READING QUESTION #1 Give a summary of one of Thaler's examples in the Misbehaving selection posted to Blackboard (railroad track example pp. 26-27, diminishing marginal utility example pp. 28-29, the value function graph example pp. 30-32, or the loss versus risk sensitivity example pp. 33-34). Explain how that example illustrates key differences in how behavioral economics views decision making as compared to traditional rational choice theory. Be sure in your explanation to include two or more of the following key terms from the textbook Ch. 9: bounded rationality (339), framing (343), habitual decision making (339), default bias (344), prospect theory (343), priming (344) and/or loss aversion (3 43). On your view, what are the implications of Thaler's ndings for consumer behavior and how marketers ought to analyze consumer decision-making? READING QUESTION #2 The chapter discussed ways that organizations can use \"nudges (344)\" to change consumer behavior. In your own words, how would you dene 'nudge'? Critics refer to them (nudges) as benevolent paternalism because they are they force people to \"eat their vegetables\" by restricting the freedom to choose in their decision making. For example, several cities, including New York and Philadelphia, have tried (unsuccessfully thus far) to ban the sales of extra-large portions of sugary drinks. What's your take on these effortsshould local, state, or federal governments be in the business of nudging citizens toward healthier decision making? Please elaborate on your response with one or more example (you may use the sugary beverage lone or come up with an original one of your own choosing). Lastly, what might be the signicance of nudges for marketing strategy and/or understanding consumer behavior? 3b) What is prospect theory? Does it support the argument that we are rational decision makers? What difference does it make for marketing strategy? On your view, what would Thaler say about prospect theory? On your view, what is the biggest weakness of prospect theory? How might a defender of prospect theory reply to that critique? On our View, should we be convinced by the reply