My research is a comparative study with dogs and human infants focusing on the perception of causality and agency from different aspects. At this stage of the project, I prefer not to commit to any specific theory. However, I can say that rational choice theory is compatible with my research questions.
One of the core points of our study is that dogs and humans exist in the same Newtonian environment and share a similar social environment. Our research questions aim to investigate whether there are similarities in how both species perceive causality and agency.
Specifically, the focus of my last study is on how infants’ and dogs’ expectancies of agents to act efficiently. And rational choice theory can provide valuable insights into this study.
However, I have some questions about the theory itself. I have listed some of my impressions and questions:
1. First, for clarification: rational choice theory is based on the assumption that humans maximize their utility by increasing the benefit and reducing the cost. And from the evolutionary viewpoint, maximizing utility can be interpreted as increasing inclusive fitness.
2. The Nettle paper was interesting in the sense that it explains the importance of the environment not only between species but within species and how the social environment might be related to natural selection.
I think domestication is a good example of the environment’s role in adaptation. As stated in the Nettle paper animals deploy strategically given the circumstances under which they have to live. And they ask ”Are patterns of behavior determined by the choices of individuals, or by the overall structure of society?”
However, the core difference between the topic in the Nettle paper and adaptation because of domestication is what constitutes this ecological context in the first place. When the ecological context is a product of human beings and the adapted species themselves are also human beings (of course open to debate), then adaptations to these contexts, for me, became an interesting point where humans have the power to change this ecological context instead of adapting to it. I would want to discuss this more.
3. Also, the difference between the Bayesian framework and Rational choice theory is not very clear to me. I think they can complement each other. I am specifically wondering about this for the concept of Naïve Utility Calculus. There are Bayesian models for Naïve Utility Calculus. Can you explain to me the differences between the 2 accounts using the model of Naïve Utility Calculus?