Explore the vast range of titles available.

Both Rational Action Theory (RAT) and Bourdieu's habitus theory are employed to explain educational decision-making. RAT assumes that decision-making involves cost-benefit analysis, while habitus theory sees educational pathways as shaped by dispositions reflecting familial class of origin. These theories are often seen as conflicting, but we argue that they can fruitfully be used together. Proponents of these theories often employ different methods. RAT advocates usually employ survey data, while those favouring habitus theory often use case studies. If cost-benefit reasoning does partly explain educational decision-making, then we should expect to find evidence of it at the micro-level. Drawing on interviews conducted in Germany and England, we show that young people do indeed talk about their educational choices in ways which fit RAT accounts. Their class-based habitus often, however, provides upper and lower boundaries for their aspirations, thus conditioning the nature of the cost-benefit analysis entering into decision-making.

Dieser Beitrag befasst sich mit der Frage, ob bzw. unter welchen Rahmenbedingungen Wähler in Mehrparteiensystemen mit Koalitionsregierungen im Stande sind, die erwartungsnutzenmaximierende Wahlalternative zu identifizieren. Hierfür verwenden wir ein laborexperimentelles Forschungsdesign, in dem die Probanden mit räumlichen Wahlszenarien konfrontiert werden. In Einklang mit den theoretischen Erwartungen gelang es den Probanden besser, die rationale Wahl in Szenarien zu treffen, in denen die rationale Wahl der Nähewahl entspricht, in denen die relativen Distanzen zwischen den Parteien der -rationalen Wahl und den Idealpunkten des Wählers geringer sind, sowie in Szenarien, in denen einfache Heuristiken herangezogen werden können oder die aus anderen Gründen weniger komplex sind.

\"Objective: This article provides a non-technical introduction to analyses of fertility which are based on a rational-choice paradigm and which acknowledge that raising children may have a strong impact on the well-being of parents that can be described in terms of costs and benefits. It surveys different types of economic fertility models which can be used to address a variety of research questions, and it also discusses some basic strengths and weaknesses of applying economic analyses in this particular field. Results: Starting from a seminal contribution by Becker (1960) which may have been of little use for applied research or for interdisciplinary work, the economic theory of fertility has unfolded a differentiated research program with indispensable contributions to the broader field of fertility research. Important features are the inclusion of (i) different bargaining positions and differing incentives of partners interacting in fertility choices; (ii) simultaneous decisions regarding labor force participation (as well as education) and fertility, and the role played by employers, labor market institutions, and other public interventions; (iii) the idea that children (or their 'human capital') are investment goods with various kinds of returns that may be dispersed over an extremely long period of time, are subject to enormous uncertainties, and are strongly influenced by the social context and, again, by public policies. Conclusions: Economic aspects and elements of economic models should be included in any large-scale attempt at understanding fertility behavior through interdisciplinary research. Improvements in the data infrastructure, which are only partly underway thus far, would be an important pre-requisite.\" (author's abstract).

Advocates of rational choice theory in political science have been perceived by their critics as attempting to establish an intellectual hegemony in contemporary social science, to the detriment of alternative methods of research. The debate has gained a nonacademic audience, hitting the pages of the New York Times and the New Republic. In the academy, the antagonists have expressed their views in books, journal articles, and at professional conferences. Mark I. Lichbach addresses the question of the place of rational choice theory in the social sciences in general and in political science in particular. He presents a typology of the antagonists as either rationalist, culturalist, or structuralist and offers an insightful examination of the debate. He reveals that the rationalist bid for hegemony and synthesis is rooted in the weaknesses, not the strengths, of rationalist thought. He concludes that the various theoretical camps are unlikely to accept the claimed superiority of the rationalist approach but that this opposition is of value in itself to the social sciences, which requires multiple perspectives to remain healthy. With its penetrating examination of the assumptions and basic arguments of each of the sides to this debate, this book cuts through the partisan rhetoric and provides an essential roadmap for the future of the discipline. Mark I. Lichbach is Professor of Government and Politics, University of Maryland.

