On the Econ within

Daniel M. Hausman

doi:10.1080/1350178X.2015.1070525

On the Econ within

Daniel M. Hausman

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

9 Scopus citations

Abstract

This essay examines the critique of behavioral economics that Infante, Lecouteaux and Sugden (ILS) offer in:"Preference Purification and the Inner Rational Agent.” It identifies and questions three main criticisms that ILS make: (i) a methodological criticism, alleging that there is no psychological basis for the attribution of purified preferences, (ii) an epistemological criticism, alleging that there is little evidence for claims about purified preferences, and (iii) a normative criticism, arguing that policies should aim to facilitate people’s choices rather than to satisfy purified preferences. The essay also distinguishes the view of welfare economics defended in Preference, Value, Choice, and Welfare from the claims of behavioral economists ILS criticize.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	26-32
Number of pages	7
Journal	Journal of Economic Methodology
Volume	23
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2015.1070525
State	Published - Jan 2 2016
Externally published	Yes

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)

Keywords

behavioral economics
paternalism
preferences
welfare economics

Access to Document

10.1080/1350178X.2015.1070525

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'On the Econ within'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

@article{504870f0de134b6d951a252ddbe46d08,

title = "On the Econ within",

abstract = "This essay examines the critique of behavioral economics that Infante, Lecouteaux and Sugden (ILS) offer in:{"}Preference Purification and the Inner Rational Agent.” It identifies and questions three main criticisms that ILS make: (i) a methodological criticism, alleging that there is no psychological basis for the attribution of purified preferences, (ii) an epistemological criticism, alleging that there is little evidence for claims about purified preferences, and (iii) a normative criticism, arguing that policies should aim to facilitate people{\textquoteright}s choices rather than to satisfy purified preferences. The essay also distinguishes the view of welfare economics defended in Preference, Value, Choice, and Welfare from the claims of behavioral economists ILS criticize.",

keywords = "behavioral economics, paternalism, preferences, welfare economics",

author = "Hausman, {Daniel M.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2015 Taylor & Francis.",

year = "2016",

month = jan,

day = "2",

doi = "10.1080/1350178X.2015.1070525",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "23",

pages = "26--32",

journal = "Journal of Economic Methodology",

issn = "1350-178X",

publisher = "Routledge",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - On the Econ within

AU - Hausman, Daniel M.

PY - 2016/1/2

Y1 - 2016/1/2

N2 - This essay examines the critique of behavioral economics that Infante, Lecouteaux and Sugden (ILS) offer in:"Preference Purification and the Inner Rational Agent.” It identifies and questions three main criticisms that ILS make: (i) a methodological criticism, alleging that there is no psychological basis for the attribution of purified preferences, (ii) an epistemological criticism, alleging that there is little evidence for claims about purified preferences, and (iii) a normative criticism, arguing that policies should aim to facilitate people’s choices rather than to satisfy purified preferences. The essay also distinguishes the view of welfare economics defended in Preference, Value, Choice, and Welfare from the claims of behavioral economists ILS criticize.

AB - This essay examines the critique of behavioral economics that Infante, Lecouteaux and Sugden (ILS) offer in:"Preference Purification and the Inner Rational Agent.” It identifies and questions three main criticisms that ILS make: (i) a methodological criticism, alleging that there is no psychological basis for the attribution of purified preferences, (ii) an epistemological criticism, alleging that there is little evidence for claims about purified preferences, and (iii) a normative criticism, arguing that policies should aim to facilitate people’s choices rather than to satisfy purified preferences. The essay also distinguishes the view of welfare economics defended in Preference, Value, Choice, and Welfare from the claims of behavioral economists ILS criticize.

KW - behavioral economics

KW - paternalism

KW - preferences

KW - welfare economics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84961244603&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84961244603&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/1350178X.2015.1070525

DO - 10.1080/1350178X.2015.1070525

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84961244603

VL - 23

SP - 26

EP - 32

JO - Journal of Economic Methodology

JF - Journal of Economic Methodology

SN - 1350-178X

IS - 1

ER -

On the Econ within

Abstract

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Cite this