IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceco/v41y2012i4p364-369.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The role of preferences in disagreements over scientific hypothesis: Evidence on cognitive bias in formation of beliefs

Author

Listed:
  • Kataria, Mitesh

Abstract

Have you ever heard the joke that if you ask three economists for an economic policy advice, you will get at least four different answers? This study takes the joke seriously by investigating whether an agent's wish for a scientific hypothesis to be true affects the agent's belief that the hypothesis is true. Using theories in psychology of cognitive bias we argue that, given certain circumstances, a positive preference–expectation relationship is actually expected, and we test the theoretical prediction using a sample of students in economics and science. The scientific hypothesis used in our empirical inquiry is the highly debated Porter hypothesis. The Porter hypothesis suggests that environmental regulations, such as those restricting firms to reduce pollution, stimulate innovations and create a win-win situation for the environment and for firms. Our results show that the students in economics who care more about the environment are more likely to believe in the Porter hypothesis. The results are in line with Fuchs et al. (1998) and Mayer (2001) who found that there is a correlation between economists’ policy positions and their ideological values.

Suggested Citation

  • Kataria, Mitesh, 2012. "The role of preferences in disagreements over scientific hypothesis: Evidence on cognitive bias in formation of beliefs," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 364-369.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:41:y:2012:i:4:p:364-369
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2012.04.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S105353571200025X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socec.2012.04.005?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Victor R. Fuchs & Alan B. Krueger & James M. Poterba, 1998. "Economists' Views about Parameters, Values, and Policies: Survey Results in Labor and Public Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(3), pages 1387-1425, September.
    2. Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney & Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 2004. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 3, pages 53-66, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Daniel Bromley, 2004. "Reconsidering Environmental Policy: Prescriptive Consequentialism and Volitional Pragmatism," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 28(1), pages 73-99, May.
    4. Boulding, Kenneth E, 1969. "Economics as a Moral Science," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 1-12, March.
    5. Thomas Mayer, 2001. "The role of ideology in disagreements among economists: a quantitative analysis," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 253-273.
    6. Yang, Sha & Markoczy, Livia & Qi, Min, 2007. "Unrealistic optimism in consumer credit card adoption," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 170-185, April.
    7. Maximilian Auffhammer, 2009. "The State of Environmental and Resource Economics: A Google Scholar Perspective," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 3(2), pages 251-269, Summer.
    8. Michael E. Porter & Claas van der Linde, 1995. "Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 97-118, Fall.
    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. Andr, Francisco J. & Gonzlez, Paula & Porteiro, Nicols, 2009. "Strategic quality competition and the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 182-194, March.
    2. DeCanio, Stephen J. & Watkins, William E., 1998. "Information processing and organizational structure," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 275-294, August.
    3. Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffe, Laure, 2016. "Modelling pollution-generating technologies in performance benchmarking: Recent developments, limits and future prospects in the nonparametric frameworkAuthor-Name: Dakpo, K. Hervé," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 347-359.
    4. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    5. Homroy, Swarnodeep, 2023. "GHG emissions and firm performance: The role of CEO gender socialization," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    6. Blind, Knut & Petersen, Sören S. & Riillo, Cesare A.F., 2017. "The impact of standards and regulation on innovation in uncertain markets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 249-264.
    7. Yu, Wantao & Ramanathan, Ramakrishnan & Nath, Prithwiraj, 2017. "Environmental pressures and performance: An analysis of the roles of environmental innovation strategy and marketing capability," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 160-169.
    8. Altman, Morris, 2001. "When green isn't mean: economic theory and the heuristics of the impact of environmental regulations on competitiveness and opportunity cost," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 31-44, January.
    9. Marina Riem, 2017. "Essays on the Behavior of Firms and Politicians," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 73.
    10. Bergquist, Ann-Kristin & Cole, Shawn A. & Ehrenfeld, John & King, Andrew A. & Schendler, Auden, 2019. "Understanding and Overcoming Roadblocks to Environmental Sustainability: Past Roads and Future Prospects," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 93(1), pages 127-148, April.
    11. Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2019. "Values of Economists Matter in the Art and Science of Economics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 472-499, August.
    12. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2015. "Environmental assessment on coal-fired power plants in U.S. north-east region by DEA non-radial measurement," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 125-139.
    13. Curkovic, Sime & Sroufe, Robert, 2007. "Total Quality Environmental Management and Total Cost Assessment: An exploratory study," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 560-579, February.
    14. Shahbaz, Muhammad & Nasreen, Samia & Abbas, Faisal & Anis, Omri, 2015. "Does foreign direct investment impede environmental quality in high-, middle-, and low-income countries?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 275-287.
    15. Aastvedt, Tonje Marthinsen & Behmiri, Niaz Bashiri & Lu, Li, 2021. "Does green innovation damage financial performance of oil and gas companies?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    16. Sinclair-Desgagne, Bernard & Gabel, H. Landis, 1997. "Environmental Auditing in Management Systems and Public Policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 331-346, July.
    17. Liu, Cenjie & Fang, Jiayu & Xie, Rui, 2021. "Energy policy and corporate financial performance: Evidence from China's 11th five-year plan," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    18. He, Feng & Yan, Yulin & Hao, Jing & Wu, Ji (George), 2022. "Retail investor attention and corporate green innovation: Evidence from China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    19. Levy, Ting & Dinopoulos, Elias, 2016. "Global environmental standards with heterogeneous polluters," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 482-498.
    20. Maxwell, John W., 1996. "What to do when win-win won't work: Environmental strategies for costly regulation," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 60-63.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Porter hypothesis; Subjective beliefs; Economic methodology;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology
    • Q00 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - General
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics

    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:eee:soceco:v:41:y:2012:i:4:p:364-369. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620175 .

    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.