Can a Rational Choice Framework Make Sense of Anorexia?
نویسندگان
چکیده
Can a rational choice modeling framework help broaden our understanding of anorexia nervosa? This question is interesting because anorexia nervosa is a serious health concern, and because a rational choice approach may shed useful light on a condition which appears to involve “choosing” to be ill. We present a model of weight choice and dieting applicable to anorexia nervosa, and the sometimes-associated purging behavior. We assess what that model, and an alternative way of thinking about anorexia, imply about the “rationality” of the choices involved. We also present empirical evidence about factors possibly contributing to anorexia nervosa; results are consistent with our modeling approach. A concluding section considers policy implications. We offer this analysis as a consciousnessraising way of thinking about the condition. We thank Bernard Wolf for suggesting extending the model described in this paper to see if it could be used to analyze anorexia, Vivian Valdmanis for helpful comments on an earlier draft, and Marsha Goldfarb and Sarah Duffy for useful suggestions. * Department of Economics, George Washington University ** Department of Economics, Princeton University *** Department of Economics, Emory University and NBER Corresponding author: Robert Goldfarb ([email protected])
منابع مشابه
Foundations of Boundedly Rational Choice and Satisficing Decisions
Formally, the orthodox rational agent’s “Olympian” choices, as Simon has called orthodox rational choice, are made in a static framework. However, a formalization of consistent choice, underpinned by computability, suggests by, satisficing in a boundedly rational framework is not only more general than the model of “Olympian” rationality, it is also consistently dynamic. This kind of naturally ...
متن کاملRational Choice Theory: A Cultural Reconsideration
Economists have heralded the formulation of the expected utility theorem as a universal method of choice under uncertainty. In their seminal paper, Stigler and Becker (Stigler & Becker, 1977) declared that “human behavior can be explained by a generalized calculus of utility-maximizing behavior” (p.76). The universality of the rational choice theory has been widely criticized by psychologists, ...
متن کاملEthics as Rational Choice
There are several advantages to viewing ethics as rational choice in this broader sense. It provides a conceptual framework that allows you to analyze complex business decisions that involve multiple stakeholders (as nearly all do). It offers a style of argument that can appeal to all parties, since rational choice, by definition, considers all points of view. It provides a vocabulary with whic...
متن کاملThe New Dynamics of Strategy sense-making in a complex-complicated world
We challenge the universality of three basic assumptions prevalent (in our view) in organizational decision support and strategy: assumptions of order, of rational choice, and of intentional capability. We describe the Cynefin framework, a sense-making device we have developed to help people make sense of the complexities made visible by the relaxation of these assumptions. The Cynefin framewor...
متن کاملMoral Implications of Rational Choice Theories
Rational choice theories assert that human beings behave rationally, either in the narrow sense of rational self-interest, or in the broader sense that decisions are rationally based on preferences. These empirical theories make no direct ethical claims, but they may have relevance to ethics. Social contract theorists have maintained, for example, that rational individuals can assent to a socia...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2009