Argument reveals stylistic bias in distinguishing pure and applied economic theories, examining audience reactions.
I argue that economists' distinction between ‘pure’ and ‘applied’ economic theory is often based on papers' stylistic markers rather than their methodology or scope. I illustrate this point with a model of price competition for boundedly rational consumers, due to Piccione and Spiegler. I first present its original, ‘pure style’ version. I then offer several ‘applied style’ modifications, and speculate how audiences would react to the various versions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ran Spiegler (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: