Schumpeter vs. Keynes Redux: 'Still Not Dead'

John T. Dalton, Lillian R. Gaeto
{"title":"Schumpeter vs. Keynes Redux: 'Still Not Dead'","authors":"John T. Dalton, Lillian R. Gaeto","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3301547","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Diamond (2009) compares the citation time series for Schumpeter and Keynes from 1956 to 2006. Citations to Schumpeter steadily increase throughout the period, whereas citations to Keynes begin to level off and then trend slightly downward beginning in the 1990s. As a result, citations to Schumpeter begin to outstrip those to Keynes. This paper replicates Diamond (2009) and extends the analysis to 2017, which incorporates citations since the onset of the Great Recession. The replication confirms the results in Diamond (2009). The analysis beyond 2006 shows citations to Schumpeter remain larger than to Keynes, but citations to Keynes undergo a resurgence. The paper argues the Great Recession helped renew interest in Keynes. Google Trends data for Schumpeter and Keynes are compared and provide evidence showing the heightened interest in Keynes during the Great Recession. For example, in the United States, the peak of Keynes's search interest occurs in February 2009, five months after Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy.","PeriodicalId":226815,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy & Methodology of Economics eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy & Methodology of Economics eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3301547","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Diamond (2009) compares the citation time series for Schumpeter and Keynes from 1956 to 2006. Citations to Schumpeter steadily increase throughout the period, whereas citations to Keynes begin to level off and then trend slightly downward beginning in the 1990s. As a result, citations to Schumpeter begin to outstrip those to Keynes. This paper replicates Diamond (2009) and extends the analysis to 2017, which incorporates citations since the onset of the Great Recession. The replication confirms the results in Diamond (2009). The analysis beyond 2006 shows citations to Schumpeter remain larger than to Keynes, but citations to Keynes undergo a resurgence. The paper argues the Great Recession helped renew interest in Keynes. Google Trends data for Schumpeter and Keynes are compared and provide evidence showing the heightened interest in Keynes during the Great Recession. For example, in the United States, the peak of Keynes's search interest occurs in February 2009, five months after Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy.
熊彼特vs凯恩斯Redux:“还没死”
Diamond(2009)比较了1956年至2006年熊彼特和凯恩斯的引文时间序列。在此期间,对熊彼特的引用稳步增加,而对凯恩斯的引用开始趋于平稳,然后在20世纪90年代开始略有下降。因此,对熊彼特的引用开始超过对凯恩斯的引用。本文复制了Diamond(2009)的研究,并将分析扩展到2017年,其中纳入了大衰退开始以来的引用。复制证实了Diamond(2009)的结果。2006年以后的分析显示,对熊彼特的引用仍然多于对凯恩斯的引用,但对凯恩斯的引用正在复苏。文章认为,大衰退帮助人们重新对凯恩斯产生了兴趣。我们比较了熊彼特和凯恩斯的谷歌趋势数据,并提供证据表明,在大衰退期间,人们对凯恩斯的兴趣增强了。例如,在美国,凯恩斯的搜索兴趣高峰出现在2009年2月,雷曼兄弟宣布破产五个月后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信