This past April, the economics podcast Planet Money released an episode titled “How Much Should We Trust Economics?” The episode focuses on a significant economic theory that was challenged (by university students!) because of mathematical errors in the statistical calculations. Exploring this one incident leads to a series of interesting questions about the nature of economic research and its value for the wider world.
You can listen to the podcast at the Planet Money website.
Discussion Questions:
- The podcast specifically cites two economic studies that were later challenged as a result of mathematical errors. The hosts imply this makes economics seem less scientific; one of the interviewees thinks exactly the opposite. What do you think?
- Economic research faces a data problem: unlike chemists, for example, economists cannot test their hypotheses by conducting experiments that isolate variables. Does this mean economists are just offering speculations? Why or why not?
- How does this podcast affect the way you think about the academic sources that you will be reading for your annotated bibliography assignment?
Join the Conversation
We welcome comments on this or other related topics on the main Spotlight page
Return to Stephen Baldridge’s Spotlight page