IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ejw/journl/v4y2007i2p241-271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Model Building versus Theorizing: The Paucity of Theory in the _Journal of Economic Theory_

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel B. Klein
  • Pedro Romero

Abstract

Drawing on the work of people with strong mainstream reputations, we distinguish model and theory. We argue that a model may qualify as theory only if it purports to answer three questions: Theory of what?, Why should we care?, What merit in your explanation? We examine the 66 regular articles appearing in the 2004 issues of Journal of Economic Theory—“the leading journal in economic theory†—and apply the three requirements. We make the assessment accountable by formulating six subtests and recording our scores in a detailed spreadsheet linked as an appendix; anyone may spot-check the spreadsheet to see if an article was scored unfairly. We find that 27 articles fail the first test (Theory of what?) and 58 articles fail at least one of the three requirements. Thus, 88 percent of the articles do not qualify as theory. (The “pass†rates would be even lower if one were to exclude the special issue, and if one were to include the short notes.) We contend that the journal’s claim to scientific status is doubtful, as well as the very title of the journal. A truer title would be, Journal of Economic Model Building. More generally, we challenge calling model building “theory.â€

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel B. Klein & Pedro Romero, 2007. "Model Building versus Theorizing: The Paucity of Theory in the _Journal of Economic Theory_," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 4(2), pages 241-271, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:ejw:journl:v:4:y:2007:i:2:p:241-271
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econjwatch.org/File+download/151/2007-05-kleinromero-econ_practice.pdf?mimetype=pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://econjwatch.org/240
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kim, E. Han & Morse, Adair & Zingales, Luigi, 2009. "Are elite universities losing their competitive edge?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(3), pages 353-381, September.
    2. Warren C. Gibson, 2005. "The Mathematical Romance: An Engineer's View of Mathematical Economics," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 2(1), pages 149-158, April.
    3. Grubel, Herbert G & Boland, Lawrence A, 1986. "On the Efficient Use of Mathematics in Economics: Some Theory, Facts and Results of an Opinion Survey," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 419-442.
    4. von Hayek, Friedrich August, 1989. "The Pretence of Knowledge," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(6), pages 3-7, December.
    5. Colander,David C. & Coats,Alfred William (ed.), 1989. "The Spread of Economic Ideas," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521362337.
    6. Philip R. P. Coelho & James E. McClure, 2005. "Theory versus Application: Does Complexity Crowd Out Evidence?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 71(3), pages 556-565, January.
    7. Simon Newcomb, 1893. "The Problem of Economic Education," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 7(4), pages 375-399.
    8. S. M. Macvane, 1895. "The Economists and the Public," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 9(2), pages 132-150.
    9. Axel Leijonhufvud, 1973. "Life Among The Econ," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 11(3), pages 327-337, September.
    10. Philip R. P. Coelho & James E. McClure, 2005. "Theory versus Application: Does Complexity Crowd Out Evidence?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 71(3), pages 556-565, January.
    11. McCloskey,Deirdre N., 1994. "Knowledge and Persuasion in Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521436038.
    12. Strassmann, Diana L, 1994. "Feminist Thought and Economics: Or, What Do the Visigoths Know?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(2), pages 153-158, May.
    13. Daniel Sutter & Rex Pjesky, 2007. "Where Would Adam Smith Publish Today? The Near Absence of Math-free Research in Top Journals," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 4(2), pages 230-240, May.
    14. Axel Leijonhufvud, 1997. "Models and theories," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(2), pages 193-198.
    15. Adair Morse, 2006. "Are elite universities losing their competitive edge?," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
    16. Herbert G. Grubel & Lawrence A. Boland, 1986. "On the Efficient Use of Mathematics in Economics: Some Theory, Facts and Results of an Opinion Survey," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 419-442, August.
    17. William L. Davis, 2004. "Preference Falsification in the Economics Profession," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 1(2), pages 359-368, August.
    18. Hausman,Daniel M., 1992. "The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521415019, December.
    19. Donald F. Gordon, 1955. "Operational Propositions in Economic Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63(2), pages 150-150.
    20. David Colander, 1995. "The Stories We Tell: A Reconsideration of AS/AD Analysis," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 169-188, Summer.
    21. Mary Morgan, 2001. "Models, stories and the economic world," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 361-384.
    22. McCloskey,Deirdre N., 1994. "Knowledge and Persuasion in Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521434751.
    23. George A. Akerlof, 1970. "The Market for "Lemons": Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500.
    24. Hausman,Daniel M., 1992. "The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521425230, December.
    25. Daniel B. Klein (ed.), 1999. "What do Economists Contribute?," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-349-14913-1.
    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. Dalibor Roháč, 2012. "On economists and garbagemen: Reflections on Šťastný (2010)," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 25(2), pages 173-183, June.
    2. Wicks, Rick, 2008. "A Model of Dynamic Balance among the Three Spheres of Society – Markets, Governments, and Communities – Applied to Understanding the Relative Importance of Social Capital and Social Goods," Working Papers in Economics 292, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics, revised 01 Jan 2009.
    3. Rick Wicks, 2009. "A model of dynamic balance among the three spheres of society – markets, governments, and communities," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 36(5), pages 535-565, April.
    4. Jean-Michel Courtault & Eric Rimbaux & Tong Zhu, 2010. "De la réputation scientifique et de sa mesure : une étude comparée des citations des économistes et des gestionnaires des Universités et des Écoles," CEPN Working Papers hal-00490058, HAL.
    5. Philip R. P. Coelho & James E. McClure, 2008. "The Market for Lemmas: Evidence That Complex Models Rarely Operate in Our World," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 5(1), pages 78-90, January.
    6. Pavel Kuchař, 2012. "Dan Št’astný: The Economics of Economics," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 3-7, August.

