Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8bljj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-15T09:07:40.624Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Evolutionary model of folk economics: That which is seen, and that which is not seen?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 August 2018

Dan Stastny
Affiliation:
Department of Business Administration, University of New York in Prague, CZ-120 00 Prague 2, Czech Republic. stastnyd2@gmail.comhttps://sites.google.com/site/stastnyd2/ Faculty of Social and Economic Studies, J. E. Purkyne University in Usti nad Labem, CZ-40096 Usti nad Labem, Czech Republic.
Petr Houdek
Affiliation:
Faculty of Social and Economic Studies, J. E. Purkyne University in Usti nad Labem, CZ-40096 Usti nad Labem, Czech Republic. Faculty of Science, Charles University in Prague, CZ-12808 Prague 2, Czech Republic. Faculty of Business Administration, University of Economics, Prague, CZ-130 67 Prague 3, Czech Republic. petr.houdek@gmail.comhttp://houdekpetr.cz/

Abstract

Although Boyer & Petersen (B&P) make the case for evolutionary roots of folk economics stronger, their evolutionary model ultimately does not deliver folk-economic explanations that are both novel and correct. We argue that (a) most current explanations are evolutionary already; (b) B&P's model is as ad hoc as other theories, and proves too much; and (c) it overrates evolution at the cost of discounting other crucial factors.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arkes, H. R. (1991) Costs and benefits of judgment errors: Implications for debiasing. Psychological Bulletin 110(3):486–98. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.110.3.486.Google Scholar
Bastiat, C. F. (1850/1995) That which is seen and that which is not seen. In: Selected essays on political economy, trans. Cain, S., ed. de Huszar, G. B.. Library of Economics and Liberty. (Original work published in 1850). Available at: http://www.econlib.org/library/Bastiat/basEss1.html.Google Scholar
Caplan, B. (2002) Systematically biased beliefs about economics: Robust evidence of judgemental anomalies from the survey of Americans and economists on the economy. The Economic Journal 112(479):433–58. doi: 10.1111/1468-0297.00041.Google Scholar
Caplan, B. (2007) The myth of the rational voter: Why democracies choose bad policies. Princeton University Press. [Original hardcover edition]Google Scholar
Caplan, B. & Miller, S. (2010) Intelligence makes people think like economists: Evidence from the General Social Survey. Intelligence 38(6):636–47 doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2010.09.005.Google Scholar
Davidov, E., Meuleman, B., Billiet, J. & Schmidt, P. (2008) Values and support for immigration: A cross-country comparison. European Sociological Review 24(5):583–99.Google Scholar
Edwards, M. S. (2006) Public opinion regarding economic and cultural globalization: Evidence from a cross-national survey. Review of International Political Economy 13(4):587608.Google Scholar
Evans, E. M. (2001) Cognitive and contextual factors in the emergence of diverse belief systems: Creation versus evolution. Cognitive Psychology 42(3):217–66.Google Scholar
Houdek, P. (2016) What comes to a manager's mind: Theory of local thinking. Journal of Management Inquiry 25(4):359–66. doi: 10.1177/1056492616640380.Google Scholar
Houdek, P., Novakova, J. & Stastny, D. (2016) Ultrasociality: When institutions make a difference. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 39(1):2426. doi: 10.1017/s0140525x15001089.Google Scholar
International Social Survey Programme (2006) International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) 2006: Role of Government IV. Available at: http://zacat.gesis.org/webview/index.jsp?object=http://zacat.gesis.org/obj/fStudy/ZA470.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2011) Thinking, fast and slow. Penguin Books.Google Scholar
McCloskey, D. N. (2006) Bourgeois virtues: Ethics for an age of commerce. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
McCloskey, D. N. (2010) Bourgeois dignity: Why economics can't explain the modern world. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Neher, F. (2011) Preferences for redistribution across the world. School of Business and Economics Discussion Papers, Freie Universität, Berlin, December 2011. doi: 10.17169/FUDOCS_document_000000013004. Available at: http://www.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/en/fachbereich/vwl/corneo/dp/Preferences_for_Redistribution_around_the_World_VDiss.pdfGoogle Scholar
O'Rourke, K. H., Sinnott, R., Richardson, J. D. & Rodrik, D. (2001) The determinants of individual trade policy preferences: International survey evidence [with comments and discussion]. In: Brookings trade forum, ed. Collins, S. M. & Rodrik, D., pp. 157206. Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Pennycook, G. & Rand, D. G. (2017) Who falls for fake news? The roles of analytic thinking, motivated reasoning, political ideology, and bullshit receptivity. (Online article). Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3023545.Google Scholar
Ribstein, L. E. (2012) Wall Street and Vine: Hollywood's view of business. Managerial and Decision Economics 33(4):211–48. doi: 10.1002/mde.2544.Google Scholar
Stastny, D. (2010) The economics of Economics. Instituto Bruno Leoni. [Google Books version] Available at: https://books.google.cz/books?id=VHHpyDcFshcC.Google Scholar
World Values Survey (2014) World Values Survey (WVS) 6. Available at: http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSOnline.jsp.Google Scholar