Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T14:05:46.678Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Causal complexity demands community coordination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2022

Beau Sievers Open the ORCID record for Beau Sievers [Opens in a new window]  and
Evan DeFilippis
Beau Sievers
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA02138, USA. beau@beausievers.com; defilippis@g.harvard.edu
Evan DeFilippis
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA02138, USA. beau@beausievers.com; defilippis@g.harvard.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Yarkoni's argument risks skepticism about the very possibility of social science: If social phenomena are too causally complex, normal scientific methods could not possibly untangle them. We argue that the problem of causal complexity is best approached at the level of scientific communities and institutions, not the modeling practices of individual scientists.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 45 , 2022 , e31
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Apicella, C. L., Azevedo, E. M., Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H. (2014). Evolutionary origins of the endowment effect: Evidence from hunter-gatherers. American Economic Review, 104(6), 1793–1805. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.6.1793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coursey, D. L., Hovis, J. L., & Schulze, W. D. (1987). The disparity between willingness to accept and willingness to pay measures of value. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 102(3), 679–690. https://doi.org/10.2307/1884223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harbaugh, W. T., Krause, K., & Vesterlund, L. (2001). Are adults better behaved than children? Age, experience, and the endowment effect. Economics Letters, 70(2), 175–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-1765(00)00359-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harding, S. (1992). Rethinking standpoint epistemology: What is “strong objectivity?” The Centennial Review, 36(3), 437–470.Google Scholar
Heesen, R., & Bright, L. K. (2020). Is peer review a good idea? The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 72(3), 635–663. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axz029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hempel, C. G. (1988). Provisoes: A problem concerning the inferential function of scientific theories. Erkenntnis, 28(2), 147–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1990). Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem. Journal of Political Economy, 98(6), 1325–1348. https://doi.org/10.1086/261737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knetsch, J. L., & Sinden, J. A. (1984). Willingness to pay and compensation demanded: Experimental evidence of an unexpected disparity in measures of value. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 99(3), 507–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakshminaryanan, V., Keith Chen, M., & Santos, L. R. (2008). Endowment effect in capuchin monkeys. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 363(1511), 3837–3844. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lange, M. (1993). Natural laws and the problem of provisos. Erkenntnis, 38, 233–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
List, J. A. (2003). Does market experience eliminate market anomalies?*. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 41–71. https://doi.org/10.1162/00335530360535144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddux, W. W., Yang, H., Falk, C., Adam, H., Adair, W., Endo, Y., … Heine, S. J. (2010). For whom is parting with possessions more painful?: Cultural differences in the endowment effect. Psychological Science, 21(12), 1910–1917. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610388818.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rowe, R. D., D'Arge, R. C., & Brookshire, D. S. (1980). An experiment on the economic value of visibility. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 7(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/0095-0696(80)90018-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. (1951). Two dogmas of empiricism. The Philosophical Review, 60(1), 20–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sievers, B., Lee, C., Haslett, W., & Wheatley, T. (2019). A multi-sensory code for emotional arousal. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 286(1906).Google ScholarPubMed
Stanford, P. K. (2006). Exceeding our grasp: Science, history, and the problem of unconceived alternatives. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanford, P. K. (2019). Unconceived alternatives and conservatism in science: The impact of professionalization, peer-review, and Big Science. Synthese, 196(10), 3915–3932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Dijk, E., & van Knippenberg, D. (1998). Trading wine: On the endowment effect, loss aversion, and the comparability of consumer goods. Journal of Economic Psychology, 19(4), 485–495. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(98)00020-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar