The Market for Ideology: A Formal Model of Subjective Decision-Making

• In Event: New Perspectives on Ideology

Abstract

In (political) decision-making, humans face informational environments that are characterized by indeterminacy and require subjective appraisals or evaluations. Consequently, beliefs and narratives that are spread by various belief systems, ideologies, and mindsets are important elements of human judgement and co-determine decision-making. In other words, people are guided by the belief systems they have adopted. But why do people adopt the specific belief systems they do? Why do some individuals adopt one while others opt for another? We suggest that adopting a particular belief system is rooted in one's individual mental condition, which is influenced by social circumstances. Specific mental needs can be served by the characteristics (and narrative themes) of various belief systems. More precisely, we propose that individuals' social and economic environments, along with personal and genetic dispositions, determine their non-tangible, mental preferences (needs). To serve these needs, individuals tend to search for reconciliation options—ideological means of attempting to satisfy their preferences. On this view, belief systems represent viable reconciliation options that help people to interpret social reality, overcome subjective indeterminacy, and evaluate choice options. Thus, individuals adopt the available belief system that, according to their own personal calculation, best serves their mental needs. Formally, we introduce a model in which we use a multi-dimensional Minkovski distance measure to identify how well the characteristics of a belief system match an individual's set of subjective mental demands. As the Minkovski distance can be transformed into CES utility function, we can apply a simple choice model, include economic variables such as income and consumption, and describe why an individual adopts a specific (political) belief system. This allows us to explain the selection of belief systems in a manner that is consistent with rational choice theory.

Authors

• Veronika Mueller, Paderborn University

• John T. Jost, New York University