The tragedy of the commons refers to the overuse of resources which are rival in consumption but lack excludability and it also refers to rent dissipation. While the tragedy of the anticommons is a tragedy closely connected with underuse of resources that are rival in consumption and with too strong excludability. The prior studies proved that the tragedy of the commons and the tragedy of the anticommons are symmetric from the perspective of pure mathematics, especially the game theory, which was later refuted by behavioral economics experiments. According to them, the tragedy of the anticommons is severer than the tragedy of the commons. The asymmetry of the tragedy of the commons and the tragedy of the anticommons is a paradox by these different research methods. This paradox shows that there are imperfections in the completely rational economic man hypothesis set up by neoclassical economics. As a fundamental theory, the tragedy of the commons is quite influential in many disciplines, such as microeconomics, public sector economics, ecological economics, environmental economics, management, sociology, property law, and political science. And the tragedy of the anticommons theory has also opened its door of both theoretical research and practical implications since its acceptance by Nobel laureate Buchanan, the main founder of public choice school. Only when theoretical issues are thoroughly discussed and made clear enough, can people avoid misunderstanding or misusing the commons theory. Thus, it is necessary to elucidate the paradox between them. Based on Simon’s bounded rationality, Kahneman and Tversky’s prospect theory, value function, Thaler’s mental accounting, endowment effect, and other cognitive psychological tools, this study clearly shows that agents’ decision-making process is not just based on the long-believed marginal benefit and marginal cost analysis advocated by traditional neoclassical economists. Agents’ decision-making is a process in which agents selectively absorb, code the objective marginal revenue and marginal cost, and feed relevant information to their brain. Therefore, what plays a directly decisive role is not the objective marginal revenue and marginal cost per se, but the mentally perceived subjective utility of marginal revenue and marginal cost by the human brain. Followed by this research clue, the paradox between the tragedy of the commons and the tragedy of the anticommons is elucidated from the perspective of cognitive psychology.

Psycholinguistics and neurolinguistics have been seldom used in investigating the cultural component of language. In this study, we suggest a scientific methodology to study neurocognitive mechanisms induced by the interaction between multi-linguistics and cross-culture differences, especially during translation between a source language (SL) and a target language (TL). Using a contest of tonal languages (Chinese) and atonal language (English) multilingual exchange, we opine that translation theories as numerous and efficacious as they are, lack the competence to bring absolute clarity into the complex cross-cultural dimension of languages when it comes to accuracy in translation. Echoing this, this study attempts to apply neuroscience in blending cross-cultural diversity and neurolinguistics as a one-in-all translation approach to “multicultural neurolinguistics” between an SL and a given TL. The linguistic examination of this study proves that “multicultural neurolinguistics” will provide a unique framework for all translation barriers, and establish a cross-cultural and multilingual network depending on the particular circumstance. This research contributes to the linguistic literature by bringing a “multicultural neurolinguistics” resolution to the cultural diversity question in translation.

Neuroeconomics has been seldom used in investigating the impact of culture on international trade. This research proposes a scientific approach to investigate how cross-cultural differences contribute to the conceptualization of international trade patterns globally. International business relations are directly influenced by factors such as cultural variations which distinguish one foreign market from another. Therefore, the level of understanding these cultural differences is able to determine the success or not of business opportunities. In response to the scarcity of scientific investigation of cultural influence on international trade, the purpose of this study is to propose a neuroeconomic framework as a strategic instrument to elucidate the cross-cultural dimension of international commercial relations. Echoing this, our study uses cultural diversities and cognitive classifications established in literature to adopt a unique scientific tool for the conceptualization of international trade patterns across the world. This research establishes the cognitive mechanism of cross-cultural diversity, as a novel framework to conceptualize international trade patterns. By unveiling the cognitive process of cross-cultural diversity, this article provides an instrument to unlock trade barriers of individualism and collectivism across nations.