Analyzing Politics: Rationality, Behavior, and Institutions

The New Institutionalism in American Politics

by Kenneth A. Shepsle

Through case studies, illustrations, and examples, the author provides students with the means to analyze a wide variety of situations. The Second Edition has been thoroughly revised to include updated cases and examples, new problem sets and discussion questions, and new Experimental Corner sections at the end of many chapters, describing experiments from social science literature.

Genres: Politics, Political Science, Nonfiction, Textbooks, Grad School

548 pages, Paperback

First published December 17, 1996

Reviews

[Brenda · Rating 3 out of 5]

Great introductory textbook on rational choice theory. Shepsle makes it easy to understand the foundations of rational choice and its implications for the study of politics.

[Carlos Campos · Rating 5 out of 5]

Es un volumen fundamental para entender los alcances analíticos de la teoría de la elección racional. Sólo se trata –como dice Shepsle– de la punta del iceberg de un enfoque teórico que sigue aportando resultados y aplicaciones en distintos ámbitos de la vida pública, en la Política (en macro) y en la política (en micro, en los escenarios de la vida cotidiana). Indispensable para quienes estudiamos ciencias sociales desde enfoques no sectarios ni doctrinarios, ajenos al tufo marxistoide que sigue prevaleciendo en Latinoamérica.
Un punto a destacar es el apartado de referencias bibliográficas, armado por el propio Shepsle, que servirá como punto de referencia para ampliar nuestro enfoque del análisis desde la elección racional.

[Steven Peterson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Rational choice theory has become an important perspective in many of the social sciences. The essence of rational choice theory is presented quite straightforwardly in this book by Shepsle and Bonchek. Indeed, I have placed this book on reserve in some of my classes, to introduce students to basic concepts and assumptions of the perspective.

The basic starting concepts include: (a) preferences, which represent various of humanity's want and needs; (b) self-interest, by which people behave according to their preferences. Making decisions occurs under conditions of uncertainty. As the authors put it, (page 18), "More often than not, individuals may not have an exact sense of how an instrument or behavior they might adopt relates to the outcomes they value." Beliefs, another key concept, ". . .describe the hunches an individual has concerning the efficacy of a given instrument or behavior for obtaining something he or she wants. . . ." (page 18). Beliefs, then, connect instruments to outcomes. When a person acts in agreement with both preferences and beliefs, the end result is "instrumental rationality."

For a rational choice theorist, any choice is rational if it is in agreement with one's preferences. People develop a preference ordering, with some ranking higher than others. When one uses higher ranking rather than lower ranking preferences to determine what action to take, the result is "maximization" of results. Shepsle and Bonchek put it thus (page 34): "Making a decision under conditions of risk involves choosing from among alternative lotteries. A rational choice entails choosing the 'best' lottery. The rule of rational choice is known as the Principle of Expected Utility."

In essence, one would follow this principle by selecting the choice that maximizes payoffs in terms of one's preference ordering. Rationality calls for people to make decisions on the basis of expected utility.
The key underlying assumption is that people can carry out analyses consistent with the principle of expected utility, engaging in a sort of rational means-ends analysis.

While this is a major theoretical orientation now, it is subject to considerable criticism as well. There are many well done critiques "out there." Nonetheless, if one wants an introduction to rational choice theory, this is a pretty good starting point.

[Ivan · Rating 1 out of 5]

0/5
li pra matéria de analise politica e quase cometi suicidio...

No ensino médio todos os conceitos principais do pensamento liberal já me foram ensinado de forma mais clara que nessas insuportáveis 472 paginas.

Sinceramente sempre me impressiono o quão longe pode alguém chegar na carreira acadêmica sem saber expor nem escrever nada de forma fluida, inteligivel e minimamente digerivel.
Esse miseravel prefere usar simbolos matemáticos e paragrafos repetidos ad nauseaum do que simplesmente escrever de forma objetiva e simples...

Enfim odeio liberais
odeio professores que não sabem ensinar
odeio escritores que não sabem escrever
e odeio livros que te dão vontade de vomitar

MAL E.F.P.
mal Escrito, mal Formulado e mal Pensado

[Alex Nelson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Caution: this review is for the first edition! This is a good introduction to game theory in political science, quite gentle. There were no exercises, but quite a few illustrating examples.

What I liked:

+ the case studies provided quasi-"Analytic Narratives" showing how to apply game theory to real-ish situations.

+ the motivating example for Arrow's theorem was beautifully done

+ the consequences of Arrow's theorem (e.g., May's theorem is an immediate corollary, etc.) again, beautifully done.

What I didn't like:

- it would have been nice to have more case studies, more "analytic narratives".

- it was less focused on studying Congress with the tools of game theory, than it was focused on the tools of game theory

Overall, this is a good first book for studying game theory applied to politics. This might be followed up with Analyzing Congress quite profitably.

[Alvaro Sánchez · Rating 4 out of 5]

Lo llevé en el CIDE, en general me gustó para análisis de política desde la elección racional y me parece recomendable. Lo único que no me gusta es que, si bien el texto puede entenderse bien por cualquier persona, los ejercicios pueden ser algo complicados para alguien que no tiene background de microeconomía.

[Aimable Niyikiza · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book has been written as a class textbook. I picked it just because I wanted to know the basics of rational decision making, as applied in politics. The book is good but it's boring(obviously)....didn't finish to read the entire book.

[Elizabeth]

PIPP, PEPP, PEWIS all wrapped into one... why didn't they just assign us this book? For anyone interested in public policy, read it.

[Stephen · Rating 3 out of 5]

For a textbook, I found it interesting and enlightening. A rare combination for assigned reading.

[Nate Huston · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great. Easy to read. A good intro to group behavior, collective action, and spatial models.