    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. Philip R. P. Coelho & James E. McClure, 2008. "The Market for Lemmas: Evidence That Complex Models Rarely Operate in Our World," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 5(1), pages 78-90, January.
    2. Turan Yay & Huseyin Tastan, 2010. "Invisible Hand in the Process of Making Economics or on the Method and Scope of Economics," Panoeconomicus, Savez ekonomista Vojvodine, Novi Sad, Serbia, vol. 57(1), pages 61-83, March.
    3. Philip R. P. Coelho & James E. McClure, 2007. "The Market for Lemmas," Working Papers 200702, Ball State University, Department of Economics, revised Apr 2007.
    4. Mary Morgan, 2001. "Models, stories and the economic world," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 361-384.
    5. Daniel Sutter, 2009. "The Market, the Firm, and the Economics Profession," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(5), pages 1041-1061, November.
    6. Francesco Guala & Andrea Salanti, 2002. "On the Robustness of Economic Models," Working Papers (-2012) 0208, University of Bergamo, Department of Economics.
    7. Ralph W Bailey, 2012. "Human Economists and Abstract Methodology," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 17(1), pages 49-75, March.
    8. D. Wade Hands, 2002. "Economic methodology is dead - long live economic methodology: thirteen theses on the new economic methodology," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 49-63.
    9. Wichardt, Philipp C., 2014. "Models and Fictions in (Micro-)Economics," Working Papers 2014:31, Lund University, Department of Economics, revised 12 Sep 2014.
    10. Jayme Lemke & John Kroencke, 2020. "Methodological confusions and the science wars in economics," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 33(1), pages 87-106, March.
    11. Tomer, John F., 2007. "What is behavioral economics?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 463-479, June.
    12. Lanteri, Alessandro & Yalcintas, Altug, 2006. "The Economics of Rhetoric: On Metaphors as Institutions," MPRA Paper 747, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Eivind Merok & Nils August Andresen, 2007. "Back to the Future – the Marginal Utility of History in Economics," Nordic Journal of Political Economy, Nordic Journal of Political Economy, vol. 33, pages 1-3.
    14. McCloskey Deirdre Nansen, 2018. "The Two Movements in Economic Thought, 1700–2000: Empty Economic Boxes Revisited," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, December.
    15. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2011. "Economic Models as Analogies," PIER Working Paper Archive 12-001, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    16. Giuseppe Garofalo, 2014. "Irreducible complexities: from Gödel and Turing to the paradigm of Imperfect Knowledge Economics," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 3463-3474, November.
    17. Max Albert & Hartmut Kliemt, 2017. "Infinite Idealizations and Approximate Explanations in Economics," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201726, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    18. Josh Angrist & Pierre Azoulay & Glenn Ellison & Ryan Hill & Susan Feng Lu, 2020. "Inside Job or Deep Impact? Extramural Citations and the Influence of Economic Scholarship," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(1), pages 3-52, March.
    19. I. Gilboa & A. Postlewaite & L. Samuelson & D. Schmeidler, 2015. "Economic models as analogies," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 4.
    20. Gérard Charreaux, 2008. "La recherche en finance d’entreprise:quel positionnement méthodologique ?," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 11(Special), pages 237-290, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    models; model building; theory; explanation; explanandum; story telling; relevance; importance;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology
    • C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory

    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:ejw:journl:v:4:y:2007:i:2:p:241-271. 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: Jason Briggeman (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edgmuus.html .

    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.