Whatever the intent of "Econometric models," I think its scope note does suggest that only "Econometric models," and not "Mathematical models," should be used as a subdivision under economic phenomena.
Unless, perhaps, there are mathematical models of economic phenomena that do not actually "test or measure" the phenomena, as the scope note requires. This is a distinction I would find extremely hard to make, but I am no expert in economics.
If "mathematical models" actually should sometimes be used under economic phenomena, the scope note seems misleading to me, and I have to imagine there are many more catalogers who are baffled. I wish the scope note could be revised.
Fortunately it would be pretty easy for a researcher to look under both subdivisions. But it is frustrating to try to apply ambiguous instructions.
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karen Jensen
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 10:24 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Mathematical models vs. econometric models
Econometric models are a more specific kind of Mathematical model. It seems there are "regularly-used" models that due to the type of mathematics used are dubbed "Econometric models."
For this reason, LCSH exist in both these forms (could also be primarily for matching purposes?):
United States--Economic conditions--Mathematical models
United States--Economic conditions--Econometric models
Whether the application of this distinction has always been correct is another question. I don't think a SACO proposal to add x-references to force the use of econometric models would fly.
Anyway, that's my best guess.
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 29, 2015, at 8:57 PM, Wilson, Pete <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi, folks,
> There are 98 hits in LC's catalog for "Foreign exchange rates--Mathematical models."
> There are 40 for "Foreign exchange rates--Econometric models."
> Interestingly, there are 4 for "Foreign exchange rates--Forecasting--Econometric models," but none for "Foreign exchange rates--Forecasting--Mathematical models."
> In all my years cataloging I have never really understood how to determine whether to use one subdivision or the other under economic topics. And I wonder how many other people do.
> The scope note for "Econometric models" says "Use as a topical subdivision for works that employ mathematical or statistical models used to test or measure economic phenomena."
> Does this mean that "Econometric models" should ALWAYS be used under topics that are intrinsically economic? (That's how I read it, though honestly I think the phrasing is a little odd. I'd have expected "works that employ mathematical or statistical models to test or measure...," but it's hard to see how the meaning would be different that way.)
> If so, a whole lot of mistakes are being made.
> What's the story?
> Pete Wilson
> Vanderbilt University