Bizarre beliefs and rational choices: A behavioral approach to analytic narratives

Abstract

Rational choice analytic narratives claim to take seriously the way real actors form their beliefs. I argue that a commonly applied formal technique - perfect Bayesian equilibrium - inadequately accounts for realistic beliefs, unnecessarily impoverishing analytic narratives. I propose an equilibrium concept drawn from cognitive psychology - support theory equilibrium - that provides an accurate account of beliefs within a formal analytic narrative approach. I ground both the critique and the alternative in a discussion of ethnic mobilization in Yugoslavia. The result is a behaviorally informed analytic narrative that offers a more accurate account of the role of real - including bizarre - beliefs in strategic interaction. © 2007 Southern Political Science Association.