IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v63y2006i9p2341-2353.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic rationality and health and lifestyle choices for people with diabetes

Author

Listed:
  • Baker, Rachel Mairi

Abstract

Economic rationality is traditionally represented by goal-oriented, maximising behaviour, or 'instrumental rationality'. Such a consequentialist, instrumental model of choice is often implicit in a biomedical approach to health promotion and education. The research reported here assesses the relevance of a broader conceptual framework of rationality, which includes 'procedural' and 'expressive' rationality as complements to an instrumental model of rationality, in a health context. Q methodology was used to derive 'factors' underlying health and lifestyle choices, based on a factor analysis of the results of a card sorting procedure undertaken by 27 adult respondents with type 2 diabetes in Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. These factors were then compared with the rationality framework and the appropriateness of an extended model of economic rationality as a means of better understanding health and lifestyle choices was assessed. Taking a wider rational choice perspective, choices which are rendered irrational within a narrow-biomedical or strictly instrumental model, can be understood in terms of a coherent rationale, grounded in the accounts of respondents. The implications of these findings are discussed in terms of rational choice theory and diabetes management and research.

Suggested Citation

  • Baker, Rachel Mairi, 2006. "Economic rationality and health and lifestyle choices for people with diabetes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(9), pages 2341-2353, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:63:y:2006:i:9:p:2341-2353
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(06)00310-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sugden, Robert, 1991. "Rational Choice: A Survey of Contributions from Economics and Philosophy," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(407), pages 751-785, July.
    2. Viktor Vanberg, 2004. "The rationality postulate in economics: its ambiguity, its deficiency and its evolutionary alternative," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 1-29.
    3. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    4. Eccleston, Chris & De C. Williams, Amanda C. & Rogers, Wendy Stainton, 1997. "Patients' and professionals' understandings of the causes of chronic pain: Blame, responsibility and identity protection," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 45(5), pages 699-709, September.
    5. Jonathan Baron, 1996. "Why Expected Utility Theory Is Normative, but Not Prescriptive," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 16(1), pages 7-9, February.
    6. Donovan, Jenny L. & Blake, David R., 1992. "Patient non-compliance: Deviance or reasoned decision-making?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 507-513, March.
    7. Schoemaker, Paul J H, 1982. "The Expected Utility Model: Its Variants, Purposes, Evidence and Limitations," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 529-563, June.
    8. Chris Starmer, 2000. "Developments in Non-expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice under Risk," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 332-382, June.
    9. Maurice Lagueux, 2004. "The forgotten role of the rationality principle in economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 31-51.
    10. Risdon, Andrea & Eccleston, Chris & Crombez, Geert & McCracken, Lance, 2003. "How can we learn to live with pain? A Q-methodological analysis of the diverse understandings of acceptance of chronic pain," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 375-386, January.
    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. van Exel, Job & Baker, Rachel & Mason, Helen & Donaldson, Cam & Brouwer, Werner, 2015. "Public views on principles for health care priority setting: Findings of a European cross-country study using Q methodology," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 128-137.
    2. N. Exel & G. Graaf & P. Rietveld, 2011. "“I can do perfectly well without a car!”," Transportation, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 383-407, May.
    3. Ryan, Mandy & Kinghorn, Philip & Entwistle, Vikki A. & Francis, Jill J., 2014. "Valuing patients' experiences of healthcare processes: Towards broader applications of existing methods," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 194-203.
    4. James Sumberg & Thomas Yeboah & Justin Flynn & Nana Akua Anyidoho, 2017. "Young people’s perspectives on farming in Ghana: a Q study," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(1), pages 151-161, February.
    5. Wonjae Jeon & Goomyeung Kwon & Kihong Joung, 2021. "Subjective Perceptions and Their Characteristics of Middle School Students Regarding the Effectiveness of the “0th Period Physical Education Class” in South Korea: The Q Methodology Application," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-12, November.
    6. Wonseok Choi & Wonjae Jeon, 2022. "A Study on the Subjectivity of Parents Regarding “0th-Period Physical Education Class” of Middle Schools in Korea Using Q-Methodology," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-11, June.
    7. Chen Fang & Liwen Chen, 2019. "Exploring the Entrepreneurial Intentions of Science and Engineering Students in China: A Q Methodology Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, May.
    8. Factor, Roni & Kawachi, Ichiro & Williams, David R., 2011. "Understanding high-risk behavior among non-dominant minorities: A social resistance framework," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(9), pages 1292-1301.
    9. Thomas Yeboah & James Sumberg & Justin Flynn & Nana Akua Anyidoho, 2017. "Perspectives on Desirable Work: Findings from a Q Study with Students and Parents in Rural Ghana," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 29(2), pages 423-440, April.
    10. Stanislav Mokrý, 2019. "Assessing Web Surface Credibility by Generation Y: A Q Methodological Study," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 67(6), pages 1577-1585.
    11. Wonjae Jeon & Seunghyun Jang & Kihong Joung, 2021. "Subjective Perceptions of South Korean Parents Regarding the Effectiveness of Taekwondo Education for Adolescents and Its Characteristics: The Q Methodology Application," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-12, September.
    12. Hempel, Corinna & Will, Sabine & Zander, Katrin, 2019. "Societal Perspectives on a Bio‐economy in Germany: An Explorative Study Using Q Methodology," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 10(01), January.
    13. Ming Lu & Alin Lin & Jiyi Sun, 2018. "The Impact of Photovoltaic Applications on Urban Landscapes Based on Visual Q Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-15, April.
    14. Christel Protiére & Rachel Baker & Dominique Genre & Anthony Goncalves & Patrice Viens, 2017. "Marketing Authorization Procedures for Advanced Cancer Drugs: Exploring the Views of Patients, Oncologists, Healthcare Decision Makers, and Citizens in France," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 37(5), pages 555-566, July.
    15. Foster, Michele M. & Earl, Peter E. & Haines, Terry P. & Mitchell, Geoffrey K., 2010. "Unravelling the concept of consumer preference: Implications for health policy and optimal planning in primary care," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(2-3), pages 105-112, October.
    16. Hempel, Corinna & Will, Sabine & Zander, Katrin, 2018. "Societal Perspectives on a Bio-Economy in Germany: An Explorative Study Using Q Methodology," 2018 International European Forum (163rd EAAE Seminar), February 5-9, 2018, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 276871, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    17. Rachel Baker & John Wildman & Helen Mason & Cam Donaldson, 2014. "Q‐Ing For Health—A New Approach To Eliciting The Public'S Views On Health Care Resource Allocation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 283-297, March.
    18. Coast, Joanna, 2018. "A history that goes hand in hand: Reflections on the development of health economics and the role played by Social Science & Medicine, 1967–2017," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 227-232.

