Models as measuring instruments: measurement of duration dependence of unemployment

Journal of Economic Methodology 12 (3):407-431 (2005)
Nancy Cartwright views models as blueprints for nomological machines? machines that, if properly shielded, generate law?like behaviour or regularities. Marcel Boumans has argued that we can look for devices inside models, which enable us to measure aspects of these regularities. Therefore, if models do produce regular behaviour, they might perhaps generate numbers about phenomena in the world, provided we can locate a good measuring device in the model. How do they do this? Models are often understood to consist of internal principles and bridge principles. Both of these play a role in the measuring process. This paper suggests that we can understand the internal principles to be responsible for generating the regularities displayed by the model? and for many users of the model, this is sufficient use. The bridge principles are a matter of picking the right mathematical representation to make the model work with respect to some real world case at hand. These?real? bridge principles may enable the model to generate numbers and so serve to make the model into a measuring device. This paper explores this construction of a measuring device of duration dependence of unemployment. Since search theory cannot be made operational for this purpose duration models, which model of the outflow process of unemployment with a Weibull function, are taken as a representation of reservation wage setting in search models. As I show, this Weibull function serves as a bridge principle to make a measure of the elasticity of response between unemployment benefit and duration of unemployment. It enables measurement to take place by modelling behaviour according to some assumptions, which operate as constraints. While this Weibull function serves this purpose, its assumptions are arbitrary rather than connected to theory, and measurements generated with this bridge principle turn out to be highly sensitive to its specification. The Weibull function does enable the model to function as a measuring device, but the lack of ability to make newly invoked unobservable variables operational makes it of dubious worth
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/13501780500223692
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 23,305
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Carl G. Hempel (1966). Philosophy of Natural Science. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.,Prentice-Hall.
Mary S. Morgan (2001). Models, Stories and the Economic World. Journal of Economic Methodology 8 (3):361-384.
Brian Ellis (1969). Basic Concepts of Measurement. Journal of Symbolic Logic 34 (2):310-311.

View all 10 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Alessandro Giordani & Luca Mari (2012). Measurement, Models, and Uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement 61 (8):2144 - 2152.
Marcel Boumans (2012). Measurement in Economics. In Uskali Mäki, Dov M. Gabbay, Paul Thagard & John Woods (eds.), Philosophy of Economics. North Holland 395.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

12 ( #355,943 of 1,932,568 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

2 ( #333,233 of 1,932,568 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.