Book contents
- The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics
- The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Introduction
- Part I Introduction: Content, Structure, and Strategy of Mainstream Economics
- Part II Theory Assessment
- Part III Conclusion
- Appendix An Introduction to Philosophy of Science
- References
- Index
- References
References
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 May 2023
Book contents
- The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics
- The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Introduction
- Part I Introduction: Content, Structure, and Strategy of Mainstream Economics
- Part II Theory Assessment
- Part III Conclusion
- Appendix An Introduction to Philosophy of Science
- References
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics , pp. 486 - 526Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
Adorno, T., ed. 1969. Der Positivismussstreit in der Deutschen Soziologie. Darmstadt: Hermann Luchterhand Verlag.Google Scholar
Ahonen, G. 1989. “On the Empirical Content of Keynes’ General Theory.” Richerche Economiche 43: 256–69.Google Scholar
Akerlof, G. 1970. “The Market for ‘Lemons’: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 84: 488–500.Google Scholar
Akerlof, G. 1980. “A Theory of Social Custom, of Which Unemployment May Be One Consequence.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 94: 749–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akerlof, G. 1982. “Labor Contracts as Partial Gift Exchange.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 97: 543–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akerlof, G. 1984a. An Economic Theorist’s Book of Tales. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Akerlof, G. 1984b. “Gift Exchange and Efficiency-Wage Theory: Four Views.” American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings 74: 79–83.Google Scholar
Akerlof, G. 1985. “Discriminatory, Status-Based Wages among Tradition-Oriented, Stochastically Trading Coconut Producers.” Journal of Political Economy 93: 265–76.Google Scholar
Akerlof, G. and Dickens, W.. 1982. “The Economic Consequences of Cognitive Dissonance.” American Economic Review 72: 307–19.Google Scholar
Akerlof, G. and Yellen, J.. 1985. “Can Small Deviations from Rationality Make Significant Differences to Economic Equilibria?” American Economic Review 75: 708–20.Google Scholar
Akerlof, G. A. and Yellen, J. L.. 1990. “The Fair Wage-Effort Hypothesis and Unemployment.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 105: 255–83.Google Scholar
Akerlof, G. A. and Kranton, R. E.. 2005. “Identity and the Economics of Organizations.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 19 (1): 9–32.Google Scholar
Alchian, A. 1950. “Uncertainty, Evolution and Economic Theory.” Journal of Political Economy 57: 211–21.Google Scholar
Allais, M. 1952. “The Foundations of a Positive Theory of Choice Involving Risk and a Criticism of the Postulates and Axioms of the American School,” in Allais, and Hagen, , eds. (1979), pp. 27–145.Google Scholar
Allais, M. and Hagen, O., eds. 1979. Expected Utility Hypotheses and the Allais Paradox. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Alós-Ferrer, C., Granic ́, D., Kern, J., and Wagner, A.. 2016. “Preference Reversals: Time and Again.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 52: 65–97. doi: 10.1007/s11166-016-9233-z.Google Scholar
Alvard, M. S. 2004. “The Ultimatum Game, Fairness, and Cooperation among Big Game Hunters,” in Henrich, J., Boyd, R., Bowles, S., Camerer, C., Fehr, E., and Gintis, H., eds. Foundations of Human Sociality. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 413–35.Google Scholar
Ando, A. and Modigliani, F.. 1963. “The Life-Cycle Hypothesis of Saving: Aggregate Implications and Tests.” American Economic Review 53: 55–84.Google Scholar
Angrist, J. 1990. “Lifetime Earnings and the Vietnam Era Draft Lottery: Evidence from Social Security Administrative Records.” American Economic Review 80: 313–36.Google Scholar
Anscombe, E. 1981. “The Intentionality of Sensation: A Grammatical Feature,” in Anscombe, G., ed. Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Mind. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 3–20.Google Scholar
Archibald, G. 1959. “The State of Economic Science.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 10: 58–69.Google Scholar
Archibald, G. 1967. “Refutation or Comparison?” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 17: 279–96.Google Scholar
Aristotle, . 1958. “Physics,” translated by R. Hardie and R. Gaye, The Pocket Aristotle. Repr. New York: Washington Square Press, pp. 2–47.Google Scholar
Arrow, K. 1967. “Values and Collective Decision Making.” Repr. in Hahn, and Hollis, (1979), pp. 110–26.Google Scholar
Arrow, K. 1978. “Extended Sympathy and the Possibility of Social Choice.” Philosophia 7: 223–37.Google Scholar
Arrow, K. and Hahn, F.. 1971. General Competitive Analysis. San Francisco: Holden-Day.Google Scholar
Ashlagi, I. and Roth, A.. Kidney Exchange: An Operations Perspective. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Faculty & Research Publications, September 21, 2021. www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=61163.Google Scholar
Asimakopulos, A. 1967. “The Pure Consumption-Loan Model Once More.” Journal of Political Economy 75: 763–4.Google Scholar
Ausubel, L. 1991. “The Failure of Competition in the Credit Card Market.” American Economic Review 81: 50–81.Google Scholar
Backhouse, R. 2007. Explorations in Economic Methodology: From Lakatos to Empirical Philosophy of Science. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Backhouse, R. 2012. “The Rise and Fall of Popper and Lakatos in Economics,” in Mäki, U., ed. Handbook of the Philosophy of Science. Volume 13: Philosophy of Economics. London: Routledge, pp. 25–48.Google Scholar
Baker, C. 1975. “The Ideology of the Economic Analysis of Law.” Philosophy & Public Affairs 5: 3–48.Google Scholar
Balzer, W. and Hamminga, B., eds. 1989. Philosophy of Economics. Dordrecht: Kluwer-Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Barro, R. 1974. “Are Government Bonds Net Wealth?” Journal of Political Economy 82: 1095–117.Google Scholar
Baumberger, J. 1977. “No Kuhnian Revolutions in Economics.” Journal of Economic Issues 11: 1–20.Google Scholar
Bear, D. and Orr, D.. 1967. “Logic and Expediency in Economic Theorizing.” Journal of Political Economy 75: 188–96.Google Scholar
Becker, G. 1962. “Irrational Behavior and Economic Theory.” Journal of Political Economy 70: 1–13.Google Scholar
Becker, G. 1976. The Economic Approach to Human Behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Becker, G., deGroot, M., and Marschak, J.. 1964. “Measuring Utility by a Single-Response Sequential Method.” Behavioral Science 9: 226–32.Google Scholar
Begg, D. 1982. The Rational Expectations Revolution in Macroeconomics: Theories and Evidence. Baltimore: Johns-Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Bell, D. and Kristol, I., eds. 1981. The Crisis in Economic Theory. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Bellemare, C. and Shearer, B.. 2011. “On the Relevance and Composition of Gifts within the Firm: Evidence from Field Experiments.” International Economic Review 52: 855–82.Google Scholar
Bentham, J. 1789. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789), Harrison, W., ed. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1967.Google Scholar
Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., and O’Brien, J.. 1985. “Preference Reversal and Arbitrage,” in Smith, V., ed. Research in Experimental Economics, vol. 3. Greenwich: JAI Press, pp. 31–72.Google Scholar
Bergmann, B. 1989. “Does the Market for Women’s Labor Need Fixing?” Journal of Economic Perspectives 3: 43–60.Google Scholar
Bewley, T. 2007. General Equilibrium, Overlapping Generations Models, and Optimal Growth Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bicchieri, C. 1988. “Should a Scientist Abstain from Metaphor?” in Klamer, et al., eds. (1988), pp. 100–14.Google Scholar
Boadway, R. 2016. “Cost-Benefit Analysis.” In Adler, Matthew and Fleurbaey, Marc, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Well-Being and Public Policy. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 47–81.Google Scholar
Boardman, A., Greenberg, D., Vining, A., and Weimer, D.. 2010. Cost-Benefit Analysis. 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Bykvist, K. 2016. “Preference-Based Views of Well-Being.” In Adler, and Fleurbaey, , eds., pp. 321–47.Google Scholar
Binmore, K. 1987. “Modeling Rational Players: Part I.” Economics and Philosophy 3: 179–214.Google Scholar
Binmore, K. 1988. “Modeling Rational Players: Part II.” Economics and Philosophy 4: 9–56.Google Scholar
Blanchard, O. 1985. “Debt, Deficits, and Finite Horizons.” The Journal of Political Economy 93: 223–47.Google Scholar
Blaug, M. 1976. “Kuhn versus Lakatos or Paradigms versus Research Programmes in the History of Economics,” in Latsis, , ed. (1976), pp. 149–80.Google Scholar
Blaug, M. 1980a. The Methodology of Economics: Or How Economists Explain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Blaug, M. 1980b. A Methodological Appraisal of Marxian Economics. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Blaug, M. 1985. “Comment on D. Wade Hand’s ‘Karl Popper and Economic Methodology: A New Look.’” Economics and Philosophy 1: 286–9.Google Scholar
Blaug, M. 1987. “Second Thoughts on the Keynesian Revolution,” Mimeograph English version of “Ripensamenti Sulla Rivoluzione Keynesiana.” Rassegna Economica 51: 605–34.Google Scholar
Blaug, M. and de Marchi, N., eds. 1991. Appraising Modern Economics: Studies in the Methodology of Scientific Research Programs. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Bleichrodt, H. and Pinto Prades, J. L.. 2009. “New Evidence of Preference Reversals in Health Utility Measurement.”Health Economics 18: 713–26.Google Scholar
Blinder, A. 1974. “The Economics of Brushing Teeth.” Journal of Political Economy 82: 887–91.Google Scholar
Blinder, A. and Choi, D.. 1990. “A Shred of Evidence on Theories of Wage Stickiness.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 105: 1003–15.Google Scholar
Bliss, C. 1975. Capital Theory and the Distribution of Income. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Blount, S. 1995. “What Social Outcomes Aren’t Fair: The Effect of Causal Attributions on Preferences.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 63: 131–44.Google Scholar
Bogen, J. and Woodward, J. 1988. “Saving the Phenomena.” The Philosophical Review 97: 303–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Böhm-Bawerk, E. 1888. The Positive Theory of Capital, translated by W. Smart. Repr. New York: G. E. Stechert & Co., 1923.Google Scholar
Boland, L. 1979. “A Critique of Friedman’s Critics.” Journal of Economic Literature 17: 503–22.Google Scholar
Boland, L. 1981. “On the Futility of Criticizing the Neoclassical Maximization Hypothesis.” American Economic Review 73: 1031–6.Google Scholar
Boland, L. 1982a. “Difficulties with the Element of Time and the ‘Principles’ of Economics or Some Lies My Teachers Told Me.” Eastern Economic Journal 8: 47–58.Google Scholar
Boland, L. 1987. “Boland on Friedman’s Methodology: A Summation.” Journal of Economic Issues 21: 380–8.Google Scholar
Boland, L. 1989. The Methodology of Economic Model Building: Methodology after Samuelson. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bolton, G., Katok, E., and Zwick, R.. 1998. “Dictator Game Giving: Rules of Fairness versus Acts of Kindness.” International Journal of Game Theory 27: 269–99.Google Scholar
Booth, W. 1974. Modern Dogma and the Rhetoric of Assent. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Booth, W. 1979. Critical Understanding: The Powers and Limits of Pluralism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Boyd, R. 1984. “The Current Status of Scientific Realism,” in Leplin, J., ed. Scientific Realism. Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 41–82.Google Scholar
