math major doing Econ PhD?

[person12345]

Hi all,

 

I'm a math major thinking of doing a PhD in Economics. I have taken few courses in economics and don't have a lot of experience in the subject as a whole. I have only studied or done research in certain subfields of economics: game theory, network, social choice. I like these subjects a lot, they are quite 'pure mathematical/computer sciencey' and I would like to study such subjects for a career.

 

However, my worry is that in doing a PhD I will have no choice but to study the other parts of economics: macro, econometrics. I have looked at graduate texts on these and to be honest, though I think I could learn them, I have no interest in them and I would like to avoid them as much as possible. If it's a matter of simply gritting my teeth and bearing it for two years, then I think it's worth it, but still the simple fact that I don't like these topics worries me.

 

 

So my questions are:

1. Do you know non-econ majors who did a PhD in economics? How did they do?

2. Do you think it's a good idea to get a PhD in a subject that I do not enjoy as a whole?

3. Provided I pass the prelims, to what extent do you think I could avoid macro and econometrics in the future? That is, is it a matter of just spending two years slaving away at something you don't like in order to do research in what you do like later on? Is that actually feasible or would I not be able to escape the things I don't like (teaching and so on)?

4. Will I be looked down on by other economists for such an attitude?

 

Thanks all!

[Andronicus]

1. Plenty of econ PhD students were math majors. They typically do at least as well as econ majors.

2. There are lots of subfields of economics that I don't find exciting, and the same is certainly true of many other economists. Once you reach the research phase you're pretty much entirely focused on your particular areas of interest.

3. You can easily avoid macro. I haven't thought about macro since I passed qualifiers. Econometrics is tougher: you can avoid it if you're doing theory. If your research has any empirical component whatsoever, you will need some econometrics.

4. Not as long as you don't look down on others whose interests are not your own, no, nobody will look down on you for being a theorist. However, the job market for theorists can be pretty tough.

[Guest buzios]

1. Do you know non-econ majors who did a PhD in economics? How did they do?

You'd be amazed how many. Just as well as, if not better than, their pure econ counterparts.

 

2. Do you think it's a good idea to get a PhD in a subject that I do not enjoy as a whole?

If not then I'm screwed.

 

3. Provided I pass the prelims, to what extent do you think I could avoid macro and econometrics in the future? That is, is it a matter of just spending two years slaving away at something you don't like in order to do research in what you do like later on? Is that actually feasible or would I not be able to escape the things I don't like (teaching and so on)?

It's actually just a matter of the one year. I don't expect to worry about macro after I'm done with the first year. I also don't believe you'd be forced to study or teach in a field of econ you haven't been sufficiently exposed to.

 

4. Will I be looked down on by other economists for such an attitude?

I seriously doubt so. It seems like your attitude is shared by a lot of us.

[Nonsequitur]

Fwiw, even if you dislike econometrics, I would try to get the best grounding you can before entering a PhD program. You will need some no matter what and the first-year course is one that many find very challenging at top programs. Hmm: would be interesting to see what second-year or later students thought was the hardest first-year sequence: econometrics, micro, or macro.

[Zeno]

I agree with all of the above.

 

That said, if you're not even remotely interested in the other parts of economics, why not do a PhD in a CS program with a game theory specialty? I could be wrong, but I believe people there get to specialize earlier than in econ. For example, I think if you were applying to do CS at CMU, you could essentially apply directly to be a part of Tuomas Sandholm's group.

[badasseconomist]

I am not a graduate student yet, but your situation is somewhat similar to what i faced earlier, except that my interests are in Macro & Metrics and I found Micro JUST BORING. But, after spending sometime in self study I have come to realise that you may not be a super star in Macro, Micro & Metrics but you should definitely have the intuition of it as a typical graduate student (not a super star), because, when you get to the phase of research you would be amazed by the way they all ( and other sub fields) inter-connect. For example, I read some article about game theory being applied to international policy negotiations.

 

I may be completely wrong, but, this is what I understood.

[mathemagician]

However, my worry is that in doing a PhD I will have no choice but to study the other parts of economics: macro, econometrics. I have looked at graduate texts on these and to be honest, though I think I could learn them, I have no interest in them and I would like to avoid them as much as possible. If it's a matter of simply gritting my teeth and bearing it for two years, then I think it's worth it, but still the simple fact that I don't like these topics worries me.

 

I think this is a poor attitude to have especially when you are just a nascent researcher. To be so closeminded already is unfortunate. Personally, there are so many things that interest me (both inside and outside economics) but I just don't have the time. I think every area of economics is interesting though some areas may be more interesting than others. Building connections between fields is a mark of a great researcher.

 

BTW, I'm at an upper year grad student and I came into economics with a pure math background and essentially no economics courses (just intro micro at the time of application). Nowadays, my research is in a subject quite different from what I set out to study - I'm doing macro instead of game theory.

[TomRod]

I second what mathemagician said. Go in with an open mind. Econometrics is probability + linear algebra--its not that far off from some of the pure math you've studied.

 

This being said, the economics tent is quite large.

[Guest 8675309]

Ph.D Macro is usually a lesson in dynamic non-linear optimization methods, select pieces of the calculus of variations. If you like math you'll be fine. Once you get to dissertation stage you can forget abotu it anyway. Your issue however is going to be getting letters from economists. They count more than letters from mathematicians.

[synthxdill]

I think anyone from a pure math background will be able to appreciate employment of econometric techniques in applied research. It is quite validating, isn't it? For what it's worth, with a basic understanding of economic relationships and a strong background in math, you stand to have a comparative advantage in many first year courses to students with a stronger econ background but bottom-bare math skills. Remember, math and philosophy are the oldest forms of study, everything else is just a combination of the two.

[blinvisible]

I think you should take a look at some of the programs business schools, computer science and electrical engineering departments have to offer as they may better fit your interests than econ PhD programs.

[person12345]

Thanks everyone for the replies, very useful.

 

Now here's another thing. What do you think is the most important economics course to take in order to develop "intuition"? I have only one space for an elective, so i need one of: intermediate macroeconomics, intermediate microeconomics or a statistics course (time series). There's no suitable econometric course I would be allowed to take.

Edited April 14, 2012 by person12345

[TomRod]

Micro. Intermediate macro is useful to get caught up to speed with macro from the 1950's and before. Modern macro builds on micro.

[riverscuomo]

To the original poster: I think you might be well served to look at operations research graduate programs, as they focus more on the theoretical side behind game theory, social decision theory, and network theory. I'm interested in those areas myself and looked into places where I could study those topics further, and after some research OR programs are the way to go if you're just looking at that and don't want to do as much econ theory.