Worrying good for your wallet? Or is this Pop Ev Psych

So says a member of the one school of economics that is actually scientific: behavioral economics.

True? Or maybe "ehhh"? Or even more problematic?

Research says good worrying can prevent dumb decisions, Robert H. Frank claims.

First, before I get to the meat of Frank's column, you have to love this quote:

The late Amos Tversky, a Stanford psychologist and a founding father of behavioral economics, used to say, “My colleagues, they study artificial intelligence; me, I study natural stupidity.”

And that's why behavioral economics is scientific; it doesn't start with the straw man of "Homo rationalis."

On the other hand, claiming that "the anxiety we feel about whether we’ll succeed (in finding an ideal job) is evolution’s way of motivating us" veers close to Pop Evolutionary Psychology.

Anxiety can fulfill that role; whether it evolved to do so, or the more ancient hominid equivalent thereof, is an entirely different question.

It stands to reason that some degree of anxiety produces a certain drive and focus. But, high-quality jobs as a Maluthusian-constrained "driver" of evolutionary change? Ahh, that's social/cultural evolution, not biological. And, if you look at the short length of human life since the development of civilization and ideas about jobs, differentiation of labor and private property, that doesn't seem enough time to be an evolutionary driver.

Then, there's this:

In every domain, people who work harder are more likely to succeed professionally, more likely to make a difference.

Well, Frank doesn't say if professional success equates to larger-life success. He doesn't talk about how the word "success," other than, in a simple evolutionary issue of "staying alive," is defined culturally.

And, there's yet other problems with Frank's column.

Per things such as happiness quotients, does job success, above a certain level, outweigh nonjob ennui, angst or even self-loathing? Or does it outweigh high blood pressure, obesity, alcohol or drug problems and other ways of trying to control this anxiety?

Also, it doesn't address genetic-based vs. societal-based differences in different people's baseline anxiety levels.

Nor does it address differences in acceptable vs. unacceptable anxiety, etc. across cultures.

And, per various happiness quotients, it doesn't address how much job success, especially the monetary part, does or does not contribute to broader happiness.

Don't get me wrong; I love behavioral economics' scientific insight into matters economic. I just don't want it jumping the shark into the world of Pop Ev Psych. Or, the shark-jumping of lack of research and just-so of non-behavioral economics.