Braithwaite, R. 1953. Scientific Explanation: A Study of the Function of Theory, Probability and Law in Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bray, J. 1977. “The Logic of Scientific Method in Economics.” Journal of Economic Studies 4: 1–28.Google Scholar
Brodbeck, M. 1958. “Methodological Individualism: Definition and Reduction.” Philosophy of Science 25: 1–22.Google Scholar
Bromberger, S. 1966. “Why Questions,” in Colodny, R., ed. Mind and Cosmos: Essays in Contemporary Science and Philosophy. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 86–111.Google Scholar
Bronfenbrenner, M. 1966. “A ‘Middlebrow’ Introduction to Economic Methodology,” in Krupp, S., ed. The Structure of Economic Science. New York: Prentice-Hall, pp. 5–24.Google Scholar
Bronfenbrenner, M. 1971. “The Structure of Revolutions in Economic Thought.” History of Political Economy 3: 136–51.Google Scholar
Broome, John. 1993. “A Cause of Preference Is Not an Object of Preference.” Social Choice and Welfare 10: 57–68.Google Scholar
Broome, John. 1998. “Extended preferences” In Preferences, Fehige, C. and Wessels, U., eds. Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 279–96.Google Scholar
Brunner, K. 1969. “‘Assumptions’ and the Cognitive Quality of Theories.” Synthese 20: 501–25.Google Scholar
Brzezinski, J. F. Coniglione, Kuipers, R., and Nowak, L., eds. 1990. Idealization I: General Problems. Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and Humanities 16. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Buchanan, J. 1975. The Limits of Liberty: Between Anarchy and the Leviathan. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Burke, K. 1961. The Rhetoric of Religion: Studies in Logology. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Cairnes, J. 1875. The Character and Logical Method of Political Economy. 2nd ed. Repr. New York: A. M. Kelley, 1965.Google Scholar
Caldwell, B. 1980a. “A Critique of Friedman’s Methodological Instrumentalism.” Southern Economic Journal 47: 366–74.Google Scholar
Caldwell, B. 1982. Beyond Positivism: Economic Methodology in the Twentieth Century. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Caldwell, B. 1983. “The Neoclassical Maximization Hypothesis: Comment.” American Economic Review 75: 824–7.Google Scholar
Caldwell, B. 1990. “Does Methodology Matter? How Should It Be Practiced?” Finnish Economic Papers 3: 64–71.Google Scholar
Camerer, C., Loewenstein, G., and Prelec, D.. 2005. “Neuroeconomics: How Neuroscience Can Inform Economics.” Journal of Economic Literature 43: 9–64.Google Scholar
Camerer, C. and Thaler, R.. 1995. “Anomalies: Ultimatums, Dictators and Manners.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 9: 209–19.Google Scholar
Card, D. and Kreuger, A.. 1994. “Minimum Wages and Employment: A Case Study of the Fast-Food Industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.” American Economic Review 84: 773–93.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. 1950. Logical Foundations of Probability. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. 1956. “The Methodological Character of Theoretical Concepts,” in Feigl, H. and Scriven, M., eds. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 1. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 33–76.Google Scholar
Cartwright, N. 1989. Nature’s Capacities and Their Measurement. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Cartwright, N. 1999. The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cartwright, N. 2007. Hunting Causes and Using Them: Approaches in Philosophy and Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cartwright, N. and Hardie, J.. 2012. Evidence-Based Policy: A Practical Guide to Doing It Better. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cass, D., Okuno, M., and Zilcha, I.. 1980. “The Role of Money in Supporting the Pareto Optimality of Competitive Equilibrium in Consumption Loan Type Models,” in Kareken, and Wallace, , eds. (1980), pp. 13–48.Google Scholar
Cass, D. and Shell, K.. 1980. “In Defense of a Basic Approach,” in Kareken, and Wallace, , eds. (1980), pp. 251–60.Google Scholar
Cass, D. and Yaari, M.. 1966. “A Re-examination of the Pure Consumption Loans Model.” Journal of Political Economy 74: 353–67.Google Scholar
Charness, G. 2004. “Attribution and Reciprocity in an Experimental Labor Market.” Journal of Labour Economics 22: 665–88.Google Scholar
Chu, Y. and Chu, R.. 1990. “The Subsidence of Preference Reversals in Simplified and Marketlike Experimental Settings: A Note.” American Economic Review 80: 902–11.Google Scholar
Coats, A. 1969. “Is There a ‘Structure of Scientific Revolutions’ in Economics?” Kyklos 22: 289–94.Google Scholar
Colander, D. and Klamer, A.. 1987. “The Making of an Economist.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 1: 95–112.Google Scholar
Coleman, J. 1986. Individual Interest and Collective Action: Selected Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Coleman, J. 1984. “Economics and the Law: A Critical Review of the Foundations of the Economic Approach to Law.” Ethics 94: 649–79.Google Scholar
Copernicus, N. 1543. On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres, translated by A. Duncan. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1976.Google Scholar
Cox, J. and Epstein, S.. 1989. “Preference Reversals without the Independence Axiom.” American Economic Review 79: 408–26.Google Scholar
Cross, R. 1982. “The Duhem-Quine Thesis, Lakatos and the Appraisal of Theories in Macroeconomics.” Economic Journal 92: 320–40.Google Scholar
Cyert, R., and Grunberg, E.. 1963. “Assumption, Prediction and Explanation in Economics,” in Cyert, and March, , eds. (1963), pp. 298–311.Google Scholar
Cyert, R., and March, J., eds. 1963. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Cyert, R. and Pottinger, G.. 1979. “Towards a Better Micro-economic Theory.” Philosophy of Science 46: 204–22.Google Scholar
Dagum, C. 1986. “Economic Model, System and Structure, Philosophy of Science and Lakatos’ Methodology of Scientific Research Programs.” Rivista Internazionale di Scienze Economiche e Commerciali 33: 859–86.Google Scholar
De Alessi, L. 1971. “Reversals of Assumptions and Implications.” Journal of Political Economy 79: 867–77.Google Scholar
Debreu, G. 1974. “Excess Demand Functions.” Journal of Mathematical Economics 1: 15–23.Google Scholar
Debreu, G. 1991. “The Mathematization of Economic Theory.” American Economic Review 81: 1–7.Google Scholar
DellaVigna, S., List, J. A., Malmendier, U., and Rao, G.. 2022. “Estimating Social Preferences and Gift Exchange at Work.” American Economic Review 112: 1038–74.Google Scholar
deLong, J. B. 2008. “Why Should Economists Study Economic History?” (www.bradford-delong.com/2008/01/why-should-econ.html).Google Scholar
de Marchi, N. 1970. “The Empirical Content and Longevity of Ricardian Economics.” Economica 37: 257–76.Google Scholar
de Marchi, N. 1976. “Anomaly and the Development of Economics: The Case of the Leontief Paradox,” in Latsis, , ed. (1976), pp. 100–28.Google Scholar
de Marchi, N. 1986. “Discussion: Mill’s Unrevised Philosophy of Economics: A Comment on Hausman.” Philosophy of Science 53: 89–100.Google Scholar
de Marchi, N., ed. 1988. The Popperian Legacy in Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
de Marchi, N. and Blaug, M., eds. 1991. Appraising Economic Theories: Studies in the Methodology of Research Programs. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Dewey, J. 1939a. “Experience, Knowledge and Value: A Rejoinder,” in P. Schilpp, ed. The Philosophy of John Dewey. La Salle, IL: Open Court, pp. 515–608.Google Scholar
Diamond, P. 1965. “National Debt in a Neoclassical Growth Model.” American Economic Review 55: 1126–50.Google Scholar
Dillard, D. 1978. “Revolutions in Economic Theory.” Southern Economic Journal 44: 705–24.Google Scholar
Dolan, E., ed. 1976. The Foundations of Modern Austrian Economics. Kansas City: Sheed & Ward.Google Scholar
Dreyer, J. 1953. A History of Astronomy from Thales to Kepler (Formerly Titled History of the Planetary Systems from Thales to Kepler). New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Dugger, W. 1979. “Methodological Differences between Institutional and Neoclassical Economics.” Journal of Economic Issues 13: 899–909.Google Scholar
Duhem, P. 1906. The Aim and Structure of Scientific Theories, translated by P. Wiener. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1954.Google Scholar
Duhem, P. 1908. To Save the Phenomena, translated by S. Jaki. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969.Google Scholar
Dzionek-Kozłowska, J. and Rehman, S. N.. 2017. “Attitudes of Economics and Sociology Students towards Cooperation. A Cross-Cultural Study.” Economics and Sociology, 10(4): 124–36.Google Scholar
Earman, J., ed. 1983. Testing Scientific Theories. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Earman, J. and Roberts, J.. 1999. “Ceteris Paribus, There Is No Problem of Provisos.” Synthese 118: 439–78.Google Scholar
Earman, J., Roberts, J., and Smith, S.. 2002. “Ceteris Paribus Lost.” Erkenntnis 57: 281–301.Google Scholar
Edgeworth, F. 1881. Mathematical Psychics: An Essay on the Application of Mathematics to the Moral Sciences. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Edwards, W. and von Winterfeldt, D.. 1986. “Cognitive Illusions and Their Implications for the Law.” Southern California Law Review 59: 225–76.Google Scholar
Eells, E. 1982. Rational Decision and Causality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Eichner, A. 1983. “Why Economics Is Not Yet a Science,” in Eichner, A., ed. Why Economics Is Not Yet a Science. Armonk, New York: M.E. Sharpe, pp. 205–41.Google Scholar
Ellsberg, D. 1954. “Classic and Current Notions of ‘Measurable Utility.’” Economic Journal 64: 528–56. Repr. in Page, A., ed. Utility Theory: A Book of Readings. New York: Wiley, 1968, pp. 269–96.Google Scholar
Elster, J. 1983. Sour Grapes: Studies in the Subversion of Rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Elster, J. 1989a. The Cement of Society: A Study of Social Order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Elster, J. 1989b. Solomonic Judgements: Studies in the Limitations of Rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Elster, J. and Roemer, J., eds. 1991. Interpersonal Comparisons of Well-Being. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Englmaier, F. and Leider, S.. 2020. “Managerial Payoff and Gift Exchange in the Field.” Review of Industrial Organization 56: 259–280.Google Scholar
Esteban, J. 1986. “A Characterization of the Core in Overlapping-Generations Economies: An Exact Consumption-Loan Model of Interest with or without the Social Contrivance of Money.” Journal of Economic Theory 39: 439–56.Google Scholar
Etzioni, A. 1986. “The Case for a Multiple-Utility Conception.” Economics and Philosophy 2: 159–84.Google Scholar
Fair, R. 1978. “A Theory of Extramarital Affairs.” Journal of Political Economy 86: 45–61.Google Scholar
Fama, E. 1980. “Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm.” Journal of Political Economy 88: 288–307.Google Scholar
Fankhauser, S., Tol, R., and Pearce, D.. 1997. “The Aggregation of Climate Change Damages: A Welfare Theoretic Approach.” Environmental and Resource Economics 10: 249–66.Google Scholar
Fehr, E., Kirchsteiger, G., and Riedl, A.. 1998. “Gift Exchange and Reciprocity in Competitive Experimental Markets.” European Economic Review 42: 1–34.Google Scholar
Fehr, E. and Schmidt, K.. 1999. A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 114: 817–68.Google Scholar
Fehr, E., Goette, L., and Zehnder, C.. 2009. “A Behavioral Account of the Labor Market: The Role of Fairness Concerns.” Annual Review of Economics 1: 355–84.Google Scholar
Feigl, H. and Maxwell, G., eds. 1962. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 3. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Festinger, L. 1954. “A Theory of Social Comparison Processes.” Human Relations 7: 117–40.Google Scholar
