IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eej/eeconj/v17y1991i1p61-71.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Scientific View of Economic Data Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Cornelis A. Los

    (Netherlands Chamber of Commerce in the US)

Abstract

Identification of systems from empirical data is a fundamental problem of economic science. In 1982 Leontief testified that Haavelmo's statistical approach to this problem has not advanced an objective understanding of economic systems. The question is: why? The standard presumptions of econometrics, e.g. that the system (" model") is known before the data are analyzed, are unscientific. They can be shown to imply that scientific evidence will be ignored. The results depend on these prejudices and not on the data, as is illustrated by a detailed example for Wall Street's investment advisory practice. However, an objective identification method, based on the recently discovered Kalman Theorem, exists and leads to surprising results.

Suggested Citation

  • Cornelis A. Los, 1991. "A Scientific View of Economic Data Analysis," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 61-71, Jan-Mar.
    • Handle: RePEc:eej:eeconj:v:17:y:1991:i:1:p:61-71
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://web.holycross.edu/RePEc/eej/Archive/Volume17/V17N1P61_71.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cornelis A. Los, 1986. "Quality control of empirical econometrics: a status report," Research Paper 8606, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    2. McCloskey, Donald N, 1985. "The Loss Function Has Been Mislaid: The Rhetoric of Significance Tests," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 201-205, May.
    3. Worswick, G D N, 1972. "Is Progress in Economic Science Possible?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 82(325), pages 73-86, March.
    4. Christ, Carl F, 1983. "The Founding of the Econometric Society and Econometrica," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(1), pages 3-6, January.
    5. repec:bla:econom:v:47:y:1980:i:188:p:387-406 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Mayer, Thomas, 1980. "Economics as a Hard Science: Realistic Goal or Wishful Thinking?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 18(2), pages 165-178, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cornelis A. Los, 2005. "Were Cobb and Douglas Prejudiced? A Critical Re-analysis of their 1928 Production Model Identification," Econometrics 0502013, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Los, Cornelis A., 1999. "Galton's Error and the under-representation of systematic risk," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 23(12), pages 1793-1829, December.
    3. Cornelis A. Los, 2000. "Visualization of Chaos for Finance Majors," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2000-07, University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.
    4. Cornelis A. Los, 2004. "Measuring Financial Cash Flow and Term Structure Dynamics," Finance 0409046, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Los, Cornelis A. & Tungsong, Satjaporn, 2008. "Investment Model Uncertainty and Fair Pricing," MPRA Paper 8859, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. S. J. Kamath & K. C. Jensen & R. E. Bennett, 1991. "A Counter-Counter Critique: A Reply," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 17(4), pages 535-541, Oct-Dec.
    2. Petrick, Martin, 2004. "Can Econometric Analysis Make (Agricultural) Economics A Hard Science? Critical Remarks And Implications For Economic Methodology," IAMO Discussion Papers 14911, Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO).
    3. Marc Poitras, 2004. "The Impact of Macroeconomic Announcements on Stock Prices: In Search of State Dependence," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 70(3), pages 549-565, January.
    4. Andrew M. Isserman, 1993. "Lost In Space? On The History, Status, And Future Of Regional Science (Presidential Address, April 4, 1992)," The Review of Regional Studies, Southern Regional Science Association, vol. 23(1), pages 1-50, Summer.
    5. Chris Starmer, 1999. "Experiments in economics: should we trust the dismal scientists in white coats?," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 1-30.
    6. Thomas Mayer, 2012. "Ziliak and McCloskey's Criticisms of Significance Tests: An Assessment," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 9(3), pages 256-297, September.
    7. Peter Lambert & Thor Thoresen, 2009. "Base independence in the analysis of tax policy effects: with an application to Norway 1992–2004," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 16(2), pages 219-252, April.
    8. Jac C. Heckelman, 2017. "Tullock on the organization of scientific inquiry," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 1-17, March.
    9. Parcell, Joe L. & Kastens, Terry L. & Dhuyvetter, Kevin C. & Schroeder, Ted C., 2000. "Agricultural Economists' Effectiveness in Reporting and Conveying Research Procedures and Results," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(2), pages 173-182, October.
    10. Günther Rehme, 2011. "Endogenous Policy And Cross‐Country Growth Empirics," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 58(2), pages 262-296, May.
    11. repec:lan:wpaper:470 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Stephen T. Ziliak & Deirdre N. McCloskey, 2013. "We Agree That Statistical Significance Proves Essentially Nothing: A Rejoinder to Thomas Mayer," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 10(1), pages 97-107, January.
    13. Kevin D. Hoover & Stephen J. Perez, 1999. "Data mining reconsidered: encompassing and the general-to-specific approach to specification search," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 2(2), pages 167-191.
    14. Kenneth J. Button, 1981. "The Economic Analysis of Economic Literature: A Survey," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 25(2), pages 36-43, October.
    15. Gallardo, R. Karina & Olanie, Aaron & Ordóñez, Rita & Ostrom, Ostrom, 2015. "The Use of Electronic Payment Machines at Farmers Markets: Results from a Choice Experiment Study," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 18(1), pages 1-26, February.
    16. Raymond Hubbard & Daniel E. Vetter, 1992. "The Publication Incidence of Replications and Critical Commentary in Economics," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 36(1), pages 29-34, March.
    17. Harrington, David, 2018. "Constraining Rivals: The Effect of State-Mandated Facility Requirements on the Locations and Sizes of Funeral Homes," Working Papers 06958, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.
    18. Christian Bjørnskov & Niklas Potrafke, 2012. "Political Ideology and Economic Freedom Across Canadian Provinces," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 143-166.
    19. Adrian C. Darnell, 1994. "A Dictionary Of Econometrics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 118.
    20. Black, Bernard & Hollingsworth, Alex & Nunes, Letícia & Simon, Kosali, 2022. "Simulated power analyses for observational studies: An application to the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    21. Slavica Manic, PhD, 2014. "Has Economics Lost Its Own Identity?," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 4(9), pages 1190-1200, September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C50 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - General
    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology

    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:eej:eeconj:v:17:y:1991:i:1:p:61-71. 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: Victor Matheson, College of the Holy Cross (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eeaa1ea.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.