Editing Performativity (section)

=== Economics and finance ===
In economics, the "performativity thesis" is the claim that the assumptions and models used by professionals and popularizers affect the phenomena they purport to describe; bringing the world more into line with theory.<ref>{{Cite journal|url = http://kieranhealy.org/files/drafts/performativity.pdf|title = The Performativity of Networks|last = Healy|first = Kieran|date = 2015|journal = European Journal of Sociology|volume = 56|issue = 2|pages = 175–205|doi = 10.1017/S0003975615000107|s2cid = 152199942|access-date = 2015-11-19}}</ref><ref name="doing">{{cite book|title=Doing Economics|date=2010|publisher=The Open University|location=Milton Keynes|isbn=978-1-8487-34692|page=493}}</ref> It also refers, more largely, to the idea of economic reality as a ceaselessly provoked reality and of things such as performance indicators, valuation formulas, consumer tests, stock prices or financial contracts constituting what they refer to.<ref name="provokedeco">{{cite book |last=Muniesa |first=Fabian |title= The Provoked Economy: Economic Reality and the Performative Turn |url=https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203798959 |year=2014 |publisher=Routledge |doi=10.4324/9780203798959 |isbn=978-1-138-96180-7 }}</ref> This theory was developed by [[Michel Callon]] in ''The Laws of the Markets'', before being further developed in ''Do Economists Make Markets'' edited by [[Donald Angus MacKenzie]], Fabian Muniesa and Lucia Siu, and in ''Enacting Dismal Science'' edited by Ivan Boldyrev and Ekaterina Svetlova.<ref>{{cite book | url=http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8442.html | title=Do Economists Make Markets?| date=21 July 2008| isbn=9780691138497}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book | url=http://www.palgrave.com/de/book/9781137492104# | title=Enacting Dismal Science - New Perspectives on the Performativity of Economics &#124; Ivan Boldyrev &#124; Palgrave Macmillan| work=SpringerLink}}</ref> The most important work in the field is that of [[Donald Angus MacKenzie|Donald MacKenzie]] and Yuval Millo<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=MacKenzie|first1=Donald|last2=Millo|first2=Yuval|date=2003|title=Constructing a Market, Performing Theory: The Historical Sociology of a Financial Derivatives Exchange|journal=American Journal of Sociology|volume=109|issue=1|pages=107–145|doi=10.1086/374404|jstor=10.1086/374404|s2cid=145805302|issn=0002-9602}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Mackenzie|first=Donald|date=March 2006|title=Is Economics Performative? Option Theory and the Construction of Derivatives Markets|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-the-history-of-economic-thought/article/is-economics-performative-option-theory-and-the-construction-of-derivatives-markets/C7CA1D5B71539D86DC13E8F43C9C6AAB#fndtn-information|journal=Journal of the History of Economic Thought|language=en|volume=28|issue=1|pages=29–55|doi=10.1080/10427710500509722|s2cid=14201125|issn=1469-9656}}</ref> on the social construction of financial markets. In a seminal article, they showed that the option pricing theory called [[Black–Scholes model|BSM]] (Black-Scholes-Merton) has been successful empirically not because of the discovery of preexisting price regularities, but because participants used it to set option prices, so that it made itself true.

The thesis of performativity of economics has been extensively criticized by Nicolas Brisset in ''Economics and Performativity''.<ref>{{cite book|title=Economics and Performativity|last=Brisset|first=Nicolas|publisher=Routledge|year=2018}}</ref> Brisset defends the idea that the notion of performativity used by Callonian and Latourian sociologists leads to an overly relativistic view of the social world. Drawing on the work of [[J. L. Austin|John Austin]] and [[David Lewis (philosopher)|David Lewis]], Brisset theorizes the idea of limits to performativity. To do this, Brisset considers that a theory, in order to be "performative", must become a convention. This requires conditions to be met. To take a convention status, a theory will have to:

* Provide social actors with a representation of their social world allowing them to choose among several actions ("Empiricity" condition);
* Indicate an option considered relevant when the agreement is generalised ("Self-fulfilling" condition);
* Be compatible with all the conventions constituting the social environment ("Coherency" condition);<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Brisset|first=Nicolas|date=2016-04-02|title=Economics is not always performative: some limits for performativity|journal=Journal of Economic Methodology|volume=23|issue=2|pages=160–184|doi=10.1080/1350178X.2016.1172805|s2cid=148033117|issn=1350-178X}}</ref>

Based on this framework, Brisset criticized the seminal work of MacKenzie and Millo on the performativity of the [[Black–Scholes model|Black-Scholes-Merton]] financial model.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Brisset|first=Nicolas|title=On Performativity: Option Theory and the Resistance of Financial Phenomena|date=December 2017|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-the-history-of-economic-thought/article/on-performativity-option-theory-and-the-resistance-of-financial-phenomena/5EA4680D1294F9D4593FCAB4FBAB1421#fndtn-metrics|journal=Journal of the History of Economic Thought|language=en|volume=39|issue=4|pages=549–569|doi=10.1017/S1053837217000128|s2cid=158017241|issn=1053-8372}}</ref> Drawing on the work of [[Pierre Bourdieu]], Brisset also uses the notion of [[Speech act|Speech Act]] to study economic models and their use in political power relations.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Brisset|first=Nicolas|date=2018-01-02|title=Models as speech acts: the telling case of financial models|url=https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2018.1419105|journal=Journal of Economic Methodology|volume=25|issue=1|pages=21–41|doi=10.1080/1350178X.2018.1419105|s2cid=148612438|issn=1350-178X}}</ref>

MacKenzie's approach was also criticized by [[Uskali Mäki|Uskali Maki]] for not using the concept of performativity in accordance with Austin's formulation.<ref>{{Citation|last=Mäki|first=Uskali|title=Performativity: Saving Austin From Mackenzie|date=2013|url=https://philpapers.org/rec/MKIPSA|work=EPSA11 Perspectives and Foundational Problems in Philosophy of Science|pages=443–453|editor-last=Karakostas|editor-first=Vassilios|publisher=Springer|access-date=2020-04-14|editor2-last=Dieks|editor2-first=Dennis}}</ref> This point gave rise to a debate in [[economic philosophy]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Guala|first=Francesco|date=2015-05-10|title=Performativity Rationalized|language=en|location=Rochester, NY|ssrn=2616814}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Brisset, Nicolas|date=2017-09-01|title=The Future of Performativity|url=https://journals.openedition.org/oeconomia/2746|journal=Œconomia. History, Methodology, Philosophy|language=en|issue=7–3|pages=439–452|doi=10.4000/oeconomia.2746|issn=2113-5207|doi-access=free}}</ref>