Lotta Lemmata: A Sour Harvest
AbstractWe quantify the increasing use of complex mathematics and show that the increase is unique to economics in the social sciences. Over half a century ago Donald F. Gordon hypothesized that mathematics was most likely to be useful in manipulating long chains of relationships, but these were the cases where the theory was least likely to valid. Time particularly bedevils the long chains because the ceteris paribus assumption requires the stability of all links. We find that the rate of hypothesis testing in articles citing mathematically complex articles is less than two percent, and summarize a variety of tests and other evidence supporting the Gordon hypothesis. We suggest that a major factor in the rise in mathematical complexity may be the decline in comments, replies, and rejoinders debating earlier publications; the decline has been rapid as editors have become increasingly “hostile” toward perspectives other than the ones they had previously published. We conclude by emphasizing that: 1) prominent journals in economics are devoting more space to mathematically complex articles despite their inconsequential operational harvest; 2) both the “appropriate” balance between mathematical complexity and operationalism, and the relative merits of “stylized facts” versus observational reality should be considered as a factor in editorial decision-making; finally 3) the vital importance of academic debate that addresses empirical verification, the appropriateness of model formulation, and the crucial matters of history and circumstance which are the measures of all research in the social sciences.
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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Ball State University, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 201006.
Length: 23 pages
Date of creation: Mar 2010
Date of revision: Mar 2010
Publication status: Forthcoming in Social Science History
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2010-04-04 (All new papers)
- NEP-HIS-2010-04-04 (Business, Economic & Financial History)
- NEP-HPE-2010-04-04 (History & Philosophy of Economics)
- NEP-PKE-2010-04-04 (Post Keynesian Economics)
- NEP-SOG-2010-04-04 (Sociology of Economics)
You can help add them by filling out this form.
reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Tung Liu).
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.