Behavioural economics has significantly advanced our understanding of human behaviour, shedding light on how it frequently diverges from the traditional economic model predictions of the homo economicus. There is however a growing sense, that the marginal returns of finding and investigating biases have decreased significantly.

There is a renewed interest in adaptive explanations for biases and cognitive biases. This interest is bolstered by progress in at least two different areas: cognitive neuroscience and economic theory. In the former, models assuming that human brains are solving complex Bayesian calculations are now being routinely used. In the latter, richer models studying optimal/equilibrium behaviour in situations where information is incomplete and costly to acquire have enriched economists' ability to study more realistic decision problems with the economic toolbox.

I recently published a book, "Optimally Irrational", that discusses the results from behavioural economics with an adaptive perspective that takes from old and recent explanations of human biases as having good reasons. I also started an eponym Substack where I'll be discussing human behaviour with an adaptive perspective, informed by recent advances in economic theory and cognitive neuroscience. I think these would be of interest to the LessWrong community.