Why economists disregard economic methodology
AbstractThis paper advances two propositions, one concerning content, the other concerning research strategy. (1) The advent of wide-spread internet publishing reduces the stifling impact of the refereeing process on the papers accepted and submitted to journals. Economics scholars are less bound to devoting a large part of their time and effort on formalisms. They have more leeway to concentrate on matters of content. This greater freedom also improves the chances of the advice and suggestions proposed by economic methodologists being put into practice. (2) Economic methodology is only able to influence the practice of economics if it takes into account the incentives to which scholars are subjected when they want to pursue an academic career and become prominent. Incentives are transmitted by institutions; it is therefore necessary for economic methodology to analyse how institutions work and how they may change in the future. An attempt has been made here to look at the publication process in economics, and the impact the internet might have on the incentives to write and to do research.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Journal of Economic Methodology.
Volume (Year): 8 (2002)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJEC20
Other versions of this item:
- A11 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Role of Economics; Role of Economists
- B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Glenn Ellison, 2000.
"Evolving Standards for Academic Publishing: A q-r Theory,"
NBER Working Papers
7805, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Glenn Ellison, 2002. "Evolving Standards for Academic Publishing: A q-r Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(5), pages 994-1034, October.
- Shaun P. Hargreaves Heap, 2001. "Methodology now!," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 95-108.
- Glenn Ellison, 2002.
"The Slowdown of the Economics Publishing Process,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(5), pages 947-993, October.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty).
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.