IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/fosoec/v30y2001i2p77-88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economists as subjects: Toward a psychology of economists

Author

Listed:
  • Wilfred Dolfsma

Abstract

Economists can reflect on their own field of research and themselves in a number of ways. The philosophy of science has long been the dominant way to reflect on the work of scientists, to be joined in more recent times by both the sociology of science and the rhetoric of science. In this paper I do not argue that these approaches are wrong, but I do argue that they should be complemented with a study of the individual scientist. A psychology of economists, in other words, is called for. One important theory in recent psychological literature (social learning/cognitive theory) is introduced as an instance to indicate what kind of suggestions concerning the reflective position of individual scientists might be derived. It would be preferable from this perspective that scientists set high standards for themselves, have an open mind to what happens in different disciplines, and set high standards by which to judge others. Then follows a discussion where some potential objections to the approach in general, or to the specific psychological theory in particular, are refuted.

Suggested Citation

  • Wilfred Dolfsma, 2001. "Economists as subjects: Toward a psychology of economists," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 77-88, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:fosoec:v:30:y:2001:i:2:p:77-88
    DOI: 10.1007/BF02828503
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF02828503
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF02828503?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nelson, Julie A., 1992. "Gender, Metaphor, and the Definition of Economics," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 103-125, April.
    2. McCloskey, Donald N, 1983. "The Rhetoric of Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 481-517, June.
    3. Robert H. Frank & Thomas Gilovich & Dennis T. Regan, 1993. "Does Studying Economics Inhibit Cooperation?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 159-171, Spring.
    4. Hausman, Daniel M, 1989. "Economic Methodology in a Nutshell," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 115-127, Spring.
    5. Esther-Mirjam Sent, 1999. "Economics of science: survey and suggestions," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 95-124.
    6. Wilfred Dolfsma, 2001. "Metaphors of Knowledge in Economics," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(1), pages 71-91.
    7. Phelps Brown, E H, 1972. "The Underdevelopment of Economics," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 82(325), pages 1-10, March.
    8. Joseph J. Cordes & Arjo Klamer & Thomas C. Leonard, 1993. "Academic Rhetoric in the Policy Arena: The Case of Capital Gains Taxation," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 459-479, Fall.
    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. Bruno S. Frey, 2000. "Was Bewirkt die Volkswirtschaftslehre?," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 1(1), pages 5-33, February.
    2. Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2003. "Pluralism in Economics: A Public Good or a Public Bad?," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 03-034/1, Tinbergen Institute, revised 18 May 2004.
    3. Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2019. "Values of Economists Matter in the Art and Science of Economics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 472-499, August.
    4. Gillian Hewitson, 2001. "A Survey of Feminist Economics," Working Papers 2001.01, School of Economics, La Trobe University.
    5. repec:dgr:rugsom:96c01 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Gebhard Kirchgässner, 2015. "Wissenschaftlicher Fortschritt in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften: Einige Bemerkungen," Schmollers Jahrbuch : Journal of Applied Social Science Studies / Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 135(2), pages 209-248.
    7. Lecq, Fieke van der, 1996. "Dualism in economic thinking : two views compared," Research Report 96C01, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    8. Swee-Hoon Chuah, 2003. "Anthropology and Economic Imperialism: The Battlefield of Culture," Occasional Papers 4, Industrial Economics Division.
    9. Turan Yay & Huseyin Tastan, 2010. "Invisible Hand in the Process of Making Economics or on the Method and Scope of Economics," Panoeconomicus, Savez ekonomista Vojvodine, Novi Sad, Serbia, vol. 57(1), pages 61-83, March.
    10. Philip R. P. Coelho & James E. McClure, 2007. "The Market for Lemmas," Working Papers 200702, Ball State University, Department of Economics, revised Apr 2007.
    11. Yalcintas, Altug, 2013. "The Oomph in economic philosophy: a bibliometric analysis of the main trends, from the 1960s to the present," MPRA Paper 44191, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Lourdes Beneria, 1999. "Globalization, Gender And The Davos Man," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(3), pages 61-83.
    13. Boldyrev, I., 2011. "Economic Methodology Today: a Review of Major Contributions," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, issue 9, pages 47-70.
    14. 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).
    15. Michael R. Hammock & P. Wesley Routon & Jay K. Walker, 2016. "The opinions of economics majors before and after learning economics," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(1), pages 76-83, January.
    16. J. Kornai., 2002. "The System Paradigm," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, vol. 4.
    17. Suzuki, Tomo, 2003. "The accounting figuration of business statistics as a foundation for the spread of economic ideas," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 65-95, January.
    18. Robison, Lindon J. & Hanson, Steven D., 1995. "Social Capital and Economic Cooperation," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 43-58, July.
    19. Graupe, Silja & Steffestun, Theresa, 2018. ""The market deals out profit and losses": Wie ökonomische Standardlehrbücher das unreflektierte Denken in Metaphern fördern," Working Paper Serie des Instituts für Ökonomie Ök-38, Hochschule für Gesellschaftsgestaltung (HfGG), Institut für Ökonomie.
    20. Gad Yair & Keith Goldstein & Nir Rotem & Anthony J. Olejniczak, 2022. "The three cultures in American science: publication productivity in physics, history and economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 2967-2980, June.
    21. Kurt Dopfer, 2013. "Economics with a Phylogenetic Signature," Papers on Economics and Evolution 2013-06, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.

    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:taf:fosoec:v:30:y:2001:i:2:p:77-88. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RFSE20 .

    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.