IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/osloec/2002_021.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Duhem-Quine thesis and experimental economics: A reinterpretation

Author

Listed:
  • Søberg, Morten

    (Statistics Norway)

Abstract

The Duhem-Quine thesis asserts that any empirical evaluation of a theory is in fact a composite test of several interconnected hypotheses. Recalcitrant evidence signals falsity within the conjunction of hypotheses, but logic alone cannot pinpoint the individual element(s) inside the theoretical cluster responsible for a false prediction. This paper considers the relevance of the Duhem-Quine thesis for experimental economics. A starting point is to detail how laboratory evaluations of economic hypotheses constitute composite tests. Another aim is to scrutinize the strategy of conducting a series of experiments in order to hem in the source(s) of disconfirmative evidence. A Bayesian approach is employed to argue that reproducing experiments is not necessarily useful in terms of identifying correct causes of recalcitrant data.

Suggested Citation

  • Søberg, Morten, 2003. "The Duhem-Quine thesis and experimental economics: A reinterpretation," Memorandum 21/2002, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:hhs:osloec:2002_021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sv.uio.no/econ/english/research/unpublished-works/working-papers/pdf-files/2002/Memo-21-2002.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John B. Davis & D. W. Hands & Uskali Mäki (ed.), 1998. "The Handbook of Economic Methodology," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 741.
    2. Smith, Vernon L, 1982. "Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Science," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 923-955, December.
    3. Nancy Cartwright, 1991. "Replicability, Reproducibility, and Robustness: Comments on Harry Collins," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 143-155, Spring.
    4. 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.
    5. Chris Starmer, 1999. "Experiments in economics: should we trust the dismal scientists in white coats?," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 1-30.
    6. Vernon L. Smith, 1964. "Effect of Market Organization on Competitive Equilibrium," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 78(2), pages 181-201.
    7. Sawyer, K. R. & Beed, Clive & Sankey, H., 1997. "Underdetermination in Economics. The Duhem-Quine Thesis," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 1-23, April.
    8. B.J. Heijdra & A.D. Lowenberg, 1986. "Duhem-Quine, Lakatos and Research Programmes in Economics," Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, , vol. 1(3), pages 175-187, April.
    9. Smith, Vernon L, 1989. "Theory, Experiment and Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 151-169, Winter.
    10. Hausman,Daniel M., 1992. "The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521415019, December.
    11. Roth, Alvin E, 1994. "Lets Keep the Con out of Experimental Econ.: A Methodological Note," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 279-289.
    12. Hausman,Daniel M., 1992. "The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521425230, December.
    13. Binmore, Ken, 1999. "Why Experiment in Economics?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(453), pages 16-24, February.
    14. Vernon L. Smith, 1994. "Economics in the Laboratory," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 113-131, Winter.
    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. Morten Søberg, 2002. "The Duhem-Quine thesis and experimental economics. A reinterpretation," Discussion Papers 329, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    2. Dorian Jullien & Nicolas Vallois, 2014. "A probabilistic ghost in the experimental machine," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 232-250, September.
    3. Francesco Guala & Andrea Salanti, 2002. "On the Robustness of Economic Models," Working Papers (-2012) 0208, University of Bergamo, Department of Economics.
    4. Irene van Staveren, 2012. "An Evolutionary Efficiency Alternative to the Notion of Pareto Efficiency," Economic Thought, World Economics Association, vol. 1(1), pages 1-6, July.
    5. van den Hauwe, Ludwig, 2007. "Did F. A. Hayek Embrace Popperian Falsificationism? A Critical Comment About Certain Theses of Popper, Duhem and Austrian Methodology," MPRA Paper 6067, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Baboo M Nowbutsing, 2012. "Experiments in International Economics," Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, AMH International, vol. 4(2), pages 75-86.
    7. Fiore, Annamaria, 2009. "Experimental Economics: Some Methodological Notes," MPRA Paper 12498, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Robin Cubitt, 2005. "Experiments and the domain of economic theory," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 197-210.
    9. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2011. "Economic Models as Analogies," PIER Working Paper Archive 12-001, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    10. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2014. "A Model of Modeling," PIER Working Paper Archive 14-026, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    11. Bosley, Stacie, 2016. "Student-crafted experiments “from the ground up”," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 1-7.
    12. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano, 2021. "Microfoundations, behaviour, and evolution: Evidence from experiments," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 372-385.
    13. 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.
    14. Marcel Boumans & Mary Morgan, 2002. "Ceteris paribus conditions: materiality and the application of economic theories," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 11-26.
    15. Guilhem Lecouteux, 2013. "Reconciling behavioural and neoclassical economics," Working Papers hal-00819763, HAL.
    16. Etchart-Vincent, Nathalie, 2007. "Expérimentation de laboratoire et économie : contre quelques idées reçues et faux problèmes," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 83(1), pages 91-116, mars.
    17. I. Gilboa & A. Postlewaite & L. Samuelson & D. Schmeidler, 2015. "Economic models as analogies," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 4.
    18. Gérard Charreaux, 2008. "La recherche en finance d’entreprise:quel positionnement méthodologique ?," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 11(Special), pages 237-290, June.
    19. Scott Scheall, 2017. "What is extreme about Mises’s extreme apriorism?," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 226-249, July.
    20. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2018. "Economics: Between Prediction And Criticism," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 59(2), pages 367-390, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Experimental economics; methodology; Duhem-Quine thesis;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology
    • C90 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - General

    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:hhs:osloec:2002_021. 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: Mari Strønstad Øverås (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/souiono.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.