IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wea/econth/v9y2020i2p38.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Self According to Others: Explaining Social Preferences with Social Approbation

Author

Listed:
  • Oswin Krüger Ruiz

    (University of Oxford, UK)

Abstract

In past decades, significant work in behavioural economics has decisively revealed the limitations of the human agency model known as Homo Economicus, whereby humans are purely driven by material self-interest. These behavioural findings are, however, far from integrated in mainstream economic theory, which builds heavily on the neoclassical tradition. Unbeknown to modern economics, Bernard Mandeville and Adam Smith already proposed a richer model of human agency in which choices also depend on the desire for social approbation. The social approbation mechanism complements material self-interest and provides a more diverse toolset, which is able to explain social preferences. Mainstream economic agency confines the study of human action to an artificially-limited spectrum because it reduces society to atomistic individuals who maximise one all-purpose measure of value: utility, which is often instrumented by consumption. Collective action is therefore only sustainable where material incentives are in place, as the economic agent rides for free unless financially penalised. To explain pro-social behaviour from the standpoint of self-interest, Mandeville and Smith proposed that agents also maximise social approbation, which conveys incentives to act pro-socially because the desire for others' approval encourages compliance with social norms. The upshot for collective action is that, assuming social norms represent common interests, approval from others provides an extrinsic motive for pro-social behaviour. I formalise the mechanism by proposing a simple utility function in which agents maximise social approbation as well as material self-interest.

Suggested Citation

  • Oswin Krüger Ruiz, 2020. "The Self According to Others: Explaining Social Preferences with Social Approbation," Economic Thought, World Economics Association, vol. 9(2), pages 38-54, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wea:econth:v:9:y:2020:i:2:p:38
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://et.worldeconomicsassociation.org/papers/the-self-according-to-others-explaining-social-preferences-with-social-approbation/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://et.worldeconomicsassociation.org/files/2020/12/WEA-ET-9.2-Ruiz.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Avner Offer, 1997. "Between the gift and the market: the economy of regard," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 50(3), pages 450-476, August.
    2. D. Colander & H. Follmer & A. Haas & M. Goldberg & K. Juselius & A. Kirman & T. Lux & B. Sloth, 2010. "The Financial Crisis and the Systemic Failure of Academic Economics," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 6.
    3. George A. Akerlof & Rachel E. Kranton, 2000. "Economics and Identity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 115(3), pages 715-753.
    4. Davies, Elwyn & Fafchamps, Marcel, 2017. "Pledging, Praising and Shaming: Experimental Labour Markets in Ghana," IZA Discussion Papers 10520, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. McCloskey,Deirdre N., 1994. "Knowledge and Persuasion in Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521436038.
    6. Force,Pierre, 2003. "Self-Interest before Adam Smith," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521830607.
    7. Morgan,Mary S., 2012. "The World in the Model," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107002975.
    8. Morgan,Mary S., 2012. "The World in the Model," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521176194.
    9. McCloskey,Deirdre N., 1994. "Knowledge and Persuasion in Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521434751.
    10. James Andreoni & John Miller, 2002. "Giving According to GARP: An Experimental Test of the Consistency of Preferences for Altruism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 737-753, March.
    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. Ramzi Mabsout, 2018. "The Backward Induction Controversy as a Metaphorical Problem," Economic Thought, World Economics Association, vol. 7(1), pages 24-49, March.
    2. Holmes, Douglas R., 2019. "Markets are a function of language: Notes on a narrative economics," Economics Discussion Papers 2019-18, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    3. John Rust, 2014. "The Limits of Inference with Theory: A Review of Wolpin (2013)," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 52(3), pages 820-850, September.
    4. Bruno S. Frey & Andre Briviba, 2023. "Two types of cultural economics," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 70(1), pages 1-9, March.
    5. Dieter Bögenhold, 2017. "Social-scienciation of Economics and its Consequences: On a Relative Convergence between Economics and Sociology," STOREPapers 3_2017, Associazione Italiana per la Storia dell'Economia Politica - StorEP.
    6. Herrmann-Pillath, Carsten, 2008. "The naturalistic turn in economics: implications for the theory of finance," Frankfurt School - Working Paper Series 105, Frankfurt School of Finance and Management.
    7. David Dequech, 2016. "Some Institutions (Social Norms And Conventions) Of Contemporary Mainstream Economics, Macroeconomics, And Financial Economics," Anais do XLIII Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 43rd Brazilian Economics Meeting] 006, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    8. Stavros A. DRAKOPOULOS, 2016. "Economic crisis, economic methodology and the scientific ideal of physics," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 10(1), pages 28-57, November.
    9. Dieter Bögenhold, 2021. "Economics in the Social Science Spectrum: Evolution and Overlap with Different Academic Areas," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 49(4), pages 335-347, December.
    10. Aldegwy, Mohamed & Thiemann, Matthias, 2016. "How economics got it wrong: Formalism, equilibrium modelling and pseudo-optimization in banking regulatory studies," SAFE Working Paper Series 138, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    11. Ioana Negru, 2013. "Revisiting the Concept of Schools of Thought in Economics: The Example of the Austrian School," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(4), pages 983-1008, October.
    12. Claus Dierksmeier, 2011. "The Freedom–Responsibility Nexus in Management Philosophy and Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 101(2), pages 263-283, June.
    13. Graupe, Silja & Steffestun, Theresa, 2018. ""The market deals out profit and losses": Wie ökonomische Standardlehrbücher das unreflektierte Denken in Metaphern fördern," Working Paper Series Ök-38, Cusanus Hochschule für Gesellschaftsgestaltung, Institut für Ökonomie.
    14. McCloskey Deirdre Nansen, 2018. "The Two Movements in Economic Thought, 1700–2000: Empty Economic Boxes Revisited," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, December.
    15. Chavanne, David & McCabe, Kevin & Paganelli, Maria Pia, 2011. "Whose money is it anyway? Ingroups and distributive behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 31-39, January.
    16. Rod O'Donnell, 2006. "Keynes's Principles of Writing (Innovative) Economics," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 82(259), pages 396-407, December.
    17. Fernando Aguiar & Pablo Brañas-Garza & Ramón Cobo-Reyes & Natalia Jimenez & Luis Miller, 2009. "Are women expected to be more generous?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 12(1), pages 93-98, March.
    18. Wakamatsu, Naoyuki, 2020. "On Ricardo’s Multilayered Method: Wage Taxation and Foreign Subsidies Considered," MPRA Paper 103531, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Warren Samuels, 1995. "Some thoughts on multiplicity," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(2), pages 287-292.
    20. Giandomenica Becchio, 2020. "The Two Blades of Occam's Razor in Economics: Logical and Heuristic," Economic Thought, World Economics Association, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, July.

    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:wea:econth:v:9:y:2020:i:2:p:38. 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: Jake McMurchie (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/worecea.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.