IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/shs/wpaper/1011.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Choice, internal consistency, and rationality

Author

Listed:
  • Aditi Bhattacharyya

    (Department of Economics and International Business, Sam Houston State University)

  • Prasanta K. Pattanaik

    (Department of Economics, University of California - Riverside)

  • Yongsheng Xu

    (Department of Economics, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University)

Abstract

The classical theory of rational choice is built on several important internal consistency conditions. In recent years, the reasonableness of those internal consistency conditions has been questioned and criticized, and several responses to accommodate such criticisms have been proposed in the literature. This paper develops a general framework to accommodate the issues raised by the criticisms of classical rational choice theory, and examines the broad impact of these criticisms from both normative and positive points of view.

Suggested Citation

  • Aditi Bhattacharyya & Prasanta K. Pattanaik & Yongsheng Xu, 2010. "Choice, internal consistency, and rationality," Working Papers 1011, Sam Houston State University, Department of Economics and International Business.
    • Handle: RePEc:shs:wpaper:1011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.shsu.edu/academics/economics-and-international-business/documents/wp_series/wp10-11_paper.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simonson, Itamar, 1989. "Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(2), pages 158-174, September.
    2. Gil Kalai & Ariel Rubinstein & Ran Spiegler, 2002. "Rationalizing Choice Functions By Multiple Rationales," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(6), pages 2481-2488, November.
    3. Ernst Fehr & Alexander Klein & Klaus M Schmidt, 2007. "Fairness and Contract Design," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(1), pages 121-154, January.
    4. Baigent, Nick & Gaertner, Wulf, 1996. "Never Choose the Uniquely Largest: A Characterization," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(2), pages 239-249, August.
    5. Suzumura, Kotaro & Xu, Yongsheng, 2001. "Characterizations of Consequentialism and Nonconsequentialism," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 423-436, December.
    6. Gaertner, Wulf & Xu, Yongsheng, 1997. "Optimization and external reference; a comparison of three axiomatic systems," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 57-62, November.
    7. Taradas Bandyopadhyay & Indraneel Dasgupta & Prasanta Pattanaik, 2004. "A general revealed preference theorem for stochastic demand behavior," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 23(3), pages 589-599, March.
    8. Wulf Gaertner & Yongsheng Xu, 2004. "Procedural choice," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 24(2), pages 335-349, August.
    9. Sen, Amartya, 1993. "Internal Consistency of Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 495-521, May.
    10. Robert Pollin (ed.), 2000. "Capitalism, Socialism, and Radical Political Economy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2055.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kevin Chung, 2020. "Incorporating a “Better” Behavioral Bias for Both Consumers and Firms in Rebate Programs," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(4), pages 1627-1646, April.
    2. Chatterjee, Sidharta, 2022. "Rationalizing Decision Choices: What Influences our Social Decision Making?," MPRA Paper 114985, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Dietrich, Franz & List, Christian, 2016. "Mentalism Versus Behaviourism In Economics: A Philosophy-Of-Science Perspective," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 249-281, July.
    4. Félix-Fernando Muñoz & María-Isabel Encinar, 2015. "Intentionality and the Emergence of Complexity: An Analytical Approach," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Pyka & John Foster (ed.), The Evolution of Economic and Innovation Systems, edition 127, pages 171-190, Springer.
    5. Cyril Hédoin, 2017. "Normative economics and paternalism: the problem with the preference-satisfaction account of welfare," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 286-310, September.
    6. Marggraf, Rainer & Masius, Patrick & Rumpf, Christine, 2012. "Zur Integration von Tieren in wohlfahrtsökonomische Analysen," DARE Discussion Papers 1207, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).

    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. Walter Bossert & Kotaro Suzumura, 2011. "Rationality, external norms, and the epistemic value of menus," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(4), pages 729-741, October.
    2. Attila Ambrus & Kareen Rozen, 2015. "Rationalising Choice with Multi‐self Models," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 125(585), pages 1136-1156, June.
    3. Alfio Giarlotta & Angelo Petralia & Stephen Watson, 2022. "Semantics meets attractiveness: Choice by salience," Papers 2204.08798, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.
    4. Tyson, Christopher J., 2008. "Cognitive constraints, contraction consistency, and the satisficing criterion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 138(1), pages 51-70, January.
    5. Dietrich, Franz & List, Christian, 2016. "Reason-Based Choice And Context-Dependence: An Explanatory Framework," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 175-229, July.
    6. Lombardi, Michele, 2009. "Reason-based choice correspondences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 58-66, January.
    7. repec:hal:pseose:halshs-01249514 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Lombardi, Michele, 2009. "Reason-based choice correspondences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 58-66, January.
    9. Eliaz, Kfir & Ok, Efe A., 2006. "Indifference or indecisiveness? Choice-theoretic foundations of incomplete preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 61-86, July.
    10. Giarlotta, Alfio & Petralia, Angelo & Watson, Stephen, 2023. "Context-sensitive rationality: Choice by salience," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    11. Ekström, Mathias, 2018. "The (un)compromise effect," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 10/2018, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics, revised 16 May 2018.
    12. Boissonnet, Niels & Ghersengorin, Alexis & Gleyze, Simon, 2020. "Revealed Deliberate Preference Changes," MPRA Paper 101756, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Taposik Banerjee, 2024. "Characterization of a k-th best element rationalizable choice function with full domain," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 96(4), pages 503-516, June.
    14. Manzini, Paola & Mariotti, Marco & Tyson, Christopher J., 2016. "Partial knowledge restrictions on the two-stage threshold model of choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 41-47.
    15. 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.
    16. Alfio Giarlotta & Angelo Petralia, 2024. "Simon’s bounded rationality," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 47(1), pages 327-346, June.
    17. Boissonnet, Niels & Ghersengorin, Alexis & Gleyze, Simon, 2023. "Revealed deliberate preference change," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 357-367.
    18. Manzini, Paola & Mariotti, Marco & Tyson, Christopher J., 2016. "Partial knowledge restrictions on the two-stage threshold model of choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 41-47.
    19. Bossert, Walter & Suzumura, Kotaro, 2007. "Social Norms and Rationality of Choice," Cahiers de recherche 2007-07, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
    20. Valentino Dardanoni & Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti & Christopher J. Tyson, 2020. "Inferring Cognitive Heterogeneity From Aggregate Choices," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(3), pages 1269-1296, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:shs:wpaper:1011. 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: Christian Raschke (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deshsus.html .

    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.