Feyerabend, P. 1975. Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge. London: Verso Edition.Google Scholar
Fish, S. 1980. Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Fish, S. 1988. “Comments from Outside Economics,” in Klamer, et al., eds. (1988), pp. 21–30.Google Scholar
Fisher, R. 1986. The Logic of Economic Discovery: Neoclassical Economics and the Marginal Revolution. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. 1991. “You Can Fool Some of the People All of the Time, Everything Else Being Equal; Hedged Laws and Psychological Explanations.” Mind 100: 19–34.Google Scholar
Fox, J. 2014. “Will Economics Finally Get Its Paradigm Shift?” Harvard Business Review, April 28, 2014.Google Scholar
Frank, R. 1988. Passions within Reason: The Strategic Role of the Emotions. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Fraser, L. 1937. Economic Thought and Language. A Critique of Some Fundamental Concepts. London: A & C Black.Google Scholar
Frazer, W. and Boland, L.. 1983. “An Essay on the Foundations of Friedman’s Methodology.” American Economic Review 73: 129–44.Google Scholar
Friedman, Michael. 1974. “Explanation and Scientific Understanding.” Journal of Philosophy 71: 5–19.Google Scholar
Friedman, Michael. 1998. Kant and the Exact Sciences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, Milton. 1953a. Essays in Positive Economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, Milton. 1953b. “The Marshallian Demand Curve,” in Friedman, , ed. (1953a), pp. 47–99.Google Scholar
Friedman, Milton. 1953c. “The Methodology of Positive Economics,” in Friedman, , ed. (1953a), pp. 3–43.Google Scholar
Friedman, Milton. 1957. A Theory of the Consumption Function. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, Milton. 1962. Price Theory: A Provisional Text, Revised edition. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
Friedman, Milton. 1968. ‘The Role of Monetary Policy,’ The American Economic Review 58: pp. 1–17.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. and Savage, L.. 1952. “The Expected-Utility Hypothesis and the Measurability of Utility.” Journal of Political Economy 60: 463–74.Google Scholar
Frigg, R. 2010. “Fiction and Scientific Representation.” in Frigg, R. and Hunter, M., eds. Beyond Mimesis and Convention, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 262: 97–138.Google Scholar
Fuchs, V. 1989. “Women’s Quest for Economic Equality.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 3: 25–42.Google Scholar
Fulton, G. 1984. “Research Programmes in Economics.” History of Political Economy 16: 187–206.Google Scholar
Gale, D. 1973. “Pure Exchange Equilibrium of Dynamic Economic Models.” Journal of Economic Theory 6: 12–36.Google Scholar
Galileo, G. 1632. Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967.Google Scholar
Galileo, G. 1638. Discourses Concerning Two New Sciences. Rpt. London: Gale ECCO, 2018.Google Scholar
Geanakoplos, J. 2008. “Overlapping Generations Models of General Equilibrium.” Cowles Foundation Discussion Paper No. 1663, pp. 1–41.Google Scholar
Geanakoplos, J. and Polemarchakis, H.. 1986. “Walrasian Indeterminacy and Keynesian Macroeconomics.” Review of Economic Studies 53: 755–79.Google Scholar
Gellner, E. 1973. Cause and Meaning in the Social Sciences, ed. Jarvie, I. and Agassi, J.. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gibbard, A. and Varian, H.. 1978. “Economic Models.” Journal of Philosophy 75: 664–77.Google Scholar
Giere, R. 1979, 1982. Understanding Scientific Reasoning. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. 2nd ed. 1982.Google Scholar
Girardi, D., Mamunuru, S. M., Halliday, S. D., and Bowles, S.. 2021. “Does Economics Make You Selfish?” UMass Amherst Working Papers. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/econ_workingpaper/304/.Google Scholar
Glimcher, P., Camerer, C., Poldrack, R. A., and Fehr, E.. 2008. Neuroeconomics: Decision Making and the Brain. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Glimcher, P., and Fehr, E., eds. 2014. Neuroeconomics: Decision Making and the Brain London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Glymour, C., Kelly, K., Scheines, R., and Spirtes, P.. 1987. Discovering Causal Structure. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Gneezy, U. and List, J.. 2006. “Putting Behavioral Economics to Work: Testing for Gift Exchange in Labor Markets Using Field Experiments.” Econometrica 74: 1365–84.Google Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, P. 2006. “The Strategy of Model-Based Science.” Biology and Philosophy 21:725–40.Google Scholar
Goldin, C. 2014. “A Grand Gender Convergence: Its Last Chapter.” American Economic Review 104: 1091–119.Google Scholar
Granovetter, M. 1981. “Toward a Sociological Theory of Income Differences,” in Berg, I., ed. Sociological Perspectives on Labor Markets. New York: Academic Press, pp. 11–47.Google Scholar
Granovetter, M. 1985. “Economics and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness.” American Journal of Sociology 91: 481–510.Google Scholar
Grant, A. 2016. “More Evidence That Learning Economics Makes You Selfish.” Evonomics: The Next Evolution of Economics. https://evonomics.com/more-evidence-that-learning-economics-makes-you-selfish/.Google Scholar
Grether, D. and Plott, C.. 1979. “Economic Theory of Choice and the Preference Reversal Phenomenon.” American Economic Review 69: 623–38.Google Scholar
Grether, D. and Plott, C.. 1982. “Economic Theory of Choice and the Preference Reversal Phenomenon: Reply.” American Economic Review 72: 575.Google Scholar
Griffin, J. 1986. Well-Being: Its Meaning, Measurement and Moral Importance. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Gruchy, A. 1947. Modern Economic Thought: The American Contribution. Repr. New York: A. M. Kelley, 1967.Google Scholar
Grünbaum, A. 1976. “Is Falsifiability the Touchstone of Scientific Rationality? Karl Popper Versus Inductivism,” in Cohen, R. et al., eds. Essays in Memory of Imre Lakatos. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 213–52.Google Scholar
Guala, F. 2019. “Preferences: Neither Behavioral nor Mental.” Economics and Philosophy 35: 383–401.Google Scholar
Guala, F. and Mittone, L.. 2010. “Paradigmatic Experiments: The Dictator Game.” Journal of Socio-Economics 39: 578–84.Google Scholar
Gul, F. and Pesandorfer, W.. 2008. “The Case for Mindless Economics,” in Caplin, and Schotter, , eds. (2008), pp. 3–39.Google Scholar
Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., and Schwarze, B.. 1982. “An Experimental Analysis of Ultimatum Bargaining.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 3: 367–88.Google Scholar
Hacking, I. 1979. “Imre Lakatos’s Philosophy of Science.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 30: 181–202.Google Scholar
Hagen, O. 1979. “Towards a Positive Theory of Preferences under Risk,” in Allais, and Hagen, , eds. (1979), pp. 271–302.Google Scholar
Hagen, O. 1986. “Arjo Klamer’s Conversations with Economists: New Classical Economists and Opponents Speak out on the Current Controversy in Microeconomics.” Economics and Philosophy 2: 275–81.Google Scholar
Hall, R. and Hitch, C.. 1939. “Price Theory and Business Behaviour.” Oxford Economic Papers 2: 12–45.Google Scholar
Händler, E. 1980. “The Logical Structure of Modern Neoclassical Static Microeconomic Equilibrium Theory.” Erkenntnis 15: 33–53.Google Scholar
Hands, D. 1979. “The Methodology of Economic Research Programs.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 9: 292–303.Google Scholar
Hands, D. 1985a. “Karl Popper and Economic Methodology.” Economics and Philosophy 1: 83–100.Google Scholar
Hands, D. 1985c. “The Structuralist View of Economic Theories: The Case of General Equilibrium in Particular.” Economics and Philosophy 1: 303–36.Google Scholar
Hands, D. 1988. “Ad Hocness in Economics and the Popperian Tradition,” in de Marchi, , ed. (1988), pp. 121–39.Google Scholar
Hands, D. 1991a. “The Problem of Excess Content: Economics, Novelty and a Long Popperian Tale,” in de Marchi, and Blaug, , eds. (1991), pp. 58–75.Google Scholar
Hands, D. 1991b. “Reply to Mäki and Hamminga,” in de Marchi, and Blaug, , eds. (1991), pp. 91–102.Google Scholar
Hands, D. W. 1985c. “The Structuralist View of Economic Theories: A Review Essay: The Case of General Equilibrium in Particular.” Economics and Philosophy 1:303–335.Google Scholar
Hanfling, O. 1981b. Essential Readings in Logical Positivism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Harsanyi, J. 1955. “Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility.” Journal of Political Economy 63: 309–21.Google Scholar
Harsanyi, J. 1977a. “Morality and the Theory of Rational Behavior.” Social Research 44. Repr. Sen and Williams (1982), pp. 39–62.Google Scholar
Harsanyi, J. 1977b. Rational Behavior and Bargaining Equilibrium in Games and Social Situations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Harsanyi, J. 1977. Rational Behavior and Bargaining Equilibrium in Games and Social Situations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hartmann, S. 1999. “Models and Stories in Hadron Physics.” In Morgan, M and Morrison, M, eds. 1999, pp. 326–46.Google Scholar
Hausman, D. 1980. “How to Do Philosophy of Economics,” in Asquith, P. and Giere, R., eds. 1980. East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 352–62.Google Scholar
Hausman, D. 1981a. Capital, Profits, and Prices: An Essay in the Philosophy of Economics. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Hausman, D. 1981b. “John Stuart Mill’s Philosophy of Economics.” Philosophy of Science 48: 363–85.Google Scholar
Hausman, D. 1988a. “An Appraisal of Popperian Methodology,” in de Marchi, , ed. (1988), pp. 65–86.Google Scholar
Hausman, D. 1988b. “Economic Methodology and Philosophy of Science,” in Winston, and Teichgraeber, , eds. (1988), pp. 88–116.Google Scholar
Hausman, D. 1989b. “Economic Methodology in a Nutshell.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 3: 115–28.Google Scholar
Hausman, D. 1990b. “Supply and Demand Explanations and Their Ceteris Paribus Clauses.” Review of Political Economy 2: 168–86.Google Scholar
Hausman, D. 1991. “On Dogmatism in Economics: The Case of Preference Reversals,” Journal of Socio-Economics 20: 205–25.Google Scholar
Hausman, D. 2001. “Explanation and Diagnosis in Economics,” Revue Internationale De Philosophie 55: 311–26.Google Scholar
Hausman, D. 2012. Preference, Value, Choice, and Welfare. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hausman, D., ed. 2007. The Philosophy of Economics: An Anthology. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hausman, D., McPherson, M., and Satz, D.. 2017. Economic Analysis, Moral Philosophy, and Public Policy. 3rd. ed. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hayek, F. 1952. The Counter-Revolution of Science: Studies in the Abuse of Reason. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Heathwood, C. 2005. “The Problem of Defective Desires.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 83: 487–504.Google Scholar
Heckman, J. 1997. “Instrumental Variables: A Study of Implicit Behavioral Assumptions Used in Making Program Evaluations.” The Journal of Human Resources 32: 441–462.Google Scholar
Helm, D. 1984. “Predictions and Causes: A Comparison of Friedman and Hicks on Method.” Oxford Economic Papers 36 (Supplement): 118–34.Google Scholar
Hempel, C. 1965. Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Henderson, J. and Quandt, R.. 1980. Microeconomic Theory: A Mathematical Approach. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Henderson, J. and Kremer, M., Miguel, E., Leino, J., and Zwane, A. P.. 2011. “Spring Cleaning: Rural Water Impacts, Valuation, and Property Rights Institutions.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 126:145–205.Google Scholar
