IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/canjag/v72y2024i2p199-204.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Method myopia

Author

Listed:
  • Alan P. Ker

Abstract

Method myopia is defined as theoretical rhetoric absent empirical discernment regarding flavor‐of‐the‐day econometric methodologies. This Fellows Address discusses why method myopia is pervasive, what factors contribute to the pervasiveness, why is likely it to increase, and finally, a possible remedy. To that end, incentive structures facing researchers, reviewers, and editors are considered within the life‐cycle of a typical econometric methodology. Considering our discipline is empirically driven, there are potentially large costs by using flavor‐of‐the‐day methodologies when an alternative ‐‐ possibly leading to different economic results and policy responses ‐‐ is the appropriate method. Furthermore, method myopia can notably restrict the set of research problems examined thereby creating additional, potentially large, opportunity costs. Finally, over‐selling the superiority/completeness/correctness of results from such flavor‐of‐the‐day methodologies to policy makers can not only be costly in the particular case, but can undermine the long‐term credibility of our disciplinary advice to policy makers. La myopie des méthodes est définie comme une rhétorique théorique dépourvue de discernement empirique concernant les méthodologies économétriques au goût du jour. Ce discours des boursiers explique pourquoi la myopie méthodique est omniprésente, quels facteurs contribuent à cette omniprésence, pourquoi je m'attends à ce qu'elle augmente (au moins dans un avenir proche) et un remède possible. À cette fin, les structures d'incitation auxquelles sont confrontés les chercheurs, les évaluateurs et les éditeurs sont considérées dans le cycle de vie d'une méthodologie économétrique typique. Étant donné que notre discipline est empirique, l'utilization de méthodologies à la mode lorsqu'une alternative—pouvant conduire à des résultats économiques et à des réponses politiques différents—est la méthode appropriée. En outre, la myopie des méthodes peut restreindre considérablement l'ensemble des problèmes de recherche examinés, créant ainsi des coûts d'opportunité supplémentaires, potentiellement importants. Enfin, vendre à l'excès la supériorité/l'exhaustivité/l'exactitude des résultats de ces méthodologies du moment aux décideurs politiques peut non seulement s'avérer coûteux dans un cas particulier, mais peut également miner la crédibilité à long terme de la discipline auprès des décideurs politiques.

Suggested Citation

  • Alan P. Ker, 2024. "Method myopia," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 72(2), pages 199-204, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:canjag:v:72:y:2024:i:2:p:199-204
    DOI: 10.1111/cjag.12348
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/cjag.12348
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/cjag.12348?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Angus Deaton, 2010. "Instruments, Randomization, and Learning about Development," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(2), pages 424-455, June.
    2. Alan P. Ker, 2017. "Evaluating Agricultural Economists within Colleges and Faculties of Agriculture," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 65(1), pages 5-17, March.
    3. Alberto Abadie & Susan Athey & Guido W Imbens & Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2023. "When Should You Adjust Standard Errors for Clustering?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 138(1), pages 1-35.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alberto Abadie & Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2020. "Sampling‐Based versus Design‐Based Uncertainty in Regression Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(1), pages 265-296, January.
    2. Sedlmayr, Richard & Shah, Anuj & Sulaiman, Munshi, 2020. "Cash-plus: Poverty impacts of alternative transfer-based approaches," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    3. Jeffrey D. Michler & Anna Josephson, 2022. "Recent developments in inference: practicalities for applied economics," Chapters, in: A Modern Guide to Food Economics, chapter 11, pages 235-268, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Mikel Bedayo & Gabriel Jiménez & José-Luis Peydró & Raquel Vegas, 2020. "Screening and Loan Origination Time: Lending Standards, Loan Defaults and Bank Failures," Working Papers 1215, Barcelona School of Economics.
    5. Allais, Olivier & Leroy, Pascal & Mink, Julia, 2020. "Changes in food purchases at retirement in France," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    6. Clément de Chaisemartin & Jaime Ramirez-Cuellar, 2024. "At What Level Should One Cluster Standard Errors in Paired and Small-Strata Experiments?," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 193-212, January.
    7. Tal Gross & Timothy J. Layton & Daniel Prinz, 2022. "The Liquidity Sensitivity of Healthcare Consumption: Evidence from Social Security Payments," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 4(2), pages 175-190, June.
    8. Ashish Arora & Michelle Gittelman & Sarah Kaplan & John Lynch & Will Mitchell & Nicolaj Siggelkow & Aaron K. Chatterji & Michael Findley & Nathan M. Jensen & Stephan Meier & Daniel Nielson, 2016. "Field experiments in strategy research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 116-132, January.
    9. Timothy J. Bartik & Nathan Sotherland, 2019. "Local Job Multipliers in the United States: Variation with Local Characteristics and with High-Tech Shocks," Upjohn Working Papers 19-301, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    10. Francis,David C. & Kubinec ,Robert, 2022. "Beyond Political Connections : A Measurement Model Approach to Estimating Firm-levelPolitical Influence in 41 Economies," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10119, The World Bank.
    11. Tao Kong, 2011. "Governance Quality and Economic Growth," ANU Working Papers in Economics and Econometrics 2011-537, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics.
    12. Jaschke Philipp & Sulin Sardoschau & Marco Tabellini, 2021. "Scared Straight? Threat and Assimilation of Refugees in Germany," RF Berlin - CReAM Discussion Paper Series 2136, Rockwool Foundation Berlin (RF Berlin) - Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration (CReAM).
    13. Luis Alvarez & Bruno Ferman, 2020. "Inference in Difference-in-Differences with Few Treated Units and Spatial Correlation," Papers 2006.16997, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    14. Leive, Adam, 2018. "Dying to win? Olympic Gold medals and longevity," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 193-204.
    15. Sauermann, Jan, 2015. "Worker Reciprocity and the Returns to Training: Evidence from a Field Experiment," IZA Discussion Papers 9179, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Jacobus de Hoop & Furio C. Rosati, 2014. "Cash Transfers and Child Labor," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 29(2), pages 202-234.
    17. Hanan G. Jacoby & Ghazala Mansuri, 2018. "Governing the Commons? Water and Power in Pakistan’s Indus Basin," Working Papers id:12933, eSocialSciences.
    18. Carpenter, Christopher S. & Gonzales, Gilbert & McKay, Tara & Sansone, Dario, 2020. "Effects of the Affordable Care Act Dependent Coverage Mandate on Health Insurance Coverage for Individuals in Same-Sex Couples," IZA Discussion Papers 13119, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Joo, Hailey Hayeon & Lee, Jungmin, 2018. "Encountering female politicians," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 88-122.
    20. Richard Blundell & Jack Britton & Monica Costa Dias & Eric French, 2023. "The Impact of Health on Labor Supply near Retirement," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 58(1), pages 282-334.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:canjag:v:72:y:2024:i:2:p:199-204. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caefmea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.