ABSTRACT
Political psychology is an intellectually rich subfield. It is invigorated by a steady stream of interesting ideas from psychology which are then challenged by being placed in political contexts. One of its valuable contributions to the discipline has been to present a richer view of human nature in general and decision making in particular than is typically put forth by rational choice theories (RCT).1 Political psychology has been receptive to empirical regularities or hypotheses such as the following: imperfect rationality, decision making infused with emotion, stereotyping and more generally biased belief formation and revision, group orientation, altruism, and so forth. Consequently, political science has been treated to a vigorous debate between rational choice (RC) scholars and those with a different scientific background. This diversity has served the discipline well: RC theories (RCT) have been subjected to sharp empirical criticism and the discipline is accumulating a rich trove of empirical patterns.
