Brief Lecture Notes

     WALLACE AND WOLF - CHAPTER 7: THEORIES OF RATIONALE CHOICE

The intellectual roads of rational choice are based on the presumption 
that people are rational and base their actions on what they perceive to 
be the most effective means to their goals.  In a world of scarce 
resources, this means constantly weighing alternative means to alternative 
ends and choosing between them.  Hence the term rational  CHOICE.

This is sometimes called an economic model.  This is because the basic 
premise is that people evaluate the costs of their behaviors in terms of 
the benefits or value that will be returned by those behaviors.  Rational 
choice theorists argued that the way to understand how people behave is by 
seeing them as economic actors in a world of scarcity.

The book gives an example of two women in their late 30s into different 
centuries in the United States or Paris.  It then notes how each might 
evaluate their situation with an abusive husband, family, children, and 
needs to earn a livelihood.

A more relevant example might be that of an abused woman who has to decide 
whether to leave her husband in our contemporary society.  It may not be 
an easy decision, and the reasons for whatever decision to woman makes, 
may be within a framework of rational choices.

Our authors point out that in contemporary sociology, rational choice
theory is often associative with EXCHANGE THEORY.  Exchange theorists 
conceptualize social interaction as an exchange of tangible goods and 
services, ranging from food and shelter to social approval or sympathy.  
People who choose to participate in an exchange after they have examined 
the costs and rewards of alternative courses of action and have chosen the 
most attractive.

The authors trace some of the roots of this perspective to anthropology 
and the IMPORTANCE OF THE GIFT.  (EXPLAIN TROBRIAND CEREMONY)

some features of this approach, explain our authors, derive from
economists who tried to examine the implications of individual psychology 
and behavior in the "marketplace".  Like economists rational choice 
theories adapt four of the basic principles:

1.  Individuals are rational profit maximizers, making decisions on the 
basis of their tastes and preferences.

2. 2 more of something and individual has, the less interested here she 
will be in yet more of it.

3.  The prices at which goods and services will be sold in a free market 
are determined directly by the tastes of prospective buyers and sellers.  
The greater the demand for a good for more "valuable" it will be and the 
high air will be its price.  The greater the supply, the less valuable 
that will be and the Lower will be its price.

4.  Goods will generally be more expensive if they are supplied by a 
monopolist than if they are supplied by a number of firms in competition 
with each other.

Take a look at these propositions on pages 300-302.

GAME THEORY

game theory was developed by George Homans, who was influenced by behavioral
experimental psychology, especially as founded by B.F.Skiner.
for Skinner, we need direct evidence of the validity of our propositions 
that other economists tend to treat as assumptions.  Skinner wanted to 
avoid hypotheses about unobservable phenomena.
this means we cannot make statements about the "black box" of the human 
minds that cannot be correctly tested or falsified.  What we need they 
argued our data that are correctly observable, and this means that unlike 
symbolic interactionist, behavioralists do not focus on the importance of 
internal and unobservable perceptions and meanings.

PART ONE -RATIONAL CHOICE, SOCIAL EXCHASNE and INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOR

GEORGE HOMANS
Homan's interests were in experimental psychology and behavior.  He laid 
out his theory in five basic propositions put together as an interlocking 
deductive system.

1.  THE SUCCESS PROPOSITION--the more a person is rewarded for a given 
behavior the more likely that person is to perform that action.

2.  THE STIMULUS PROPOSITION.  If the past, the occurrence of a 
particular stimulus were set of stimuli has been the occasion on which a 
person's action has been rewarded, then the more similar the present 
stimuli are to past ones, the more likely that person is to perform that 
worries similar action now.

3.  VALUE PROPOSITION.  The more valuable to a person is the results 
of an action, the more likely would be to perform that action.

THE RATIONALITY PROPOSITION, combining 1-3: in choosing between 
alternative actions, a person will choose that one for which, as perceived 
at the time, the value of the results, multiplied by the probability of 
getting the result, is the greater.

4. THE DEPRIVATION-SATIATION PROPOSITION.  The more often in the recent 
past a person has received a particular reward, the less valuable in a 
further unit of that reward becomes.

5.  THE AGGRESSION-APPROVAL PROPOSITION.  This is in two parts first when 
a person's action does not receive the expected reward, or receives 
unexpected punishment, anger and aggression may result, and the results of 
such behavior become more valuable (the frustration-aggression 
hypothesis).  Second when a person's action receives the expected reward, 
especially a greater reward than expected, or does not receive punishment, 
the results is likely to be continuation of performing the approving 
behavior, and the results of such behavior become more valuable.

POWER, EQUITY, AND GAMES

Power is the ability to provide valuable rewards.  For in the words of Max 
Weber, power is the ability to exercise ones will over others.

One of the things that distinguishes the sociological view of rational 
choice from the economists view is the sociologist's insistence on a moral 
or normative dimension to social exchange.  So, for social exchange 
theorists for example, the existence of the ideals of equity and justice 
also feed power relations, THUS CONSTRAINING THE USE THAT PEOPLE MAKE OF 
THEIR  POWER. For example, in an experiment by Cook and Emerson,
they found that powerful partners would put constraints on their power and 
not to make full use of it.

GAME THEORY - PRISONER'S DILEMMA

take a look at the prisoners dilemma and his students dilemma what to the 
similarities and differences between the two?

PETER BLAU Exchange and social integration

They developed "exchange theory," a perspective that sees interaction
as an exchange of resources (status, power, intimacy) and we rationally
chose to work out an equilibrium in our interactions. W&W note that
we work out "exchanges" in out "presentation of self" (See Goffman, who
might disagree) - But, Blau does draw from Goffman (but is less cynical).

--We "offer" ourselves to others who, in return, "give back" benefits,
such as status, self-worth, identity-acceptance, and social, cultural,
and economic capital. Impressions are therefore crucially important to 
the "prices" at whcih social exchange is conducted (W&W: 329).

Some premises:

1) People value status (both for symbolic and tangible value). Two
points: 
   a) interactions and friendship generally occur among equals
   b) Role/status boundaries easier when their obvious between non-equals

2) Social exchange different than economic exchange because trust is
required - recipriocity (based on trust of "equal return") is critical.
"social norm" reciprocity provides stability in social relationships

3) In both interpersonal (micro) and group/organizational exchange,
rewards can be indirect - (W&W use the example of prostitution and
various rewards/losses)

4) Power is rooted in exchange. Gets us back to capital that we "spend"
and "acquire." (economic, social, cultural capital)

===========

The key to rational choice theory is that people make conscious decisions,
and these decisions are the basis of interaction and the larger
social structures on which it's built.


QUESTIONS:

1) What kinds of phenomena does this explain?

2) What doesn't it explain?

3) How would it explain, for example, gender inequality?

Return to Jim Thomas's homepage