    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. Gebhard Kirchgässner, 2013. "The Weak Rationality Principle in Economics," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 149(I), pages 1-26, March.
    2. Bernd Lahno, 2007. "Rational Choice and Rule-Following Behavior," Rationality and Society, , vol. 19(4), pages 425-450, November.
    3. Pelikan, Pavel, 2006. "Markets vs. Government when Rationality is Unequally Bounded: Some Consequences of Cognitive Inequalities for Theory and Policy," Freiburg Discussion Papers on Constitutional Economics 06/5, Walter Eucken Institut e.V..
    4. Vriend, Nicolaas J., 1996. "Rational behavior and economic theory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 263-285, March.
    5. Luca Congiu & Ivan Moscati, 2022. "A review of nudges: Definitions, justifications, effectiveness," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 188-213, February.
    6. Francesco GUALA, 2017. "Preferences: Neither Behavioural nor Mental," Departmental Working Papers 2017-05, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    7. Luís Santos-Pinto & Adrian Bruhin & José Mata & Thomas Åstebro, 2015. "Detecting heterogeneous risk attitudes with mixed gambles," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(4), pages 573-600, December.
    8. Michaël Lainé, 2014. "Vers une alternative au paradigme de la rationalité ? Victoires et déboires du programme spinoziste en économie," Post-Print hal-01335618, HAL.
    9. Tobias Thomas & Dominik Straub & Fabian Tatai & Megan Shene & Tümer Tosik & Kristian Kersting & Constantin A. Rothkopf, 2024. "Modelling dataset bias in machine-learned theories of economic decision-making," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 8(4), pages 679-691, April.
    10. Gebhard Kirchgässner, 2014. "On Self-Interest and Greed," CESifo Working Paper Series 4883, CESifo.
    11. Bruno S. Frey & Matthias Benz, 2004. "From Imperialism to Inspiration: A Survey of Economics and Psychology," Chapters, in: John B. Davis & Alain Marciano & Jochen Runde (ed.), The Elgar Companion To Economics and Philosophy, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Berg, Nathan & Biele, Guido & Gigerenzer, Gerd, 2010. "Does consistency predict accuracy of beliefs?: Economists surveyed about PSA," MPRA Paper 26590, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Marek Hudik, 0. "Equilibrium as compatibility of plans," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    14. Robison, Lindon J. & Shupp, Robert S. & Myers, Robert J., 2010. "Expected utility paradoxes," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 187-193, April.
    15. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:6:p:1324-1369 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Helga Fehr-Duda & Thomas Epper, 2012. "Probability and Risk: Foundations and Economic Implications of Probability-Dependent Risk Preferences," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 4(1), pages 567-593, July.
    17. Tomasz Obloj & Metin Sengul, 2020. "What do multiple objectives really mean for performance? Empirical evidence from the French manufacturing sector," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(13), pages 2518-2547, December.
    18. Gebhard Kirchgässner, 2014. "The role of homo oeconomicus in the political economy of James Buchanan," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 2-17, March.
    19. Michaël Lainé, 2014. "Vers une alternative au paradigme de la rationalité ? Victoires et déboires du programme spinoziste en économie," Post-Print hal-04264939, HAL.
    20. Mareile Drechsler & Konstantinos Katsikopoulos & Gerd Gigerenzer, 2014. "Axiomatizing bounded rationality: the priority heuristic," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(2), pages 183-196, August.
    21. William Harbaugh & Kate Krause & Lise Vesterlund, 2002. "Risk Attitudes of Children and Adults: Choices Over Small and Large Probability Gains and Losses," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(1), pages 53-84, June.

    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:eee:socmed:v:63:y:2006:i:9:p:2341-2353. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.