Weak Models, Nil Hypotheses, And Decorative Statistics

Barry O'Neill
Additional contact information
Barry O'Neill: Yale University

Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1995, vol. 39, issue 4, 731-748

Abstract: Donald Green and Ian Shapiro contend that rational choice models have made negligible contributions to the empirical study of politics. Published tests systematically violate some basic research principles, they say, and they ascribe the problem to modelers' universalist aim of explaining all human behavior. This review critiques some of the authors' principles, which seem to derive from an extreme form of Popperianism combined with norms around null hypothesis testing. Their attribution of universalism is exaggerated; what they are seeing is actually a desire to unify different selected areas, a basic goal in theoretical explanation. One advantage of rational choice models is that they frequently make precise predictions. Models that can do this offer an escape from the uninformative ritual of null hypotheses tests.

Date: 1995
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002795039004007 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:jocore:v:39:y:1995:i:4:p:731-748

DOI: 10.1177/0022002795039004007

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Conflict Resolution from Peace Science Society (International)
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().