Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A political science model based on rational choice used to explain why citizens do or do not vote. The alternative equation is V = pB + D > C. Where for voting to occur the (P)robability the vote will matter "times" the (B)enefit of one candidate winning over another combined with the feeling of civic (D)uty, must be greater than the (C)ost of ...
The rational choice model, also called rational choice theory refers to a set of guidelines that help understand economic and social behaviour. [1] The theory originated in the eighteenth century and can be traced back to the political economist and philosopher Adam Smith . [ 2 ]
Social choice theory is a branch of welfare economics that extends the theory of rational choice to collective decision-making. [1] Social choice studies the behavior of different mathematical procedures ( social welfare functions ) used to combine individual preferences into a coherent whole.
Arrow's impossibility theorem is a key result on social welfare functions, showing an important difference between social and consumer choice: whereas it is possible to construct a rational (non-self-contradictory) decision procedure for consumers based only on ordinal preferences, it is impossible to do the same in the social choice setting ...
The mythological Judgement of Paris required selecting from three incomparable alternatives (the goddesses shown).. Decision theory or the theory of rational choice is a branch of probability, economics, and analytic philosophy that uses the tools of expected utility and probability to model how individuals would behave rationally under uncertainty.
Consider a hypothetical “run-off vote” between say only 2 available social states. The social choice is associated with the sets of rankings for that subset, not with rankings of unavailable social states beyond the subset. Thus, that social choice for the subset is unaffected by say a change in orderings only beyond the subset.
The paradox of voting, also called Downs' paradox, is that for a rational and egoistic voter (Homo economicus), the costs of voting will normally exceed the expected benefits. Because the chance of exercising the pivotal vote is minuscule compared to any realistic estimate of the private individual benefits of the different possible outcomes ...
For example, from the viewpoint of rational choice theory, the expected gains of voting depend on (1) the benefit to the voter if their candidate wins and (2) the probability that one's vote will determine the election's outcome. [38] Even in a tight election the probability that one's vote decides the outcome is estimated at effectively zero. [40]