The trap of narratives: The impact of scientific hypotheses on the effectiveness of economic policy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article presents some of the author’s reflections on the role played by economic narratives in the formation of economic policy in Russia in the first quarter of the 21 st century. In the author’s opinion, by now Russian economic policy has found itself in the “trap of narratives” that have dominated the intellectual economic environment for at least 20 years. The author notes a shift in the semantics of scientific research, which is expressed in the gradual decline in the popularity of economic growth and increased attention to monetary factors of development, inflation and financial stability. At the same time, the article shows that the Bank of Russia assumed the role of the main macroeconomic ideologist and regulator, and the key rate became the most important instrument of its monetary policy. The author defines the focus of the regulator’s efforts on monetary instruments of economic policy and, above all, the interest rate as a “narrative trap”. The author presents his view on how and why this economy found itself in this trap, hoping that his conclusions will help in the search for new approaches to the management of complex economic processes in a difficult period of global economic transformation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".