scholarly journals Endogenous preference formation on macroeconomic issues: the role of individuality and social conformity

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guido Baldi
2021 ◽  
Vol 111 (2) ◽  
pp. 720-754
Author(s):  
B. Douglas Bernheim ◽  
Luca Braghieri ◽  
Alejandro Martínez-Marquina ◽  
David Zuckerman

We propose and develop a dynamic theory of endogenous preference formation in which people adopt worldviews that shape their judgments about their experiences. The framework highlights the role of mindset flexibility, a trait that determines the relative weights the decision-maker places on her current and anticipated worldviews when evaluating future outcomes. The theory generates rich behavioral dynamics, thereby illuminating a wide range of applications and providing potential explanations for a variety of observed phenomena. (JEL D11, D81, D91, Z13)


Author(s):  
Jane McKay ◽  
Frances Atherton

Jane McKay and Frances Atherton examine young people’s social play in terms of how space is negotiated where potential conflict is tempered to maintain the freedom, which boundary spaces may offer. They focus on the role of resistance at places of intersection, where the desire to define a new liberty, or a free space can involve opposition, resistance and transgression. They consider adult interruption, especially from the Police where young people are framed by wider social and political contexts that set the boundaries, rules, and possibilities of their lives. They demonstrate how marginalisation occurs in the micro-interactions of the mundane, and relate their findings to the wider competing discourses of risk and marginality.


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 525-541
Author(s):  
Hussein Kassim ◽  
Scott James ◽  
Thomas Warren ◽  
Shaun Hargreaves Heap

In the literature on member state position-taking in the eurozone crisis, the debate has mainly centred on whether national preferences are shaped exclusively within the domestic setting or influenced by shared EU-level norms or interaction within EU institutions. This article goes beyond this discussion. Drawing on original data collected by the authors, it uses the UK’s experience to test the claims both of society-centred approaches, including liberal intergovernmentalism, and perspectives that emphasise the importance of shared EU norms or interaction. It argues that while the first overlook the role of institutions as both actors and mediating variables in preference formation, the second have so far focused on the experience of eurozone members, thereby raising the possibility of selection bias. Treating eurozone form as a series of processes rather than a single event, it contests the claim that preference formation is always driven by societal interests, highlights instances where government acts in the absence of or contrary to expressed societal interests, and reveals limitations of the shared norms critique of liberal intergovernmentalism. It shows that the UK government was driven by a scholars concern to protect the UK economy from financial contagion rather than solidarity with its European partners.


1989 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon Elster

In this paper I want to discuss a well-known but poorly understood problem: how can socialists reconcile the observed paucity of cooperatives in capitalist societies with their alleged superiority on normative grounds? If cooperatives are so desirable, why don't workers desire them? If one's ideal of socialism is central planning, it is clear enough that it cannot emerge gradually within the womb of the capitalist economy. If instead it is something like market socialism, it is not clear that a discontinuous transformation of society is required. If workers want (market) socialism, they can start up here and now. If they don't, doesn't it prove that they do not want it?I shall proceed as follows. Section I argues that the usual explanation - that cooperatives are not economically viable or that workers prefer working in capitalist firms – is not necessarily correct. The explanation may lie elsewhere, in endogenous preference formation, adverse selection, discrimination, or externalities.Section II is concerned with the variety of cooperative arrangements. Only rarely do we find cooperatives in their pure form, with all workers and only workers having equal ownership rights. Non-working owners, non-owning workers and unequal distribution of shares are frequent. When the deviations become sufficiently large, the firms cease to become cooperatives in any meaningful sense.Section III extends the argument of Section I by surveying the causes of cooperative failure. Some fail by success: profitable cooperatives often attract or turn into private ownership. Others fail outright, partly because they tend to be established under unfavorable circumstances and partly because of intrinsic difficulties of management.


Author(s):  
Pepper D. Culpepper

This chapter explores the contributions of historical institutionalist scholarship to understanding preference formation in business. It critiques the analytical drift of the literature away from some conceptual sites of essential political action in democratic capitalism: issues of power, common trends across capitalist countries, and the role of voters in structuring the character of political conflict among interest groups and political parties. The chapter proposes a governance space, defined by the two dimensions of political salience and institutional formality, as a way to combine insights about the importance of institutional context with the structurally uneven allocation of power resources in capitalism.


2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (7) ◽  
pp. 607-621 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philipp Jugert ◽  
J. Christopher Cohrs ◽  
John Duckitt

Several personality constructs have been theorised to underlie right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA). In samples from New Zealand and Germany (Ns = 218, 259), we tested whether these constructs can account for specific variance in RWA. In both samples, social conformity and personal need for structure were independent predictors of RWA. In Sample 2, where also openness to experience was measured, social conformity and personal need for structure fully mediated the impact of the higher‐order factor of openness on RWA. Our results contribute to the integration of current approaches to the personality basis of authoritarianism and suggest that two distinct personality processes contribute to RWA: An interpersonal process related to social conformity and an intrapersonal process related to rigid cognitive style. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document