Bağlanma Kuramı Kapsamında İlişkisel Malların Fayda Üzerindeki Etkisinin İncelenmesi

Year 2024, SBF Dergisi Erken Görünüm, 1 - 34

Keziban Altun Erdoğdu Türkmen Göksel

https://doi.org/10.33630/ausbf.1378868

Abstract

Yirminci yüzyılın sonlarına doğru iktisat biliminde ekonomik davranışların temelleri psikolojik öğelerden yararlanarak açıklanmaya başlanmıştır. Psikoloji, iktisada entegre edilerek daha önceleri iktisat dışı sayılan güven, karşılıklılık, dayanışma, yardımseverlik gibi insan ilişkilerine odaklı sosyal konulara yönelik ilgi artmıştır. Buradan hareketle çalışmada, bu konulardan biri olarak değerlendirilen ilişkisel malların fayda üzerindeki etkisi psikolojik temelleri üzerine kurulu iktisadi model ile analiz edilmiştir. Pugno (2005)’nun bağlanma kuramına dayalı modeli, sosyalleşme dışı boş zaman (bireylerin sadece kendileri için ayırdıkları zaman) eklenmesiyle yeniden kurgulanmıştır. Yeniden kurgulanan modelde, sosyal kişiliğe sahip güvenli bireyin geliri arttığında ilişkisel maldan fazla tüketse de başkalarını güvenilmez bulduğu için ilişki kurmaktan kaçınan güvensiz bireye göre fayda düzeyinin her zaman yüksek olmadığı sonucuna varılmıştır. Bu açıdan model, bireyler zamanlarını sadece başkalarıyla vakit geçirmek için değil, kitap okumak, egzersiz yapmak, müzik dinlemek, günlük tutmak gibi kendileri için de kullanırlarsa fayda düzeylerinin yüksek olacağını ortaya koymuştur.

Keywords

İlişkisel Mallar, Psikoloji, Bağlanma Kuramı, Fayda, Sosyalleşme Dışı Boş Zaman

Examining The Effect of Relational Goods on Utility within the Context of Attachment Theory

Abstract

In the later 20th century, in economics, the foundations of economical behaviours began to be explained using psychological elements. There has been an increased interest in social issues focused on human relations, by integrating psychology into economics. These social issues are trust, reciprocity, solidarity and helpfulness, which were previously seen as non-economic. Thus, in this study, the impact of relational goods, one of these social issues, on utility is analyzed through an economic model based on psychological foundations. Maurizio Pugno’s (2005) model based on attachment theory was reconstructed with the addition of non-social leisure time (leisure time that individuals allocate only for themselves). In the reconstructed model, it is concluded that even if a secure individual with a social personality consumes more relational goods when income increases, his/her utility level is not always higher than an insecure individual who avoids establishing relationships because he/she finds others unreliable. In this regard, the model revealed that if individuals use their time not only for spending time with others but also for themselves, such as reading a books, exercising, listening to music, diarise, etc., their utility levels would be high.

Keywords

Relational Goods, Psychology, Attachment Theory, Utility, Non-Social Leisure Time

