Introduction to This Special Issue on Rational Choice TheoryAuthor(s): Peter HedströmSource: Acta Sociologica, Vol. 36, No. 3, Rational Choice Theory (1993), p. 167Published by: Sage Publications, Ltd.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4200852 .

Accessed: 17/06/2014 17:48

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Sage Publications, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ActaSociologica.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.77.146 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:48:17 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Acia Sociologica (1993) 36:167

Introduction to this special issue on rational choice theory

Most sociologists have strong sentiments about the role of rational choice theory within the discipline; some are highly enthusiastic, others are equally critical. The controversial nature of rational choice theory stems from the fact that it differs in several important respects from much of traditional sociological theorizing, both in terms of the main explanatory factors being used and in the mode of theorizing.

Rational choice theory usually assumes that variations in individual behavior are explained by differences in the opportunity structures actors face, rather than by vari- ations in the internal 'makeup' of the actors. In sharp contrast to this, sociological theo- rizing traditionally has focused on between- individual variations in norms, values and cultural orientations, i.e. on precisely the types of factors consciously ignored by most rational choice theorists.

In addition to these differences in types of explanatory factors, the two traditions also differ in more fundamental, meta- theoretical respects. Much of sociological theorizing is inductive, based on a causal mode of explanation, and aims for complex theories mirroring a complex social reality. Rational choice theory, on the other hand, is deductive, based on an intentional mode of explanation, and aims for simple and abstract theories.

Within sociology, social exchange theory is a close kin of rational choice theory. But the current surge in rational choice sociology appears to have been more inspired by developments within economics and political science than by the work of Homans, Blau and Emerson. Unlike the older social exchange tradition, current rational choice sociologists are decisively macro oriented. Rational choice theory does not concern itself with explaining indi- vidual behavior but rather with explaining aggregate changes in social systems with

( Scandinavian Sociological Association. 1993

reference to the intended and unintended consequences of individuals' actions.

Although the utility of rational choice theory is still being debated among soci- ologists, it is clear that rational choice the- ory has made deep inroads into the discipline, not only intellectually but also institutionally. During the last few years a new journal has been founded focusing on rational choice sociology (Rationality and Society), important books detailing the approach have been published (e.g. James Coleman's Foundations of Social Theory), and rational choice sections have been established within several of the leading sociological associations in the world.

An obvious strength of rational choice theory is its interdisciplinary character. Given the current trend toward increasing fragmentation of the social sciences, rational choice theory constitutes an impor- tant integrative force. It provides a common theoretical framework and a 'language' that permits researchers from different aca- demic disciplines to communicate and to assess critically each other's work. This interdisciplinary character is also reflected in this special issue, which includes con- tributions not only by sociologists (Cole- man. Lindenberg, Skog, Udehn, Evans and Petersen). but also by philosophers/ political scientists and economists (Elster, Frey and Eggertsson).

When issuing the call for papers about a year ago, our hope was to attract a number of articles that would provide innovative examples of rational choice based research and theorizing as well as general assess- ments of the utility of this branch of theo- rizing. The articles published in this special issue have not only fulfilled these ambitious goals but have surpassed our expectations. Their high quality testifies to the intellectual vigor that currently characterizes this area of research.

PETER HEDSTROM Editor

167

This content downloaded from 185.44.77.146 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:48:17 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions