Hi,

i liked your presentation very much, it very well presents many aspects of the human decision making, very useful for actuaries and for many others, but let me add some comments.

At the end of your presentation you highlight how humans' decision can be improved (measured under any kind of (ethical?) metrics), but it is also relevant that how actuaries should use the information you just explained.

I believe that actuaries - in their analysis - should remain in the rational ground. We should rationally calculate what we need to calculate, but we should keep in mind that the policyholders will not always behave rationally. And this irrational behavior may lead us to different best estimates and different worst case scenarios compared to the assumptions that everybody is rational.

Actuaries should also be more open to such information when pricing products and offering/evaluating various options to the clients.

One of your slides compares Actuaries with Humans. (Will get many comments :-) ). But under"Actuaries" we should understand for-profit corporations (rational, profit max) and under "Humans" we should understand (retail) consumers. (Of course: corporations under quarterly profit reporting requirements may not be 100% rational in their decisions.) Do you agree or do I misunderstand?