Même à partir d'un jpg ?

The 2010 JEBO issue included a paper by Eckel and Gintis in defense of FS. The editors received dozens of referee reports for the paper of BS (some unsolicited), and the issue led to important tensions within the editorial board...

The controversy moved from specialized issues related to model calibration to whether this part of behavioral economics was even science at all. Another aspect that led the controversy to grow in scope was the people involved. While it initially only involved BS and FS, others joined.

For example, Shaked commented, "Could it be that, with the exception of Quarterly Journal of Economics's proofreader, no one has ever carefully read the details of the paper until now?" while FS ironized that Shaked had the rhetoric of a literary critic, not of an economist.

FS responded the same year with an online paper accusing Shaked of "misquoting" them and "making grave charges without substantiating them" (again more details in the paper). In 2010, Kenneth Binmore joined Shaked (BS) with another critical paper followed by a reply by FS and a final rejoinder by BS

Existing literature emphasizes that controversies are not only structured by the scientific issues at stake or the quality of the arguments but also by how the wider community reacts, the format of the controversy (traditional media, journal articles...), or its length (decades...).

It was noted by Coelho et al. (2005) that economists are engaging in fewer controversies over time as measured by published replies and critical commentary. So when some economists criticized behavioral econ by arguing they “cast a dark shadow on the theory” we took a look at what was happening: