Towards a Unity of the Human Behavioral Sciences | SpringerLink
Skip to main content

Towards a Unity of the Human Behavioral Sciences

  • Chapter
Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science

Part of the book series: Logic, Epistemology, And The Unity Of Science ((LEUS,volume 1))

Abstract

Despite their distinct objects of study, the human behavioral sciences all include models of individual human behavior. Unity in the behavioral sciences requires that there be a common underlying model of individual human behavior, specialized and enriched to meet the particular needs of each discipline. Such unity does not exist, and cannot be easily attained, since the various disciplines have incompatible models and disparate research methodologies. Yet recent theoretical and empirical developments have created the conditions for unity in the behavioral sciences, incorporating core principles from all fields, and based upon theoretical tools (game theory and the rational actor model) and data gathering techniques (experimental games in laboratory and field) that transcend disciplinary boundaries. This paper sketches a set of principles aimed at fostering such a unity. They include: (a) evolutionary and behavioral game theory provides a transdisciplinary lexicon for communication and model-building; (b) the rational actor model, rooted in biology but developed in economic theory, applies to all the human behavioral disciplines. This model treats actions as instrumental towards satisfying preferences. However, the content of preferences must be empirically determined. Moreover, the rational actor model is based on a notion of preference consistency that is not universally satisfied, so its range of applicability must also be empirically determined; (c) controlled experiments have been underutilized in most behavioral disciplines. Game theory and the rational actor model can be used as the basis for formulating, deploying, and analyzing data generated from controlled experiments with human subjects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alcock, John: 1993, Animal Behavior: An Evolutionary Approach, Sunderland, MA, Sinauer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andreoni, James and John H. Miller: 2002, ‘Giving According to GARP: An Experimental Test of the Consistency of Preferences for Altruism’, Econometrica 70(2), 737–753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, Kenneth J. and Gerard Debreu: 1954, ‘Existence of an Equilibrium for a Competitive Economy’, Econometrica 265–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, Robert and William D. Hamilton: 1981, ‘The Evolution of Cooperation’, Science 211, 1390–1396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benedict, Ruth: 1934, Patterns of Culture, Boston, Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergstrom, Theodore C. and Oded Stark: 1993, ‘How Altruism can Prevail in an Evolutionary Environment’, American Economic Review 83(2), 149–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonner, John Tyler: 1984, The Evolution of Culture in Animals, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowles, Samuel and Herbert Gintis: 2003, ‘Prosocial Emotions’, in Lawrence Blume and Steven Durlauf (eds.), Complex Nonlinear Systems III (under submission).

