Sociological Rational Choice Theory

(1997) - Michael Kanazawa, Satoshi Hechter

Journal: Annual Review of Sociology
Link::
DOI::
Links::
Tags:: #paper #RAT
Cite Key:: [@kanazawaSociologicalRationalChoice1997]

Abstract

Although rational choice theory has made considerable advances in other social sciences, its progress in sociology has been limited. Some sociologists’ reservations about rational choice arise from a misunderstanding of the theory. The first part of this essay therefore introduces rational choice as a general theoretical perspective, or family of theories, which explains social outcomes by constructing models of individual action and social context. “Thin” models of individual action are mute about actors’ motivations, while “thick” models specify them ex ante. Other sociologists’ reservations, however, stem from doubts about the empirical adequacy of rational choice explanations. To this end, the bulk of the essay reviews a sample of recent studies that provide empirical support for particular rational choice explanations in a broad spectrum of substantive areas in sociology. Particular attention is paid to studies on the family, gender, and religion, for these subareas often are considered least amenable to understanding in terms of rational choice logic.

Notes

• ''Thin'' models of individual action are mute about actors' motivations, while ''thick'' models specify them exante

• Introduction

• Some of the scepticism around RAT comes from misunderstanding

  • One critique focuses on the lack of realism in its assumption to calculate the expected consequences of our options and choose the best of them

  • RAT does not aim to explain what a rational person will do in a particular situation

    • Genuine RAT by contrast are concerned exclusively with the social rather individual outcomes

• Rational Choice Theory is inherently a multilevel enterprise.

  • At the lower level its model contains assumptions about individual cognitive capacities and values among other things.

  • Relation 2 describes how a person who is subject to a given social structure

  • At the higher level RAT contains assumptions about the specifications of social structures

    • These social structures serve as the social and material contexts for individual action as well as new structures resulting from the actions of individuals whose behaviour is described by the lower level assumptions (Coleman 1990)

  • Since norms and other kinds of institutions enter the model both as contexts for and as outcomes of action, RAT do not rest on premises pertaining exclusively to individuals

• Values and other internal states are far more difficult to measure than structural constrains, which are external to individuals (Hechter 1992). Measuring values from verbal responses to direct survey questions is problematic (Fischhoff 1991)

• Perhaps the most important division separates ''thin'' and ''thick'' models of individual action

  • Thin rational choice models are unconcerned with the particular values which individuals pursue

    • These models- normally found in economics- are highly universalistic and resemble theories of physics and biology concerning the optimal behaviour of atoms and organisms

    • Thin models are substantively empty

  • Thick rational choice models advocated by Weber, are substantively richer, for they countenance some aspects of intentionality

    • It does not assume that individuals are selfish agents. What is required is simply that individuals are self-interested, not selfish (Friedman and Diem 1990)

• The appeal of rational choice in sociology is unlikely to increase substantially until the approach provides demonstrable empirical payoffs in a wide variety of substantive areas