Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tammi, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow B29 - Other
Right arrow B40 - General
Right arrow C90 - General
Right arrow C91 - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Cambridge Journal of Economics 27:85-96 (2003)
Copyright © 2003 Cambridge Political Economy Society

Article

Simon's and Siegel's responses to the ‘mixed strategy anomaly’: a missed case in the sensitivity of economics to empirical evidence

Timo Tammi *

*University of Joensuu.

Address for correspondence: Timo Tammi, Department of Economics, University of Joensuu, PO Box 111, Fin-80101 Joensuu, Finland; email: timo.tammi{at}joensuu.fi

Abstract

In some of their papers published in the 1950s, Herbert Simon and Sidney Siegel responded to the so-called mixed strategy anomaly in ways which deserve more attention. They produced not only (i) immediate defences of the economic theory of their own time, but also (ii) ideas and solutions that have later turned out to be significant contributions to the development of the economic theory of choice and decision-making and the separation of experimental economics from experimental psychology. These observations suggest that economics can be more responsive to empirical anomalies than has been assumed. Furthermore, knowledge of the desirable responsiveness to anomalies can provide means of avoiding the non-desirable immunity to anomalies.

Key Words: Anomalies • Experimental economics • Rationality


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.