IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aoq/ekonom/y2023i1p78-101.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experiments in Modern Economics – Expansion and Technological and Institutional Innovations in the U.S

Author

Listed:
  • Beata Woźniak-Jęchorek

Abstract

Experimental economics emerged during the mid-20th century and was created through a combination of the experimental methodology employed in psychology and new advancements in economic theory. Early studies utilizing experimental approaches were conducted on bargaining behavior, social dilemmas, individual decision-making, and market institutions, but experienced a lengthy period of underground growth prior to flourishing in the 21st century. The contemporary state of experimental economics is characterized by a surge of new data sources, the adoption of innovative measurement techniques, the implementation of underutilized experimental designs, advancements in statistical methodologies, increased discussions on robustness and generalizability, and the extensive application of experiments to various fields of study (Druckman, Green, 2021). The main aim of this paper is to outline the evolution of experimental economics, describe contemporary experimental methods, highlight the technological and institutional innovations that support experimentation, particularly in the United States, and identify the primary challenges that exist for the further development of this methodology. It is argued that experimental methods are more commonly employed in the U.S. due to factors such as access to low-cost data collection tools, institutional support, and the emphasis on interdisciplinary research.

Suggested Citation

  • Beata Woźniak-Jęchorek, 2023. "Experiments in Modern Economics – Expansion and Technological and Institutional Innovations in the U.S," Ekonomista, Polskie Towarzystwo Ekonomiczne, issue 1, pages 78-101.
  • Handle: RePEc:aoq:ekonom:y:2023:i:1:p:78-101
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ekonomista.pte.pl/pdf-161838-88676
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mullinix, Kevin J. & Leeper, Thomas J. & Druckman, James N. & Freese, Jeremy, 2015. "The Generalizability of Survey Experiments," Journal of Experimental Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 109-138, January.
    2. Joshua D. Angrist & Alan B. Krueger, 2001. "Instrumental Variables and the Search for Identification: From Supply and Demand to Natural Experiments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 69-85, Fall.
    3. David Neumark & Ian Burn & Patrick Button, 2019. "Is It Harder for Older Workers to Find Jobs? New and Improved Evidence from a Field Experiment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(2), pages 922-970.
    4. Michael J. Gilligan & Benjamin J. Pasquale & Cyrus Samii, 2014. "Civil War and Social Cohesion: Lab‐in‐the‐Field Evidence from Nepal," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(3), pages 604-619, July.
    5. John H. Kagel & Alvin E. Roth, 2016. "The Handbook of Experimental Economics, Volume 2," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, volume 2, number 10874.
    6. Nicholas Bardsley & Robin Cubitt & Graham Loomes & Peter Moffatt & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 2009. "Experimental Economics: Rethinking the Rules," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 9074.
    7. Anastasia Buyalskaya & Marcos Gallo & Colin F. Camerer, 2021. "The golden age of social science," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 118(5), pages 2002923118-, February.
    8. Alvin E. Roth, 2002. "The Economist as Engineer: Game Theory, Experimentation, and Computation as Tools for Design Economics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(4), pages 1341-1378, July.
    9. Joseph Henrich & Steve J. Heine & Ara Norenzayan, 2010. "The Weirdest People in the World?," RatSWD Working Papers 139, German Data Forum (RatSWD).
    10. Alexander Coppock & Thomas J. Leeper & Kevin J. Mullinix, 2018. "Generalizability of heterogeneous treatment effect estimates across samples," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 115(49), pages 12441-12446, December.
    11. Roth, Alvin E., 1993. "The Early History of Experimental Economics," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 184-209, October.
    12. Baert, Stijn, 2017. "Hiring Discrimination: An Overview of (Almost) All Correspondence Experiments Since 2005," IZA Discussion Papers 10738, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Coppock, Alexander, 2019. "Generalizing from Survey Experiments Conducted on Mechanical Turk: A Replication Approach," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 613-628, July.
    14. Daniel McFadden, 2017. "Stated preference methods and their applicability to environmental use and non-use valuations," Chapters, in: Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train (ed.), Contingent Valuation of Environmental Goods, chapter 6, pages 153-187, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Joshua Angrist & Alan Krueger, 2001. "Instrumental Variables and the Search for Identification: From Supply and Demand to Natural Experiments," Working Papers 834, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    16. Hainmueller, Jens & Hopkins, Daniel J. & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2014. "Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 1-30, January.
    17. David Neumark, 2018. "Experimental Research on Labor Market Discrimination," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 56(3), pages 799-866, September.
    18. Bullock, Will & Imai, Kosuke & Shapiro, Jacob N., 2011. "Statistical Analysis of Endorsement Experiments: Measuring Support for Militant Groups in Pakistan," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(4), pages 363-384.
    19. Berinsky, Adam J. & Druckman, James N. & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2021. "Publication Biases in Replication Studies," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(3), pages 370-384, July.
    20. repec:fth:prinin:455 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Robert M. Bond & Christopher J. Fariss & Jason J. Jones & Adam D. I. Kramer & Cameron Marlow & Jaime E. Settle & James H. Fowler, 2012. "A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization," Nature, Nature, vol. 489(7415), pages 295-298, September.
    22. Smith, Vernon L, 1976. "Experimental Economics: Induced Value Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(2), pages 274-279, May.
    23. Ben-Akiva, Moshe & McFadden, Daniel & Train, Kenneth, 2019. "Foundations of Stated Preference Elicitation: Consumer Behavior and Choice-based Conjoint Analysis," Foundations and Trends(R) in Econometrics, now publishers, vol. 10(1-2), pages 1-144, January.
    24. Vernon L. Smith, 1994. "Economics in the Laboratory," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 113-131, Winter.
    25. Allison J. Sovey & Donald P. Green, 2011. "Instrumental Variables Estimation in Political Science: A Readers’ Guide," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(1), pages 188-200, January.
    26. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    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. Lamberova, Natalia, 2021. "The puzzling politics of R&D: Signaling competence through risky projects," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 801-818.
    2. Dai, Zhixin & Zheng, Jiwei & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2024. "Theories of reasoning and focal point play with a matched non-student sample," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    3. Chen, Daniel L. & Schonger, Martin & Wickens, Chris, 2016. "oTree—An open-source platform for laboratory, online, and field experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 88-97.
    4. Veszteg, Róbert F. & Funaki, Yukihiko, 2018. "Monetary payoffs and utility in laboratory experiments," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 108-121.
    5. Maria Eduarda Fernandes & Marieta Valente, 2018. "When Is Green Too Rosy? Evidence from a Laboratory Market Experiment on Green Goods and Externalities," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-18, September.
    6. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano, 2021. "Microfoundations, behaviour, and evolution: Evidence from experiments," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 372-385.
    7. James Fiet & Pankaj Patel, 2008. "Entrepreneurial Discovery as Constrained, Sytematic Search," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 215-229, March.
    8. Croson, Rachel & Gächter, Simon, 2010. "The science of experimental economics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 122-131, January.
    9. Le Viet Phu, 2020. "Electricity price and residential electricity demand in Vietnam," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 22(4), pages 509-535, October.
    10. Gagnon, Nickolas & Noussair, C., 2016. "Does Reciprocity Persist Over Time?," Research Memorandum 033, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    11. Pueboobpaphan, Suthatip & Indra-Payoong, Nakorn & Opasanon, Sathaporn, 2019. "Experimental analysis of variable surcharge policy of taxi service auction," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 134-148.
    12. Boateng, Elliot & Agbola, Frank W. & Mahmood, Amir, 2021. "Foreign aid volatility and economic growth in Sub-Saharan Africa: Does institutional quality matter?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 111-127.
    13. Navarro, Noemí & Veszteg, Róbert F., 2020. "On the empirical validity of axioms in unstructured bargaining," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 117-145.
    14. Penelope Buckley & Daniel Llerena, 2022. "Nudges and peak pricing: A common pool resource energy conservation experiment," Post-Print hal-03765755, HAL.
    15. Jablonski, Ryan S. & Oliver, Steven, 2013. "The political economy of plunder: economic opportunity and modern piracy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 50451, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Tellez,Juan Fernando & Balcells,Laia, 2022. "Social Cohesion, Economic Security, and Forced Displacement in the Long-Run : Evidencefrom Rural Colombia," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10019, The World Bank.
    17. Klaus E Meyer & Arjen Witteloostuijn & Sjoerd Beugelsdijk, 2017. "What’s in a p? Reassessing best practices for conducting and reporting hypothesis-testing research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 48(5), pages 535-551, July.
    18. Ana C. Santos, 2011. "Experimental Economics," Chapters, in: John B. Davis & D. Wade Hands (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Recent Economic Methodology, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Buckley, Penelope & Llerena, Daniel, 2022. "Nudges and peak pricing: A common pool resource energy conservation experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    20. Mark Carlson & Kris James Mitchener, 2009. "Branch Banking as a Device for Discipline: Competition and Bank Survivorship during the Great Depression," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(2), pages 165-210, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    experiments; methodology; experimental economics;
    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
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments

    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:aoq:ekonom:y:2023:i:1:p:78-101. 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: Tomasz Kwarcinski (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/pteeeea.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.