... The white flight and a racial segmented housing market can cause the concentration of ethnic ... more ... The white flight and a racial segmented housing market can cause the concentration of ethnic minorities and the reduction of housing prices as well. ... lead to complete segregation. ... 22 Finally, as the poverty is correlated to race, residential segregation of immigrants can turn into ...
Page 1. Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics, Volume 3, Issue 2, Autumn 2010, pp. 95-102.... more Page 1. Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics, Volume 3, Issue 2, Autumn 2010, pp. 95-102. http://ejpe.org/pdf/3-2-br-1.pdf EJPE.ORG BOOK REVIEW 95 Review of the Oxford handbook of philosophy of economics, edited by Harold Kincaid and Don Ross. ...
Studies in history and philosophy of science, 2014
We examine the diversity of strategies of modelling networks in (micro) economics and (analytical... more We examine the diversity of strategies of modelling networks in (micro) economics and (analytical) sociology. Field-specific conceptions of what explaining (with) networks amounts to or systematic preference for certain kinds of explanatory factors are not sufficient to account for differences in modelling methodologies. We argue that network models in both sociology and economics are abstract models of network mechanisms and that differences in their modelling strategies derive to a large extent from field-specific conceptions of the way in which a good model should be a general one. Whereas the economics models aim at unification, the sociological models aim at a set of mechanism schemas that are extrapolatable to the extent that the underlying psychological mechanisms are general. These conceptions of generality induce specific biases in mechanistic explanation and are related to different views of when knowledge from different fields should be seen as relevant.
Odenbaugh and Alexandrova (2011) provide a challenging critique of
the epistemic benefits of robu... more Odenbaugh and Alexandrova (2011) provide a challenging critique of the epistemic benefits of robustness analysis, singling out for particular criticism the account we articulated in Kuorikoski et al. (2010). Odenbaugh and Alexandrova offer two arguments against the confirmatory value of robustness analysis: robust theorems cannot specify causal mechanisms and models are rarely independent in the way required by robustness analysis. We address Odenbaugh and Alexandrova’s criticisms in order to clarify some of our original arguments and to shed further light on the properties of robustness analysis and its epistemic rationale.
... The white flight and a racial segmented housing market can cause the concentration of ethnic ... more ... The white flight and a racial segmented housing market can cause the concentration of ethnic minorities and the reduction of housing prices as well. ... lead to complete segregation. ... 22 Finally, as the poverty is correlated to race, residential segregation of immigrants can turn into ...
Page 1. Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics, Volume 3, Issue 2, Autumn 2010, pp. 95-102.... more Page 1. Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics, Volume 3, Issue 2, Autumn 2010, pp. 95-102. http://ejpe.org/pdf/3-2-br-1.pdf EJPE.ORG BOOK REVIEW 95 Review of the Oxford handbook of philosophy of economics, edited by Harold Kincaid and Don Ross. ...
Studies in history and philosophy of science, 2014
We examine the diversity of strategies of modelling networks in (micro) economics and (analytical... more We examine the diversity of strategies of modelling networks in (micro) economics and (analytical) sociology. Field-specific conceptions of what explaining (with) networks amounts to or systematic preference for certain kinds of explanatory factors are not sufficient to account for differences in modelling methodologies. We argue that network models in both sociology and economics are abstract models of network mechanisms and that differences in their modelling strategies derive to a large extent from field-specific conceptions of the way in which a good model should be a general one. Whereas the economics models aim at unification, the sociological models aim at a set of mechanism schemas that are extrapolatable to the extent that the underlying psychological mechanisms are general. These conceptions of generality induce specific biases in mechanistic explanation and are related to different views of when knowledge from different fields should be seen as relevant.
Odenbaugh and Alexandrova (2011) provide a challenging critique of
the epistemic benefits of robu... more Odenbaugh and Alexandrova (2011) provide a challenging critique of the epistemic benefits of robustness analysis, singling out for particular criticism the account we articulated in Kuorikoski et al. (2010). Odenbaugh and Alexandrova offer two arguments against the confirmatory value of robustness analysis: robust theorems cannot specify causal mechanisms and models are rarely independent in the way required by robustness analysis. We address Odenbaugh and Alexandrova’s criticisms in order to clarify some of our original arguments and to shed further light on the properties of robustness analysis and its epistemic rationale.
Uploads
Papers by caterina marchionni
the epistemic benefits of robustness analysis, singling out for particular criticism the
account we articulated in Kuorikoski et al. (2010). Odenbaugh and Alexandrova
offer two arguments against the confirmatory value of robustness analysis: robust
theorems cannot specify causal mechanisms and models are rarely independent in
the way required by robustness analysis. We address Odenbaugh and Alexandrova’s
criticisms in order to clarify some of our original arguments and to shed further light
on the properties of robustness analysis and its epistemic rationale.
the epistemic benefits of robustness analysis, singling out for particular criticism the
account we articulated in Kuorikoski et al. (2010). Odenbaugh and Alexandrova
offer two arguments against the confirmatory value of robustness analysis: robust
theorems cannot specify causal mechanisms and models are rarely independent in
the way required by robustness analysis. We address Odenbaugh and Alexandrova’s
criticisms in order to clarify some of our original arguments and to shed further light
on the properties of robustness analysis and its epistemic rationale.