Herstein, I. and Milnor, J.. 1953. "An Axiomatic Approach to Measurable Utility." Econometrica 21: 291–7.Google Scholar
Hicks, J. and Allen, R.. 1934. “A Reconsideration of the Theory of Value.” Economica. N.S. 1: 52–76 and 196–219.Google Scholar
Hirsch, A. and de Marchi, N.. 1986. “Making a Case When Theory Is Unfalsifiable: Friedman’s Monetary History.” Economics and Philosophy 2: 1–22.Google Scholar
Hirsch, A. and de Marchi, N.. 1990. Milton Friedman: Economics in Theory and Practice. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Hirsch, F. 1976. The Social Limits to Growth. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, C. 1995. “The Mishap at Reichenbach Fall: Singular vs. General Causation.” Philosophical Studies 78: 257–91.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, C. 1996. “Farewell to Binary Causation.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 26: 267–82.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, C. 2001. “The Intransitivity of Causation Revealed in Equations and Graphs.” Journal of Philosophy 98: 273–99.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, C. 2003. “Of Humean Bondage.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 54: 1–25.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, C. and Woodward, J.. 2003a. “Explanatory Generalizations, Part I: A Counterfactual Account.” Noûs 37: 1–24.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, C. and Woodward, J.. 2003b. “Explanatory Generalizations, Part II: Plumbing Explanatory Depth.” Noûs 37: 181–99.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. 1986. “Behind Methodological Individualism.” Cambridge Journal of Economics 10: 211–24.Google Scholar
Holland, J., Holyoak, K., Nisbett, R., and Thagard, P.. 1986. Induction: Processes of Inference, Learning, and Discovery. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hollander, S. 1985. The Economics of John Stuart Mill. Vol. 1 Theory and Method. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Hollis, M. and Nell, E.. 1975. Rational Economic Man: A Philosophical Critique of Neo-Classical Economics. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Holt, C. 1986. “Preference Reversals and the Independence Axioms.” American Economic Review 76: 508–15.Google Scholar
Hoover, K. 1988. The New Classical Macroeconomics: A Sceptical Inquiry. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Houthakker, H. 1950. “Revealed Preference and the Utility Function.” Economica 17: 159–74.Google Scholar
Hoyningen-Huene, P. 1987. “Context of Discovery and Context of Justification.” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 18: 501–16.Google Scholar
Huber, J. and Puto, C.. 1983. “Market Boundaries and Product Choice: Illustrating Attraction and Substitution Effects.” Journal of Consumer Research 10: 31–44.Google Scholar
Huber, J., Payne, J. W., and Puto, C.. 1982. “Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis.” Journal of Consumer Research 9: 90–8.Google Scholar
Hull, D. 1988. Science as a Process: An Evolutionary Account of the Social and Conceptual Development of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hume, D. 1748. An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Repr. Bobbs-Merrill, Indianapolis, 1955.Google Scholar
Hutchison, T. 1938. The Significance and Basic Postulates of Economic Theory. Repr. with a new Preface. New York: A.M. Kelley, 1960.Google Scholar
Hutchison, T. 1941. “The Significance and Basic Postulates of Economic Theory: A Reply to Professor Knight.” Journal of Political Economy 49: 732–50.Google Scholar
Hutchison, T. 1956. “Professor Machlup on Verification in Economics.” Southern Economic Journal 22: 476–83.Google Scholar
Hutchison, T. 1960. “Methodological Prescriptions in Economics: A Reply.” Economica 27: 158–60.Google Scholar
Hutchison, T. 1977. Knowledge and Ignorance in Economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hutchison, T. 1978. On Revolutions and Progress in Economic Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hutchison, T. 1981. The Politics and Philosophy of Economics: Marxians, Keynesians and Austrians. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hutchison, T. 1988. “The Case for Falsification,” in de Marchi, , ed. (1988), pp. 169–82.Google Scholar
Jalladeau, J. 1978. “Research Program versus Paradigm in the Development of Economics.” Journal of Economic Issues 12: 583–608.Google Scholar
Jensen, N. 1967. "An Introduction to Bernoullian Utility Theory: I. Utility Functions." Swedish Journal of Economics 69: 163–83.Google Scholar
Jensen, M. and Meckling, W.. 1976. “Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure.” Journal of Financial Economics 3: 305–60.Google Scholar
Kagel, J., Battalio, R., Rachlin, H., et al. 1975. “Experimental Studies of Consumer Behavior Using Laboratory Animals.” Economic Inquiry 13: 22–38.Google Scholar
Kahnemann, D. 1992. “Reference Points, Anchors, Norms, and Mixed Feelings.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 51: 296–312.Google Scholar
Kahnemann, D. 1999. “Objective Happiness,” in Kahneman, D., Diener, E., and Schwarz, N., eds. Well-Being: Foundations of Hedonic Psychology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation Press, pp. 3–27.Google Scholar
Kahnemann, D. 2000a. “Evaluation by Moments: Past and Future,” in Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A., eds. (2000), pp. 693–708.Google Scholar
Kahnemann, D. 2000b. “Experienced Utility and Objective Happiness: A Moment-Based Approach,” in Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A., eds. (2000), pp. 673–92.Google Scholar
Kahnemann, D. 2006. "New Challenges to the Rationality Assumption," in Slovic, P. and Lichtenstein, S., eds. The Construction of Preference. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 487–503.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J., and Thaler, R.. 1986. “Fairness as a Constraint on Profit Seeking.” American Economic Review 76: 728–41.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J., and Thaler, R.. 1990. “Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem.” Journal of Political Economy 98: 1325–48.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J., and Thaler, R.. 1991. “The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 5: 193–206.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A.. 1979. “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Making under Risk.” Econometrica 47: 263–91.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A., eds. 2000. Choices, Values and Frames. New York: Cambridge University Press and the Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., Wakker, P., and Sarin, R.. 1997. “Back to Bentham? Explorations of Experienced Utility.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 112: pp. 375–405.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D. A., Schwarz, N., and Stone, A. A.. 2004a. “A Survey Method for Characterizing Daily Life Experience: The Day Reconstruction Method.” Science 306 (5702): 1776–80.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D. A., Schwarz, N., and Stone, A. A.. 2004b. “Toward National Well-Being Accounts.” American Economic Review 94: 429–34.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Krueger, A.. 2006. “Developments in the Measurement of Subjective Well-Being.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 20: 3–24.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Sugden, R.. 2005. “Experienced Utility as a Standard of Policy Evaluation.” Environmental and Resource Economics 32: 161–81.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Thaler, R.. 2006. “Utility Maximization and Experienced Utility.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 20: 221–34.Google Scholar
Kaldor, N. 1939. “Welfare Propositions of Economics and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility.” Economic Journal 49: 549–52.Google Scholar
Kant, I. 1787. Critique of Pure Reason, translated by N. Kemp Smith. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1965.Google Scholar
Kaplan, M. 1989. “Bayesianism without the Black Box.” Philosophy of Science 56: 48–69.Google Scholar
Karelis, C. 1986. “Distributive Justice and the Public Good.” Economics and Philosophy 2: 101–26.Google Scholar
Karni, E. and Safra, Z.. 1987. “‘Preference Reversal’ and the Observability of Preferences by Experimental Methods.” Econometrica 55: 675–85.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, F. 1933. “On the Subject-Matter and Method of Economic Science.” Economica 13: 381–401.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, F. 1934. “The Concept of Law in Economic Science.” Review of Economic Studies 1: 102–9.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, F. 1944. Methodology of the Social Sciences. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kehoe, T. and Levine, D.. 1990. “The Economics of Indeterminacy in Overlapping Generations Models.” Journal of Public Economics 42; 219–43.Google Scholar
Kelly, K. and Glymour, C.. 1989. “Convergence to the Truth and Nothing but the Truth.” Philosophy of Science 56: 185–220.Google Scholar
Keynes, J. N. 1917. The Scope and Method of Political Economy (4th ed.) (1st ed. 1891). Repr. New York: A. M. Kelley, 1955.Google Scholar
Kim, B., Seligman, D., and Kable, J. W.. 2012. “Preference Reversals in Decision Making under Risk Are Accompanied by Changes in Attention to Different Attributes.” Frontiers in Neuroscience. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2012.00109.Google Scholar
Kincaid, H. 1986. “Reduction, Explanation, and Individualism.” Philosophy of Science 53: 492–513.Google Scholar
Kincaid, H. 1989. “Confirmation, Complexity and Social Laws,” in Fine, A., ed. PSA 1988, vol. 2. East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 299–307.Google Scholar
Kitcher, P. 1995. The Advancement of Science – Science without Legend, Objectivity without Illusions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Klamer, A. 1984. Conversations with Economists: New Classical Economists and Opponents Speak Out on the Current Controversy in Macroeconomics. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Allanheld.Google Scholar
Klamer, A. and Colander, D.. 1990. The Making of an Economist. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Klappholz, K. 1964. “Value Judgments and Economics.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 15: 97–114.Google Scholar
Klappholz, K. and Agassi, J.. 1959. “Methodological Prescriptions in Economics.” Economica 26: 60–74.Google Scholar
Klappholz, K. and Agassi, J.. 1960. “Methodological Prescriptions in Economics: A Rejoinder.” Economica 27: 160–1.Google Scholar
Klein, L. 1980. An Introduction to Econometric Forecasting and Forecasting Models. Philadelphia: New York: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Knetsch, J. L. 1989. The Endowment Effect and Evidence of Non-reversible Indifference Curves.” American Economic Review 79: 1277–84.Google Scholar
Knetsch, J. L. 1992. “Preferences and Nonreversibility of Indifference Curves. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 17: 131–9.Google Scholar
Knies, K. 1853. Die Politische Oekonomie Vom Standpunkte der Geschichtlichen Methode. 2nd ed. Braunschweig: C.A. Schwetschke, 1883.Google Scholar
Knight, F. 1921. “Traditional Economic Theory – Discussion.” American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings 22: 143–6.Google Scholar
Knight, F. 1935a. “Economics and Human Action,” from Knight 1935b. Repr. in Hausman, ed. (1984), pp. 141–8.Google Scholar
Knight, F. 1935b. The Ethics of Competition and Other Essays. New York and London: Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar
Knight, F. 1940. “What Is ‘Truth’ in Economics?” Journal of Political Economy 48: 1–32.Google Scholar
Knight, F. 1941. “The Significance and Basic Postulates of Economic Theory: A Rejoinder.” Journal of Political Economy 49: 750–3.Google Scholar
