Maximization and the Act of Choice
By Amartya Sen. 1997
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
- Boris N. Nikolaev
- Bruno S. Frey
- Alois Stutzer
- T. Holmes
- Nadav Shir
- Kevin J. Boyle
- Richard A. Easterlin
- Joakim Wincent
Citations in the corpus
- Sen's Capability Approach to Welfare Economics (2004, background): “In what follows, we will not examine Sen’s critique of maximising behaviour, as this critique is independent of whether welfare is defined in terms of utility, income or capability (Sen [62]).”
- Entrepreneurship and well-being: The role of psychological autonomy, competence, and relatedness (2019, background): “According to this body of knowledge, engagement in entrepreneurship is valued for its well-being freedom (Nussbaum and Sen, 1993; Sen, 1985, 1997) or procedural utility (Frey et al., 2004) because it provides greater independence from managerial limitation and respite from being constantly…”
- An Unworkable Idea or a Promising Alternative? Sen's Capability Approach Re-examined (2000, background): “Foster James & Amartya Sen (1997), Substantive annex to the reprint of Sen (1973), Oxford: Clarendon Press.”
- What Can Economists Learn from Happiness Research? (2001, background): “There are also contributions by sociologists, in particular Ruut Veenhoven (for example 1993), and political scientists (Ronald Inglehart 1990; Robert Lane 2000). considered (Sen 1995, 1997; Marc Le Menestrel 2001).”
- Dynamic Learning and Context-Dependence in Sequential, Attribute-Based, Stated-Preference Valuation Questions (2005, background): “Perhaps the most ambitious approach would be to develop a theory of choice that includes context effects as a component of rational behavior (Sen 1993, 1997), and then develop survey designs and empirical models consistent with such a theory (McFadden 1999).”
- Strategic Communication with Lying Costs (2009, background): “In these cases, aversion to lying represents a procedural preference (cf. Sen, 1997): a person may care not just about how much money she gets, but also about how she gets that money, in particular whether she must lie to get it.”