The Experts below are selected from a list of 7260 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Catherine Herfeld - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Diversity of Rational Choice Theory: A Review Note
Topoi, 2020Co-Authors: Catherine HerfeldAbstract:In this paper, I review the literature on Rational Choice Theory (RCT) to scrutinize a number of criticisms that philosophers have voiced against its usefulness in economics. The paper has three goals: first, I argue that the debates about RCT have been characterized by disunity and confusion about the object under scrutiny, which calls into question the effectiveness of those criticisms. Second, I argue that RCT is not a single and unified Choice Theory—let alone an empirical Theory of human behavior—as some critics seem to suppose. Rather, there are several variants of RCT used in economics. Third, I propose that we think of RCT as a set of distinct research strategies to appreciate its diversity. This account implies that the effectiveness of any criticism depends on the variant of RCT we are considering.
-
The importance of commitment for morality: How Harry Frankfurt’s concept of care contributes to Rational Choice Theory
What Makes Us Moral? On the capacities and conditions for being moral, 2013Co-Authors: Catherine Herfeld, Katrien SchaubroeckAbstract:Using Rational Choice Theory to account for moral agency has always had some uncomfortable aspect to it. Economists’ attempts to include the moral dimension of behaviour either as a preference for moral behaviour or as an external constraint on self-interested Choice, have been criticized for relying on tautologies or lacking a realistic picture of motivation. Homo Oeconomicus, even when conceptually enriched by all kinds of motivations, is ultimately still characterized as caring only for what lies in his interest. Amartya Sen has drawn the economists’ attention to a specific blind spot in Rational Choice Theory (henceforth RCT), i.e. the idea of commitment. By starting from the premise that the human capacity to commit is a necessary precondition for moral behaviour, our aim in this paper is twofold: first, we argue that taking the idea of commitment seriously in economics requires an enriched concept of Rationality. Second, we reject a Kantian interpretation of Sen’s concept of commitment and argue that Harry Frankfurt’s views about caring can be used to develop the concept of commitment in a direction that is compatible with Rational Choice Theory.
-
the importance of commitment for morality how harry frankfurt s concept of care contributes to Rational Choice Theory
2013Co-Authors: Catherine Herfeld, Katrien SchaubroeckAbstract:Using Rational Choice Theory to account for moral agency has always had some uncomfortable aspect to it. Economists’ attempts to include the moral dimension of behaviour either as a preference for moral behaviour or as an external constraint on self-interested Choice, have been criticized for relying on tautologies or lacking a realistic picture of motivation. Homo Oeconomicus, even when conceptually enriched by all kinds of motivations, is ultimately still characterized as caring only for what lies in his interest. Amartya Sen has drawn the economists’ attention to a specific blind spot in Rational Choice Theory (henceforth RCT), i.e. the idea of commitment. By starting from the premise that the human capacity to commit is a necessary precondition for moral behaviour, our aim in this paper is twofold: first, we argue that taking the idea of commitment seriously in economics requires an enriched concept of Rationality. Second, we reject a Kantian interpretation of Sen’s concept of commitment and argue that Harry Frankfurt’s views about caring can be used to develop the concept of commitment in a direction that is compatible with Rational Choice Theory.
-
the motive of commitment and its implications for Rational Choice Theory
Analyse and Kritik, 2009Co-Authors: Catherine HerfeldAbstract:This paper addresses the explanatory role of the concept of a motive for action in economics. The aim of the paper is to show the di culty economists have to accommodate the motive of commitment into their explanatory and predictive framework, i.e. Rational Choice Theory. One di culty is that the economists' explanation becomes analytic when assuming preferences of commitment. Another di culty is that it is highly doubtful whether commitment can be represented by current frameworks while (pre-)serving the `folk-psychological' idea of what is commonly understood by the idea of a commitment. Both di culties lead to the conclusion that, although motives do matter, conceptualizing the motive of commitment would cause trouble for Rational Choice Theory.
Milos Krstic - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Normative Rational Choice Theory: Past, present, and future
Theoria, 2020Co-Authors: Bojan Krstić, Milos KrsticAbstract:In this paper, we have tried to explain the normative turn in more recent work on experimental economics and behavioral economics. In section two, we discussed the various arguments that philosophers have offered in related to a normative interpretation of Rational Choice Theory. We used the Friedman-Savage work on Expected Utility Theory as an example of the differences between the way that economists and philosophers see Rational Choice Theory. We concluded that economists have traditionally equated the normative with ethically. In the third part, we examined the results of experimental and behaviorial economic literature with emphasis on the influence of experimental psychology. We presented a number of empirical anomalies and we agreed that representatives of economic psychology tend to view Rational Choice Theory as a normative Theory of Rationality. In the last part, we examined some of the causes and consequences of the normative turn. [Projekat Ministarstva nauke Republike Srbije, br. 179066]
-
Rational Choice Theory and random behaviour
Ekonomika Journal for Economic Theory and Practice and Social Issues, 2015Co-Authors: Bojan Krstic, Milos KrsticAbstract:According to Rational Choice Theory, Rational consumers tend to maximize utility under a given budget constraints. This will be achieved if they choose a combination of goods that cannot satisfy their needs and provide the maximum level of utility. Gary Becker imagines irRational consumers who choose bundle on the budget line. As irRational consumers have an equal probability of choosing any bundle on the budget line, on average, we expect that they will pick the bundle lying at the midpoint of the line. The results of research in which artificial Becher’s agents choose among more than two commodities Rational Choice Theory is small. And in more than two budget/price situations show that the percentage of agents whose behaviour violate. Adding some factors to Becker’s model of random behaviour, experimenters can minimize these minor violations and fit the actor’s Choice with the Theory. In addition, the results of organizations’ Choices analysis show that the observed agents behave Rationally, and this behaviour confirms the Theory Rational Choice. Therefore, Rational Choice Theory is unfalsifiable. As the Theory can always fits with the facts, it would have been much more productive if we had admitted that the Theory was falsifiable and then debated its explanatory value in specific circumstances.
