choices. When I studied economics in college, I frequently questioned the assumption that all human beings act rationally. While I had respect for the ability of economists’ mathematical models to predict outcomes, I always felt like there was something missing in these models that would give their predictions more significance. This lack of understanding was finally clarified when I learned about Richard Thaler's concept of “mental accounting.” When I read about mental accounting, it explained why people treat money differently depending on its source. For example, some people spend money from tax refunds but save money from wages. Therefore, if you want to correct inefficient uses of money, you can't simply determine what you think people should be doing, you need to observe what people actually do. As I continued to learn more about behavioral economics, I grew increasingly fascinated with the relationship between choice architecture and government policy. What began as an academic curiosity soon turned into an interest in designing “nudges” to influence people's behavior at a low cost. Nudges are small changes in the environment or information presented to someone to nudge him/her toward making a certain decision. For example, nudges may encourage employees to contribute more to pension plans or promote consumers to use less energy. Behavioral economics gives us a new tool in our efforts to improve society. Unlike traditional economic theory, which relies almost exclusively on numerical data, behavioral economics combines insights from psychology, neuroscience, sociology, and economics to better understand human decision-making. I'm excited about the opportunity to pursue a graduate degree in behavioral economics at your university. Your emphasis on using experiments and empirical research methods will allow me to conduct investigations into how cognitive biases affect income inequality and access to financial services.

Standard economic theories have always provided me with the impression that humans are rational optimizers — cold, calculating machines operating within a frictionless world of supply and demand. However, as I watched the world evolve around me — especially during the economic turmoil of the past few years — it became evident that there is a huge difference between what standard economics states and how humans actually behave. During times of crisis, people tend to panic-buy; they fall prey to the sunk-cost fallacy when investing in failed projects; and they regularly opt for immediate gratification at the expense of long-term financial stability. It is this obvious gap between the theoretical elegance of classical models and the messy reality of human decision-making that initially sparked my interest in behavioral economics. During my time as an undergraduate student studying Economics, I was constantly challenged by the Homo Economicus assumption. While I appreciated the ability of quantitative models to make predictions about behavior, it always seemed to me that numbers alone were hollow without a human element. My intellectual awakening occurred when I first read Richard Thaler’s work on “Mental Accounting.” The abstract financial behaviors I had previously viewed as irrational—such as treating tax refund checks differently than salary checks—became intuitively logical. I now understood that in order to solve the problem of economic inefficiency, it would be necessary to understand what humans actually do rather than simply assuming what they ought to do. The fascination of this topic drove me to explore the relationship between choice architecture and public policy. I was especially intrigued by how small changes, or "nudges," may have large impacts on society; examples include increasing retirement savings rates and encouraging sustainable energy usage. Behavioral economics is a form of democratization of economic theories, making data relevant to everyday life using the perspectives of psychology, neuroscience, and sociology. I intend to connect my work in theoretical research with my work in applied policy design at your institution. Specifically, I am interested in exploring how cognitive bias affects wealth inequality and financial inclusion through the use of experimental economics and empirical field studies. I'm not interested in studying economics solely to provide an objective view of how markets operate; instead, I'm interested in understanding the underlying psychology of what motivates market participants. Through a graduate program in behavioral economics, I will gain the necessary interdisciplinary knowledge and skills to develop policies, products and/or systems that are aligned with the principles of human behavior, as opposed to developing policies, products and/or systems that conflict with human behavior.