IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ksa/szemle/1133.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Társadalomtudományi tények és természettudományos módszerek
[Social scientific facts and natural scientific techniques]

Author

Listed:
  • Török, Ádám

Abstract

A tanulmány a közgazdaságtanban gyakori módszertani törekvést vizsgálja arra, hogy lehetőség szerint minél több összefüggést kvantitatív formában ábrázoljanak. Itt kulcskérdés, hogy a tények tükrözésének a természettudományokban megszokott módszerei milyen feltételekkel állják meg helyüket a társadalomtudományokban. A tanulmány statisztikai, majd kliometriai példákkal szemlélteti e törekvések néhány korlátját, és hangsúlyozza a "kvantitatív" és az "álkvantitatív" megközelítések közötti különbségtétel fontosságát a közgazdasági elemzések megítélésében.* Journal of Economic Literature (JEL ) kód: A12, B23, B25, B41, B52, N01.

Suggested Citation

  • Török, Ádám, 2009. "Társadalomtudományi tények és természettudományos módszerek [Social scientific facts and natural scientific techniques]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(12), pages 1067-1087.
    • Handle: RePEc:ksa:szemle:1133
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.kszemle.hu/tartalom/letoltes.php?id=1133
    Download Restriction: Registration and subscription. 3-month embargo period to non-subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Andrei Shleifer & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Rafael La Porta, 2008. "The Economic Consequences of Legal Origins," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 46(2), pages 285-332, June.
    2. George A. Akerlof, 2009. "How Human Psychology Drives the Economy and Why It Matters," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1175-1175.
    3. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Erdélyi, Márk, 2006. "Felfaló árazás. Árazás a versenytárs megsemmisítésére [Predatory prices. Pricing designed to annihilate competitors]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(4), pages 365-379.
    5. Debreu, Gerard, 1991. "The Mathematization of Economic Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(1), pages 1-7, March.
    6. Martin Srholec, 2007. "High-Tech Exports from Developing Countries: A Symptom of Technology Spurts or Statistical Illusion?," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 143(2), pages 227-255, July.
    7. E. Han Kim & Adair Morse & Luigi Zingales, 2006. "What Has Mattered to Economics Since 1970," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 189-202, Fall.
    8. Fogel, Robert William, 1975. "Three Phases of Cliometric Research on Slavery and Its Aftermath," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(2), pages 37-46, May.
    9. Baumol, William J, 1996. "Predation and the Logic of the Average Variable Cost Test," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(1), pages 49-72, April.
    10. Godin, Benoit, 2003. "The emergence of S&T indicators: why did governments supplement statistics with indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 679-691, April.
    11. Faber, Jan & Hesen, Anneloes Barbara, 2004. "Innovation capabilities of European nations: Cross-national analyses of patents and sales of product innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 193-207, March.
    12. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Hüttl, Antónia, 2003. "A gazdasági mérés történetéről. Adatok, elmélet, gazdaságpolitika [On the history of economic measurement - data, theory and economic policy]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 164-182.
    14. Valentina Dimitrova‐Grajzl, 2007. "The Great Divide Revisited: Ottoman and Habsburg Legacies on Transition," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(4), pages 539-558, November.
    15. Madarász, Aladár, 2009. "Buborékok és legendák. Válságok és válságmagyarázatok - a tulipánmánia és a Déltengeri Társaság, I. rész [Bubbles and myths, crises and explanations: tulip mania and the South Sea bubble. I]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(7), pages 609-633.
    16. G. M.P. Swann, 2006. "Putting Econometrics in its Place," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 858.
    17. Fishlow, Albert & Fogel, Robert W., 1971. "Quantitative Economic History: An Interim Evaluation Past Trends and Present Tendencies," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(1), pages 15-42, March.
    18. McGee, John S, 1980. "Predatory Pricing Revisited," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(2), pages 289-330, October.
    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. Móczár, József, 2014. "Rendszerváltás és közgazdaság-tudomány [Systemic change and economics]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 220-227.
    2. Török, Ádám, 2013. "Levelled or Tilted Playing Field? [A level or a tilted playing field?]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(3), pages 342-351.