Knight, F. 1957. Three Essays on the State of Economic Science. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Knight, F. 1961. “Methodology in Economics.” Southern Economic Journal 27: 185–93, 273–82.Google Scholar
Krajewski, W. 1977. Correspondence Principle and the Growth of Knowledge. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Kreps, D., Milgrom, P., Roberts, J., and Wilson, R.. 1982. “Rational Cooperation in the Finitely Repeated Prisoners’ Dilemma.” Journal of Economic Theory 27: 245–52.Google Scholar
Krugman, P. n.d. “There’s Something about Macro.” http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/islm.html.Google Scholar
Kube, S., André Maréchal, M., and Puppe, C.. 2012. “The Currency of Reciprocity: Gift Exchange in the Workplace.” American Economic Review 102: 1644–62.Google Scholar
Kube, S., André Maréchal, M., and Puppe, C.. 2013. “Do Wage Cuts Damage Work Morale? Evidence from a Natural Field Experiment.” Journal of the European Economic Association 11: 853–70.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kuipers, T., ed. 1987. What Is Closer-to-the Truth? A Parade of Approaches to Truthlikeness. Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and Humanities. 10. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Kunin, L. and Weaver, F.. 1971. “On the Structure of Scientific Revolutions in Economics.” History of Political Economy 3: 391–7.Google Scholar
Lakatos, I. 1968. “Changes in the Problem of Inductive Logic.” Repr. in Lakatos, vol. 2 (1978): 128–200.Google Scholar
Lakatos, I. 1970. “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes,” in Lakatos and Musgrave (1970), pp. 91–196 and in Lakatos, vol. 1 (1978), pp. 8–101.Google Scholar
Lakatos, I. 1971. “History of Science and Its Rational Reconstructions.” Repr. in Lakatos, vol. 1 (1978), pp. 102–38.Google Scholar
Lakatos, I. 1974. “Popper on Demarcation and Induction,” in Schlipp, P., ed. The Philosophy of Karl Popper. LaSalle, IL, Open Court, pp. 241–73. Repr. in Lakatos, vol. 1 (1978), pp. 139–67.Google Scholar
Lakatos, I. 1976. Proofs and Refutations: The Logic of Mathematical Discovery. Worrall, J. and Zahar, E., eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lakatos, I. 1978a. “Anomalies versus ‘Crucial Experiments’ (a Rejoinder to Professor Grünbaum),” in Lakatos, vol. 2 (1978), pp. 211–23.Google Scholar
Lakatos, I. 1978. Philosophical Papers. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A., eds. 1970. Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lakatos, I. and Zahar, E.. 1976. “Why Did Copernicus’s Research Programme Supersede Ptolemy’s?” Repr. in Lakatos, vol. 1 (1978b), pp. 168–92.Google Scholar
Lange, M. 2002. “Who’s Afraid of Ceteris-Paribus Laws? Or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Them.” Erkenntnis 57: 407–23.Google Scholar
Langley, P., Simon, H. A., Bradshaw, G., and Zytkow, J.. 1987. Scientific Discovery: Computational Explorations of the Creative Process. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Latsis, S. 1972. “Situational Determinism in Economics.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 23: 207–45.Google Scholar
Latsis, S. 1976. “A Research Programme in Economics,” in Latsis, ed. (1976), pp. 1–42.Google Scholar
Latsis, S., ed. 1976. Method and Appraisal in Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Laudan, L. 1977. Progress and Its Problems: Toward a Theory of Scientific Growth. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Laudan, L. 1983. “The Demise of the Demarcation Problem.” Working Papers in Science and Technology 2: 7–36. Virginia Tech Center for the Study of Science in Society.Google Scholar
Layard, R. and Glaister, S., eds. 1994. Cost-Benefit Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Le Grand, J. 1991. Equity and Choice: An Essay in Economics and Applied Philosophy. London: Harper-Collins.Google Scholar
Leibenstein, H. 1976. Beyond Economic Man: A New Foundation for Economics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Leijonhufvud, A. 1968. On Keynesian Economics and the Economics of Keynes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Leijonhufvud, A. 1976. “Schools, ‘Revolutions’ and Research Programmes in Economic Theory,” in Latsis, , ed. (1976), pp. 65–100.Google Scholar
Lerner, A. 1959a. “Consumption-Loan Interest and Money.” Journal of Political Economy 67: 512–18.Google Scholar
Lester, R. A. 1946. “Shortcomings of Marginal Analysis for Wage-Employment Problems.” American Economic Review 36: 62–82.Google Scholar
Lester, R. A. 1947. “Marginal, Minimum Wages, and Labor Markets.” American Economic Review 37: 135–48.Google Scholar
Levi, I. 1986. “The Paradoxes of Allais and Ellsberg.” Economics and Philosophy 2: 23–53.Google Scholar
Levi, I. and Morgenbesser, S.. 1964. “Beliefs and Dispositions.” American Philosophical Quarterly 1: 221–32.Google Scholar
Levine, A., Sober, E., and Wright, E.. 1987. “Marxism and Methodological Individualism.” New Left Review 162 (March/April): 67–84.Google Scholar
Levison, A. 1974. “Popper, Hume, and the Traditional Problem of Induction,” in Schilpp, , ed. (1974), pp. 322–31.Google Scholar
Levy, D. 1985. “The Impossibility of a Complete Methodological Individualist Reduction When Knowledge Is Imperfect.” Economics and Philosophy 1: 101–9.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. 1986. “Postscripts to ‘Counterfactual Dependence and Time’s Arrow,’” in Philosophical Papers, vol. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 52–66.Google Scholar
Lichtenstein, S. and Slovic, P.. 1971. “Reversals of Preference between Bids and Choices in Gambling Decisions.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 89: 46–55.Google Scholar
Lichtenstein, S. and Slovic, P.. 1973. “Response-Induced Reversals of Preference in Gambling: An extended Replication in Las Vegas.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 101: 16–20.Google Scholar
Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., Layman, M., and Combs, B.. 1978. “Judged Frequency of Lethal Events.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory 4: 551–78.Google Scholar
Lieberson, J. 1982b. “The Romantic Rationalist.” New York Review of Books 29 (December 2) www.nybooks.com/articles/1982/12/02/the-romantic-rationalist/.Google Scholar
Lindman, H. 1971. “Inconsistent Preferences among Gambles.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 89: 390–7.Google Scholar
Lipsey, R. 1966. An Introduction to Positive Economics. 2nd ed. London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson.Google Scholar
Lipsey, R. and Lancaster, K.. 1956–7. “The General Theory of the Second Best.” Review of Economic Studies 24: 11–31.Google Scholar
Long, J. and Plosser, C.. 1983. “Real Business Cycles.” Journal of Political Economy 91: 39–69.Google Scholar
Loomes, G. and Sugden, R.. 1982. “Regret Theory: An Alternative Theory of Rational Choice under Uncertainty.” Economic Journal 92: 805–24.Google Scholar
Loomes, G. and Sugden, R.. 1983. “A Rationale for Preference Reversal.” American Economic Review 73: 428–32.Google Scholar
Lucas, R. 1980. “Methods and Problems in Business Cycle Theory.” Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 12: 696–715.Google Scholar
Lukes, S. 1973. “Methodological Individualism Reconsidered,” in Ryan, , ed. (1973), pp. 119–30.Google Scholar
MacCrimmon, K. and Larsson, S.. 1979. “Utility Theory: Axioms versus ‘Paradoxes,’” in Allais, and Hagen, , ed. (1979), pp. 333–409.Google Scholar
Macdonald, G. 1986. “Modified Methodological Individualism.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 86: 199–211.Google Scholar
Machina, M. 1987. “Choice under Uncertainty: Problems Solved and Unsolved.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 1: 121–54.Google Scholar
Machlup, F. 1946. “Marginal Analysis and Empirical Research.” American Economic Review 36: 519–54.Google Scholar
Machlup, F. 1947. “Rejoinder to an Antimarginalist.” American Economic Review 37: 148–54.Google Scholar
Machlup, F. 1955. “The Problem of Verification in Economics.” Southern Economic Journal 22: 1–21.Google Scholar
Machlup, F. 1956. “Rejoinder to a Reluctant Ultra-Empiricist.” Southern Economic Journal 22: 483–93.Google Scholar
Machlup, F. 1960. “Operational Concepts and Mental Constructs in Model and Theory Formation.” Giornale Degli Economisti 19: 553–82.Google Scholar
Machlup, F. 1963. Essays on Economic Semantics Miller, M., ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Machlup, F. 1964. “Professor Samuelson on Theory and Realism.” American Economic Review. 54: 733–6.Google Scholar
Machlup, F. 1969. “If Matter Could Talk.” Repr. in F. Machlup, Methodology of Economics and Other Social Sciences. New York: Academic Press, pp. 309–32.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, A. 1967. “The Idea of a Social Science.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 41: 95–114.Google Scholar
MacKay, A. 1980. Arrow’s Theorem: The Paradox of Social Choice. A Case Study in the Philosophy of Economics. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
MacKay, A. 1986. “Extended Sympathy and Interpersonal Utility Comparisons.” Journal of Philosophy 83: 305–22.Google Scholar
Maher, P. 1989. “Levi on the Allais and Ellsberg Paradoxes.” Economics and Philosophy 5: 69–78.Google Scholar
Maher, P. and Kashima, Y.. 1991. “On the Descriptive Adequacy of Levi’s Decision Theory.” Economics and Philosophy 7: 93–100.Google Scholar
Mäki, U. 1986. “Rhetoric and the Expense of Coherence: A Reinterpretation of Milton Friedman’s Methodology.” Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology 4: 127–43.Google Scholar
Mäki, U. 1988a. “How to Combine Rhetoric and Realism in the Methodology of Economics.” Economics and Philosophy 4: 89–109.Google Scholar
Mäki, U. 1988b. “Realism, Economics, and Rhetoric: A Rejoinder to McCloskey.” Economics and Philosophy 4: 167–9.Google Scholar
Mäki, U. 1990. “Methodology of Economics: Complaints and Guidelines.” Finnish Economic Papers 3: 77–84.Google Scholar
Mäki, U. 1992. “On the Method of Isolation in Economics,” in Dilworth, C., ed. Intelligibility in Science in Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, vol. 26: pp. 19–54.Google Scholar
Mäki, U. 2005. “Models Are Experiments, Experiments Are Models. Journal of Economic Methodology 12: 303–15.Google Scholar
Mäki, U. 2009. “Missing the World: Models as Isolations and Credible Surrogate Systems.” Erkenntnis 70: 29–43.Google Scholar
Mayo, E. 1949. The Social Problems of an Industrial Civilization. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
McCallum, B. 1983. “The Role of Overlapping Generations Models in Monetary Economics,” in Brunner, K. and Meltzer, A., eds. Theory, Policy and Institutions: Papers from the Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy. Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 129–64.Google Scholar
McClennen, E. 1983. “Sure Thing Doubts,” in Stigum, B. and Wenstop, F., eds. Foundations of Utility and Risk Theory with Applications. Dordrecht: Reidel., pp. 117–36.Google Scholar
McClennen, E. 1990. Rationality and Dynamic Choice: Foundational Explorations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McCloskey, D. 1983. “The Rhetoric of Economics.” Journal of Economic Literature 21: 481–517.Google Scholar
McCloskey, D. 1985a. The Rhetoric of Economics. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
McCloskey, D. 1985b. “Sartorial Epistemology in Tatters: A Reply to Martin Hollis.” Economics and Philosophy 1: 134–8.Google Scholar
McCloskey, D. 1988a. “Thick and Thin Methodologies in the History of Economic Thought,” in de Marchi, , ed. (1988), pp. 245–58.Google Scholar
McCloskey, D. 1988b. “Towards a Rhetoric of Economics,” in Winston, and Teichgraeber, , eds. (1988), pp. 13–29.Google Scholar
McCloskey, D. 1988c. “Two Replies and a Dialogue on the Rhetoric of Economics: Mäki, Rappaport, Rosenberg.” Economics and Philosophy 4: 150–66.Google Scholar
McCloskey, D. 1989. “The Very Idea of Epistemology: A Comment on Standards.” Economics and Philosophy 5: 1–6.Google Scholar
