실험실 연구의 외적타당성에 대한 근심에서 벗어나는 법 : 1970년대 후반 실험경제학 방법론 논쟁 분석

The present paper sheds light on Charles Plott’s 1979 paper on the methodology of experimental economics, and its ensuing debate. In an attempt to pursue compa- rative institutional analysis and institutional engineering in the laboratory, Plott took it for granted that several, heroic assumptions could safely be made concerning preferences. This methodological stance invited a harsh criticism from without the economics profession, which pointed out that the laboratory experiment à la Plott could hardly serve the purpose of simulation due to the lack of external validity. Responding to a criticism of this sort in alliance with Vernon Smith, Plott made a case that a laboratory experiment could serve another legitimate, theoretical purpose without simulating the field environment in the laboratory. A plausible interpretation of their position is that they believed a niche could be carved out for laboratory experimentation within the mainstream of the economics profession by (almost) exclusively concentrating upon the internal validity of the laboratory experiment for comparative institutional analysis and institutional engineering. This clash of ideas, which took place in the late 1970s concerning the methodology of experimental economics, suggests that the relationship between the economics profession and other professions in social sciences should be handled with great care by both supporters and opponents of contemporary mainstream economics.