Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T19:13:58.886Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Intention isn't indivisible

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 August 2019

George Ainslie  and
Barbara Gault
George Ainslie
Affiliation:
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Coatesville, PA 19320 and Temple Medical Collegeainslie@coatesville.va.gov.
Barbara Gault
Affiliation:
Psychology Department, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104 gault@cattell.psych.upenn.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An intertemporal bargaining model of commitment does not entail the interaction of parts within the person as Rachlin claims, and is needed to explain properties of “ordinary” self-control that his molar generalization model does not predict.

Type
Continuing Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , June 1997 , pp. 365 - 366
Copyright
1997 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.)