Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T01:59:44.720Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is “willpower” a scientific concept? Suppressing temptation contra resolution in the face of adversity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 April 2021

Elias L. Khalil Open the ORCID record for Elias L. Khalil [Opens in a new window]
Elias L. Khalil*
Affiliation:
School of Public Administration and Development Economics, Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, Doha, Qatar. [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The distinction that Ainslie draws among the triple-phenomena “suppression,” “resolve,” and “habit” is a great advance in decision making theory. But the conceptual machinery “willpower,” and its underpinning distinction between small/soon (SS) rewards as opposed to large/later (LL) rewards, provides a faulty framework to understand the triple-phenomena.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 44 , 2021 , e43
Check for updates
Creative Commons
The target article and response article are works of the U.S. Government and are not subject to copyright protection in the United States.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Khalil, E. L. (1997). Buridan's ass, uncertainty, risk, and self-competition: A theory of entrepreneurship. Kyklos, 50(2), 147–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khalil, E. L. (2008). Are addictions “biases and errors” in the rational decision process? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 31(4), 449–450 (A commentary on A. David Redish, Steve Jensen, and Adam Johnson's (2008) A unified framework for addiction: Vulnerabilities in the decision process. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 31(4), 415–437.).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khalil, E. L. (2015). Temptations as impulsivity: How far are regret and the Allais paradox from shoplifting?. Economic Modelling, 51, 551–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khalil, E. L. (2017). Weakness of will and stiffness of will: How far are shirking, slackening, favoritism, spoiling of children, and pornography from obsessive-compulsive behavior? In Altman, M. (Ed.), Handbook of behavioral economics and smart decision-making: Rational decision-making within the bounds of reason (pp. 492–514). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khalil, E. L. (2019). Wellbeing and happiness. Journal of Value Inquiry, 53, 627–652. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10790-018-9678-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khalil, E. L. (2020). Solving the wellbeing-happiness paradox (paper submitted for publication).Google Scholar
Redish, A. D., Jensen, S., & Johnson, A. (2008). A unified framework for addiction: Vulnerabilities in the decision process. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 31(4), 415–437.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed