The Making of Index Numbers in the Early 1920s
A Closer Look at the Fisher-Mitchell Debate
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 7797233 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Victor Cruz-E-Silva (Universidade Federal do Paraná), Victor Cruz‐e‐silva (0000-0002-2504-5980, Universidade Federal do Paraná, autor de correspondencia), Felipe Almeida (0000-0002-3792-793X, Universidade Federal do Paraná, autor de correspondencia) |
| Año | 2022 |
| Volumen | 54 |
| Número | 4 |
| Páginas | 655-686 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2022-08-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | No |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | History of Political Economy (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 0018-2702 • E-ISSN: 1527-1919 |
| Editorial | Duke University Press (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1215/00182702-9895860 |
| OpenAlex | W4281257610 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citas recibidas | 2 |
| Referencias citadas | 72 |
The systematic emergence of the test approach to index numbers took place in the early 1920s, a period marked by pluralism in American economics. Promoted by Irving Fisher, the test approach to index numbers aimed to select a universally valid, ideal formula for index numbers by employing a series of mathematical tests. However, from the first presentation of Fisher's approach, at the 1920 Annual Meeting of the American Statistical Association, to the publication of his book The Making of Index Numbers, in 1922, he faced a series of criticisms, not addressed to his ideal formula per se, but rather aimed at the very idea that a universal formula for index numbers could be singled out. The most prominent individuals involved in this debate were Wesley Mitchell, Warren Persons, Correa Walsh (Fisher's only supporter), and Allyn Young. Among them, the foremost representative of Fisher's antagonists was Mitchell. This study aims at reconstructing this antagonism, arguing that the disagreements between Fisher and Mitchell resulted from their different backgrounds and their distinct understandings of economics as a science. More specifically, this article illustrates how Fisher, as a mathematical economist, privileged a universalist conception of science, while Mitchell, as an institutionalist, understood economics as a contextual and historical discipline, and it illustrates how these preconceptions spilled over to their debates on index numbers. To illuminate such positions, this study explores their archival correspondence
Economics · Epistemology · Ideal (ethics · Index (typography · Mathematical economics · Pluralism (philosophy · Positive economics · Sociology · Computer Science · Economic Theory and Institutions · Historical Economic and Social Studies · Mathematics · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science
The History of Econometric Ideas
Irving Fisher, J. M. Keynes, and the Transition to Modern Macroeconomics
Social Science and the Making of Social Policy
Fisher's Formula for Index Numbers
Measurement Without Theory
Wisconsin Institutionalism
Mr. Walsh on the Measurement of General Exchange Value
The Making of Index-Numbers; A Study of their Varieties, Tests, and Reliability
Professor Bowley on Index-Numbers
The Plurality of Index-Numbers
The Doctrine of Index-Numbers According to Mr. Correa Walsh
Probability and Depreciation
Fisher's Instrumental Approach to Index Numbers
The Form and Function of Price Indexes
The a Posteriori Method and the Creation of New Theory
Modern Economic Thought
American Economics
William Graham Sumner's Social Darwinism
"Böhm-Bawerk, Irving Fisher, and the Term "Veil of Money
Perhaps I'm a Don Quixote but I'm Trying to Be a Paul Revere
The Harvard Economic Service and the Problems of Forecasting
Wesley Clair Mitchell
A Citation Analysis of the Sources and Extent of Wesley Mitchell's Reputation
The Teaching of Business Cycles in 1905-1906
Irving Fisher of Yale
Breed Out the Unfit and Breed In the Fit
Economics invents the economy
| Obras citantes distintas | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 1 |
| Intervalo de citas | 2024 - 2025 (2) |
| Velocidad de citación | recent |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 2 |