IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v26y2002i2p261-267.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the scope of experiments in economics: comments on Siakantaris

Author

Listed:
  • Francesco Guala

Abstract

The problem of 'parallelism' or external validity can in principle be solved; I try to show how by means of two simple examples. I also criticise attempts to dismiss experimental economics that appeal to alleged ontological differences between the natural and the social realm. Copyright 2002, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Francesco Guala, 2002. "On the scope of experiments in economics: comments on Siakantaris," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 26(2), pages 261-267, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:26:y:2002:i:2:p:261-267
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Anna Conte & M. Vittoria Levati & Natalia Montinari, 2019. "Experience in public goods experiments," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(1), pages 65-93, February.
    2. 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.
    3. Abigail Barr & Andrew Zeitlin, 2011. "Conflict of interest as a barrier to local accountability," CSAE Working Paper Series 2011-13, Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford.
    4. Ohana, Marc, 2009. "La réciprocité sur le marché du travail : les limites du laboratoire," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 85(2), pages 239-256, juin.
    5. repec:hal:wpaper:halshs-00746617 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Zizzo, Daniel John, 2013. "Claims and confounds in economic experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 186-195.
    7. Uskali Maki, 2005. "Models are experiments, experiments are models," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 303-315.
    8. Christine Horne & Heiko Rauhut, 2013. "Using laboratory experiments to study law and crime," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 1639-1655, April.
    9. Till Feier & Jan Gogoll & Matthias Uhl, 2021. "Hiding Behind Machines: When Blame Is Shifted to Artificial Agents," Papers 2101.11465, arXiv.org.
    10. Yannick Gabuthy & Nicolas Jacquemet, 2013. "Analyse économique du droit et méthode expérimentale," Post-Print halshs-00746617, HAL.
    11. Arthur Schram, 2005. "Artificiality: The tension between internal and external validity in economic experiments," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 225-237.
    12. Stock-Homburg, Ruth, 2024. "Survey of Emotions in Human–Robot Interactions: Perspectives from Robotic Psychology on 20 Years of Research," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 149448, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    13. Daniel John Zizzo, 2012. "Inducing natural group identity: A RDP analysis," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 12-01, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    14. Karola Bastini & Rainer Kasperzak, 2013. "Erkenntnisfortschritt in der Rechnungslegung durch experimentelle Forschung? — Diskussion methodischer Grundsatzfragen anhand der Entscheidungsnützlichkeit des Performance Reporting," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 65(7), pages 622-660, December.
    15. Jefferson, Therese & Taplin, Ross, 2012. "Relational aspects of decisions to sell," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 697-704.
    16. Gunessee, Saileshsingh & Lane, Tom, 2023. "Changing perceptions about experimentation in economics: 50 years of evidence from principles textbooks," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    17. Martin Jones, 2008. "On the autonomy of experiments in economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4), pages 391-407.
    18. Saileshsingh Gunessee & Tom Lane, 2020. "Is Economics An Experimental Science? A Textbook Perspective," Discussion Papers 2020-16, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    19. Christine Horne & Heiko Rauhut, "undated". "Using Laboratory Experiments to Study Law and Crime," Working Papers CCSS-10-010, ETH Zurich, Chair of Systems Design.

    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:oup:cambje:v:26:y:2002:i:2:p:261-267. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    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.