Rationally Inaccessible Rationality@@@Sour Grapes: Studies in the Subversion of Rationality.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a list of states that are essentially by-products of rationality, bias, and ideology, including sour grapes, as well as byproducts of belief, bias and ideology.
Abstract: Preface and acknowledgements 1. Rationality 2. States that are essentially by-products 3. Sour grapes 4. Belief, bias and ideology References Index.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors outline the theoretical presuppositions of network analysis and distinguish between three different implicit models in the network literature of the interrelations of social structure, culture, and human agency.
Abstract: Network analysis is one of the most promising currents in sociological research, and yet it has never been subjected to a theoretically informed assessment and critique. This article outlines the theoretical presuppositions of network analysis. It also distinguishes between three different (implicit) models in the network literature of the interrelations of social structure, culture, and human agency. It concludes that only a strategy for historical explanation that synthesizes social structural and cultural analysis can adequately explain the formation, reproduction, and transformation of networks themselves. The article sketches the broad contours of such a theoretical synthesis in the conclusion.
1,928 citations
01 Jan 2000
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined the implications of individual differences in performance for each of the four explanations of the normative/descriptive gap, including performance errors, computational limitations, wrong norm being applied by the experimenter, and a different construal of the task by the subject.
Abstract: Much research in the last two decades has demonstrated that human responses deviate from the performance deemed normative according to various models of decision making and rational judgment (e.g., the basic axioms of utility theory). This gap between the normative and the descriptive can be interpreted as indicating systematic irrationalities in human cognition. However, four alternative interpretations preserve the assumption that human behavior and cognition is largely rational. These posit that the gap is due to (1) performance errors, (2) computational limitations, (3) the wrong norm being applied by the experimenter, and (4) a different construal of the task by the subject. In the debates about the viability of these alternative explanations, attention has been focused too narrowly on the model response. In a series of experiments involving most of the classic tasks in the heuristics and biases literature, we have examined the implications of individual differences in performance for each of the four explanations of the normative/descriptive gap. Performance errors are a minor factor in the gap; computational limitations underlie non-normative responding on several tasks, particularly those that involve some type of cognitive decontextualization. Unexpected patterns of covariance can suggest when the wrong norm is being applied to a task or when an alternative construal of the task should be considered appropriate.
231 citations
TL;DR: The authors construct a repeated game model in which the players are not individuals but roles (a profit-maximizing "businessperson" and a non-strategic "friend", and the businessperson role acts strategically in light of a metatule that governs intrapersonal role switching.
Abstract: Attempting to formalize Granovetter's embeddedness argument, rational choice theorists have viewed social relationships as repeated games. This article argues that role theory would provide a better metatheoretical perspective on embeddedness. A preliminary sketch of role theory suggests a promising theoretical methodology. To illustrate, I construct a repeated‐game model in which the players are not individuals but roles (a profit‐maximizing “businessperson” and nonstrategic “friend”); the businessperson role acts strategically in light of a metatule that governs intrapersonal role switching.
217 citations
TL;DR: In this expanded edition, Cohen offers his own account of the history and the further promise of analytical Marxism, and expresses reservations about traditional historical materialism, in the light of which he reconstructs the theory as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: First published in 1978, this book rapidly established itself as a classic of modern Marxism. In this expanded edition Cohen offers his own account of the history, and the further promise, of analytical Marxism. He also expresses reservations about traditional historical materialism, in the light of which he reconstructs the theory.
201 citations