Rationality

About: Rationality is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 20459 publications have been published within this topic receiving 617787 citations.

Rationality in decision- and policy-making: implications for strategic environmental assessment

Abstract: A proper integration of strategic environmental assessment (SEA) into policy-making processes is considered critical to the success of SEA. Most of the work in SEA seems to be based on the assumption that the provision of rational information will help improve decision-making, but the literature points to other characteristics of real decision-making processes, including cognitive limitations, behavioural biases, ambiguity and variability of preferences and norms, distribution of decision-making over actors and in time, and the notion of decision-making as a process of learning and negotiation between multiple actors. All these are very relevant at the planning and policy level. In the policy sciences literature, some approaches may also hold promise for SEA, such as supporting an open learning process, variety in ways to support and roles to play in these processes, and paying more attention to the actor configuration and distribution of interests, as a basis for finding implementable and effective solut...

Unprincipled Virtue: An Inquiry Into Moral Agency

Abstract: Nomy Arpaly rejects the model of rationality used by most ethicists and action theorists. Both observation and psychology indicate that people act rationally without deliberation, and act irrationally with deliberation. By questioning the notion that our own minds are comprehensible to us-and therefore questioning much of the current work of action theorists and ethicists-Arpaly attempts to develop a more realistic conception of moral agency.

Considering rational self-interest as a disposition: organizational implications of other orientation.

Abstract: In contrast with major theories of attitudes and behavior, the authors propose that individuals are not equally motivated to pursue their self-interests. The authors show that differences in other orientation affect the extent to which actions and attitudes reflect self-interested calculation (instrumental rationality) and the extent to which beliefs represent their external environment (epistemic rationality). These differences have consequences for processes underlying a wide range of attitudes and behavior typically assumed to be rationally self-interested. Thus, the authors' model exposes a common explanation for diverse organizational phenomena. It also clarifies inconsistencies surrounding the validity of certain attitudinal and motivational models, the relationship between job attitudes and actions, cross-cultural differences in attitudes and behavior, escalation of commitment, and the relationship between chief executive officer characteristics and organizational performance.

Policy making and collective action: Defining coalitions within the advocacy coalition framework

Abstract: Research on policy communities, policy networks, and advocacy coalitions represents the most recent effort by policy scholars in North America and Europe to meaningfully describe and explain the complex, dynamic policy making processes of modern societies. While work in this tradition has been extraordinarily productive, issues of collective action have not been carefully addressed. Focusing on the advocacy coalitions (AC) framework developed by Sabatier (1988) and Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith (1993) as an example of a productive research program within the policy network tradition, this article (1) examines the potential of the AC framework, with its emphasis on beliefs, policy learning, and preference formation, to provide richer explanations of policy making processes than frameworks grounded exclusively in instrumental rationality; (2) suggests that paradoxically, however, the AC framework can more fully realize its potential by admitting the explanations of collective action from frameworks based on instrumental rationality; (3) incorporates within the AC framework accounts of how coalitions form and maintain themselves over time and of the types of strategies coalitions are likely to adopt to pursue their policy goals; and (4) derives falsifiable collective action hypotheses that can be empirically tested to determine whether incorporating theories of collective action within the AC framework represents a positive, rather than a degenerative, expansion of the AC framework.