IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fep/journl/v3y1990i1p72-76.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Thirteen theses on progress in economic methodology

Author

Listed:
  • D. Wade Hands

    (University of Puget Sound)

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • D. Wade Hands, 1990. "Thirteen theses on progress in economic methodology," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 72-76, Spring.
    • Handle: RePEc:fep:journl:v:3:y:1990:i:1:p:72-76
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://taloustieteellinenyhdistys.fi/images/stories/fep/f1990_1h.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cross, Rodney, 1982. "The Duhem-Quine Thesis, Lakatos and the Appraisal of Theories in Macroeconomics," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(366), pages 320-340, June.
    2. Boland, Lawrence A, 1981. "On the Futility of Criticizing the Neoclassical Maximization Hypothesis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(5), pages 1031-1036, December.
    3. repec:bla:kyklos:v:34:y:1981:i:3:p:377-87 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Andrea Salanti, 1987. "Falsificationism and Fallibilism as Epistemic Foundations of Economics: A Critical View," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(3), pages 368-392, August.
    5. Douglas W. Hands, 1985. "Second Thoughts on Lakatos," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 1-16, Spring.
    6. repec:bla:econom:v:47:y:1980:i:188:p:387-406 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Bruce J. Caldwell, 1990. "Does methodology matter? : how should it be practiced?," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 64-71, Spring.
    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. repec:hal:journl:dumas-00906285 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. 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.

    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. Andrea Salanti, 1994. "On the Lakatosian apple of discord in the history and methodology of economics," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 7(1), pages 30-41, Spring.
    2. Arne HEISE, 2020. "Comparing economic theories or: pluralism in economics and the need for a comparative approach to scientific research programmes," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 13(2), pages 162-184, November.
    3. Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 2013. "Dr Blaug's diagnosis: is economics sick?," Chapters, in: Marcel Boumans & Matthias Klaes (ed.), Mark Blaug: Rebel with Many Causes, chapter 8, pages 78-97, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Keuzenkamp, Hugo A. & Barten, Anton P., 1995. "Rejection without falsification on the history of testing the homogeneity condition in the theory of consumer demand," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 103-127, May.
    5. David F. Hendry, 2013. "Econometric Modelling: The ‘Consumption Function’ In Retrospect," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 60(5), pages 495-522, November.
    6. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    7. Clark, Stephen A., 1995. "Indecisive choice theory," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 155-170, October.
    8. Ole Røgeberg & Morten Nordberg, 2005. "A defence of absurd theories in economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 543-562.
    9. Gerald T. Healy III & Jing Ru Tan & Peter F. Orazem, 2020. "Measuring Market Power in Professional Baseball, Basketball, Football, and Hockey," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 65(2), pages 214-231, October.
    10. Eduardo Angeli, 2014. "A Importância da História do Pensamento Econômico e do pluralismo metodológico em economia a partir da perspectiva da Escola Austríaca [The importance of Economic Thought and methodological pluralism ," Nova Economia, Economics Department, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (Brazil), vol. 24(1), pages 33-50, January-A.
    11. Amitava Krishna Dutt & Peter Skott, 2006. "Keynesian Theory and the AD-AS Framework: A Reconsideration," Contributions to Economic Analysis, in: Quantitative and Empirical Analysis of Nonlinear Dynamic Macromodels, pages 149-172, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    12. John Geweke & Joel Horowitz & M. Hashem Pesaran, 2006. "Econometrics: A Bird’s Eye View," CESifo Working Paper Series 1870, CESifo.
    13. Morten Søberg, 2002. "The Duhem-Quine thesis and experimental economics. A reinterpretation," Discussion Papers 329, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    14. Eran Binenbaum, 2005. "Knight versus Herskovits: A Methodologically Charged Debate in the 1940s," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2005-08, University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.
    15. Pavel Pelikán, 2010. "The Government Economic Agenda in a Society of Unequally Rational Individuals," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(2), pages 231-255, May.
    16. Olivier Mesly & David W. Shanafelt & Nicolas Huck, 2021. "Dysfunctional Markets: A Spray of Prey Perspective," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(3), pages 797-819, July.
    17. Pessali, Huascar & Berger, Bruno, 2010. "A teoria da perspectiva e as mudanças de preferência no mainstream: um prospecto lakatoseano [Prospect theory and preference change in the mainstream of economics: a Lakatosian prospect]," MPRA Paper 26104, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Heather Anderson, 1999. "Explanations of an empirical puzzle: what can be learnt from a test of the rational expectations hypothesis?," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 31-59.
    19. Wilfred Dolfsma, 2005. "Consumption in a vacuum," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(1), pages 59-67, January.
    20. Brighton, Henry, 2020. "Statistical foundations of ecological rationality," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 14, pages 1-32.

    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:fep:journl:v:3:y:1990:i:1:p:72-76. 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: Editorial Secretary (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/talouea.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.