History Of Economics Or A Selected History Of Economics?
While research on the history of economics can be important to modern economics, the work of historians of economics is more often than reasonable associated with either non-contemporary or heterodox issues. I provide quantitative evidence of this, by analyzing the publications in the three main history of economics journals over the last fourteen years (1993-2006). This trend must change if the work of historians of economics is to be taken seriously by mainstream economists.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
Volume (Year): 30 (2008)
Issue (Month): 01 (March)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://journals.cambridge.org/jid_HET
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Esther-Mirjam Sent, 1999. "The randomness of rational expectations: a perspective on Sargent's early incentives," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(3), pages 439-471.
- Mark Blaug, 2001. "No History of Ideas, Please, We're Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 145-164, Winter.
- Moscati, Ivan, 2008. "More Economics, Please: We'Re Historians Of Economics," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(01), pages 85-92, March.
- Olivier Blanchard, 2000.
"What do we know about Macroeconomics that Fisher and Wicksell did not?,"
NBER Working Papers
7550, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Weintraub, E. Roy, 2007. "Economic Science Wars," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(03), pages 267-282, September.
- Kenneth Arrow, 2001. "The five most significant developments in economics of the twentieth century," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 298-304.
- Kenneth E. Boulding, 1971. "After Samuelson, Who Needs Adam Smith?," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 225-237, Fall.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jhisec:v:30:y:2008:i:01:p:93-104_00. See general 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: (Keith Waters)
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.