Public Choice Theory And Public Choice Theory

Choice can be defined as the act of selecting or making a decision when faced with multiple possibilities. In John Steinbeck’s East of Eden, the motifs of houses, hands, and money reflect how the pattern of good and evil repeat due to the reoccurring theme that one has the right to choose.

In 1996, Glasser announced that he was going to start referring to what had hitherto been control theory, as “choice theory,” and in 1998 published Choice Theory: A New Psychology of Personal Freedom. Glasser felt that the term control was misleading and suggestive of coercion.

Deborah Stone compares the market and polis models of policy making with the intent to show that the original origin of the public policy discipline was to be grounded in a practical science, economics, but to also show how and why the economic approach to policy making has significant limitations. Stone is arguing against the view that policy decision making is rational decision making. Deborah Stone’s main reason for comparing the two models of policy making is to identify and critique the simplistic assumptions that have been used in the market and rationality project. Stone is attempting to point out the paradox that exists between the two because the two models are evidently contradictory, the market being ground in rationality and the polis being based on emotion. Stone compares the two policies in order to show that economics cannot be solely used to understand policy making because the two are fundamentally different. She also points out that policy is made in a political society and because of this the polis model seeks to explain public policy as it actually happens in reality since the field and study of public policy was created to allow government to make decisions that would best benefit their citizens.

* Publics: Group that has an actual or potential interest in or impact on an organization’s ability to achiever its objectives (Financial publics, media publics, Government publics)

Choices essentially are what dictates the path that is traveled and the series of events

The rational choice theory and social disorganization theory contrast in so many ways. The rational choice theory is when wrongdoers choose to commit crimes and is punished severely. On the other hand, the social disorganization theory is differences in crime levels based on structure and culture factors that shape the nature of social order across communities. Furthermore, the difference between the two is that one of the is about a decision making process choice and the other is about how socialization controls criminal behavior.

This paper will cover two criminological theories and they will be applied to two types of criminality. The two theories chosen for the paper were developmental theory and rational choice theory. The two types of crimes that were chosen were organized crime, specifically focusing on gangs, and terrorism. Then the crimes will be compared and contrasted. Finally, the developmental theory will be applied to organized crime to explain why and how it happens. The rational choice theory will be applied to terrorism to explain what compels individuals to attempt this form of criminality.

The concern at hand is why teachers have sex with students; however, it goes much deeper than this. It is not just simply teacher on student through temptation or desire. There is a true criminal event happening with educator sexual misconduct, sexual abuse, and harassment. Teachers are taking advantage of students and even sometimes vice versa. Teacher student relationships may develop inappropriately through not only temptation or desire, but also specific mental concerns, sexual preferences, force, bonding, and many other reasons. Research shows different criminological theories that can be associated with this criminal event. Noted in this writing is the labeling theory and the rational choice theory. With the labeling theory, it is broken

Gordon (2011) describes publics as potential or actual audiences connected to various messages. (Rawlins, 2006) furthers this statement by stating that publics “…can be employees, shareholders, political leaders, consumers, etc.” and “…are often segmented even further by demographics, geographics, or psychographics.” (p.133). Grunig and Repper (1992) expand on this saying publics are self formed and identify organisations for attention, essentially meaning publics are groups of people linked by a common interest or problem. PR practitioners according to (Gordon,

Rational choice theory, also known simply as choice theory, is the assessment of a potential offender to commit a crime. Choice theory is the belief that committing a crime is a rational decision, based on cost benefit analysis. The would-be offender will weigh the costs of committing a particular crime: fines, jail time, and imprisonment versus the benefits: money, status, heightened adrenaline. Depending on which factors out-weigh the other, a criminal will decide to commit or forgo committing a crime. This decision making process makes committing a crime a rational choice. This theory can be used to explain why an offender will decide to commit burglary, robbery, aggravated assault, or murder.

Rational choice theory and social control theory both show why an individual may commit a criminal act, but they both also draw criticism of their approach. Rational choice theory critics point out that “The first problem with the theory has to do with explaining collective action. That is, if individuals simply base their actions on calculations of personal profit, why would they ever choose to do something that will benefit others more than themselves?” (Crossman, 2015). The theory focuses only on the individual’s mindset and doesn’t take into account any of their social structure. The society an individual grows up in may make them more prone to commit crime. Social control theory, in particular the study conducted by Travis Hirschi, also

When making public policy decisions, policy makers must face a world with imperfect information and a finite amount of resources. Both of these realities put limitations on how effectively a policymaker can make people’s lives better off. Obviously, it is impossible for anyone to perfectly predict how a certain policy will play out when it is enacted. This includes policymakers, who despite their noble goals of increasing the well-being of society, can only make an educated guess about the effects a policy will have. Factors such as the fickleness of human nature or hidden information creates uncertainties that are hard to address when making policy. For example, in 1929 the causes of the Great Depression were not fully understood, but

In this paper, we will discuss what Choice Theory is and how it relates and differs from Positive Psychology. Also in this paper, two articles will be reviewed. One about Choice Theory and the other about Positive Psychology. This will help get a better understanding about the background of these two theories. Choice Theory was developed by Dr. William Glasser. It is the theory that states, “We choose all of our actions and thoughts, based on the information we receive in our lives.” (Bradley, 2014) This means we are in charge of how we feel, no one can make us feel or act in a certain way. Reality Therapy goes hand in hand with this theory. Reality therapy is used by counselors in order to train a client to take control of their lives. Positive Psychology is “A branch of psychology that focuses on building positive qualities that lead to more fulfilling lives.” (Project Innovation Inc., 2013) This branch contrasts many others because it does not focus on treating mental disorders. It is simply just training the brain to think more positively. It focuses on building up four characteristics – grit, optimism, positive affect, and life satisfaction. Both Choice Theory and Positive Psychology help achieve long term goals and help people to be successful

"Fundamentally, public relation is relations with publics." (Public Relations Writing, 2000, p.10) The publics can be any group of people that shares a common interest.

The elite is the selected few but does not reflex the needs of the masses