|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Rational Choice and Rule-Following Behavior
Bernd Lahno
Frankfurt School of Finance and Management, Sonnemannstr. 9-11, D-60314 Frankfurt am Main, Germany, b.lahno{at}arcor.de
While Rational Choice Theory (RC) may be understood as a theory of choice, which does not necessarily reflect actual deliberative processes, rule-following behavior is definitely based on a certain form of deliberation. This article aims at clarifying the relationship between the two. Being guided by instrumental rules, i.e., rules reducible to the maximization principle, is perfectly consistent with the fundamental behavioral assumptions of RC. But human individuals use other forms of rules in decision making, especially tie-breaking rules and coordination rules. It is argued that within RC no satisfying account of such rule-following behavior can be given. In particular it is impossible to determine suitable preference orderings such that coordinating may be understood as maximizing relative to these orderings. Still, once there is coordination, following a coordination rule may be perfectly consistent with the basic assumptions of RC. So there might be a more complex theory of action that incorporates RC as well as a satisfying theory of rule-guided behavior.
Key Words: rationality rule-following behavior coordination maximization preference
References
- Anderson, E. 2001. `Unstrapping the Straitjacket of "Preference": A Comment on Amartya Sen's Contributions to Philosophy and Economics.' Economics and Philosophy 17: 21—38.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
- Asheim, G.B. and M. Dufwenberg. 2003. `Admissibility and Common Belief.' Games and Economic Behavior 42: 208—34.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
- Aumann, R. 1997. `Rationality and Bounded Rationality.' Games and Economic Behavior 21: 2—14.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
- Bernheim, B.D. 1984. `Rationalizable Strategic Behavior.' Econometrica 52(4): 1007—28.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
- Cubitt, R.P. and R. Sugden. 2003. `Common Knowledge, Salience and Convention: A Reconstruction of David Lewis' Game Theory.' Economics and Philosophy 19: 175—210.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
- Gauthier, D. 1975. `Coordination.' Dialogue 14: 195—221.[Web of Science]
- Gilbert, M. 1989. `Rationality and Salience.' Philosophical Studies 57: 61—77.
- Gilbert, M. 1990. `Rationality, Coordination, and Convention.' Synthese 84: 1—21.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
- Goyal, S. and M. Janssen. 1996. `Can We Rationally Learn to Coordinate? ' Theory and Decision 40: 29—49.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
- Harsanyi, J. and R. Selten. 1988. A General Theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games and Social Situations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Hart, H.L.A. 1961. The Concept of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Heiner, R.A. 1983. `The Origin of Predictable Behavior.' The American Economic Review 73(4): 560—86.[Web of Science]
- Heiner, R.A. 1990. `Rule-Governed Behavior in Evolution and Human Society.' Constitutional Political Economy 1(1): 19—46.[CrossRef]
- Kant, I. 1968. Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.
- Kliemt, H. 1990. `Commitment and Rules' In Papers on Buchanan and Related Subjects, pp. 72—95, H. Kliemt. Munich: Accedo.
- Kliemt, H. 1993. `Constitutional Commitments: On the Economic and Legal Philosophy of Rules.' Jahrbuch für Neue Politische Ökonomie 12: 145—73.
- Lewis, D. 1969. Convention: A Philosophical Study. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- McClennen, E.F. 1998. `Rationality and Rules.' In Modeling Rationality, Morality and Evolution, pp. 13—40, ed. P. A. Danielson. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Pearce, D.G. 1984. `Rationalizable Behavior and the Problem of Perfection.' Econometrica 52(4): 1029—56.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
- Rabin, M. 1993. `Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics.' American Economic Review 83(5): 1281—1301.[Web of Science]
- Rowe, N. 1989. Rules and Institutions. New York: Philip Allan.
- Sen, A.K. 1976. `Rational Fools: A Critique of the Behavioural Foundations of Economic Theory.' Philosophy and Public A fairs 6: 317—44.
- Sen, A.K. 2002. `Maximization and the Act of Choice.' In Rationality and Freedom, pp. 158—205, A. K. Sen. Cambridge, MA, London: Harvard University Press.
- Simon, H.A. 1955. `A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice.' Quarterly Journal of Economics 69: 99—118.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Sugden, R. 1991. `Rational Choice: A Survey of Contributions from Economics and Philosophy.' The Economic Journal 101: 751—85.[CrossRef]
- Sugden, R. 1993. `Thinking as a Team: Towards an Explanation of Nonselfish Behavior.' Social Philosophy and Policy 120(1): 69—89.
- Sugden, R. 2003. `The Logic of Team Reasoning.' Philosophical Explorations VI(3): 165—81.
- Taylor, M. 1987. The Possibility of Cooperation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Vanberg, V.J. 1994. Rules and Choice in Economics. London, New York: Routledge.
- Vanberg, V.J. 2000. `Ordnungsökonomik und Ethik — Zur Interessenbegründung von Moral' In Freiheit und wettbewerbliche Ordnung, eds B. Külp and V. J. Vanberg, pp. 579—605. Freiburg, Berlin, Munich: Haufe Verlagsgruppe.
- Vanberg, V.J. 2004. `The Rationality Postulate in Economics: Its Ambiguity, Its Deficiency and Its Evolutionary Alternative.' Journal of Economic Methodology 11(1): 1—29.[CrossRef]
- Vanberg, V.J. and J.M. Buchanan. 1988. `Rational Choice and Moral Order.' Analyse & Kritik 10: 138—60.
Rationality and Society, Vol. 19, No. 4,
425-450 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1043463107083737

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter What's this?
|
|