Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-21T20:23:20.910Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Challenges of folk-economic beliefs: Coverage, level of abstraction, and relation to ideology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 August 2018

Zeljka Buturovic*
Affiliation:
Institute for Social Sciences, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia. zbuturovic@idn.org.rshttp://www.idn.org.rs/index_eng.php

Abstract

There are no clear criteria regarding what kind of beliefs should count as folk-economic beliefs (FEBs), or any way to make an exhaustive list that could be filtered through such criteria. This allows the target article authors, Boyer & Petersen, to cherry-pick FEBs, which results in the omission of some well-established FEBs. The authors do not sufficiently address a strong relationship between ideology and FEBs.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aarøe, L. & Petersen, M. B. (2014) Crowding out culture: Scandinavians and Americans agree on social welfare in the face of deservingness cues. The Journal of Politics 76(3):684–97.Google Scholar
Buturovic, Z. & Klein, D. B. (2010) Economic enlightenment in relation to college-going, ideology, and other variables: A Zogby survey of Americans. Econ Journal Watch 7(2):174–96.Google Scholar
Caplan, B. (2008) The myth of the rational voter: Why democracies choose bad policies. (New edition, with a new preface by the author). Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Klein, D. B. & Buturovic, Z. (2011) Economic enlightenment revisited. Econ Journal Watch 8(2):157–73.Google Scholar
Petersen, M. B. (2012) Social welfare as small-scale help: Evolutionary psychology and the deservingness heuristic. American Journal of Political Science 56(1):116. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00545.x.Google Scholar