References

• Ainsworth, Mary, Mary C. Blehar, Everett Waters ve Sally Wall (1978), Patterns of Attachment: A Psychological Study of the Strange Situation (New York: Psychology Press).
• Akdere, Çınla ve Mürüvvet Büyükboyacı (2018), “Davranışsal İktisat ve Sınırlı Rasyonellik Varsayımı”, Dumludağ, Devrim, Özge Gökdemir, Levent Neyse ve Ester Ruben (Der.), İktisatta Davranışsal Yaklaşımlar (Ankara: İmge Kitabevi Yayınları): 33-73.
• Aktan, Coşkun C. ve Kıymet Yavuzaslan (2020), “Davranışsal İktisat: Bireylerin İktisadi Karar ve Tercihlerinde Zihinsel, Duygusal ve Psikolojik Faktörlerin Analizi”, Sosyal ve Beşerî Bilimler Dergisi, 12 (2): 100-120.
• Antoci, Angelo, Pier L. Sacco ve Paolo Vanin (2007), “Social Capital Accumulation and the Evolution of Social Participation”, Journal of Socio-Economics, 36 (1): 128-143.
• Becchetti, Leonardo (2019), “Beyond the Homo Economicus”, Annals of the Fondazione Luigi Einaudi, 53: 115-142.
• Becchetti, Leonardo ve Alessandra Pelloni (2013), “What are We Learning from the Life Satisfaction Literature?”, International Review of Economics, 60 (2): 113-155.
• Becchetti, Leonardo ve Marika Santoro (2007), “The Income–Unhappiness Paradox: A Relational Goods/Baumol Disease Explanation”, Bruni, Luigino ve Pier L. Porta (Der.), Handbook on the Economics of Happiness (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing): 239-262.
• Becchetti, Leonardo, Giovanni Trovato ve David A. L. Bedoya (2011), “Income, Relational Goods and Happiness”, Applied Economics, 43 (3): 273-290.
• Becchetti, Leonardo, Luigino Bruni ve Stefano Zamagni (2019), The Microeconomics of Wellbeing and Sustainability: Recasting the Economic Process (London: Academic Press).
• Bilancini, Ennio ve Simone D'Alessandro (2012), “Long-Run Welfare under Externalities in Consumption, Leisure, and Production: A Case for Happy Degrowth vs. Unhappy Growth”. Ecological Economics, 84: 194-205.
• Boland, Lawrence A. (2017), Equilibrium Models In Economics: Purposes And Critical Limitations (New York: Oxford University Press).
• Bowlby, John (1969), Attachment and Loss: Volume I: Attachment (New York: Basic Books).
• Bowlby, John (1973), Attachment and Loss: Volume II: Separation, Anxiety and Anger (New York: Basic Books).
• Bruni, Luigino (2013), “Relational Goods, a New Tool for an Old Issue”, ECOS-Estudos Contemporâneos da Subjetividade, 3 (2): 173-178.
• Bruni, Luigino ve Luca Stanca (2008), “Watching Alone: Relational Goods, Television and Happiness”, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 65 (3-4): 506-528.
• Donati, Pierpaolo (1986), Introduzione Alla Sociologia Relazionale (Milan: Franco Angeli).
• Donati, Pierpaolo (2014), “Relational Goods and their Subjects: The Ferment of a New Civil Society and Civil Democracy”, Recerca: Revista de Pensament i Anàlisi, 14: 19-46.
• Donati, Pierpaolo (2019), “Discovering the Relational Goods: Their Nature, Genesis and Effects”, International Review of Sociology, 29 (2): 238-259.
• Gui, Benedetto (1987), “Eléments Pour Une Définition D’économie Communautaire”, Notes Et Documents, 19-20: 32-42.
• Gui, Benedetto (1996), “On ‘Relational Goods’: Strategic Implications of Investment in Relationships”, International Journal of Social Economics, 23 (10-11): 260-278.
• Gui, Benedetto (2005), “From Transactions to Encounters: The Joint Generation of Relational Goods and Conventional Values”, Gui, Benedetto ve Robert Sugden (Der.), Economics and Social Interaction: Accounting for Interpersonal Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press): 23-51.
• Gui, Benedetto (2013), “Relational Goods”, Bruni, Luigino ve Stefano Zamagni (Der.), Handbook on the Economics of Reciprocity and Social Enterprise (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing): 295-305.
• Holmes, Jeremy (1993), John Bowlby and Attachment Theory (London: Routledge).
• Neyse, Levent ve Filippos Exadaktylos (2014), “Davranışsal İktisat, Sosyal Sermaye ve Kalkınma”, Aysan, Ahmet Faruk ve Devrim Dumludağ (Der.), Kalkınmada Yeni Yaklaşımlar (Ankara: İmge Kitabevi Yayınları): 413-432.
• Nussbaum, Martha C. (1986), The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
• Pugno, Maurizio (2005), “The Happiness Paradox: A Formal Explanation from Psycho-Economics”, Discussion Paper, No: 1.
• Ruben, Ester ve Devrim Dumludağ (2018), “İktisat ve Psikoloji”, Dumludağ, Devrim, Özge Gökdemir, Levent Neyse ve Ester Ruben (Der.), İktisatta Davranışsal Yaklaşımlar (Ankara: İmge Kitabevi Yayınları): 33-73.
• Siegel, Daniel J. (1999), The Developing Mind: How Relationships and the Brain Interact to Shape Who We are (New York: The Guilford Press).
• Sugden, Robert (2005), “Fellow-Feeling”, Gui, Benedetto ve Robert Sugden (Der.), Economics and Social Interaction: Accounting for Interpersonal Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press): 52-75.
• Sümer, Nebi, Melike Sayıl ve Sibel Kazak Berument (2020), Anne Duyarlılığı ve Çocuklarda Bağlanma, 2. Baskı (İstanbul: Koç Üniversitesi Yayınları).
• Uhlaner, Carole J. (1989), “ ‘Relational Goods’ and Participation: Incorporating Sociability into a Theory of Rational Action”, Public Choice, 62 (3): 253-285.
• Uhlaner, Carole J. (2014), “Relational Goods and Resolving the Paradox of Political Participation”, Recerca: Revista de Pensament i Anàlisi, 14: 47-72.