Rational choice theory

Rational choice theory is a way of looking at deliberations between a number of potential courses of action, in which "rationality" of one form or another is used either to decide which course of action would be the best to take, or to predict which course of action actually will be taken. Such a perspective finds itself in models for both human behavior and behavior of non-human but nonetheless potentially rational entities, such as corporations.

Obviously, what is taken as "rational" is of chief importance here. This varies with context:

Often, to simplify calculation and ease prediction, some rather unrealistic assumptions are made about the world. These can include:

Assumptions such as these have sparked criticism from a number of camps. Some people have tried to create models of bounded rationality, which try to be more psychologically plausible without giving up completely on the idea that some kind of reason underlies decision-making processes. Others have critiqued rational choice theorists for not being able to empirically test their claims. Early critiques of the rational choice approach in political science for example, argued that the rational choice theorists couldn't explain why people voted, much less make more sophisticated arguments about political behavior.

Why rational choice theory?

One question that can be asked is why people try to base their models on concepts such as "reason", "preferences", and what is implied by them, free will. Some potential reasons:

Various researchers has found some limits to this theory, under the name of bounded rationality, an element used for example in behavioral economics.

See also

See also: Rational choice theory, Assumption, Behavior, Behavioral economics, Being, Bounded rationality, Calculation, Corporations, Framing (economics), Free will