‘Groundhog day’ all over again: Minimum wage research under ‘thought style compulsion’
Clicks: 6
ID: 320270
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
0.0
/100
6 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Ranked #12 of 24 articles by views in cambridge journal of economics
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract Before the introduction of a statutory, nationwide minimum wage in Germany in 2015, labour market economics largely agreed that this ‘social experiment’ would come at the cost of significant job losses. However, accompanying research on the implementation of the minimum wage failed to confirm the predicted employment losses. As seen in all countries where minimum wages exist and are studied, researchers had to acknowledge the ‘elusiveness of employment effects’ in Germany as well. This paper traces the debate surrounding the introduction of the minimum wage and analyses the scientific community’s response to the discrepancy between actual employment trends and model-based forecasts—an issue that, from the perspective of the philosophy of science, can be understood as an ‘anomaly’ or ‘crisis’. The object of inquiry is not the minimum wage itself, but the scientific conduct of economists confronted with evidence at odds with their paradigm. Drawing on Ludwik Fleck’s theory of thought styles, the analysis distinguishes between two phases: the initial introduction of the minimum wage and the drastic increase in 2022. This distinction allows for an examination of both learning processes and the resilience of a prevailing paradigm.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7167852870
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Arne Heise |
| Journal | cambridge journal of economics |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/cje/beag022
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.