Milton Friedman, the Statistical Methodologist

Teira, David

doi:10.1215/00182702-2007-020

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For discussion on this and other work on consumption during the New Deal see Stapleford (forthcoming). 18 For discussion of Friedman's problem and Neyman's solution see Teira (2007). 19 These lectures were also published by the Graduate School (Shewhart 1939).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Usda Graduate School: Government Training in Statistics and Economics, 1921–1945

Rutherford¹

2011

J Hist Econ Thought

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The USDA Graduate School was founded in 1921 to provide statistical and economic training to the employees of the Department of Agriculture. The school did not grant degrees, but its graduate courses were accepted for credit by a significant number of universities.In subsequent years, the activities of the school grew rapidly to provide training in many different subject areas for employees from almost all federal departments. The training in statistics provided by the school was often highly advanced (instructors included Howard Tolley and, later, Edwards Deming), while the economics taught displayed an eclectic mix of standard and institutional economics. Mordecai Ezekiel taught both economics and statistics at the school, and had himself received his statistical training there. Statistics instruction in 1936 and 1937 included seminar series from R.A. Fisher and J. Neyman, and courses on the probability approach to sampling involving Lester Frankel and William Hurwitz became important after 1939. The instruction in economics was noticeably institutionalist in the period of the New Deal. Towards the end of the period considered here, the instruction in economics became narrower and more focused on agricultural economics.The activities of the school provide a basis for understanding some of the sources of the relative statistical sophistication of agricultural economists and of the statistical work done in government in the interwar period. It is noteworthy than within the USDA Graduate School, and in contrast to the Cowles Commission, statistical sophistication coexisted with an approach to economics that was not predominantly neoclassical. It also provides a light on the place of institutional economics in the training of government economists through the same time span.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Usda Graduate School: Government Training in Statistics and Economics, 1921–1945

Rutherford¹

2011

J Hist Econ Thought

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Friedman’s statistical training was conducted first under the supervision of a disciple of Pearson (the econometrician Henry Schultz) and, most significantly, at Harold Hotelling’s department at Columbia, one of the very few places in the United States where the theoretical developments introduced by Ronald Fisher were taught and applied to economic issues. The statistical methods that Friedman applied throughout his career were in many ways Fisherian and he was a firm believer in the virtues of simple regressions (Teira 2007). We may safely assume that the predictions he had in mind when drafting his methodological piece were yielded by these methods.…”

Section: Classifications and Predictionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Friedman’s Methodology Did Not Generate Consensus Among Economists

Teira¹

2009

J Hist Econ Thought

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper I study how the theoretical categories of consumption theory were used by Milton Friedman in order to classify empirical data and obtain predictions. Friedman advocated a case by case definition of these categories that traded theoretical coherence for empirical content. I contend that this methodological strategy puts a clear incentive to contest any prediction contrary to our interest: it can always be argued that these predictions rest on a wrong classification of data. My conjecture is that this methodological strategy can contribute to explain why Friedman's predictions never generated the consensus he expected among his peers. .

show abstract

“… 21 Teira (2007) covers Friedman’s familiarity with probability theory and classical methods of inference, and offers an explanation of his non-use of these methods. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

2016 Hes Presidential Address: Statistical Inference in Economics, 1920–1965: Changes in Meaning and Practice

Biddle

2017

J Hist Econ Thought

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Milton Friedman, the Statistical Methodologist

Cited by 10 publications

References 36 publications

The Usda Graduate School: Government Training in Statistics and Economics, 1921–1945

The Usda Graduate School: Government Training in Statistics and Economics, 1921–1945

Why Friedman’s Methodology Did Not Generate Consensus Among Economists

2016 Hes Presidential Address: Statistical Inference in Economics, 1920–1965: Changes in Meaning and Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About