McCloskey, D. 1990. If You’re so Smart: The Narrative of Economic Expertise. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
McKenzie, R. 1979. “The Non-Rational Domain and the Limits of Economic Analysis.” Southern Economic Journal 26: 145–57.Google Scholar
Malinvaud, E. 1972. Lectures on Microeconomic Theory, translated by A. Silvey. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Malinvaud, E. 1987. “The Overlapping Generations Model in 1947.” Journal of Economic Literature 25: 103–5.Google Scholar
Mankiw, G. 2006. “The Macroeconomist as Scientist and Engineer.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 20: 29–46.Google Scholar
Mantel, R. 1974. “On the Characterization of Aggregate Excess Demand.” Journal of Economic Theory 7: 348–53.Google Scholar
Marwell, G. and Ames, R.. 1981. “Economists Free Ride. Does Anyone Else? Experiments on the Provision of Public Goods. IV.” Journal of Public Economics 15: 295–310.Google Scholar
Marx, K. 1867. Capital, vol. 1, translated by S. Moore and E. Aveling. New York: International Publishers, 1967.Google Scholar
Mas-Collel, A. 1974. “An Equilibrium Existence Theorem without Complete or Transitive Preferences.” Journal of Mathematical Economics 1: 237–46.Google Scholar
Mas-Collel, A., Whinston, M., and Green, J.. 1995. Microeconomic Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mason, W. 1980–1. “Some Negative Thoughts on Friedman’s Positive Economics.” Journal of Post-Keynesian Economics 3: 235–55.Google Scholar
Masterman, M. 1970. “The Nature of a Paradigm,” in Lakatos and Musgrave (1970), pp. 59–90.Google Scholar
Mauss, M. 1954. The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies, translated by I. Cunnison. London: Cohen and West.Google Scholar
Meckling, W. 1960a. “An Exact Consumption-Loan Model of Interest: A Comment.” Journal of Political Economy 68: 72–6.Google Scholar
Melitz, J. 1965. “Friedman and Machlup on the Significance of Testing Economic Assumptions.” Journal of Political Economy 73: 37–60.Google Scholar
Menger, C. 1883. Problems of Economics and Sociology, Schneider, L., ed., translated by F. Nock. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1963.Google Scholar
Mill, J. 1820. An Essay on Government, Shields, Currin V., ed. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1955.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1836a. “On the Definition of Political Economy and the Method of Investigation Proper to It.” Repr. in J. Robson, ed. Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, vol. 4. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967, pp. 309–39.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1836b. “Of the Influence of Consumption on Production,” in J. Robson, ed. Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, vol. 4. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967, pp. 262–70.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1848. Principles of Political Economy with some of their Applications to Social Philosophy. Rpt. EconLib. https://www.econlib.org/library/Mill/mlP.htmlGoogle Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1871. Principles of Political Economy. 7th ed. Ashley, W., ed. (1909). Repr. New York: A. M. Kelley, 1976.Google Scholar
Miller, D. 1974. “Popper’s Qualitative Theory of Verisimilitude.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 25: 166–77.Google Scholar
Miller, D. 1982. “Conjectural Knowledge: Popper’s Solution to the Problem of Induction,” in Levinson, P., ed. In Pursuit of Truth: Essays in Honor of Karl Popper’s 80th Birthday. Hassocks: Harvester, pp. 17–49.Google Scholar
Miller, H. and Williams, W., eds. 1982. The Limits of Utilitarianism. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Miller, R. 1978. “Methodological Individualism and Social Explanation.” Philosophy of Science 45: 387–414.Google Scholar
Miller, R. 1987. Fact and Method: Explanation, Confirmation and Reality in the Natural and the Social Sciences. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Mirowski, P. 1989. “How Not to Do Things with Metaphors: Paul Samuelson and the Science of Neoclassical Economics.” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 20: 175–91.Google Scholar
Mises, L. von. 1949. Human Action. A Treatise on Economics. New Haven, Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Mises, L. von. 1978. The Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science: An Essay on Method. 2nd ed. Kansas City: Sheed Andrews.Google Scholar
Mises, L. von. 1981. Epistemological Problems of Economics, translated by G. Reisman. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Mishan, E. 1981. An Introduction to Normative Economics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Modigliani, F. and Brumberg, R.. 1955. “Utility Analysis and the Consumption Function,” in Kurihara, K., ed. Post-Keynesian Economics. London: Allen & Unwin, pp. 383–436.Google Scholar
Mongin, P. 1986a. “Are ‘All-and-Some’ Statements Falsifiable After All? The Example of Utility Theory.” Economics and Philosophy 2: 185–96.Google Scholar
Mongin, P. 1986b. “La Controverse sur l’Entreprise (1940–1950) et la Formation de l’Irréalisme Méthodologique.” Economies et Sociéties, sèrie Oeconomia 5: 91–151.Google Scholar
Mongin, P. 2015. “The Early Full-Cost Debate and the Problem of Empirically Testing Profit-Maximization.” Journal of Post-Keynesian Economics 13: 236–51.Google Scholar
Morgan, M. 2012. The World in the Model: How Economists Work and Think. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Morgan, M. and Morrison, M., eds. 1999. Models as Mediators: Perspectives on Natural and Social Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Morgenbesser, S. 1956. “Theories and Schemata in the Social Sciences.” Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Morgenbesser, S. 1969. “The Realist-Instrumentalist Controversy,” in Morgenbesser, S., Suppes, P., and White, M., eds. Philosophy, Science, and Method Structure of Science. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, pp. 106–52.Google Scholar
Morgenbesser, S. 1970. “Is It a Science?” in Emmett, D. and MacIntyre, A., eds. Sociological Theory and Philosophical Analysis. New York: Macmillan, pp. 20–35.Google Scholar
Mowen, J. and Gentry, J.. 1980. “Investigation of the Preference-Reversal Phenomenon in a New Product Introduction Task.” Journal of Applied Psychology 65: 715–22.Google Scholar
Murphy, N. 1989. “Another Look at Novel Facts.” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 20: 385–8.Google Scholar
Musgrave, A. 1981. “’Unreal Assumptions’ in Economic Theory: The F-Twist Untwisted.” Kyklos 34: 377–87.Google Scholar
Muth, J. 1961. “Rational Expectations and the Theory of Price Movements.” Econometrica 29: 315–35.Google Scholar
Myrdal, G. 1955. The Political Element in the Development of Economic Thought, translated by P. Streeten. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Nagel, E. 1963. “Assumptions in Economic Theory.” American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings 53: 211–19.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. and Winter, S.. 1974. “Neoclassical vs. Evolutionary Theory of Economic Growth: Critique and Prospectus.” Economic Journal 84: 886–905.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. and Winter, S.. 1982. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Netzer, N. and Schmutzler, A.. 2014. “Explaining Gift-Exchange—The Limits of Good Intentions.” Journal of the European Economic Association 12: 1586–616.Google Scholar
Neuberg, L. 1988. Conceptual Anomalies in Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nisbett, R. and Thagard, P.. 1982. “Variability and Confirmation.” Philosophical Studies 42: 379–94.Google Scholar
North, D. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Northcraft, G. B. and Neale, M. A.. 1987. “Experts, Amateurs, and Real Estate: An Anchoring-and-Adjustment Perspective on Property Pricing Decisions.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 39: 84–97.Google Scholar
Nowak, L. 1972. “Laws of Science, Theory, Measurement.” Philosophy of Science 39: 533–48.Google Scholar
Nowak, L. 1980. The Structure of Idealization: Towards a Systematic Interpretation of the Marxian Idea of Science. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, M. 2000. Women and Human Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Okun, A. 1975. Equality and Efficiency: The Big Tradeoff. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Okuno, M. and Zilcha, I.. 1983. “Optimal Steady-State in Stationary Consumption-Loan Type Models.” Journal of Economic Theory 31: 355–63.Google Scholar
Olson, M., Jr 1984. “Beyond Keynesianism and Monetarism.” Economic Inquiry 22: 297–322.Google Scholar
Overvold, M. 1984. “Morality, Self-Interest, and Reasons for Being Moral.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 44: 493–507.Google Scholar
Papandreou, A. 1963. “Theory Construction and Empirical Meaning in Economics.” American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings 53: 205–10.Google Scholar
Pareto, V. 1909. Manual of Political Economy, translated by A. Schwier. New York: A. M. Kelley, 1971.Google Scholar
Pettit, P. and Sugden, R.. 1989. “The Backward Induction Paradox.” Journal of Philosophy 86: 169–82.Google Scholar
Pheby, J. 1988. Methodology and Economics: A Critical Introduction. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Pietroski, P. and Rey, G.. 1995. “When Other Things Aren’t Equal: Saving Ceteris Paribus Laws from Vacuity.” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 46: 81–110.Google Scholar
Pommerehne, W. W., Schneider, F., and Zweifel, P.. 1982. “Economic Theory of Choice and the Preference Reversal Phenomenon: A Reexamination.” American Economic Review 72: 569–74.Google Scholar
Pope, D. and Pope, R.. 1972. “Predictionists, Assumptionists and the Relatives of the Assumptionists.” Australian Economic Papers 11: 224–8.Google Scholar
Popper, K. 1966. The Open Society and Its Enemies, vol. II, 5th ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1966.Google Scholar
Popper, K. 1968. The Logic of Scientific Discovery (rev. ed.) London: Hutchinson & Co.Google Scholar
Popper, K. 1969a. Conjectures and Refutations; The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. 3rd ed. London: Routledge & Kegan-Paul.Google Scholar
Popper, K. 1969b. “Die Logik der Sozialwissenschaften,” in Adorno, , ed. (1969), pp. 103–23.Google Scholar
Popper, K. 1969c. “Truth, Rationality and the Growth of Scientific Knowledge,” in Popper, , ed. (1969a), pp. 215–50.Google Scholar
Popper, K. 1972. Objective Knowledge; An Evolutionary Approach. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Popper, K. 1979. Die Beiden Grundprobleme der Erkenntnistheorie. Tubingen: Mohr-Siebeck.Google Scholar
Popper, K. 1983. Realism and the Aim of Science; From the Postscript to the Logic of Scientific Discovery, ed. Bartley, W., III. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Prescott, E. 1986. “Theory Ahead of Business Cycle Measurement.” Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Quarterly Review, 25: pp. 11–44.Google Scholar
Putnam, H. 1962. “The Analytic and the Synthetic,” in Feigl, and Maxwell, , eds. (1962), pp. 350–97.Google Scholar
Putnam, H. 1974. “The ‘Corroboration’ of Theories,” in Schilpp, , ed. (1974), pp. 221–40.Google Scholar
Quandt, R. 1980. MicroeconomicTheory: A Mathematical Approach. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Quine, W. 1953. “Two Dogmas of Empiricism,” in From a Logical Point of View. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 20–46.Google Scholar
Quine, W. 1969. “Epistemology Naturalized,” in Ontological Relativity and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 69–90.Google Scholar
Rabin, M. 1993. “Incorporating Fairness Into Game Theory and Economics.” American Economic Review 83: 1281–302.Google Scholar
Rachlin, H., Battalio, R., Kagel, J., and Green, L.. 1981. “Maximization Theory in Behavioral Psychology.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 4: 371–418.Google Scholar
