IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jecmet/v7y2001i2p195-210.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Three attitudes towards data mining

Author

Listed:
  • Kevin Hoover
  • Stephen Perez

Abstract

'Data mining' refers to a broad class of activities that have in common, a search over different ways to process or package data statistically or econometrically with the purpose of making the final presentation meet certain design criteria. We characterize three attitudes toward data mining: first, that it is to be avoided and, if it is engaged in, that statistical inferences must be adjusted to account for it; second, that it is inevitable and that the only results of any interest are those that transcend the variety of alternative data mined specifications (a view associated with Leamer's extreme-bounds analysis); and third, that it is essential and that the only hope we have of using econometrics to uncover true economic relationships is to be found in the intelligent mining of data. The first approach confuses considerations of sampling distribution and considerations of epistemic warrant and, reaches an unnecessarily hostile attitude toward data mining. The second approach relies on a notion of robustness that has little relationship to truth: there is no good reason to expect a true specification to be robust alternative specifications. Robustness is not, in general, a carrier of epistemic warrant. The third approach is operationalized in the general-to-specific search methodology of the LSE school of econometrics. Its success demonstrates that intelligent data mining is an important element in empirical investigation in economics.

Suggested Citation

  • Kevin Hoover & Stephen Perez, 2001. "Three attitudes towards data mining," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 195-210.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jecmet:v:7:y:2001:i:2:p:195-210
    DOI: 10.1080/13501780050045083
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13501780050045083
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13501780050045083?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hendry, D.F. & Richard, J.-F., 1987. "Recent developments in the theory of encompassing," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 1987022, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    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. Thomas Mayer, 2006. "The Empirical Significance of Econometric Models," Working Papers 620, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    2. Thomas Mayer, "undated". "Misinterpreting a Failure to Disconfirm as a Confirmation: A Recurrent Misreading of Significance Tests," Department of Economics 01-08, California Davis - Department of Economics.
    3. Kevin Hoover & Mark Siegler, 2008. "Sound and fury: McCloskey and significance testing in economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 1-37.
    4. Selva Demiralp & Kevin D. Hoover, 2003. "Searching for the Causal Structure of a Vector Autoregression," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 65(s1), pages 745-767, December.
    5. Jim Woodward, 2006. "Some varieties of robustness," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 219-240.
    6. Thomas Mayer, "undated". "Misinterpreting a Failure to Disconfirm as a Confirmation: A Recurrent Misreading of Significance Tests," Department of Economics 01-08, California Davis - Department of Economics.
    7. Hsiang-Ke Chao, 2005. "A misconception of the semantic conception of econometrics?," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 125-135.
    8. Thomas Mayer, 2009. "Honesty and Integrity in Economics," Working Papers 92, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    9. Steven Cook, 2001. "Observations on the practice of data-mining: comments on the JEM symposium," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 415-419.
    10. Harris Dellas & Kevin Hoover, 2003. "Truth and Robustness in Cross-country Growth Regressions," Working Papers 11, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    11. Christophe Schinckus, 2011. "What can econophysics contribute to financial economics?," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 58(2), pages 147-163, June.
    12. 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.

    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. Marc Lavoie & Gabriel Rodriguez & Mario Seccareccia, 2004. "Similitudes and Discrepancies in Post-Keynesian and Marxist Theories of Investment: A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation," International Review of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 127-149.
    2. Loann David Denis Desboulets, 2018. "A Review on Variable Selection in Regression Analysis," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-27, November.
    3. Berkowitz, Daniel & Pistor, Katharina & Richard, Jean-Francois, 2003. "Economic development, legality, and the transplant effect," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 165-195, February.
    4. 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.
    5. Neil R. Ericsson, 2008. "The Fragility of Sensitivity Analysis: An Encompassing Perspective," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 70(s1), pages 895-914, December.
    6. Matteo Manera, 2006. "Modelling factor demands with SEM and VAR: an empirical comparison," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 121-146, October.
    7. Pierre-André Chiappori, 1990. "La théorie du consommateur est-elle réfutable ?," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 41(6), pages 1001-1026.
    8. Hendry, David F & Ericsson, Neil R, 1991. "An Econometric Analysis of U.K. Money Demand in 'Monetary Trends in the United States and the United Kingdom' by Milton Friedman and Anna Schwartz," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(1), pages 8-38, March.
    9. David F. Hendry & Neil R. Ericsson, 1999. "Encompassing and rational expectations: How sequential corroboration can imply refutation," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 1-21.
    10. Kevin D. Hoover & Stephen J. Perez, 2004. "Truth and Robustness in Cross‐country Growth Regressions," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 66(5), pages 765-798, December.
    11. 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.
    12. Harris Dellas & Kevin Hoover, 2003. "Truth and Robustness in Cross-country Growth Regressions," Working Papers 11, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.

    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:jecmet:v:7:y:2001:i:2:p:195-210. 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/RJEC20 .

    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.