Decision Analysis In Political Science: The Problem With The Uncertainty Principle

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12797/Politeja.22.2025.98.09

Keywords:

decision, analysis, political, science, uncertainty, principle

Abstract

Decision analysis is considered to be one of the most important research methods in political science. The problem, however, is to determine to what extent such analysis can be reliable. The application of classical decision theory, referring to statistical research and probability theory, to the assessment of the political decision-making process is usually inadequate. This results, among other things, from the inability to obtain reliable knowledge about the initial state of the decision and the state of nature, differences in the perspectives of the assessing entities, differences in short- and long-term priorities, and above all, the impossibility of achieving several goals at the same time due to their mutual exclusion. These difficulties are generalized by the ‘uncertainty principle,’ analogous to the Heisenberg equation: the more certain priorities are realized, the less it is possible to realize others. Similarly, the use of some paths of justification excludes others in the real decision-making process. What can serve as a useful procedure, however, is the ‘expansion of time horizons,’ i.e. the gradual distancing of the time perspective of benefits.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

  • Joachim Diec, Jagiellonian University

    Jagiellonian University Chair in Eurasian Area Studies, Professor at the Faculty of International and Political Studies. Main areas of research: geopolitics, Russian political doctrines, the Eurasian area in international relations and social policy.

References

Arrow K., Social Choice and Individual Values, New Haven-London 2012.

Bäcker R. et al., Metodologia badań politologicznych, Toruń 2016.

Bradley R., “Decision Theory. A Formal Philosophical Introduction,” in S.O. Hansson, V.F. Hendricks (eds), Introduction to Formal Philosophy, Cham 2018, pp. 1-42.

Cartlidge J., “Lyotard, The Differend, and the Philosophy of Deep Disagreement,” penultimate draft, at https://philpapers.org/archive/CARLTD-22.pdf. Ultimate publication: Synthese, vol. 200, art. no. 359 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-022-03841-5.

Council for Economic Advisers, Discounting for Public Policy. Theory and Recent Evidence on the Merits of Updating the Discount Rate, issue brief, January 2017, at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/pagefiles/201701_cea_discounting_issue_brief.pdf.

Cox R.T., “Probability, Frequency, and Reasonable Expectation,” American Journal of Physics, vol 14, no. 1 (1946), pp. 1-13, https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1990764.

Downs A., An Economic Theory of Democracy, New York 1957.

Durning D.W., Brown S.R., “Q Methodology and Decision Making,” in G. Morçöl (ed.), Handbook of Decision Making, New York 2007, pp. 537-563.

Embrey I.P., “States of Nature and States of Mind. A Generalized Theory of Decision‑Making,” Theory and Decision, vol. 88 (2020), рр. 5-35, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-019-09705-8.

Farmer C.L., “Uncertainty Quantification and Optimal Decisions,” The Royal Society Publishing, vol. 473, no. 2200 (2017), https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2017.0115.

French S., “Cynefin. Uncertainty, Small Worlds and Scenarios,” Journal of the Operational Research Society, vol. 66, no. 10 (2015), https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.2015.21.

Fricker M., Epistemic Injustice. Power and the Ethics of Knowing, Oxford 2007.

Gallhofer I.M., Saris W., Foreign Policy Decision-Making. A Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Political Argumentation, Westward 1996.

Hansson S.O., Decision Theory. A Brief Introduction, Stockholm 1994.

Heinelt H., Challenges to Political Decision-Making. Dealing with Information Overload, Ignorance and Contested Knowledge, Routledge 2020.

Holska A., “Teorie podejmowania decyzji,” in K. Klincewicz (ed.), Zarządzanie, organizacje i organizowanie. Przegląd perspektyw teoretycznych, Warszawa 2016, pp. 139-252.

Inglis J., “Admissible Decision Rules for the Compound Decision Problem. The Two-Action Two-State Case,” The Annals of Statistics, vol. 7, no. 5 (1979), pp. 1127-1135, https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176344795.

Kashyap R., “The Uncertainty Principle of the Social Sciences,” 2 January 2014, p. 1-39, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2424350.

Kooiman J., Jentoft S., “Meta-Governance. Values, Norms and Principles, and the Making of Hard Choices,” Public Administration, vol. 87, no. 4 (2009), pp. 818-836, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2009.01780.x.

Lagewaard T.J., “Epistemic Injustice and Deepened Disagreement,” Philosophical Studies, vol. 178 (2021), pp. 1571-1592, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-020-01496-x.

Newell R.G., Pizer W.A., “Discounting the Distant Future. How Much do Uncertain Rates Increase Valuations?,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, vol. 46, no. 1 (2003), pp. 52-71, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0095-0696(02)00031-1.

Nowak E., “Metodologiczne problemy badania zależności pomiędzy agendą medialną, publiczną i polityczną,” Annales Universitatis Marie Curie-Skłodowska, sectio K, vol. 20, no. 2 (2013), pp. 187-206, https://doi.org/10.2478/v10226-012-0046-2.

Peterson M., An Introduction to Decision Theory, Cambridge 2022.

Parmigiani G., Inoue L.Y., Lopes H.F., Decision Theory. Principles and Approaches, Newark 2009.

Pietraś Z.J., Teoria gier jako sposób analizy procesów podejmowania decyzji politycznych, Lublin 1997.

Ríos S. (ed.), Decision Theory and Decision Analysis. Trends and Challenges, Dordrecht 1994.

Roman T.E., Cleary S., McIntyre D., “Exploring the Functioning of Decision Space. A Review of the Available Health Systems Literature,” International Journal of Health Policy and Management, vol. 6, no. 7 (2017), pp. 365-376, https://doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2017.26.

Rose M., Why Culture Matters Most, Oxford 2018.

Simon Н.A., Administrative Behavior. A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization, New York 1957.

Sklair L., “Transcending the Impasse. Metatheory, Theory and Empirical Research in the Sociology of Development and Underdevelopment,” World Development, vol. 16, no. 6 (1988), pp. 697-709, https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(88)90176-3.

Steele K., Stefánsson H.O., “Decision Theory”, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Stanford-Palo Alto, at https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/decision-theory/.

Downloads

Published

21-10-2025

How to Cite

“Decision Analysis In Political Science: The Problem With The Uncertainty Principle”. 2025. Politeja 22 (4(98): 173-88. https://doi.org/10.12797/Politeja.22.2025.98.09.

Similar Articles

1-10 of 1012

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.