理性成瘾理论:观点调查

Q3 Social Sciences Journal of Drug Policy Analysis Pub Date : 2010-12-13 DOI:10.2202/1941-2851.1019
H. Melberg, O. Røgeberg
{"title":"理性成瘾理论:观点调查","authors":"H. Melberg, O. Røgeberg","doi":"10.2202/1941-2851.1019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper reports on results from a survey of views on the theory of rational addiction among academics who have contributed to this research. The topic is important because if the literature is viewed by its participants as an intellectual game, then policy makers should be aware of this so as not to derive actual policy from misleading models. A majority of the respondents believe the literature is a success story that demonstrates the power of economic reasoning. At the same time, they also believe the empirical evidence to be weak, and they disagree both on the type of evidence that would validate the theory and the policy implications. These results shed light on how many economists think about model building, evidence requirements and the policy relevance of their work.","PeriodicalId":38436,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Drug Policy Analysis","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2202/1941-2851.1019","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rational Addiction Theory: A Survey of Opinions\",\"authors\":\"H. Melberg, O. Røgeberg\",\"doi\":\"10.2202/1941-2851.1019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper reports on results from a survey of views on the theory of rational addiction among academics who have contributed to this research. The topic is important because if the literature is viewed by its participants as an intellectual game, then policy makers should be aware of this so as not to derive actual policy from misleading models. A majority of the respondents believe the literature is a success story that demonstrates the power of economic reasoning. At the same time, they also believe the empirical evidence to be weak, and they disagree both on the type of evidence that would validate the theory and the policy implications. These results shed light on how many economists think about model building, evidence requirements and the policy relevance of their work.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38436,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Drug Policy Analysis\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-12-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2202/1941-2851.1019\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Drug Policy Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2202/1941-2851.1019\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Drug Policy Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2202/1941-2851.1019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

本文报告了对参与这项研究的学者对理性成瘾理论观点的调查结果。这个话题很重要,因为如果文献被参与者视为智力游戏,那么政策制定者应该意识到这一点,以免从误导性的模型中得出实际的政策。大多数受访者认为,这些文献是一个成功的故事,证明了经济推理的力量。与此同时,他们也认为经验证据是薄弱的,他们在验证理论和政策含义的证据类型上都存在分歧。这些结果揭示了许多经济学家对模型构建、证据要求和他们工作的政策相关性的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Rational Addiction Theory: A Survey of Opinions
This paper reports on results from a survey of views on the theory of rational addiction among academics who have contributed to this research. The topic is important because if the literature is viewed by its participants as an intellectual game, then policy makers should be aware of this so as not to derive actual policy from misleading models. A majority of the respondents believe the literature is a success story that demonstrates the power of economic reasoning. At the same time, they also believe the empirical evidence to be weak, and they disagree both on the type of evidence that would validate the theory and the policy implications. These results shed light on how many economists think about model building, evidence requirements and the policy relevance of their work.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Drug Policy Analysis
Journal of Drug Policy Analysis Social Sciences-Health (social science)
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Frontmatter Don’t Let the COVID-19 Crisis Go to Waste: Breaking Through the Status Quo & Flattening the Opioid Epidemic Curve An Examination of Racial Disparities in Misdemeanor Marijuana Possession Arrests Following Reforms in Four U.S. Jurisdictions Did the 2018 Farm Bill’s Hemp Provisions Decriminalize Marijuana? Problematising ‘Recovery’ in Drug Policy within Great Britain: A Comparative Policy Analysis Between England, Wales and Scotland
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1