Jebo theory model

Behavioral Theory & Model (jebo-theory-model)

When to trigger

• A referee asks "what model rationalizes this behavior / what is the mechanism?"
• The treatment effect is credible but its behavioral meaning is ambiguous
• You have a behavioral model but it generates no prediction the experiment could falsify
• You are building an agent-based or evolutionary model and must justify its discipline
• You are tempted to lead with a heavy structural model and need to right-size it for JEBO

The JEBO theory dial

JEBO is pluralist: theory can be the lead (a behavioral/bounded-rationality model is itself the contribution) or the support (a model that yields the prediction an experiment tests, or interprets a reduced-form estimate). What JEBO does not reward is theory that adds notation without a testable behavioral prediction or a sharper interpretation. Pick the lightest tool that does the job — and whatever the weight, the model's behavioral primitives (preferences, beliefs, heuristics, learning rules) must be explicit and defensible, not assumed for convenience.

Theory's job	Right amount of model	Where it goes
Name the mechanism / give intuition	a few equations or a conceptual frame	short section before results
Generate a sharp prediction to test	a small behavioral model with comparative statics	framework section; tested in results
Map a reduced-form estimate to a behavioral parameter	sufficient-statistic / structural-behavioral link	inline derivation + appendix
Lead the paper (theory is the contribution)	a full behavioral model, with at least one testable implication	main body, with a discipline section
Explore emergent organizational/market behavior	agent-based / evolutionary model	main body + robustness sweeps

Making the prediction sharp (the usual JEBO sweet spot)

A behavioral model earns its place when it predicts something a rational benchmark does not — a sign, an ordering of treatments, a moderator. State the comparative static before the results ("the model predicts cooperation rises with γ only when monitoring is salient") so the test is a real test, not a post-hoc fit. A model whose every parameterization confirms the data predicts nothing.

Behavioral primitives, not free parameters

Whether a social-preference utility (e.g., inequity aversion, reciprocity, reference dependence) or a learning rule (reinforcement, EWA, level-k / cognitive hierarchy), tie each behavioral primitive to something the design measures or the literature constrains. A "behavioral" parameter chosen only to fit the data is decoration.

Agent-based / evolutionary discipline

Simulation is welcome at JEBO, but referees demand discipline: justify behavioral rules from evidence, calibrate to known moments, report parameter sweeps (handled in jebo-robustness), and distinguish robust emergent regularities from knife-edge artifacts.

Checklist

• Theory's job named (mechanism / prediction / mapping / lead / emergent behavior)
• Lightest adequate tool chosen; weight matches the journal slot
• At least one comparative static / sign prediction stated before it is tested
• Behavioral primitives (preferences/beliefs/learning rules) tied to data or literature, not free
• If structural-behavioral: each parameter linked to a data feature; untargeted-moment check
• If agent-based: rules justified, calibration stated, sweeps planned
• Predictions/magnitudes carry scope and uncertainty

Anti-patterns

• A "model" section that adds notation but yields no testable behavioral prediction
• Comparative statics derived after seeing the results (HARKing the theory)
• A social-preference or learning parameter chosen purely to fit, with no independent discipline
• Leading a thin empirical paper with a heavy structural model (reads as a different journal)
• An agent-based model whose headline result is a knife-edge of untested tuning choices
• Calling a reduced-form effect "loss aversion" with no model linking the estimate to that primitive

Worked vignette (illustrative)

A within-firm field study finds output falls after a pay-cut more than it rises after an equal raise. The raw asymmetry is suggestive but ambiguous. The JEBO move: a reference-dependent effort model with the prior wage as the reference point predicts exactly this asymmetry and a kink at the reference wage. The paper states the kink prediction before testing, then shows effort drops ~2× as steeply below the reference as it rises above (illustrative) — turning a correlation into a mechanism-level result a reference-free model cannot produce.

Output format

【Theory's job】mechanism / prediction / mapping / lead / emergent
【Tool chosen】frame / small behavioral model / structural-behavioral / agent-based
【Behavioral primitives】<preferences / beliefs / learning rule> — disciplined by ___
【Sharp prediction (pre-stated)】<sign / ordering / moderator>
【Magnitude or interpretation delivered】[number + scope], or "prediction only"
【Next step】jebo-robustness