IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Autism in Economics? A Second Opinion

Listed author(s):
  • Klaus Mohn

    ()

A popular claim among critics is that economic science is suffering from autism, a severe developmental disorder characterised by impairments in social relations and communication, combined with rigid and repetitive behaviour. So far, this allegation has not been substantiated. This essay explores the claim of autism in economics based on modern schemes of diagnostics. A key finding is that the structure of the critique against mainstream economics bears a striking resemblance to the structure of the diagnostic criteria for autism. Based on an examination of three groups of key symptoms, I conclude that the required set of criteria for the autism diagnosis are not met. However, there are parallels which may serve as constructive reminders for the future development and application of economic theories and models.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

If 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.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s12143-008-9028-3
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Springer & The Association for Social Economics in its journal Forum for Social Economics.

Volume (Year): 39 (2010)
Issue (Month): 2 (July)
Pages: 191-208

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:spr:fosoec:v:39:y:2010:i:2:p:191-208
DOI: 10.1007/s12143-008-9028-3
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.springer.com

Web page: http://socialeconomics.org/

Order Information: Web: http://link.springer.com/journal/12143

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.:

as
in new window


  1. Arjo Klamer & Hendrik van Dalen, 2001. "Attention and the art of scientific publishing," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 289-315.
  2. Bruno Frey & Stephan Meier, 2005. "Selfish and Indoctrinated Economists?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 165-171, April.
  3. Davis, John B., 2006. "The turn in economics: neoclassical dominance to mainstream pluralism?," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(01), pages 1-20, April.
  4. Joseph Persky, 1995. "The Ethology of Homo Economicus," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 221-231, Spring.
  5. Thomas Mayer, 2002. "Improving communication in economics: a task for methodologists," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 77-84.
  6. David Colander, 2005. "The Making of an Economist Redux," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(1), pages 175-198, Winter.
  7. Colander, David, 2003. "The Aging of an Economist," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(02), pages 157-176, June.
  8. Tony Lawson, 2006. "The nature of heterodox economics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 483-505, July.
  9. von Hayek, Friedrich August, 1989. "The Pretence of Knowledge," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(6), pages 3-7, December.
  10. Erik Angner, 2006. "Economists as experts: Overconfidence in theory and practice," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 1-24.
  11. 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.
  12. Machlup, Fritz, 1978. "Methodology of Economics and Other Social Sciences," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 1, number 9780124645509 edited by Shell, Karl.
  13. Bruno S. Frey & Reiner Eichenberger, 1993. "American and European Economics and Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 7(4), pages 185-193, Fall.
  14. Rik Pieters & Hans Baumgartner, 2002. "Who Talks to Whom? Intra- and Interdisciplinary Communication of Economics Journals," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 483-509, June.
  15. Padma Desai, 2005. "Russian Retrospectives on Reforms from Yeltsin to Putin," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(1), pages 87-106, Winter.
  16. Smith, Adam, 1776. "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number smith1776.
  17. Elster, Jon, 1989. "Social Norms and Economic Theory," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(4), pages 99-117, Fall.
  18. 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.
  19. Alan Kirman, 2006. "Heterogeneity in Economics," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 1(1), pages 89-117, May.
  20. Richard H. Thaler, 2000. "From Homo Economicus to Homo Sapiens," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 133-141, Winter.
  21. Colin F. Camerer & Richard H. Thaler, 1995. "Anomalies: Ultimatums, Dictators and Manners," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 209-219, Spring.
  22. Edward P. Lazear, 2000. "Economic Imperialism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 115(1), pages 99-146.
  23. Ariel Rubinstein, 2006. "A Sceptic's Comment on the Study of Economics," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 116(510), pages 1-9, 03.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:fosoec:v:39:y:2010:i:2:p:191-208. 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: (Sonal Shukla)

or (Rebekah McClure)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.