The empirical content of rational choice theory - A reply to Green and Shapiro

Green and Shapiro have argued that rational choice theory has produced virt ually no new propositions about politics that have been carefully tested an d not found wanting; and that an empirically successful rational choice the ory would be no more universal than the middle-level theories that they adv ocate. In this essay I argue four main points. First, Pathologies of Ration al Choice Analysis was much better designed to illustrate methodological fa ilings than to sustain a global claim that rational choice theory has made no empirical contributions. Second, there is empirically confirmed content specific to rational choice theory, enough to make it the vital and excitin g research program that it is. Third, there is a sense in which rational ch oice is more universal than its predecessors. Fourth, to provide a full eva luation of the scientific value of any theory one needs to consider both th eoretical and empirical success.