Identification versus Importance

26 November 2008 at 11:17 am Peter G. Klein 56 comments

| Peter Klein |

At a recent workshop the subject of econometric identification came up. Identification is of course the major issue of our day among mainstream empirical economists. Some have described the dissertation process as the “search for a good instrument.” Instrumental-variables estimators have their critics, of course, but these critics are in the minority.

One of the workshop participants, a regular attendee at NBER events, summarized the consensus view among the elites of the profession with the following diagram:

A research problem can be important, and it can be well identified. The ideal problem is one in quadrant B, both important and identified. However, a problem in quadrant C is much more likely to be published in a top journal than a problem in quadrant A.

What does this say about the economics profession?

Entry filed under: - Klein -, Methods/Methodology/Theory of Science.

Hayek Speaks on Inflation and Unemployment Some Interesting Working Papers

56 Comments Add your own

1. MomentarilyAnonymous | 26 November 2008 at 12:53 pm

Obviously there are two ways: a–>b) to properly identify important issues or c–>b) to ‘problematize’ identified issues. If I was forced to choose, I would prefer pushing A to B because that’s a good way to make research in economics relevant to society at large. For example, I think a good deal of the behavioral economics literature represents a shift from A to B.
2. david | 26 November 2008 at 2:12 pm

What does this say about the economics profession?

That we have trouble identifying important issues?
3. Stuart Buck | 26 November 2008 at 5:07 pm

Brings to mind the old joke about the drunk and the streetlight.
4. Stuart Buck | 26 November 2008 at 5:12 pm

What about Michael Murray’s conclusion: “The barriers to Archimedes moving the earth with a lever were more daunting
than the challenges facing instrumental variables estimation, but the comparison is apt. The perils of invalid and weak instruments open all instrumental variable estimates to skepticism.”

Click to access Murray_IV_jep_06.pdf
5. Jason | 22 December 2008 at 10:20 pm

That economics is on the right track?

Anybody can come up with stuff tackling the ‘big’ issues if they’re lax in their identification. You don’t want to call that research properly done though.

For other social sciences, change “identified” to “having good evidence” and you’ll want C types more than A types too.
6. David Hoopes | 26 April 2011 at 11:17 am

Saw a paper presented at Wharton a “few” years ago with very big identification problems. The results were useless. It was published, as is, in ASQ a few years later. At least economists are trying.
7. Randomized Controlled Trials and Economic Questions | 28 December 2018 at 3:13 am

[…] design may come at the expense of the importance of the underlying economic question (a point I have also made). RCT enthusiasts have been called randomistas, not always as a […]
8. Randomized Controlled Trials and Economic Questions – USSA News | The Tea Party's Front Page | 28 December 2018 at 6:32 pm

[…] design may come at the expense of the importance of the underlying economic question (a point I have also made). RCT enthusiasts have been called randomistas, not always as a […]
9. Pruebas controladas aleatorizadas y preguntas económicas, por Mises Hispano. – Minarquia 2 | 18 January 2019 at 1:01 am

[…] puede producirse a costa de la importancia de la cuestión económica subyacente (algo que yo también he dicho). A los entusiastas de las PCA se les ha llamado randomistas, lo que no siempre es un […]
10. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Elon's Vision | 11 October 2021 at 1:09 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
11. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Retirement Daily Reporting | 11 October 2021 at 1:12 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
12. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Success American Investors | 11 October 2021 at 1:12 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
13. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking - Free Market Daily | 11 October 2021 at 1:15 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
14. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Market Daily Updates | 11 October 2021 at 1:17 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
15. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Futures Lab Research | 11 October 2021 at 1:21 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
16. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking - FX Journo | 11 October 2021 at 1:23 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
17. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Best Retirement Wishes | 11 October 2021 at 1:23 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
18. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – LiveAfterQuit | 11 October 2021 at 1:23 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
19. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – InvestingsDontLie | 11 October 2021 at 1:24 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
20. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Black Swan Wallets | 11 October 2021 at 1:29 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
21. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Effective Stock Habbits | 11 October 2021 at 1:29 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
22. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Day Trading Reports | 11 October 2021 at 1:30 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
23. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Investors On Retire | 11 October 2021 at 1:38 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
24. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Smart Investing Reports | 11 October 2021 at 1:41 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
25. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Your Investing Foundation | 11 October 2021 at 1:44 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
26. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Empire Stock Trader | 11 October 2021 at 1:45 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
27. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Billions And Millions | 11 October 2021 at 1:48 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
28. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Keep Resignation Safe | 11 October 2021 at 1:50 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
29. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Investment Wave Updates | 11 October 2021 at 1:52 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
30. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – YourRetireInvest | 11 October 2021 at 1:52 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
31. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Mars Retirement | 11 October 2021 at 1:53 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
32. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Leading Indicator News | 11 October 2021 at 2:03 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
33. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Smarty Yield | 11 October 2021 at 2:03 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
34. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Crypto Retirement News | 11 October 2021 at 2:07 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
35. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Bullish Stock Trader | 11 October 2021 at 2:10 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
36. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Vaccine Investment Wave | 11 October 2021 at 2:10 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
37. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Stockholders Fortune | 11 October 2021 at 2:24 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
38. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Profit Daily Insights | 11 October 2021 at 2:29 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
39. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Golden Stock Insiders | 11 October 2021 at 2:33 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
40. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking | New Covenant Network News | 11 October 2021 at 2:34 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
41. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Cryptocurrency Advices | 11 October 2021 at 2:36 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
42. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – China Secrets Revealed | 11 October 2021 at 2:40 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
43. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Decent Retirement Now | 11 October 2021 at 2:44 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
44. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Happy Retirement Report | 11 October 2021 at 2:55 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
45. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Bear Market Leader | 11 October 2021 at 3:02 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
46. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Protect Your Stock | 11 October 2021 at 3:05 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
47. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Cross Market Review | 11 October 2021 at 3:14 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
48. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Top Stocks Insider | 11 October 2021 at 3:22 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
49. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking – Informed Investor Decisions | 11 October 2021 at 3:22 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
50. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Pattern of Financial Considering - cryptomarket24news.com | 12 October 2021 at 2:02 am

[…] critics of the overuse of pure experiments, field experiments (randomized managed trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
51. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking | 12 October 2021 at 3:41 am

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized-controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
52. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Development of Financial Pondering - Publicinvestorday.Com | 12 October 2021 at 5:26 am

[…] critics of the overuse of pure experiments, field experiments (randomized managed trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
53. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking | Mises Wire « MCViewPoint | 13 October 2021 at 9:04 am

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
54. The 2021 Nobel Prize and the Trend of Economic Thinking | Peter G. Klein | 15 October 2021 at 8:40 pm

[…] of the overuse of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
55. The 2021 Nobel Prize Demonstrates the Decline of Economic Thinking - INDIAN LIBERTY REPORT | 15 October 2021 at 10:59 pm

[…] of natural experiments, field experiments (randomized controlled trials), and the overemphasis on identification over importance (George Akerlof calls this a bias toward […]
56. Der Nobelpreis 2021 und der Trend im ökonomischen Denken – Ludwig von Mises Institut Deutschland | 18 October 2021 at 1:50 am

[…] Natürlichen Experimenten und Feldstudien (randomisiert-kontrollierte Studien) bemängeln und eine Überbewertung von Identifizierbarkeit (identification) gegenüber Bedeutsamkeit (importance) (George Akerlof bezeichnet dies als Voreingenommenheit zu Gunsten „harter Methoden“ (bias […]