    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. Kumar, Sanjesh & Singh, Baljeet, 2019. "Barriers to the international diffusion of technological innovations," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 74-86.
    2. James B. Ang & Jakob B. Madsen, 2012. "Risk capital, private credit, and innovative production," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(4), pages 1608-1639, November.
    3. Fagerberg, Jan & Landström, Hans & Martin, Ben R., 2012. "Exploring the emerging knowledge base of ‘the knowledge society’," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1121-1131.
    4. David Mitch, 2010. "Chicago and Economic History," Chapters, in: Ross B. Emmett (ed.), The Elgar Companion to the Chicago School of Economics, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Antonio Andrés & Simplice Asongu & Voxi Amavilah, 2015. "The Impact of Formal Institutions on Knowledge Economy," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 6(4), pages 1034-1062, December.
    6. Elizabeth A. Alexander, 2012. "The Effects of Legal, Normative, and Cultural-Cognitive Institutions on Innovation in Technology Alliances," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 52(6), pages 791-815, December.
    7. Janger, Jürgen & Schubert, Torben & Andries, Petra & Rammer, Christian & Hoskens, Machteld, 2017. "The EU 2020 innovation indicator: A step forward in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 30-42.
    8. Ernest Aigner & Florentin Gloetzl & Matthias Aistleitner & Jakob Kapeller, 2018. "The focus of academic economics: before and after the crisis," ICAE Working Papers 75, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
    9. Valentiny, Pál, 2004. "Árprés és felfaló árazás. Közgazdasági elmélet, bírói, szabályozói gyakorlat [Price squeezing and predatory pricing. Economic theory and judicial and regulatory practice]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 24-45.
    10. Randall Morck, 2009. "Generalized Agency Problems," NBER Working Papers 15051, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Chen, Kaihua & Guan, Jiancheng, 2011. "Mapping the functionality of China's regional innovation systems: A structural approach," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 11-27, March.
    12. Mendonca, Sandro & Pereira, Tiago Santos & Godinho, Manuel Mira, 2004. "Trademarks as an indicator of innovation and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1385-1404, November.
    13. Jahn, Vera & Berlemann, Michael, 2014. "Governance, Firm Size and Innovative Capacity: Regional Empirical Evidence for Germany," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100412, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. Guan, Jiancheng & Chen, Kaihua, 2012. "Modeling the relative efficiency of national innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 102-115.
    15. Buesa, Mikel & Heijs, Joost & Baumert, Thomas, 2010. "The determinants of regional innovation in Europe: A combined factorial and regression knowledge production function approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 722-735, July.
    16. Chen Kaihua & Kou Mingting, 2014. "Staged efficiency and its determinants of regional innovation systems: a two-step analytical procedure," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 52(2), pages 627-657, March.
    17. Ronde, Patrick & Hussler, Caroline, 2005. "Innovation in regions: What does really matter?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1150-1172, October.
    18. Esfandiar Maasoumi & Almas Heshmati & Inhee Lee, 2021. "Green innovations and patenting renewable energy technologies," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 60(1), pages 513-538, January.
    19. Jürgen Janger & Agnes Kügler & Andreas Reinstaller & Fabian Unterlass, 2017. "Austria 2025 – Looking Out For the Frontier(s): Towards a New Framework For Frontier Measurement in Science, Technology and Innovation," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 59289, February.
    20. BenYishay, Ariel & Grosjean, Pauline, 2014. "Initial endowments and economic reform in 27 post-socialist countries," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 892-906.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • A12 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Other Disciplines
    • B23 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - Econometrics; Quantitative and Mathematical Studies
    • B25 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - Historical; Institutional; Evolutionary; Austrian; Stockholm School
    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology
    • B52 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches - - - Historical; Institutional; Evolutionary; Modern Monetary Theory;
    • N01 - Economic History - - General - - - Development of the Discipline: Historiographical; Sources and Methods

    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:ksa:szemle:1133. 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: Odon Sok (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.kszemle.hu .

    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.