Chapter 3, Paradigms : Rational Choice Theory Flashcards
according to the rational choice approach, what is the study of international relations?
international relations are the outcomes of rational choices made by rational actors.
can a goal be rational or irrational?
no, a goal is never (ir)rational according to rational choice theory.
(in that sense, the goal of an actor is neutral, but the courses of action the actor takes to get there are rational)
what are the four steps included in the logic of consequences?
- the rational actor considers all possible courses of action
- the rational actor deduces the outcome that will follow every possible course of action
- based on its pre-given interests, the rational actor rank-orders the outcomes
- according to the best possible outcome, the rational actor selects the course of action that makes that outcome possible
what are the four limits to rational choice theory (not the cognitive limits, but rather the theory’s discontents)?
- to what extent can we assume that actors act rationally?
- inductive theorizing (making the model fit the data, instead of the other way around)
- the theory cannot be tested empirically
- bounded rationality (cognitive limitations, lack of information and other obstacles make it impossible for actors to take into account ALL the relevant information when making a choice)
what are the seven cognitive limits that can limit actors in their rational decision-making process (i included those from the lectures as well as those from the reading Why Hawks Win)?
- misuse of analogies
- cognitive dissonance
- excessive optimism
- reactive devaluation
- attribution
- prospect theory
- endowment effect
what is a false analogy (misuse of analogy)?
a type of informal in which the fact that two things are alike in one respect leads to the invalid conclusion that they must be alike in some other respect (e.g. : if A and B have the quality X in common, then they must also have the quality Y in common).
what is cognitive dissonance?
it is the tendency to discount evidence that is inconsistent with prior beliefs.
what is excessive optimism?
it is the tendency to exaggerate one’s strengths and qualities.
what is reactive devaluation?
it is the tendency to disparage proposals made by another party, simply because they were made by another party.
what is attribution?
it is the tendency to attribute someone’s actions to their nature/character instead of taking into account contextual restraints (e.g. : mutual attribution of hostile intentions).
what is prospect theory?
it is the idea that actors are not risk-neutral and that they do take risks into account when making a choice. when things are good, actors are less inclined to take risks. when things are bad, actors are more inclined to take risks.
what is the endowment effect?
it is the tendency to value something you have more than something you don’t have (e.g.: losing 100$ is worse than winning 100$).
