Paradox in deviation measure and trap in method improvement—take international comparison as an example

IF 3.2 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Dongziao Qiu, Nanchang China Economics, Dongju Li, Zhengzhou China Law
{"title":"Paradox in deviation measure and trap in method improvement—take international comparison as an example","authors":"Dongziao Qiu, Nanchang China Economics, Dongju Li, Zhengzhou China Law","doi":"10.3934/qfe.2021026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Due to the problem of \"true value agnostic\" in the measurement of the real world, people believe that the existing methods can be closer to the true value by improving them. Therefore, they are willing to excessively affirm the more advanced method and deny the relatively \"traditional\" method. Taking the exchange rate method and purchasing power parity method commonly used in international economic comparison as examples, this paper generalizes the problems revealed by the exchange-rate-deviation index and concludes that there are at least three paradoxes in the deviation measurement of different methods. These paradoxes are the paradox of behavior significance, the paradox of comparative object, and the paradox of measurement result. The reason is that there is a cautionary trap in the improvement or innovation of measurement methods in reality. Sometimes the improved method is not necessarily better than the unimproved method. People tend to prefer advanced technology and methodology, but the problem of statistical input and related statistical benefits need to be considered in practical measurement. In fact, these basic problems still exist in some of the methods of economic statistics that we regard as common sense. When learning or introducing new methods, scholars do not absolutize the existing methods and conclusions. They should pay attention to critical experience, avoid the trap of improvement methods, and seek real improvement or innovation.","PeriodicalId":45226,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Finance and Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quantitative Finance and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3934/qfe.2021026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Due to the problem of "true value agnostic" in the measurement of the real world, people believe that the existing methods can be closer to the true value by improving them. Therefore, they are willing to excessively affirm the more advanced method and deny the relatively "traditional" method. Taking the exchange rate method and purchasing power parity method commonly used in international economic comparison as examples, this paper generalizes the problems revealed by the exchange-rate-deviation index and concludes that there are at least three paradoxes in the deviation measurement of different methods. These paradoxes are the paradox of behavior significance, the paradox of comparative object, and the paradox of measurement result. The reason is that there is a cautionary trap in the improvement or innovation of measurement methods in reality. Sometimes the improved method is not necessarily better than the unimproved method. People tend to prefer advanced technology and methodology, but the problem of statistical input and related statistical benefits need to be considered in practical measurement. In fact, these basic problems still exist in some of the methods of economic statistics that we regard as common sense. When learning or introducing new methods, scholars do not absolutize the existing methods and conclusions. They should pay attention to critical experience, avoid the trap of improvement methods, and seek real improvement or innovation.
偏差度量中的悖论与方法改进中的陷阱——以国际比较为例
由于在现实世界的测量中存在“真值不可知论”的问题,人们认为通过改进现有的方法可以更接近真实的价值。因此,他们愿意过度肯定更先进的方法,而否定相对“传统”的方法。本文以国际经济比较中常用的汇率法和购买力平价法为例,概括了汇率偏离指数所揭示的问题,得出了不同方法的偏离测量至少存在三个悖论。这些悖论分别是行为意义悖论、比较对象悖论和测量结果悖论。究其原因,在于现实中测量方法的改进或创新存在着警示陷阱。有时改进的方法不一定比未改进的方法好。人们往往更喜欢先进的技术和方法,但在实际测量中需要考虑统计投入和相关统计效益的问题。事实上,这些基本问题在一些我们认为是常识的经济统计方法中仍然存在。学者在学习或引入新方法时,不会将已有的方法和结论绝对化。他们应该注意批判性经验,避免改进方法的陷阱,寻求真正的改进或创新。
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
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
1.90%
发文量
14
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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