Abstract
Individualistic utility theory has long been the core of economics since its appearance in the end of the 19G. This theory explicitly presumes that agents in the societies arehomogeneousin a sense of all fulfilling a certain set of similar rational preference postulates. Another conspicuous feature of the story is to assume that every individual is based on a universally giveninnatepreference as never been affected by outside environments or random shocks. Into individual’s decision the cost for social interaction has never been taken account. Recently, sonic new innovations to overcome these limitations in utility theory are coming up to renew our old story entirely. These have some different springs. One of these comes from the idea ofrandom preferencein economics, which could be traced back to Hildenbrand [9]. Even if agents were homogeneous, random shocks could generate a fluctuation in a macroscopic structure of social states.
The first draft of this paper was presented in ICM2002GTA, August 14–17, 2002, Qingdao, China
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Arthur WB (1994) Increasing returns and path dependence in the economy. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor
Arthur WB (1996) Increasing returns and the new world of business. Harvard Business Review 74 (July-Aug): 100–109
Aruka Y (2003) How to measure social interactions via group selection? Journal of Economic Behavior, special issue, forthcoming
Durlauf SN (1997) Statistical mechanics approaches to socioeconomic behavior. In Arthur WB, Durlauf SN, Lane, DA(eds) The economy as an evolving complex system II, Addison-Wesley, Mass., 81–104
Durlauf SN (2000) A framework for the study of individual behavior and social interaction. SSRI Working Paper Series(Social Systems Research Institute of the Economic Department), the University of Wisconsin, Madison
Fullmer H (1974) Random economies with many interacting agents. Journal of Mathematical Economics 1:51–62
Fukao, T (1987) The disperse system: the thermodynamic system. Shokocio, tokyo (in Japanese)
Glaeser EL, Scheinkman JA (2001) Measuring social interactions. In Durlauf SN, Young, HP(eds) Social dynamics, Brooking Institute, Washington DC, 83131
Hildenbrand W (1971) Random preferences and equilibrium analysis. Jounral of Economic Theory 3:41.4–429
Helbing D (1905) Quantitative sociodynamics: stochastic methods and models of social interaction processes. Kluwer Academic Press, Dordrecht.
Helbing D (2003) Dynamic decision behavior and optimal guidance through information services: models and experiments. In Schreckenbcrg, M, Selten R.(eds.) Human behaviour and traffic networks. Springer, Berlin (in print
Holland J (1992) Adaptation in natural and artificial systems, MIT press, Mass: Cambridge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer Japan
About this paper
Cite this paper
Aruka, Y. (2004). Formulating Social Interactions in Utility Theory of Economics*. In: Takayasu, H. (eds) The Application of Econophysics. Springer, Tokyo. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-53947-6_47
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-53947-6_47
Publisher Name: Springer, Tokyo
Print ISBN: 978-4-431-67961-5
Online ISBN: 978-4-431-53947-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive