Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Rationality and Society
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lahno, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

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


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



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lahno, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?