[underlipton]

If I'm wrong on this subject (and I would be interested in knowing how "resource allocation under scarcity" and "manipulation of the behavior of the people obtaining and using resources" are mutually exclusive), I might say that it's a product of the layman's (my) relationship to "economics" and "economists". The contact the most people have with economists is usually, "Talking heads or disembodied voices telling listeners how they should feel about developments in various markets that are connected to whether or not they'll be able to find their lifestyle affordable." The emphasis is decidedly on application, which I imagine runs into game theory and mechanism design, to the point where a reasonable observer might consider the latter two components of (applied?) economics. ...Which raises the question: DOES anyone subscribe to this model? What would an expert make of it?

>you might find your thoughts more appropriately align to sociology and social psychology than economics

Since economics is an emergent property of agents interacting with other agents and their environment, I'm failing to see how I'm misaligned with any of the three. I've heard economics described as "sociology with a veneer of statistics", which is something I can't say I'm unconvinced by. I respect your status as a relative expert, and also as someone close enough to the subject to have a conflict of interest in characterizing it fairly.