Rational, normative and procedural theories of beliefs: Can they explain internal motivations?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

This paper offers three-way taxonomy of theories of beliefs. For rational theories, beliefs are determined by given information and updated via Bayes s rule. For normative theory, best represented by Hayek and sociological theory, beliefs are categories that precede information and, in fact, formulate the otherwise impenetrable information. For procedural theory, best represented by Herbert Simon and pragmatic philosophy, while beliefs formulate the information, they can be replaced in response to shocks. While each theory manages to capture one kind of belief, all three largely fail to explain internal motivations that characterize entrepreneurship, innovation, and creativity. The failure arises from the fact that the three theories are about cognitive beliefs (i.e., beliefs about the world), while internal motivations are beliefs concerning self-ability.
LanguageEnglish
Pages641 - 664
Number of pages24
JournalJournal of Economic Issues
Volume45
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 2011

Cite this

@article{74129a6dc79741d8b8f541a12a19790f,
title = "Rational, normative and procedural theories of beliefs: Can they explain internal motivations?",
abstract = "This paper offers three-way taxonomy of theories of beliefs. For rational theories, beliefs are determined by given information and updated via Bayes s rule. For normative theory, best represented by Hayek and sociological theory, beliefs are categories that precede information and, in fact, formulate the otherwise impenetrable information. For procedural theory, best represented by Herbert Simon and pragmatic philosophy, while beliefs formulate the information, they can be replaced in response to shocks. While each theory manages to capture one kind of belief, all three largely fail to explain internal motivations that characterize entrepreneurship, innovation, and creativity. The failure arises from the fact that the three theories are about cognitive beliefs (i.e., beliefs about the world), while internal motivations are beliefs concerning self-ability.",
author = "Elias Khalil",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.2753/JEI0021-3624450307",
language = "English",
volume = "45",
pages = "641 -- 664",
journal = "Journal of Economic Issues",
issn = "0021-3624",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "3",

}

Rational, normative and procedural theories of beliefs: Can they explain internal motivations? / Khalil, Elias.

In: Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. 45, No. 3, 2011, p. 641 - 664.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rational, normative and procedural theories of beliefs: Can they explain internal motivations?

AU - Khalil,Elias

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - This paper offers three-way taxonomy of theories of beliefs. For rational theories, beliefs are determined by given information and updated via Bayes s rule. For normative theory, best represented by Hayek and sociological theory, beliefs are categories that precede information and, in fact, formulate the otherwise impenetrable information. For procedural theory, best represented by Herbert Simon and pragmatic philosophy, while beliefs formulate the information, they can be replaced in response to shocks. While each theory manages to capture one kind of belief, all three largely fail to explain internal motivations that characterize entrepreneurship, innovation, and creativity. The failure arises from the fact that the three theories are about cognitive beliefs (i.e., beliefs about the world), while internal motivations are beliefs concerning self-ability.

AB - This paper offers three-way taxonomy of theories of beliefs. For rational theories, beliefs are determined by given information and updated via Bayes s rule. For normative theory, best represented by Hayek and sociological theory, beliefs are categories that precede information and, in fact, formulate the otherwise impenetrable information. For procedural theory, best represented by Herbert Simon and pragmatic philosophy, while beliefs formulate the information, they can be replaced in response to shocks. While each theory manages to capture one kind of belief, all three largely fail to explain internal motivations that characterize entrepreneurship, innovation, and creativity. The failure arises from the fact that the three theories are about cognitive beliefs (i.e., beliefs about the world), while internal motivations are beliefs concerning self-ability.

U2 - 10.2753/JEI0021-3624450307

DO - 10.2753/JEI0021-3624450307

M3 - Article

VL - 45

SP - 641

EP - 664

JO - Journal of Economic Issues

T2 - Journal of Economic Issues

JF - Journal of Economic Issues

SN - 0021-3624

IS - 3

ER -