Railton, P. 1980. “Explaining Explanation: A Realist Account of Scientific Explanation.” Ph. D. Dissertation, Princeton University.Google Scholar
Ramsey, F. 1926. “Truth and Probability,” in Braithwaite, R., ed. The Foundations of Mathematics and Other Logical Essays. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 156–98.Google Scholar
Ratneshwar, S., Shocker, A. D., and Stewart., D. W. 1987. “Toward Understanding the Attraction Effect: The implications of Product Stimulus Meaningfulness and Familiarity.” Journal of Consumer Research 13: 520–33.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, H. 1938. Experience and Prediction. An Analysis of the Foundations and the Structure of Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Reilly, R. 1982. “Preference Reversal: Further Evidence and Some Suggested Modifications in Experimental Design.” American Economic Review 72: 576–84.Google Scholar
Reiss, J. 2013. The Philosophy of Economics: A Contemporary Introduction. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Reutlinger, A. 2011. “Ceteris Paribus Laws.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ceteris-paribus.Google Scholar
Reynolds, E. 2019. “When We’re Hungry, We Remain Surprisingly Helpful and Co-operative.” The British Psychological Society Research Digest. November 11. https://digest.bps.org.uk/2019/11/11/when-were-hungry-we-remain-surprisingly-helpful-and-co-operative/.Google Scholar
Ricardo, D. 1817. On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation. Vol. 1 of the Collected Works of David Ricardo, eds. Sraffa, P. and Dobb, M.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1951.Google Scholar
Rizvi, S. 2006. “The Sonnenschein-Mantel-Debreu Results after Thirty Years.” History of Political Economy 38, Suppl. 1: 228–45.Google Scholar
Rizzo, M. 1982. “Mises and Lakatos: A Reformulation of Austrian Methodology,” in Kirzner, I., ed. Method, Process and Austrian Economics: Essays in Honour of Ludwig von Mises. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.Google Scholar
Robbins, L. 1932, 1935. An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science. 2nd ed. 1935. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Robbins, L. 1979. “On Latsis’ Method and Appraisal in Economics: A Review Essay.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 17: 996–1004.Google Scholar
Robeyns, I. 2017. Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice: The Capability Approach Re-Examined. Cambridge, UK: Open Book.Google Scholar
Rodrik, D. 2016. Economics Rules: The Rights and Wrongs of the Dismal Science. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Rol, M. 2012. “On Ceteris Paribus Laws in Economics (and Elsewhere): Why Do Social Sciences Matter to Each Other?” Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics 5: 27–53.Google Scholar
Romer, D. 2018. “Short-Run Fluctuations.” Copyright 2018 by David Romer. https://eml.berkeley.edu/~dromer/papers/Romer%20Short-Run%20Fluctuations%20January2018.pdf.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 1979. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Roscher, W. 1874. Geschichte der National-ökonomik in Deutschland. Munich: R. Oldenbourg.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, A. 1976. Microeconomic Laws: A Philosophical Analysis. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, A. 1980. Sociobiology and the Preemption of Social Science. Baltimore: Johns-Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, A. 1983. “If Economics Isn’t a Science: What Is It?” Philosophical Forum 14: 296–314.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, A. 1986. “Lakatosian Consolations for Economics.” Economics and Philosophy 2: 127–40.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, A. 1987. “Weintraub’s Aims: A Brief Rejoinder.” Economics and Philosophy 3: 143–4.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, A. 1988a. “Economics Is too Important to Be Left to the Rhetoricians.” Economics and Philosophy 4: 129–49.Google Scholar
Roth, A. n.d. “Matching Kidney Donors with Those Who Need Them—and Other Explorations in Economics.” www.nap.edu/read/23508/Google Scholar
Roth, A. 1987. “Bargaining Phenomena and Bargaining Theory,” in Roth, , ed. (1987), pp. 14–41.Google Scholar
Roth, A. 1988. “Laboratory Experimentation in Economics: A Methodological Overview.” Economic Journal 98: 974–1031.Google Scholar
Roth, A., ed. 1987. Laboratory Experimentation in Economics: Six Points of View. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rothbard, M. 1957. “In Defense of ‘Extreme Apriorism.’” Southern Economic Journal 23: 314–20.Google Scholar
Rothbard, M. 1976. “Praxeology: The Methodology of Austrian Economics,” in Dolan, , ed. (1976), pp. 19–39.Google Scholar
Rotwein, E. 1959. “On ‘The Methodology of Positive Economics.’” Quarterly Journal of Economics 73: 554–75.Google Scholar
Rotwein, E. 1962. “On ‘The Methodology of Positive Economics’ Reply.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 76: 666–8.Google Scholar
Rubinstein, A. and Salant, Y.. 2008. "Some Thoughts on the Principle of Revealed Preference,” in Caplin, and Schotter, , eds. (2008), pp. 116–24.Google Scholar
Runciman, W. 1972. A Critique of Max Weber’s Philosophy of the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Russell, B. 1905. “On Denoting.” Repr. in Russell, B., Logic and Knowledge: Essays 1901–50. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, pp. 39–56.Google Scholar
Russell, B. 1912. “On the Notion of Cause.” Repr. in Russell, B., Mysticism and Logic and Other Essays. London: George Allen & Unwin, pp. 132–51.Google Scholar
Russell, T. and Thaler, R.. 1985. “The Relevance of Quasi Rationality in Competitive Markets.” American Economic Review 75: 1071–82.Google Scholar
Ryan, A., ed. 1973. The Philosophy of Social Explanation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Safra, Z., Segal, U., and Spivak, A.. 1990. “Preference Reversal and Nonexpected Utility Behavior.” American Economic Review 80: 922–30.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. 1971. “Statistical Explanation,” in Salmon, W., ed. Statistical Explanation and Statistical Relevance. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 29–88.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. 1981. “Rational Prediction.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 32: 115–25.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. 1985. Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. 1990. Four Decades of Scientific Explanation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Samuels, W., ed. 1980. The Methodology of Economic Thought: Critical Papers from the Journal of Economic Thought [Issues]. New Brunswick: Transaction Books.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P. 1938. “A Note on the Pure Theory of Consumer’s Behavior.” Economica 5: 61–71.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P. 1947. Foundations of Economic Analysis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P. 1950. “Evaluation of Real National Income.” Oxford Economic Papers. N.S. 2: 1–29.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P. 1958. “An Exact Consumption-Loan Model of Interest with or without the Social Contrivance of Money.” Journal of Political Economy 66: 467–82.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P. 1960. “Infinity, Unanimity and Singularity: A Reply.” Journal of Political Economy 68: 76–83.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P. 1963. “Problems of Methodology – Discussion.” American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings 53: 232–36.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P. 1964. “Theory and Realism: A Reply.” American Economic Review 54: 736–40.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P. 1965. “Professor Samuelson on Theory and Realism: Reply.” American Economic Review 55: 1162–72.Google Scholar
Sargent, T. 1987. Dynamic Macroeconomic Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schiller, R. 2020. Narrative Economics: How Stories Go Viral and Drive Major Economic Events. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Schkade, D. and Johnson, E.. 1989. “Cognitive Processes in Preference Reversals.” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 44: 203–31.Google Scholar
Schmoller, G. 1888. Zur Literatur-geschichte der Staats- und Sozialwissenschaften. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
Schmoller, G. 1898. Über einige Grundfragen der Sozialpolitik und der Volkswirtshaftslehre. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
Segal, U. 1988. “Does the Preference Reversal Phenomenon Necessarily Contradict the Independence Axiom?” American Economic Review 78: 233–6.Google Scholar
Seidenfeld, T., Schervish, M., and Kadane, J.. 1987. “Decisions without Ordering.” Technical Report N. 391, Department of Statistics, Carnegie Mellon University.Google Scholar
Sen, A. 1971. “Choice Functions and Revealed Preference.” Review of Economic Studies 38: 307–17.Google Scholar
Sen, A. 1977. "Rational Fools: A Critique of the Behavioural Foundations of Economics Theory." Philosophy & Public Affairs 6: 317–45.Google Scholar
Sen, A. 1979a. “Personal Utilities and Public Judgment: or What’s Wrong with Welfare Economics?” Economic Journal 89: 537–58.Google Scholar
Sen, A. 1985. “Well-being, Agency and Freedom: The Dewey Lectures 1984.” Journal of Philosophy 82: 169–221.Google Scholar
Senior, N. 1836. Outline of the Science of Political Economy. Repr. New York: A. M. Kelley, 1965.Google Scholar
Sensat, J. 1988. “Methodological Individualism and Marxism.” Economics and Philosophy 4: 189–220.Google Scholar
Shafer, W. and Sonnenschein, H.. 1982. “Market Demand and Excess Demand Functions,” in Arrow, K. and Intriligator, M., eds. Handbook of Mathematic Economics, vol. 2. New York: North-Holland, pp. 671–93.Google Scholar
Shapere, D. 1964. “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.” Philosophical Review 73: 383–94.Google Scholar
Shapere, D. 1974. “Scientific Theories and Their Domains,” in Suppe, , ed. (1977), pp. 518–65.Google Scholar
Shapere, D. 1985. “Objectivity, Rationality, and Scientific Change,” in Asquith, P. and Kitcher, P., eds. PSA 1984, vol. 2. East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 637–63.Google Scholar
Shell, K. 1971. “Notes on the Economics of Infinity.” Journal of Political Economy 79: 1002–11.Google Scholar
Simon, H. 1954. “Bandwagon and Underdog Effects of Election Predictions.” Public Opinion Quarterly 18: 245–53.Google Scholar
Simon, H. 1959. “Theories of Decision-Making in Economics and Behavioral Science.” American Economic Review 49: 253–83.Google Scholar
Simon, H. 1963. “Problems of Methodology – Discussion.” American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings 53: 229–31.Google Scholar
Simon, H. 1976. “From Substantive to Procedural Rationality,” in Latsis, , ed. (1976), pp. 129–48.Google Scholar
Simon, H. 1978. “Rationality as Process and as Product of Thought.” American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings 68: 1–16.Google Scholar
Simon, H. 1979. “Rational Decision Making in Business Organizations.” American Economic Review 69: 493–513.Google Scholar
Simonson, I. and Tversky., A. 1992. “Choice in Context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion.” Journal of Marketing Research 29: 281–95.Google Scholar
Sims, C. 1977. “Exogeneity and Causal Orderings in Macroeconomic Models,” in Sims, C., ed. New Methods in Business Cycle Research. Minneapolis: Federal Reserve Bank, pp. 23–43.Google Scholar
Sims, C. 1981. “What Kind of Science Is Economics? A Review Article on Causality in Economics by John R. Hicks.” Journal of Political Economy 89: 578–83.Google Scholar
Slovic, P. 1972. “From Shakespeare to Simon: Speculations — and Some Evidence — about Man’s Ability to Process Information.” Oregon Research Institute Research Bulletin 12: 1–30.Google Scholar
Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., and Lichtenstein., S. 1977. “Cognitive Processes and Societal Risk Taking,” in Jungermann, H. and de Zeeuw, G., eds. Decision Making and Change in Human Affairs. Boston: D. Reidel, pp. 7–36.Google Scholar
Slovic, P., Griffin, D., and Tversky, A.. 1990. “Compatibility Effects in Judgment and Choice,” in Hogarth, R. M., ed. Insights in Decision Making: Theory and Applications. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 5–27.Google Scholar
Slovic, P. and Lichtenstein, S.. 1983. “Preference Reversals: A Broader Perspective.” American Economic Review 73: 596–605.Google Scholar
Slovic, P. and Tversky, A.. 1974. “Who Accepts Savage’s Axiom?” Behavioral Science 19: 368–73.Google Scholar
Smith, A. 1759. The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Repr. 1976. Indianapolis: Liberty Press.Google Scholar
Smith, A. 1776. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Repr. New York: Random House, 1937.Google Scholar
Smith, M. 1990. “What Is New in “New Structuralist” Analyses of Earnings?” American Journal of Sociology 55: 827–41.Google Scholar
Smith, V. 1982. “Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Science.” American Economic Review 72: 923–55.Google Scholar
Smith, V., ed. 1978. Research in Experimental Economics. Greenwich, Connecticut: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Solow, R. 1957. “Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Function.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 39: 312–20.Google Scholar
Sonnenschein, H. 1973. “Do Walras’ Identity and Continuity Characterize the Class of Community Excess Demand Functions?” Journal of Economic Theory 6: 345–54.Google Scholar
Stalnaker, R. 1968. “A Theory of Conditionals.” Repr. in Sosa, E., ed. Causation and Conditionals. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975, pp. 165–79.Google Scholar
Stalnaker, R. 1972. “Pragmatics,” in Davidson, D. and Harman, G., eds. Semantics of Natural Language. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 380–97.Google Scholar
Stanfield, R. 1974. “Kuhnian Revolutions and the Keynesian Revolution.” Journal of Economic Issues 8: 97–109.Google Scholar
Starmer, C. 2008. “Preference Reversals,” in Durlauf, S. and Blume, L., eds. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. 2nd ed. London: Palgrave Macmillan doi: 10.1057/978-1-349-95121-5_1692-2.Google Scholar
Starmer, C. and Sugden, R.. 1998. “Testing Alternative Explanations of Cyclical Choices. Economica 65: 259–347.Google Scholar
Stegmueller, W. 1976. The Structure and Dynamics of Theories, translated by William Wohlhueter. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Stegmueller, W., Balzer, W., and Spohn, W., eds. 1982. Philosophy of Economics: Proceedings, Munich, July 1981. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Stewart, I. 1979. Reasoning and Method in Economics. An Introduction to Economic Methodology. London: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Stigler, G. J. 1947. “Professor Lester and the Marginalists.” American Economic Review 37: 154–7.Google Scholar
Stigler, G. J. 1959. “The Politics of Political Economists.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. Repr. in Stigler, G. J., Essays in the History of Economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1965, pp. 51–65.Google Scholar
Stigler, G. J. 1976. “Do Economists Matter?” Southern Economic Journal. Repr. in Stigler, G. J., The Economist as Preachers and Other Essays. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982, pp. 57–67.Google Scholar
Stigler, G. J. and Becker, G.. 1977. “De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum.” American Economic Review 67: 76–90.Google Scholar
Stouffer, S., Lumsdaine, A., Lumsdaine, M., Williams, R., Smith, M., Jarvis, I., Star, S, and Cottrell, L., Jr. 1949. The American Soldier: Combat and Its Aftermath. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Stouffer, S., Suchman, E., de Vinney, L., Star, S., and Williams, R., Jr. 1949. The American Soldier: Adjustment during Army Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Suarez, M. 1999. “The Role of Models in the Application of Scientific Theoreis: Epistemological Implications.” Pp. 168–195 of Morgan and Morrison, eds. (1999).Google Scholar
Sugden, R. 1986. “New Developments in the Theory of Choice under Uncertainty.” Bulletin of Economic Research 38: 1–24.Google Scholar
Sugden, R. 2000. “Credible Worlds: The Status of Theoretical Models in Economics.” Journal of Economic Methodology: 7: 1–31.Google Scholar
Sugden, R. 2003. Reference-Dependent Subjective Expected Utility. Journal of Economic Theory 111: 172–91.Google Scholar
Sugden, R. 2018. The Community of Advantage: A Behavioural Economist’s Defence of the Market. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Suppe, F. 1974. “Theories and Phenomena,” in Leinfeller, W. and Kohler, W., eds. Developments in the Methodology of Social Science. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 45–92.Google Scholar
Suppe, F., ed. 1977. The Structure of Scientific Theories. 2nd ed. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Thagard, P. and Nisbett, R.. 1982. “Variability and Confirmation.” Philosophical Studies 42: 379–94.Google Scholar
Thaler, R. 1980. “Toward a Positive Theory of Consumer Choice.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 1: 39–60.Google Scholar
Thaler, R. 1987. “The Psychology of Choice and the Assumptions of Economics,” in Roth, , ed. (1987), pp. 99–130.Google Scholar
Thaler, R. and Sunstein, C.. 2008. Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Thoma, J. 2021a. “In Defense of Revealed Preference Theory.” Economics and Philosophy 37: 163–87.Google Scholar
Thoma, J. 2021b. “Folk Psychology and the Interpretation of Decision Theory. Ergo 7: 904–36.Google Scholar
Thurow, L. 1980. The Zero-Sum Society. New York: Basic Books. Repr. and cited in the Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1981 edition.Google Scholar
Tichy, P. 1974. “On Popper’s Definition of Verisimilitude.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 25: 155–60.Google Scholar
Titmuss, R. 1971. The Gift Relationship: From Human Blood to Social Policy. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Toulmin, S. and Goodfield, J.. 1961. The Fabric of the Heavens: The Development of Astronomy and Dynamics. New York: Harper Torchbooks.Google Scholar
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. 1973. “Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability.” Cognitive Psychology 5: 207–32.Google Scholar
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. 1981. “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice.” Science 211: 453–8.Google Scholar
Tversky, A., Slovic, P., and Kahneman, D.. 1990. “The Causes of Preference Reversal.” American Economic Review 80: 204–17.Google Scholar
Tversky, A. and Simonson, I.. 1993. “Context–Dependent Preferences.” Management Science 39: 1179–89.Google Scholar
Tversky, A. and Thaler, R.. 1990. “Preference Reversals.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 4: 201–11.Google Scholar
Tyszka, T. 1983. “Contextual Multiattribute Decision Rules,” in Sjöberg, L., Tyszka, T., and Wise, J. A., eds. Human Decision Making. Lund: Bokförlaget Doxa, pp. 243–56.Google Scholar
Veblen, T. 1898. “Why Is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science?” Quarterly Journal of Economics 12: 373–97.Google Scholar
Veblen, T. 1900. “The Preconceptions of Economic Science.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 13 (1899): 121–50, 396–426: 14: 240–69.Google Scholar
Veblen, T. 1909. “The Limitations of Marginal Utility.” Journal of Political Economy 17: 620–36.Google Scholar
Vining, A. and Weimer, D. L.. (2010) “An Assessment of Important Issues Concerning the Application of Benefit-Cost Analysis to Social Policy,” Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis 1(1): Article 6. Available at: http://www.bepress.com/jbca/vol1/iss1/6 DOI: 10.2202/2152-2812.1013.Google Scholar
von Neumann, J. and Morgenstern, O.. 1947. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wallace, N. 1980a. “Integrating Micro and Macroeconomics: An Application to Credit Controls.” Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Quarterly Review 4, #4 (Fall): 16–29.Google Scholar
Wallace, N. 1980b. “The Overlapping Generations Model of Fiat Money,” in Kareken, and Wallace, , eds. (1980), pp. 49–82.Google Scholar
Walras, L. 1926. Elements of Pure Economics, translated by W. Jaffe. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin, 1954.Google Scholar
Watkins, J. 1953. “Ideal Types and Historical Explanation,” in Feigl, H. and Brodbeck, M., eds. Readings in the Philosophy of Science, pp. 723–44. Repr. in Ryan (1973), pp. 82–104.Google Scholar
Watkins, J. 1968. “Methodological Individualism and Social Tendencies,” in Brodbeck, M., ed. Readings in the Philosophy of the Social Sciences. New York: Macmillan, pp. 269–79.Google Scholar
Weber, M. 1904. “‘Objectivity’ in Social Science and Social Policy,” in Weber, , ed. (1949), pp. 49–112.Google Scholar
Weber, M. 1949. The Methodology of the Social Sciences, translated by and ed. Shils, E. and Finch, H.. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Weber, M. 1975. Roscher and Knies: The Logical Problem of Historical Economics, translated by G. Oakes. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Wedell, D. H. 1991. “Distinguishing among Models of Contextually Induced Preference Reversals.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 17: 767–78.Google Scholar
Weil, P. 2008. “Overlapping Generations: The First Jubilee.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 22: 115–34.Google Scholar
Weintraub, E. 1985a. “Appraising General Equilibrium Analysis.” Economics and Philosophy 1: 23–38.Google Scholar
Weintraub, E. 1985b. General Equilibrium Analysis: Studies in Appraisal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Weintraub, E. 1987. “Rosenberg’s ‘Lakatosian Consolations for Economics’: Comment.” Economics and Philosophy 3: 139–42.Google Scholar
Weintraub, E. 1988. “The “Neo-Walrasian Program Is Empirically Progressive,” in de Marchi, , ed. (1988), pp. 213–30.Google Scholar
Weintraub, E. 1990. Stabilizing Economic Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Whalley, J. 1988. “Lessons from General Equilibrium Models,” in Aaron, H., Galper, H., and Pechman, J., eds. Uneasy Compromise: Problems of a Hybrid Income-Consumption Tax. Washington: Brookings Institution, pp. 15–57.Google Scholar
Whewell, W. 1840. The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences. New York: Johnson Reprint, 1967.Google Scholar
White, M. 1956. Toward Reunion in Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wible, J. 1987. “Criticism and the Validity of the Special-Case Interpretation of Friedman’s Essay: Reply.” Journal of Economic Issues 21: 430–40.Google Scholar
Wilber, C. and Harrison, R.. 1978. “The Methodological Basis of Institutional Economics: Pattern Model, Storytelling and Holism.” Journal of Economic Issues 12: 61–89.Google Scholar
Winch, P. 1964. “Understanding a Primitive Society.” American Philosophical Quarterly 1: 307–24.Google Scholar
Winter, S. 1962. “Economic ‘Natural Selection’ and the Theory of the Firm.” Yale Economic Essays 4: 255–72.Google Scholar
Woodward, J. 2000. “Explanation and Invariance in the Special Sciences.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 51: 197–254.Google Scholar
Worland, S. 1972. “Radical Political Economy as a ‘Scientific Revolution.’” Southern Economic Journal 39: 274–84.Google Scholar
Yeager, L. 1969. “Methodenstreit over Demand Curves.” Journal of Political Economy 68: 53–64.Google Scholar
Zahar, E. 1983. “The Popper-Lakatos Controversy in the Light of ‘Die Beiden Grundprobleme der Erkenntnistheorie.’” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 34: 149–74.Google Scholar