Lecture 6 - Rational Choice Flashcards
background rational choice theory
1960s popular in the US
discipline of economics
core idea (making it a content-based / substantive theory)
behavior is a rational self-interested response to incentives (homo economicus)
core idea of how humans behave
different types rational choice
- rational actor theory (individual)
- public choice theory (governments)
- social choice theory (aggregating individuals)
rational choice core characteristics
- foundationalist ontology
- positivist epistemology
- privileges quantitative methodology
deductive approach as it starts with theory (theory of homo economicus)
*inductive approaches such as behaviouralism start with observation
rational choice models
work out how people might behave given their expectations of how other rational self-interested people are going to behave
aim: accurate prediction of how actors behave in the aggregate, not a detailed reconstruction of how they actually reach decisions
!so RC models are based on idealization
early Rational Choice - Adam Smith
Invisible hand:
idea that macrolevel economic organization functions as if there is a hand organizing behaviour, it seems as if it is planned, but there is not a master-planner:
micro-level interactions have the effect of giving this appearance of an organizing hand in the macrolevel
the macrolevel economy functions because of the self-interest of humans on the microlevel
methodological individualism
we also see this in behaviouralism
idea that:
- behaviour is predictable
- scientific explanations are based on the interests, preferences and behaviours of individual actors (methodological individualism)
similar logic is applicable to collective unit, with an unitary actor assumption
behaviouralism vs rational choice
behaviouralism asks: why do people behave the way they do?
rational choice answers: self-interest and rationality
assumptions: rationality and self-interest
- people act to achieve their goals, these goals reflect self-interest (e.g. goal not te be hungry, response to eat on time)
-** instrumental rationality:** people are able to achieve the course of action most likely to achieve their goals - behaviour is instrumental: through cost-benefit analysis actors try to maximize their self-interest
- groups of actors have the same self-interested goals which they pursue rationally (-> macroeconomic explanations)
*this doesn’t mean that everyone always acts in self-interest and is always acting rational: this is merely the best way to analyse and predict behaviour, it is an aggregate assumption that self-interest and rationality are stable
how are interests and preferences assumed?
- they are assumed to be complete (involve all viable options
- they are assumed to be stable/fixed (do not change easily)
- they are assumed to be transitive: if i prefer A over B, and B over C -> i prefer A over C
!at the individual level this doesn’t always work, but at the macroeconomic level we can assume this is how people behave
unitary actor assumption
logic of collective action (important in rational choice research, also mentions in the text)
- given that individuals are rational groups, being composed of individuals, are also rational
- if a group shares a common goal which everyone agrees is worthwhile, we can expect everyone to contribute to the realization of this goal
e.g. realist theory holds the unitary actor assumption
Keynes’ paradox of thrift (1936)
when the economy slows down, there is not a lot of economic growth. what should be the rational response of an individual?
- individual: worry about income + employment + family financial situation -> individually rational to save some money (to thrifth money)
this leads to a problem on the macroeconomic level
paradox of thrift: wat is individually rational to do has a collective outcome that the economy goes even worse
what is better on the collective level is not better on the individual level
Peltzman’s effect (seatbellt effect) 1975
expectation: introduction obligation of wearing seatbelts would lead to decrease in deaths in car accidents
actually: people felt more protected -> drove less carefully -> collectively more deaths and inguries
criticism/questions RC raises
- Keynes paradox of thrift
- Peltzman effect
- political questions: to what extent can and should governmetns manipulate these behaviours (individual behaviour leading to poor collective questions)
prisoners dilemma
collective rationality where the best outcome for the group is different than the best outcome for the individuals
police needs a confession to have enough proof: if one confesses and the other doesn’t, one gets of free
if both confess, both go in for e.g. 2 year
if both stay quiet, they both go in for e.g. 1 year
no matter how anyone models the behaviour of the other, it is the best for the individual to confess
Nash equilibrium: both confess, what is individually rational for both of them to do
the Nash equilibrium is not the best outcome: if they both defect they will both only have to serve 1 year
Pareto optimality : best outcome, both shut up (defect)
still, they will choose the Nash equilibrium, as that is in both’s self interest