This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Rationality and its bounds: Re-framing social framing

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Matthias Klaes (Centre for Economic Research, Keele University, England)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

The concept of bounded rationality has been at the forefront of a recent empiricist program in economics which under the heading of ‘behavioral economics ‘ seeks to broaden the rational choice paradigm in the direction of psychology, to the neglect of a similar broadening in the direction of sociology. While a small but increasing number of studies consider the influence of social framing on economic decision making, these studies proceed on an impoverished understanding of the social, treating social framing as inessential in a sense clarified in this chapter, which argues for an essential notion of social framing effects. Starting point is Pareto’s distinction between logical and non-logical action, and an exploration of how the concept of bounded rationality has been employed to broaden the logical action paradigm in economics towards its counterpart of non-logical action. The puzzle of successfully performed transactions in anonymous non-repetitive encounters serves as illustrative context and builds up to the overarching argument that in conceptual terms, social framing needs to be understood in the more general context of human intentionality, where rational behavior can be addressed as a particular kind of intentional response to environmental factors. The paper pursues this argument in the context of social framing by drawing from Pettit’s (1993) dual distinction between atomism ver-sus holism on the one hand, and individualism versus collectivism on the other hand, to introduce a the distinction between essential as opposed to inessential social framing effects. It concludes that departures from psychologistic notions of bounded rationality require a theory of essential social framing, in the sense that the social frames intentional behavior in a constitutive way.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.sceme.org.uk/wps/SCEME012_Klaes_2006.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by SCEME in its series SCEME Working Papers: Advances in Economic Methodology with number 012/2006.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 13 pages
Date of creation: Jul 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:sti:wpaper:012/2006

Contact details of provider:
Email:
Web page: http://www.sceme.org.uk/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Matthias Klaes).

Related research
Keywords: bounded-rationality; social-framing;

Find related papers by JEL classification:
B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology
B5 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches
Z13 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Social Norms and Social Capital; Social Networks Economic Anthropology

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

  1. Matthias Klaes, 2002. "Some Remarks on the Place of Psychological and Social Elements in a Theory of Custom," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 61(2), pages 519-530, 04. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. repec:cup:jhisec:v:22:y:2000:i:02:p:191-216_00 is not listed on IDEAS
  4. Matthias Klaes, 2000. "The History Of The Concept Of Transaction Costs: Neglected Aspects," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 191-216, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Schlicht, Ekkehart, 1996. "Exploiting the Coase Mechanism: The Extortion Problem," Kyklos, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 49(3), pages 319-30.
  6. Carpenter, Jeffrey & Burks, Stephen & Verhoogen, Eric, 2004. "Comparing Students to Workers: The Effects of Social Framing on Behavior in Distribution Games," IZA Discussion Papers 1341, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA). [Downloadable!]
  7. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1986. "Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions," Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages S251-78, October. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-91, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  9. Schelling, Thomas C, 1969. "Models of Segregation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(2), pages 488-93, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Coase, R H, 1981. "The Coase Theorem and the Empty Core: A Comment," Journal of Law & Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(1), pages 183-87, April.
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? All top Economics journals are listed on RePEc.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-25.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.