**4. Conclusions**

The prospect theory explains how people make decisions in uncertain situations and evaluate choices in terms of potential gains and losses in relation to a reference point, rather than calculating expected utility. In fact, the prospect theory questions the idea of a single theory of human behavior being normative and descriptive. The prospect theory shows that choices can be structured in different ways, even with the same outcomes, differing from orthodox economics.

Above all, human decisions can be influenced by norms, habits, and personal characteristics of those making them, and these factors can bias the choice of alternatives—as shown by the prospect theory. Human perception is also imperfect, and changes in perspective can alter the relative size of objects and the level of desire for each option. For example, a change in perspective regarding a problem can bias the choice of alternatives. Additionally, furthermore, when it comes to choices involving gains, people tend to be risk-averse, but they tend to seek risk in choices involving losses.

On the other hand, all theories have flaws and are not infallible, even if they are the best explanation of a phenomenon or accepted by the majority. The prospect

theory is no exception. In the words of Professor Daniel Kahneman himself, the theory cannot deal with disappointments and does not consider regret.

Furthermore, the prospect theory is also criticized for not being able to explain the irrational decision-making of human beings. In this sense, it is necessary to resort to other areas of knowledge, such as neuroscience, to obtain more comprehensive explanations.

Entrepreneurs are motivated by potential gains, but need to take calculated risks. In this way, the prospect theory applies to the search for innovation by entrepreneurs. The theory helps to evaluate and manage risks, considering expected losses and gains, norms, habits, and personal characteristics. Entrepreneurs should consider these factors and seek opportunities that achieve their goals and minimize the risks involved.

In essence, innovation is the materialization of a brilliant idea in the market, either by the entrepreneur's own initiative or by the existence of a need to be met. Generating direct and indirect gains for the innovator, it can happen on three platforms: product, service, and delivery. Furthermore, innovation encompasses the entire process of developing ideas to achieve a return and comprises three phases of action, each with a different outcome. They are: conception of the idea, commercialization, and concretization.

However, it is important to differentiate "invention" from "innovation." Invention is the making tangible of an original idea under the prism of a product or process, while innovation is the action of this commercialized product or process, including its wide acceptance in the market.

Consequently, entrepreneurship emerges as a concept related to innovation, as enterprise is the realization of new combinations, and entrepreneurs are individuals whose function is to carry them out. Entrepreneurs generate disruptive innovations that disturb existing markets, generating above-average profits for pioneer companies, and attracting imitators.

Entrepreneurs, described by Schumpeter, have a certain advantage over other potential innovators. This is because Schumpeterian entrepreneurs tend to seek maximum risk, as no one knows what might happen in the face of a possible innovation.

On the other hand, it seems that genetic mechanisms influence how people deal with risk and uncertainty. In innovation, entrepreneurs are required to find a balance between anxiety and courage.

Additionally, when considering the genetic influence on human behavior, it is important to mention another relevant topic: epigenetics. Epigenetics refers to lasting changes in DNA that do not involve alterations in its sequence. Environmental factors, such as nutrition, stress, and exposure to toxins, can influence these changes, affecting gene expression and, consequently, behavior.

Entrepreneurs can apply memetics to improve their understanding of how ideas are disseminated and also to understand how cognitive biases affect their teams and organizations. In addition, they can use "organizational culture" techniques to create a culture that encourages innovative solutions and helps deal with loss aversion in their projects.

Interestingly, the presence of the parasite Toxoplasma gondii has been linked to behavioral changes in rodents, including a reduction in risk aversion. This can lead to more exploratory and active behavior, as well as a decrease in fear of cats. As a result, some researchers propose that these behavioral changes may be related to entrepreneurial traits.

Despite significant advances in biology in understanding human behavior, ethical issues prevent organizations from conducting experiments with their employees,

including genetic, epigenetic, hormonal tests, and studies involving fungi. Therefore, the role of culture in innovative behavior is crucial and more feasible as a solution, in fact, the only possible way to manage human behavior.

Additionally, behavioral genetics has contributed to understanding human behavior, but has been criticized for oversimplification, confirmation bias, ignoring the environment, raising ethical concerns, and having an incomplete understanding of heredity. The same is true of epigenetics, as criticism can be made that the theory of memetics is poorly grounded and does not consider the social, historical, and cultural context in which ideas and behaviors develop and spread.

In addition to the mentioned alternative approaches, behavioral economics offers a solution to improving economic decisions—choice architecture. This technique seeks to improve people's choices through the strategic organization of available information and options. Compared to conventional approaches to education and financial incentives in economics and management, choice architecture has proven more effective in improving people's decisions.

This study faced difficulties due to the complexity of the topic in relation to scientific advances in behavioral science. However, it is possible to say that the objective of presenting the prospect theory as an integral part of decision-making in business innovation, especially in the context of risk and uncertainty, was achieved.

The study in question has great importance for those interested in the topics of behavioral economics and innovation, as it innovatively addresses decision-making in situations of risk and uncertainty, particularly in the context of innovation projects. This is especially relevant for expanding the scope of behavioral economics and innovation. Furthermore, it is important to note that there is a lack of specific scientific productions on the application of prospect theory in the area of innovation, which makes this study even more significant.

For future researchers who wish to investigate prospect theory for innovation, there are several clues to explore. It is recommended to deepen knowledge about topics such as genetics, epigenetics, and memetics, as well as the use of behavioral games to study biases related to prospect theory. Another possibility is to perform brain imaging mapping during decision-making in financial innovation projects. Case studies in organizations that have applied this theory to decision-making can provide valuable insights. It is also important to focus on specific situations related to the innovation process in products and services. Finally, it is essential to analyze decisionmaking involving risk and uncertainty in the entrepreneurial context, offering insights for more assertive decision-making in innovation projects.

Finally, entrepreneurs who take more risks have an advantage in innovation. Culture and genetic mechanisms influence how people deal with risks. Entrepreneurs can use culture to create solutions to deal with loss aversion, and the choice architecture technique serves to deal with risks. Although risks cannot be eliminated, entrepreneurs can manage them better using these strategies, thus bypassing cognitive biases.