-
Rational Choice Theory and Addiction Behaviour
2014Co-Authors: Milos KrsticAbstract:The purpose of this paper is to explore the construct of student satisfaction and analyze its relationship with student loyalty in the context of state and private universities. The Rational Choice Theory assumes that, when deciding whether to consume some goods or not, consumers use analysis in order to estimate the values of individual preference indicators. From this point of view, there are risk and time preferences. The former show aversion to a risk and are expressed through the risk aversion coefficient, while the latter measure the degree of preference for present satisfaction in relation to the same satisfaction in the future. The degree of preference for present satisfaction regarding the same satisfaction in the future is expressed by the time preference rate. Smokers with a low time preference rate and high risk aversion coefficient level can be expected to be successful in cessation. The aim of this paper is to study smokers from the perspective of Rational Choice Theory, in order to detect factors influencing their behavior. The study (investigation) found that the significant factors for smokers’ behavior are gender, age, education, risk aversion coefficient, and the time preference rate. Analysis of smokers’ behavior, with appropriate limits and qualifications, is a well-developed and highly effective tool for exploring and interpreting reality.
Rathindra Sarathy - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
understanding compliance with internet use policy from the perspective of Rational Choice Theory
Decision Support Systems, 2010Co-Authors: Han Li, Jie Zhang, Rathindra SarathyAbstract:Current studies on compliance with security policies have largely ignored the impact of the perceived benefits of deviant behavior, personal norms, and organizational context. Drawing on the literature in criminology, this paper applies Rational Choice Theory to examine how employees' intention to comply with Internet use policy is driven by cost-benefit assessments, personal norms and organizational context factors. The results indicate that employees' compliance intention is the result of competing influences of perceived benefits, formal sanctions, and security risks. Furthermore, the effect of sanction severity is found to be moderated by personal norms.
Michael Hechter - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
sociological Rational Choice Theory
Review of Sociology, 1997Co-Authors: Michael Hechter, Satoshi KanazawaAbstract:Although Rational Choice Theory has made considerable advances in other social sciences, its progress in sociology has been limited. Some sociologists' reservations about Rational Choice arise from a misunderstanding of the Theory. The first part of this essay therefore introduces Rational Choice as a general theoretical perspective, or family of theories, which explains social outcomes by constructing models of individual action and social context. “Thin” models of individual action are mute about actors' motivations, while “thick” models specify them ex ante. Other sociologists' reservations, however, stem from doubts about the empirical adequacy of Rational Choice explanations. To this end, the bulk of the essay reviews a sample of recent studies that provide empirical support for particular Rational Choice explanations in a broad spectrum of substantive areas in sociology. Particular attention is paid to studies on the family, gender, and religion, for these subareas often are considered least amenabl...
-
the role of values in Rational Choice Theory
Rationality and Society, 1994Co-Authors: Michael HechterAbstract:Most empirical applications of Rational Choice employ a typical value assumption—that actors are motivated to pursue private and instrumental goods. When is this typical value assumption warranted, and when is it not? This article proposes guidelines for thinking about the use of value assumptions in Rational Choice Theory. When instrumental and immanent values are substitutable, use of the typical value assumption is justifiable. However, in cases where there is imperfect substitutability—in which actors face production constraints, significant role conflict, or in which immanent values are nonrandomly distributed—the typical value assumption should be reexamined.
Jeffrey A Bouffard - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
methodological and theoretical implications of using subjectgenerated consequences in tests of Rational Choice Theory
Justice Quarterly, 2002Co-Authors: Jeffrey A BouffardAbstract:Previous research on Rational Choice Theory has typically asked subjects to evaluate the impact of research-derived consequences on offending likelihood using a hypothetical scenario design. However, this procedure may not produce results that accurately reflect the subjects' actual consideration of consequences. In this study, subjects were allowed to develop their own set of potential consequences in response to two hypothetical offending scenarios. The results support the use of this innovative technique, but also revealed many types of consequences that were not commonly used in previous tests of the Theory. Limitations of the study and implications for future tests of Rational Choice Theory are discussed.
