Norms and Rationality in Electoral Participation and in the Rescue of Jews in WWII

Abstract

The rescue of Jews in WWII and electoral participation both constitute prominent puzzles for rational choice theories of human behavior and have given rise to lengthy debates about norms and rationality. To explain both phenomena, we apply the Model of Frame Selection. This theory of action provides an integrated account of norms and rationality, where cost-benefit calculus is replaced by unconditional norm conformity if actors hold strongly activated normative convictions. In support of this hypothesis, our empirical analyses show that strong feelings of social responsibility led actors to disregard the risks of helping. Likewise, intense norms of civic duty can make electoral participation independent of the incentive to express political preferences and the expectation to influence the election outcome. At the same time, the real strength of calculated incentives is revealed by identifying the actors who indeed seem to engage in a reflecting-calculating mode of decision-making.

Social framing effects: Preferences or beliefs?

“…At a more practical level, the results have been used to criticize economists' emphasis on material incentives. By triggering a selfish social frame, material incentives could potentially reduce, for example, employee effort (Frey and Osterloh, 2005;Pfeffer, 2007), legal compliance (Tyran and Feld, 2006;Bohnet and Cooter, 2001), and other prosocial behaviors (Koneberg et al, 2010). Through this channel, the very language and assumptions of economics could be eroding cooperation (Ferraro et al, 2005).…”

Thou Shalt Recycle: How Social Norms of Environmental Protection Narrow the Scope of the Low-Cost Hypothesis

“…Third, dual-process and framing theories suggest that situational cues (e.g., others' observed recycling participation) define mental representations of a situation and thus lead to those behavioral choices deemed appropriate (Chaiken & Trope, 1999;Lindenberg & Steg, 2007). A popular formulation distinguishes a deliberative mode of cost-benefit calculation from an automatic-spontaneous mode more strongly patterned by moral obligations (Best & Kneip, 2011;Kroneberg, Yaish, & Stocké, 2010). The latter frame's activation-which pushes incentive-based reasoning to the background-becomes more likely for the highly concerned as situational cues match their personal convictions.…”

Norms and rationality. Is moral behavior a form of rational action?

“…Nonetheless, revenge and vendettas have been socially accepted institutions in several countries, and rescuing Jews during World War II was a frequent phenomenon. We mention vendetta and rescuing Jews because for these examples the claim that RCT cannot be applied has been challenged (for vendettas see Hamlin 1991; for rescuing Jews see Opp 1997;Varese and Yaish 2000;Kroneberg et al 2010).…”

“…See also the model of frame selection that has been developed in sociology by Esser (see, e.g., 2001) that also tries to explain when individuals choose a reflective or automatic mode of behavior. For a short introduction to and application of this model see Kroneberg et al (2010), Mehlkop and Graeff (2010). a behavioral program is adopted.…”