In this study, we analyze to what extent students’ social background and, particularly, the motive of status maintenance, as proposed by the rational choice theory, are related to parents’ decision to provide private tutoring in secondary school. Given the large share of students attending the highest type of secondary school in Germany (Gymnasium) in recent years, several researchers suggest that this type of school might no longer serve its long-lived purpose of ensuring that families maintain their social status. We propose that parents might employ private tutoring as a new means for status maintenance. Analyzing data from the National Educational Panel Study (NEPS), we find that the decision to take private tutoring in grades 5–8 depends on one aspect of students’ social capital, that is, the school-related support that parents offer at home. Additional effects can be identified for the type of school that students attend, a migration history in the family, and students’ performance in mathematics and German. Regarding the motive of status maintenance, we find no statistical support for the assumption that parents employ private tutoring to maintain their families’ social status. Our analyses indicate, however, that at Gymnasium, parents might use private tutoring to increase their children’s social status beyond that of their own. (DIPF/Orig.) Diese Studie geht der Frage nach, inwiefern die soziale Herkunft von Schülerinnen und Schülern und insbesondere das Motiv des Statuserhalts, wie es von der Rational Choice Theorie vorgeschlagen wird, mit der Entscheidung für Nachhilfeunterricht in der Sekundarstufe I zusammenhängen. Angesichts des Anteils von Schülerinnen und Schülern, die in den vergangenen Jahren das Gymnasium besuchen, gehen verschiedene Forscherinnen und Forscher davon aus, dass diese Schulform ihrem langjährigen Anspruch, Familien den Erhalt ihres sozialen Status zu ermöglichen, nicht mehr gerecht wird. Wir nehmen an, dass Eltern Nachhilfe als neues Mittel einsetzen könnten, um den sozialen Status ihrer Familie zu erhalten. In Analysen mit Daten des Nationalen Bildungspanels (NEPS) zeigt sich, dass die Entscheidung für Nachhilfeunterricht in den Klassen 5–8 mit einem Aspekt des sozialen Kapitals der Schülerinnen und Schüler zusammenhängt, nämlich mit der Unterstützung der Eltern für schulbezogene Aufgaben. Darüber hinaus zeigen sich Effekte der besuchten Schulform, eines Migrationshintergrundes und der Schulleistungen in Mathematik und Deutsch. Im Hinblick auf das Motiv des Statuserhalts finden die Autoren keinen statistischen Beleg für die Annahme, dass Eltern Nachhilfe einsetzen, um ihren Status zu erhalten. Die Analysen liefern jedoch Hinweise darauf, dass Eltern von Gymnasiastinnen und Gymnasiasten Nachhilfe nutzen, um ihren Kindern einen höheren sozialen Status zu verschaffen als ihren eigenen. (DIPF/Orig.)

Weisberg and Muldoon’s epistemic landscape model (ELM) has been one of the most significant contributions to the use of agent-based models in philosophy. The model provides an innovative approach to establishing the optimal distribution of cognitive labor in scientific communities, using an epistemic landscape. In the paper, we provide a critical examination of ELM. First, we show that the computing mechanism for ELM is correct insofar as we are able to replicate the results using another programming language. Second, we show that small changes in the rules that determine the behavior of individual agents can lead to important changes in simulation results. Accordingly, we claim that ELM results are robust with respect to the computing mechanism, but not necessarily across parameter space. We conclude by reflecting on the possible lessons to be gained from ELM as a class of simulations or cluster of models.

Collective action problems are ubiquitous in situations involving human interactions and therefore lie at the heart of economy and political science. In one of the most salient statements on this topic, Elinor Ostrom, co-recipient of the 2009 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, even claims that “the theory of collective action is the central subject of political science\". The collection of essays presented in this timely volume targets the problem of collective action from both a theoretical and applied perspective. Its multidisciplinary approach makes it a valuable reading for students and scholars working in a number of different areas of study, such as political science, economy, political philosophy, public policies, comparative politics, and international relations.

Collective action problems are ubiquitous in situations involving human interactions and therefore lie at the heart of economy and political science. In one of the most salient statements on this topic, Elinor Ostrom, co-recipient of the 2009 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, even claims that “the theory of collective action is the central subject of political science\". The collection of essays presented in this timely volume targets the problem of collective action from both a theoretical and applied perspective. Its multidisciplinary approach makes it a valuable reading for students and scholars working in a number of different areas of study, such as political science, economy, political philosophy, public policies, comparative politics, and international relations.

While many texts on international relations deal only with ideologies, this book goes beyond discussion of ideology to provide an understanding of how global economics, politics, and society operate. The book begins with a history of the International Studies Association, which was founded to develop empirically-based knowledge and was opposed to ideological “isms” as biased guides to policy. The book focuses on four major paradigms—Marxian, Mass Society, Community Building, and Rational Choice—with diagrams indicating their empirical predictions over time. The Marxian paradigm focuses on scientific claims of Marx and Engels. The Mass Society paradigm explains why democracies become dysfunctional. The Community Building paradigm explains how communities can be and are built at the local, national, regional, and international levels. The Rational Choice paradigm assembles proposed explanations of reason-based economic, political, and social life to demonstrate what they have in common. Other candidates for paradigms are reviewed, with a focus on why they need further development to become major paradigms at the decision-making, dyadic, societal, national, and international system levels of analysis. --

Long description: Bildung hat einen wesentlichen Einfluss auf die Lebenschancen von Menschen und begründet wissenschaftliches Interesse: Die Auseinandersetzung mit soziologischen Ansätzen der ungleichheitstheoretischen Perspektive, die Darstellung verschiedener schulischer Institutionen im österreichischen Bildungssystem sowie die Zusammenfassung und Auswertung leitfadengestützter, problemzentrierter Schüler*inneninterviews sollen helfen, bestehende Ungleichheitsverhältnisse in der Wiener Grundschule sichtbar zu machen. Im ersten Teil des vorliegenden Bandes findet eine Auseinandersetzung mit ungleichheitstheoretischen Ansätzen sowie die Darstellung schulischer Institutionen im österreichischen Bildungssystem statt. Dadurch ist es möglich, theoretische Ursachen für Bildungsungleichheit zu identifizieren. Darauf aufbauend wird das theoretische Konstrukt mit Wahrnehmungen von Grundschüler*innen verglichen, ergänzt und erweitert: Mit der Methode des problemzentrierten Interviews werden Ursachen für herkunftsbedingte Bildungsdisparität aus den Darstellungen der Schüler*innen abgeleitet. Dieses Wissen kann als Voraussetzung verstanden werden, um Veränderung denken zu können.