Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis note in the Milestones series is dedicated to the paper "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice", written by Herbert Simon and published in 1955 on the Quarterly Journal of Economics.

In Bounded Rationality and Politics, Jonathan Bendor considers two schools of behavioral economics--the first guided by Tversky and Kahneman's work on heuristics and biases, which focuses on the mistakes people make in judgment and choice; the second as described by Gerd Gigerenzer's program on fast and frugal heuristics, which emphasizes the effectiveness of simple rules of thumb. Finding each of these radically incomplete, Bendor's illuminating analysis proposes Herbert Simon's pathbreaking work on bounded rationality as a way to reconcile the inconsistencies between the two camps. Bendor sho.

ARTICLE OPERATIONALIZES TWO BOUNDED RATIONALITY THEORIES OF FEDERAL BUDGETARY DECISIONMAKING AND TESTS THEM WITHIN A STOCHASTIC PROCESS FRAMEWORK. EMPIRICAL ANALYSES OF EISENHOWER, KENNEDY AND JOHNSON DOMESTIC BUDGET DATA, COMPILED FROM OMB PLANNING DOCUMENTS, SUPPORT THE THEORY OF SERIAL JUDGEMENT OVER THE THEORY OF INCREMENTALISM. METHODOLOGICAL LIMITATIONS OF THE THEORIES ARE ALSO DISCUSSED.

In Bounded Rationality and Politics, Jonathan Bendor considers two schools of behavioral economics—the first guided by Tversky and Kahneman's work on heuristics and biases, which focuses on the mistakes people make in judgment and choice; the second as described by Gerd Gigerenzer's program on fast and frugal heuristics, which emphasizes the effectiveness of simple rules of thumb. Finding each of these radically incomplete, Bendor's illuminating analysis proposes Herbert Simon's pathbreaking work on bounded rationality as a way to reconcile the inconsistencies between the two camps. Bendor shows that Simon's theory turns on the interplay between the cognitive constraints of decision makers and the complexity of their tasks

Contrasts Immanuel Kant's & John Rawls's views of justice beyond borders, which are supposedly alert to the claims of bounded institutions & of universal principles. Their views were semi-cosmopolitan, not endorsing a world state, but seeing justice as needing assistance beyond the internal institutions of states. Kant's strategy is proposed as a more realistic & open approach to justice beyond boundaries, & it contains a deeper theoretical basis. An acceptable approach to justice across boundaries is described. It would not presuppose the status quo nor particular institutional structures. It would not ground the account of justice in the realist conception of the state that ignores the rights of those beyond its boundaries. It would not be abstract cosmopolitanism nor contain a puzzling notion of a people; & it would be based on the ideal of a just world where cosmopolitan principles of justice are institutionalized to support international justice from legitimate political boundaries. L. A. Hoffman

Two bounded rationality theories of federal budgetary decision making are operationalized and tested within a stochastic process framework. Empirical analyses of Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson domestic budget data, compiled from internal Office of Management and Budget planning documents, support the theory of serial judgment over the theory of incrementalism proposed by Davis, Dempster and Wildavsky. The new theory highlights both the structure of ordered search through a limited number of discrete alternatives and the importance of informal judgmental evaluations. Serial judgment theory predicts not only that most programs most of the time will receive allocations which are only marginally different from the historical base, but also that occasional radical and even "catastrophic" changes are the normal result of routine federal budgetary decision making. The methodological limitations of linear regression techniques in explanatory budgetary research are also discussed.