English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The article is a critical analysis of rational choice explanations in social science. It is argued that there are a number of restrictions to this work. First, many authors in this tradition develop post-hoc theories: they adjust their theoretical framework to available empirical evidence. The theories are thus immunised against empirical refutation. Second, the so-called internalist approaches fail to distinguish between acting as though one is rational on the one hand, and acting because one is rational on the other. Third, the so-called externalist perspectives fail to differ significantly from other theories. Fourth, rational choice theories mistakenly assume that rationality is free from cultural influence.

Algumas limitações das explicações da escolha racional na Ciência Política e na Sociologia