Paul planned to hold up a local 7-11 but changed his mind. According to rational choice theorists, this is an example of a(n) _________ decision.

In the context of rational choice theory, this situation exemplifies an involvement decision. According to rational choice theorists, individuals use a cost-benefit analysis when determining whether to engage in criminal behavior. In this instance, Paul initially contemplated the decision to rob the store but ultimately chose not to follow through after presumably weighing the potential risks and rewards.

An involvement decision refers specifically to the moment when an individual considers engaging in a criminal act but chooses not to proceed, often based on the recognition of consequences such as potential arrest, harm, or other negative outcomes. This reflects the rational choice perspective, which emphasizes that individuals make logical decisions based on their assessments of situations.

In contrast, terms like impulse are associated with spontaneous actions often lacking this calculated assessment, while irrational decisions imply a deviation from logical reasoning altogether. A deterrent would not apply here as it refers to external factors that discourage criminal behavior rather than the individual's internal decision-making process. Therefore, the choice of involvement accurately captures the essence of the decision-making process experienced by Paul in this scenario.