IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/erh/journl/v12y2020i1p50-74.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Models and Reality: How Did Models Divorced from Reality Become Epistemologically Acceptable?

Author

Listed:
  • Asad Zaman

    (Professor of Economics, Former Vice Chancellor, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, Islamabad, Pakistan)

  • Taseer Salahuddin

    (Assistant Professor of Economics, Government Sadiq College Women University, Bahawalpur, Pakistan)

Abstract

This is an introductory article which explains the importance of explicit consideration and modeling of causality, contrary to current econometric practice, in order to use data set for extraction of meaningful information. One of the easiest to understand approaches to causality is via Simpson’s paradox. We will use this paradox, framed in different real-world contexts, to provide an introduction to basic concepts of causality.

Suggested Citation

  • Asad Zaman & Taseer Salahuddin, 2020. "Models and Reality: How Did Models Divorced from Reality Become Epistemologically Acceptable?," International Econometric Review (IER), Econometric Research Association, vol. 12(1), pages 50-74, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:erh:journl:v:12:y:2020:i:1:p:50-74
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.era.org.tr/makaleler/110120.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Olivier Blanchard, 2016. "Do DSGE Models Have a Future?," Policy Briefs PB16-11, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    2. Julian Reiss, 2012. "The explanation paradox," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 43-62, March.
    3. Mehmet Karacuka & Asad Zaman, 2012. "The empirical evidence against neoclassical utility theory: a review of the literature," International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(4), pages 366-414.
    4. Asad Zaman, 2010. "Causal Relations via Econometrics," International Econometric Review (IER), Econometric Research Association, vol. 2(1), pages 36-56, April.
    5. Asad Zaman, 2015. "Deification of science and its disastrous consequences," International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(2), pages 181-197.
    6. Asad Zaman, 2012. "Methodological Mistakes and Econometric Consequences," International Econometric Review (IER), Econometric Research Association, vol. 4(2), pages 99-122, September.
    7. Asad Zaman, 2017. "Lessons in Econometric Methodology: The Axiom of Correct Specification," International Econometric Review (IER), Econometric Research Association, vol. 9(2), pages 50-68, September.
    8. George W. Evans & Seppo Honkapohja, 2005. "An Interview with Thomas J. Sargent," CESifo Working Paper Series 1434, CESifo.
    9. Hausman,Daniel & McPherson,Michael & Satz,Debra, 2016. "Economic Analysis, Moral Philosophy, and Public Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781316610886, January.
    10. Morgan,Mary S., 2012. "The World in the Model," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107002975, January.
    11. Morgan,Mary S., 2012. "The World in the Model," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521176194, January.
    12. Bergmann Barbara R, 2007. "Needed: A New Empiricism," The Economists' Voice, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 1-4, March.
    13. Cooter, Robert & Rappoport, Peter, 1984. "Were the Ordinalists Wrong about Welfare Economics?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 22(2), pages 507-530, June.
    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. Asad Zaman, 2020. "New Directions in Macroeconomics," International Econometric Review (IER), Econometric Research Association, vol. 12(1), pages 1-23, April.

    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. Nicolas Brisset, 2018. "Models as speech acts: the telling case of financial models," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 21-41, January.
    2. Asad Zaman, 2021. "Islamic Alternatives to the Secular Morality Embedded in Modern Economics البدائل الإسلامية للأخلاقيات العلمانية المُتضمنة في الاقتصاد الحديث," Journal of King Abdulaziz University: Islamic Economics, King Abdulaziz University, Islamic Economics Institute., vol. 34(2), pages 83-100, July.
    3. Arthur Brackmann Netto, 2017. "The Double Edge of Case-Studies: A Frame-Based Definition of Economic Models," Working Papers, Department of Economics 2017_21, University of São Paulo (FEA-USP).
    4. Peter Rodenburg, 2016. "How Full is Full Employment?How Tools and Not Theory Explained Full Employment," HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT AND POLICY, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2016(2), pages 5-25.
    5. Asad Zaman, 2014. "An Islamic Approach to Humanities مقاربة إسلامية للعلوم الإنسانية," Journal of King Abdulaziz University: Islamic Economics, King Abdulaziz University, Islamic Economics Institute., vol. 27(2), pages 3-28, July.
    6. Morgan, Mary S., 2020. "Inducing visibility and visual deduction," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103540, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Dorin, Bruno & Joly, Pierre-Benoît, 2020. "Modelling world agriculture as a learning machine? From mainstream models to Agribiom 1.0," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    8. Sachie Mizohata & Raynald Jadoul, 2013. "Towards International and Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration for the Measurements of Quality of Life," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 111(3), pages 683-708, May.
    9. Gene Callahan & Andreas Hoffmann, 2017. "Two-Population Social Cycle Theories," Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, in: Including a Symposium on New Directions in Sraffa Scholarship, volume 35, pages 303-321, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    10. Michael McLure & Aldo Montesano, 2020. "Extending Edgeworth: Labour Exchange and Production," Economics Discussion / Working Papers 20-08, The University of Western Australia, Department of Economics.
    11. Ramzi Mabsout, 2018. "The Backward Induction Controversy as a Metaphorical Problem," Economic Thought, World Economics Association, vol. 7(1), pages 24-49, March.
    12. Khamdamov, T., 2022. "A brief overview of the evolution of computer simulations in economic research," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 54(2), pages 189-207.
    13. Łukasz Hard, 2014. "Models of Mechanisms and their Role in Building Economic Explanations," Ekonomia journal, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw, vol. 37.
    14. Judy L Klein, 2015. "The Cold War Hot House for Modeling Strategies at the Carnegie Institute of Technology," Working Papers Series 19, Institute for New Economic Thinking.
    15. Ryan Rumble & Vincent Mangematin, 2015. "Business Model Implementation: The Antecedents of Multi-Sidedness," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-01183388, HAL.
    16. Nicola Giocoli, 2016. "Truth or precision? Some reflections on the economists’ failure to predict the financial crisis," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 29(4), pages 371-386, December.
    17. Charles Baden-Fuller & Vincent Mangematin, 2015. "Business Models and Modelling Business Models," Post-Print hal-01183386, HAL.
    18. Philipp Robinson Rössner, 2019. "Martin Luther and the making of the modern economic mind," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 66(3), pages 233-248, September.
    19. Mohammad Hajigholizadeh & Assefa M. Melesse & Hector R. Fuentes, 2018. "Erosion and Sediment Transport Modelling in Shallow Waters: A Review on Approaches, Models and Applications," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-24, March.
    20. John Rust, 2014. "The Limits of Inference with Theory: A Review of Wolpin (2013)," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 52(3), pages 820-850, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Simpson's Paradox; Causality; Econometrics; Confounders; Mediators.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C0 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General
    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General

    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:erh:journl:v:12:y:2020:i:1:p:50-74. 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: M. F. Cosar (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eratrea.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.