ABSTRACT
The emergence of a ‘new institutionalism’ in modern economics and converging developments in sociology and in political science have drawn attention to the potential role of rational choice theory as the paradigmatic core of a theoretically integrated social science. However, ‘rational choice theory’ can not simply be presumed to exist as a well-defined paradigm with a clearly specified set of uncontroversial propositions. As the monumental and still growing body of literature on the subject amply illustrates, ambiguities and differences in interpretation rule out an easy answer to the question of what the essential content of rational choice theory is. Certainly, such basic assumptions as the principle of methodological individualism and a general notion of self-interested behaviour seem to be shared by all versions of this theory. Yet, closer inspection reveals that behind such agreement in fundamentals the specific content of the theory can be, and is, interpreted quite differently.1
