IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/aep/anales/4822.html

Mainstream, Strategic Interdependence and Economic Judgment: a methodological reconstruction from a Perceptive Perspective, 75 years after John Nash’s foundational contribution

Author

Listed:
  • Munt Juan Leandro
  • Parodi Salvador
  • Carrión Gonzalo
  • Bosch Miguel

Abstract

This paper proposes a methodological reconstruction of contemporary economic mainstream, privileging structural continuity over rupture theses. From a Lakatosian approach, the transformations undergone by game theory, experimental economics, and behavioral economics are examined, interpreting them as coherent extensions of the neoclassical program. Within this framework, Ariel Rubinstein’s internal critique of the naturalistic view of economic theory is revisited, arguing that his perceptual stance—focused on the plausibility and representational value of models—offers more consistent grounds for sustaining the continuity of economic analysis. This methodological notion is articulated with Don Ross’s ontological defense of qualitative prediction, put forward in response to Alexander Rosenberg’s objections concerning the empirical entity of the discipline. The paper concludes with a reflection on the metaxioms that organize economic judgment, highlighting the internal coherence of the mainstream and its adaptive capacity.

Suggested Citation

  • Munt Juan Leandro & Parodi Salvador & Carrión Gonzalo & Bosch Miguel, 2025. "Mainstream, Strategic Interdependence and Economic Judgment: a methodological reconstruction from a Perceptive Perspective, 75 years after John Nash’s foundational contribution," Asociación Argentina de Economía Política: Working Papers 4822, Asociación Argentina de Economía Política.
    • Handle: RePEc:aep:anales:4822
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://aaep.org.ar/works/works2025/4822.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Davis, Douglas D. & Holt, Charles a., 1993. "Experimental economics: Methods, problems and promise," Estudios Económicos, El Colegio de México, Centro de Estudios Económicos, vol. 8(2), pages 179-212.
    2. Cass R. Sunstein & Richard H. Thaler, 2003. "Libertarian paternalism is not an oxymoron," Conference Series ; [Proceedings], Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, vol. 48(Jun).
    3. Axel Ockenfels & Gary E. Bolton, 2000. "ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 166-193, March.
    4. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Alex Rosenberg, 2025. "Solving the explanation paradox – one last attempt," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 1-13, January.
    6. Vernon L. Smith, 1962. "An Experimental Study of Competitive Market Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70(2), pages 111-111.
    7. Rubinstein, Ariel, 2001. "A theorist's view of experiments," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(4-6), pages 615-628, May.
    8. Richard H. Thaler & Cass R. Sunstein, 2023. "Libertarian paternalism," Chapters, in: Cass R. Sunstein & Lucia A. Reisch (ed.), Research Handbook on Nudges and Society, chapter 1, pages 10-16, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Ariel Rubinstein, 2017. "Comments on Economic Models, Economics, and Economists: Remarks on Economics Rules by Dani Rodrik," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(1), pages 162-172, March.
    10. Gigerenzer, Gerd, 2018. "The Bias Bias in Behavioral Economics," Review of Behavioral Economics, now publishers, vol. 5(3-4), pages 303-336, December.
    11. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226727233 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    2. Nobel Prize Committee, 2017. "Richard H. Thaler: Integrating Economics with Psychology," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2017-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    3. Güth, Werner, 2021. "(Un)bounded rationality of decision deliberation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 364-372.
    4. Comisión Nacional de los Mercados y la Competencia (CNMC), 2025. "Study on behavioural economics for efficient regulation and supervision," Colección Estudios de Mercado E/CNMC/002/23_ENG, Comisión Nacional de los Mercados y la Competencia (CNMC).
    5. Croson, Rachel & Gächter, Simon, 2010. "The science of experimental economics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 122-131, January.
    6. Dorian Jullien & Nicolas Vallois, 2014. "A probabilistic ghost in the experimental machine," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 232-250, September.
    7. Sugden, Robert, 2021. "Hume's experimental psychology and the idea of erroneous preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 836-848.
    8. Upravitelev, A., 2023. "Neoclassical roots of behavioral economics," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 58(1), pages 110-140.
    9. Samuel Ferey & Yannick Gabuthy & Nicolas Jacquemet, 2013. "L'apport de l'économie expérimentale dans l'élaboration des politiques publiques," Revue française d'économie, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 0(2), pages 155-194.
    10. Hitoshi Matsushima, 2018. "Bank Runs and Minimum Reciprocity," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-1099, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    11. Cristiano Codagnone & Giuseppe Alessandro Veltri & Francesco Bogliacino & Francisco Lupiáñez-Villanueva & George Gaskell & Andriy Ivchenko & Pietro Ortoleva & Francesco Mureddu, 2016. "Labels as nudges? An experimental study of car eco-labels," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 33(3), pages 403-432, December.
    12. Floris Heukelom, 2007. "Who are the Behavioral Economists and what do they say?," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 07-020/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    13. Kaiser, Micha & Bernauer, Manuela & Sunstein, Cass R. & Reisch, Lucia A., 2020. "The power of green defaults: the impact of regional variation of opt-out tariffs on green energy demand in Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    14. Ashton, John K. & Hudson, Robert S., 2008. "Interest rate clustering in UK financial services markets," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1393-1403, July.
    15. He, Haoran & Wu, Keyu, 2016. "Choice set, relative income, and inequity aversion: An experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 177-193.
    16. van Dalen, H.P. & Henkens, K. & Koedijk, C.G. & Slager, A.M.H., 2010. "Decision Making in the Pension Fund Board Room : An Experiment with Dutch Pension Fund Trustees," Discussion Paper 2010-18, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    17. Kaufmann, Cornel & Müller, Tobias & Hefti, Andreas & Boes, Stefan, 2018. "Does personalized information improve health plan choices when individuals are distracted?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 197-214.
    18. Häckel, Björn & Pfosser, Stefan & Tränkler, Timm, 2017. "Explaining the energy efficiency gap - Expected Utility Theory versus Cumulative Prospect Theory," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 414-426.
    19. Weimann Joachim, 2015. "Die Rolle von Verhaltensökonomik und experimenteller Forschung in Wirtschaftswissenschaft und Politikberatung," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 16(3), pages 231-252, October.
    20. Eldar Shafir, 2003. "Context, conflict, weights, and identities: some psychological aspects of decision making," Conference Series ; [Proceedings], Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, vol. 48(Jun).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • B21 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - Microeconomics
    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:aep:anales:4822. 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: Juan Manuel Quintero (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeppea.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.