IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jothpo/v36y2024i4p328-343.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Explanation, formal models, and rational choice

Author

Listed:
  • Scott Ashworth

Abstract

Formal theorists use a unified collection of models to generate intentional and causal explanations of political behavior. I explicate this claim and argue that disagreements about the role of unification and intentionality are at the root of persistent friction between theorists and empiricists. A debate around pathologies of rational choice theory is used to illustrate the argument.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott Ashworth, 2024. "Explanation, formal models, and rational choice," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 36(4), pages 328-343, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:36:y:2024:i:4:p:328-343
    DOI: 10.1177/09516298241270965
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09516298241270965
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/09516298241270965?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Sen, Amartya, 1993. "Internal Consistency of Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 495-521, May.
    3. repec:cup:apsrev:v:113:y:2019:i:03:p:838-859_00 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Donald P. Green & Shang E. Ha & John G. Bullock, 2010. "Enough Already about “Black Box†Experiments: Studying Mediation Is More Difficult than Most Scholars Suppose," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 628(1), pages 200-208, March.
    5. Thoma, Johanna, 2021. "In defence of revealed preference theory," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 37(2), pages 163-187, July.
    6. Blair, Graeme & Cooper, Jasper & Coppock, Alexander & Humphreys, Macartan, 2019. "Declaring and Diagnosing Research Designs," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 113(3), pages 838-859, August.
    7. Imbens,Guido W. & Rubin,Donald B., 2015. "Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521885881, January.
    8. Blair, Graeme & Cooper, Jasper & Coppock, Alexander & Humphreys, Macartan, 2019. "Declaring and Diagnosing Research Designs," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 113(3), pages 838-859.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2019. "What are axiomatizations good for?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(3), pages 339-359, May.
    2. Tsoukias, Alexis, 2008. "From decision theory to decision aiding methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 138-161, May.
    3. Ary José A. de Souza-Jr. & Flávio Terto, 2021. "The propensity to adaptation under the new era of climate changes," Working Papers REM 2021/0167, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, REM, Universidade de Lisboa.
    4. Julia M. Puaschunder, 2023. "Behavioral Economics for All: From Nudging to Leadership," RAIS Conference Proceedings 2022-2024 0293, Research Association for Interdisciplinary Studies.
    5. Yan, Xiaoming & Zhao, Wenhan & Yu, Yugang, 2022. "Optimal product line design with reference price effects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(3), pages 1045-1062.
    6. Brodeur, Abel & Esterling, Kevin & Ankel-Peters, Jörg & Bueno, Natália S & Desposato, Scott & Dreber, Anna & Genovese, Federica & Green, Donald P & Hepplewhite, Matthew & de la Guardia, Fernando Hoces, 2024. "Promoting Reproducibility and Replicability in Political Science," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt23n3n3dg, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    7. McKenzie, David & Mohpal, Aakash & Yang, Dean, 2022. "Aspirations and financial decisions: Experimental evidence from the Philippines," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    8. Paul Dolan & Daniel Kahneman, 2008. "Interpretations Of Utility And Their Implications For The Valuation Of Health," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 215-234, January.
    9. Robin Maialeh, 2019. "Generalization of results and neoclassical rationality: unresolved controversies of behavioural economics methodology," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 1743-1761, July.
    10. Holzmeister, Felix & Stefan, Matthias, 2019. "The Risk Elicitation Puzzle Revisited: Across-Methods (In)consistency?," OSF Preprints pj9u2, Center for Open Science.
    11. Krekel, Christian & MacKerron, George, 2023. "Back to Edgeworth? Estimating the Value of Time Using Hedonic Experiences," IZA Discussion Papers 16308, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Suresh P. Sethi & Sushil Gupta & Vipin K. Agrawal & Vijay K. Agrawal, 2022. "Nobel laureates’ contributions to and impacts on operations management," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(12), pages 4283-4303, December.
    13. M. Vittoria Levati & Aaron Nicholas & Birendra Rai, 2011. "Testing the Framework of Other-Regarding Preferences," Jena Economics Research Papers 2011-041, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    14. Karthik Muralidharan & Mauricio Romero & Kaspar Wüthrich, 2019. "Factorial Designs, Model Selection, and (Incorrect) Inference in Randomized Experiments," NBER Working Papers 26562, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Shumpei Goke & Gabriel Y. Weintraub & Ralph Mastromonaco & Sam Seljan, 2021. "Bidders' Responses to Auction Format Change in Internet Display Advertising Auctions," Papers 2110.13814, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2022.
    16. Berg, Erlend & Blake, Michael & Morsink, Karlijn, 2022. "Risk sharing and the demand for insurance: Theory and experimental evidence from Ethiopia," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 236-256.
    17. Dawid, Philip & Humphreys, Macartan & Musio, Monica, 2022. "Bounding Causes of Effects With Mediators," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue OnlineFir, pages 1-1.
    18. Felix Holzmeister & Matthias Stefan, 2019. "The risk elicitation puzzle revisited: Across-methods (in)consistency?," Working Papers 2019-19, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    19. Daniel Kahneman, 2003. "A Psychological Perspective on Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(2), pages 162-168, May.
    20. Raphael Schilling & Milena Pavlova & Andrea Karaman, 2023. "Consumer Preferences for Health Services Offered by Health Insurance Companies in Germany," Risks, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-27, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:36:y:2024:i:4:p:328-343. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.