IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fth/caldav/94-04.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Why Does Mothodology Matter for Economics? A Review Article

Author

Listed:
  • Hoover, K.D.

Abstract

In the context of reviewing some of the important recent literature on the methodology of economics, this article argues for the continuity of economics, economic methodology, and philosophy against the proposition maintained by some so-called pragmatists and the rhetoric program that economics is sui generis and should be immune to criticism rooted in related disciplines. It is argued that, since methodological considerations are unavoidable, effort should be directed to good methodology. The credentials of economics as a somewhat successful, empirical science are defended. Copyright 1995 by Royal Economic Society.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Hoover, K.D., 1994. "Why Does Mothodology Matter for Economics? A Review Article," Papers 94-04, California Davis - Institute of Governmental Affairs.
    • Handle: RePEc:fth:caldav:94-04
    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.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. Alejandro Diaz-Bautista, 2005. "La metodología de la investigación en la Economía Aplicada; The Research Methodology in Applied Economics," Method and Hist of Econ Thought 0509008, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Tacconi, Luca, 1998. "Scientific methodology for ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 91-105, October.
    4. Mathias KUEPIE & Eric Patrick FEUBI PAMEN, 2017. "An Application of the Alkire-Foster’s Multidimensional Poverty Index to Data from Madagascar: Taking Into Account the Dimensions of Employment and Gender Inequality," Working Paper 6ca04615-044d-41a0-8737-9, Agence française de développement.
    5. Uskali Maki, 1994. "Methodology might matter, but Weintraub's meta-Methodology shouldn't," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 215-232.
    6. Stavros A. DRAKOPOULOS, 2016. "Economic crisis, economic methodology and the scientific ideal of physics," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 10(1), pages 28-57, November.
    7. 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.
    8. Kevin D. Hoover, "undated". "Econometrics And Reality," Department of Economics 97-28, California Davis - Department of Economics.
    9. Mullen, John D., 1996. "Why Economists and Scientists Find Cooperation Costly," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(02), pages 1-9, August.
    10. Drakopoulos, Stavros A., 2014. "Mainstream Aversion to Economic Methodology and the Scientific Ideal of Physics," MPRA Paper 57222, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Drakopoulos, Stavros A., 2014. "Mathematical Psychics and Hydraulics: The Methodological Influence of Edgeworth and Fisher," MPRA Paper 52981, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    methodology;

    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:fth:caldav:94-04. 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: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.