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, Robert and Peter J. Richerson: 1985, Culture and the Evolutionary Process, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, Pascal: 2001, Religion Explained: The Human Instincts That Fashion Gods, Spirits and Ancestors, London, William Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, Donald E.: 1991, Human Universals, New York, McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, James M. and R. D. Tollison: 1984, The Theory of Public Choice, Ann Arbor, MI, University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calvin, William H.: 1983, ‘A Stone's Throw and its Launch Window: Timing Precision and its Implications for Language and Hominid Brains’, Journal of Theoretical Biology 104, 121–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, James S.: 1990, Foundations of Social Theory, Cambridge, MA, Belknap.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conlisk, John: 1988, ‘Optimization Cost’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 9, 213– 228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cosmides, Leda and John Tooby: 1992, ‘The Psychological Foundations of Culture’, in Jerome H. Barkow, Leda Cosmides, and John Tooby (eds.), The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture, New York, Oxford University Press, pp. 19–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damasio, Antonio R.: 1994, Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain, New York, Avon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downs, Anthony: 1957, An Economic Theory of Democracy, Boston, Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dugatkin, Lee Alan and Hudson Kern Reeve: 1998, Game Theory and Animal Behavior, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, Emile: 1951, Suicide, a Study in Sociology, New York, Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edgerton, Robert B.: 1992, Sick Societies: Challenging the Myth of Primitive Harmony, New York, The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, Ernst and Simon Gächter: 2002, ‘Altruistic Punishment in Humans’, Nature 415, 137–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fudenberg, Drew and Eric Maskin: 1986, ‘The Folk Theorem in Repeated Games with Discounting or with Incomplete Information’, Econometrica 54(3), 533–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, Gerd and Reinhard Selten: 2001, Bounded Rationality, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gintis, Herbert: 1975, ‘Welfare Economics and Individual Development: A Reply to Talcott Parsons’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 89(2), 291–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gintis, Herbert: 2000, Game Theory Evolving, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gintis, Herbert: 2003, ‘The Hitchhiker's Guide to Altruism: Genes, Culture, and the Internalization of Norms’, Journal of Theoretical Biology 220(4), 407–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gintis, Herbert: 2003, ‘Solving the Puzzle of Human Prosociality’, Rationality and Society 15(2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gintis, Herbert, Eric Alden Smith, and Samuel Bowles: 2001, ‘Costly Signaling and Cooperation’, Journal of Theoretical Biology 213, 103–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gintis, Herbert, Samuel Bowles, Richard Boyd and Ernst Fehr: 2004, The Moral Sentiments: Modeling the Roots of Cooperative Exchange, The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, Stephen J. and Elizabeth Vrba: 1981, ‘Exaption: A Missing Term in the Science of Form’, Paleobiology 8, 4–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grusec, Joan E. and Leon Kuczynski: 1997, Parenting and Children's Internalization of Values: A Handbook of Contemporary Theory, New York, John Wily & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, W. D.: 1964, ‘The Genetical Evolution of Social Behavior’, Journal of Theoretical Biology 37, 1–16, 17–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, William D.: 1967, ‘Extraordinary Sex Ratios’, Science 156, 477–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hechter, Michael and Satoshi Kanazawa: 1997, ‘Sociological Rational Choice’, Annual Review of Sociology 23, 199–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henrich, Joe, Robert Boyd, Samuel Bowles, Colin Camerer, Ernst Fehr and Herbert Gintis: 2004, Foundations of Human Sociality, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Henrich, Joseph, Robert Boyd, Samuel Bowles, Colin Camerer, Ernst Fehr, Herbert Gintis, and Richard McElreath: 2001, ‘Cooperation, Reciprocity and Punishment in Fifteen Small-scale Societies’, American Economic Review 91, 73–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jablonka, Eva and Marion J. Lamb: 1995, Epigenetic Inheritance and Evolution: The Lamarckian Case, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jablonka, Eva and Marion J. Lamb: 1998, ‘Epigenetic Interitance in Evolution’, Journal of Evolutionary Biology 11, 159–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiyonari, Toko, Shigehito Tanida, and Toshio Yamagishi: 2000, ‘Social Exchange and Reciprocity: Confusion or a Heuristic?’, Evolution and Human Behavior 21, 411–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kollock, Peter: 1997, ‘Transforming Social Dilemmas: Group Identity and Cooperation’, in Peter Danielson (ed.), Modeling Rational and Moral Agents, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreps, David M.: 1990, A Course in Microeconomic Theory, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewontin, Richard C.: 1961, ‘Evolution and the Theory of Games’, Journal of Theoretical Biology 1, 382–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewontin, Richard C.: 1974, The Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change, New York, Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandeville, Bernard: 1729, The Fable of the Bees: Private Vices, Publick Benefits.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith, John and G. R. Price: 1973, ‘The Logic of Animal Conflict’, Nature 246, 15–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mead, Margaret: 1963, Sex and Temperament in Three Primitive Societies, New York, Morrow.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mealey, Linda: 1995, ‘The Sociobiology of Sociopathy’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18, 523– 541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monroe, Kristen Renwick: 1991, The Economic Approach to Politics, Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, Jr., Barrington: 1978, Injustice: The Social Bases of Obedience and Revolt, White Plains, M. E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, Mancur: 1965, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, Talcott: 1967, Sociological Theory and Modern Society, New York, Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinker, Steven: 2002, The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature, New York, Viking.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabin, Matthew: 1993, ‘Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics’, American Economic Review 83(5), 1281–1302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richerson, Peter J. and Robert Boyd: 1998, ‘The Evolution of Ultrasociality’, in I. Eibl-Eibesfeldt and F. K. Salter (eds.), Indoctrinability, Idology and Warfare, New York, Berghahn Books, pp. 71–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schrödinger, Edwin: 1958, What is Life?: The Physical Aspect of the Living Cell, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, Herbert: 1972, ‘Theories of Bounded Rationality’, in C. B. McGuire and Roy Radner (eds.), Decision and Organization, New York, American Elsevier, pp. 161–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Adam: 2000[1759], The Theory of Moral Sentiments, New York, Prometheus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, P. and L. Jonker: 1978, ‘Evolutionarily Stable Strategies and Game Dynamics’, Mathematical Biosciences 40, 145–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomasello, Michael: 1999, The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trivers, R. L.: 1971, ‘The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism’, Quarterly Review of Biology 46, 35–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, Amos and Daniel Kahneman: 1981, ‘Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 106(4), 1039–1061.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winter, Sidney G.: 1971, ‘Satisficing, Selection and the Innovating Remnant’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 85, 237–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, Elisabeth Jean: 2003, Insurgent Collective Action and Civil War in El Salvador, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wrong, Dennis H.: 1961, ‘The Oversocialized Conception of Man in Modern Sociology’, American Sociological Review 26, 183–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, H. Peyton: 1998, Individual Strategy and Social Structure: An Evolutionary Theory of Institutions, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gintis, H. (2009). Towards a Unity of the Human Behavioral Sciences. In: Rahman, S., Symons, J., Gabbay, D.M., Bendegem, J.P.v. (eds) Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science. Logic, Epistemology, And The Unity Of Science, vol 1. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2808-3_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2808-3_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-2486-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-2808-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics