IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/soecon/v65y1999i3p603-610.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Teaching Economics with Classroom Experiments: A Symposium

Author

Listed:
  • Charles A. Holt

Abstract

Classroom experiments are effective because students are placed directly into the economic environments being studied. The papers in this special section span diverse applications, for example, speculation and multiple markets, coordination and voting games, and a simple macroeconomy. All experiments can be run with simple props, such as ordinary playing cards. After participating, students bring firsthand experience to the discussion to enhance the effectiveness of the Socratic method. In small classes, these exercises also enable bright undergraduates to run the experiments on their own classmates and to lead the ensuing discussions, creating a special teaching/learning environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Charles A. Holt, 1999. "Teaching Economics with Classroom Experiments: A Symposium," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(3), pages 603-610, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:soecon:v:65:y:1999:i:3:p:603-610
    DOI: 10.1002/j.2325-8012.1999.tb00180.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2325-8012.1999.tb00180.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/j.2325-8012.1999.tb00180.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sheryl B. Ball & Charles A. Holt, 1998. "Classroom Games: Speculation and Bubbles in an Asset Market," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(1), pages 207-218, Winter.
    2. Davis, Douglas D. & Holt, Charles a., 1993. "Experimental economics: Methods, problems and promise," Estudios Económicos, El Colegio de México, Centro de Estudios Económicos, vol. 8(2), pages 179-212.
    3. Vernon L. Smith, 1962. "An Experimental Study of Competitive Market Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70, pages 322-322.
    4. Ochs Jack, 1995. "Games with Unique, Mixed Strategy Equilibria: An Experimental Study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 202-217, July.
    5. Charles A. Holt, 1996. "Classroom Games: Trading in a Pit Market," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 193-203, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Matthew C. Rousu & Jay R. Corrigan & David Harris & Jill K. Hayter & Scott Houser & Becky A. Lafrancois & Olugbenga Onafowora & Gregory Colson & Adam Hoffer, 2015. "Do Monetary Incentives Matter in Classroom Experiments? Effects on Course Performance," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(4), pages 341-349, October.
    2. Mary H. Lesser, 2022. "Behavioral Economics in the First-Year Experience," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 67(1), pages 106-115, March.
    3. Raboy, David G., 2017. "An introductory microeconomics in-class experiment to reinforce the marginal utility/price maximization rule and the integration of modern theory," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 36-49.
    4. Don J. Webber & Andrew Mearman, 2012. "Students’ perceptions of economics: identifying demand for further study," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(9), pages 1121-1132, March.
    5. David L. Dickinson, 2006. "Cash or Credit? The importance of reward medium and experiment timing in classroom preferences for fairness," Working Papers 06-12, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    6. Hannes Wallimann & Silvio Sticher, 2024. "How to Use Data Science in Economics -- a Classroom Game Based on Cartel Detection," Papers 2401.14757, arXiv.org.
    7. Robert Rebelein & Evsen Turkay, 2016. "When do first-movers have an advantage? A Stackelberg classroom experiment," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(3), pages 226-240, July.
    8. Coda Moscarola, Flavia & Migheli, Matteo, 2015. "Educating Children to Save: an Experimental Approach to Financial Education of Pupils in Primary Schools," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201502, University of Turin.
    9. Edward Cartwright & Anna Stepanova, 2012. "What do Students Learn from a Classroom Experiment: Not much, Unless they Write a Report on it," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 48-57, January.

    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. Sheryl B. Ball, 1998. "Research, Teaching, and Practice in Experimental Economics: A Progress Report and Review," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(3), pages 772-779, January.
    2. Grace Finley & Charles Holt & Emily Snow, 2019. "The welfare costs of price controls and rent seeking in a class experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(3), pages 753-771, September.
    3. Giuseppe Attanasi & Samuele Centorrino & Elena Manzoni, 2020. "Zero-Intelligence vs. Human Agents: An Experimental Analysis of the Efficiency of Double Auctions and Over-the-Counter Markets of Varying Sizes," Working Papers 05/2020, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    4. Jonathan Guest, 2015. "Reflections on ten years of using economics games and experiments in teaching," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1115619-111, December.
    5. Haoran He & Yefeng Chen, 2021. "Auction mechanisms for allocating subsidies for carbon emissions reduction: an experimental investigation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(2), pages 387-430, August.
    6. Charles A. Holt, 2003. "Economic Science: An Experimental Approach for Teaching and Research," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 69(4), pages 754-771, April.
    7. Noussair, C.N. & Powell, O.R., 2008. "Peaks and Valleys : Experimental Asset Markets With Non-Monotonic Fundamentals," Other publications TiSEM 9be9b88a-9251-4921-a913-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Tai, Chung-Ching & Chen, Shu-Heng & Yang, Lee-Xieng, 2018. "Cognitive ability and earnings performance: Evidence from double auction market experiments," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 409-440.
    9. Brandts, Jordi & Riedl, Arno, 2020. "Market interaction and efficient cooperation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    10. Katerina Sherstyuk & Krit Phankitnirundorn & Michael J. Roberts, 2021. "Randomized double auctions: gains from trade, trader roles, and price discovery," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1325-1364, December.
    11. Alex Richardson & Shirley Gregor & Richard Heaney, 2012. "Using decision support to manage the influence of cognitive abilities on share trading performance," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 37(3), pages 523-541, December.
    12. Croson, Rachel & Gächter, Simon, 2010. "The science of experimental economics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 122-131, January.
    13. Kirstein Roland & Schmidtchen Dieter, 2002. "Eigennutz als Triebfeder des Wohlstands - die invisible hand im Hörsaal-Experiment sichtbar gemacht," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 53(1), pages 227-240, January.
    14. Giuseppe Attanasi & Kene Boun My & Andrea Guido & Mathieu Lefevbre, 2019. "Controlling Monopoly Power in a Classroom Double-Auction Market Experiment," Working Papers of BETA 2019-08, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    15. Andreas Park, 2010. "Experiential Learning of the Efficient Market Hypothesis: Two Trading Games," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(4), pages 353-369, September.
    16. Inoua, Sabiou M. & Smith, Vernon L., 2023. "A classical model of speculative asset price dynamics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    17. Vernon L. Smith, 2020. "Causal versus Consequential Motives in Mental Models of Agent Social and Economic Action: Experiments, and the Neoclassical Diversion in Economics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(3), pages 341-370, August.
    18. Attanasi, Giuseppe & Centorrino, Samuele & Moscati, Ivan, 2016. "Over-the-counter markets vs. double auctions: A comparative experimental study," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 22-35.
    19. Giuseppe Attanasi & Kene Boun My & Andrea Guido & Mathieu Lefebvre, 2021. "Controlling monopoly power in a double‐auction market experiment," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 23(5), pages 1074-1101, October.
    20. Arthur Schram, 2016. "Gordon Tullock and experimental public choice," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 214-226, June.

    More about this item

    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:wly:soecon:v:65:y:1999:i:3:p:603-610. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2325-8012 .

    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.