Good and bad justifications of analytical modelling

Robert Sugden

Journal of Economic Methodology, 2024, vol. 31, issue 4, 209-219

Abstract: Gilboa, Postlewaite, Samuelson and Schmeidler (2022, Economic theories and their dueling interpretations. Journal of Economic Methodology, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2022.2142270; henceforth GPSS) give a ‘sociological’ account of various ways in which economists claim to find value in ‘analytical’ models – i.e. models that investigate formal relationships between concepts without deriving substantive empirical or normative conclusions. In this paper, I argue that some of the claims that GPSS report economists as making are defensible, but that others are used in support of modelling strategies that have little or no scientific value.

Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/1350178X.2023.2275584 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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:taf:jecmet:v:31:y:2024:i:4:p:209-219

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RJEC20

DOI: 10.1080/1350178X.2023.2275584

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Economic Methodology is currently edited by John Davis and D Wade Hands

More articles in Journal of Economic Methodology from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().