| Title |
Reciprocity as a Foundation of Financial Economics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Business Ethics, July 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10551-014-2257-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Timothy C. Johnson |
| Abstract |
This paper argues that the subsistence of the fundamental theorem of contemporary financial mathematics is the ethical concept 'reciprocity'. The argument is based on identifying an equivalence between the contemporary, and ostensibly 'value neutral', Fundamental Theory of Asset Pricing with theories of mathematical probability that emerged in the seventeenth century in the context of the ethical assessment of commercial contracts in a framework of Aristotelian ethics. This observation, the main claim of the paper, is justified on the basis of results from the Ultimatum Game and is analysed within a framework of Pragmatic philosophy. The analysis leads to the explanatory hypothesis that markets are centres of communicative action with reciprocity as a rule of discourse. The purpose of the paper is to reorientate financial economics to emphasise the objectives of cooperation and social cohesion and to this end, we offer specific policy advice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 56 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 15% |
| Researcher | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 6 | 10% |
| Other | 13 | 22% |
| Unknown | 9 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Business, Management and Accounting | 11 | 18% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 10 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 12% |
| Engineering | 5 | 8% |
| Psychology | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 18% |
| Unknown | 12 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 January 2017.
All research outputs
#1,571,112
of 22,758,248 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Business Ethics
#272
of 2,931 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,813
of 227,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Business Ethics
#5
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,248 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,931 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 227,466 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.