Talk:Cobweb model
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Economics WikiProject, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve economics-related articles.. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale. | |
I know that it might be more logical to have price on the x-axis and quantity on the y-axis for supply/demand diagrams, but the general convention seems to be having price marked verticaly and quantity horizontally like in Supply and Demand - do you think the diagram would be more clear like that? --Alex Whittaker 29 June 2005 10:37 (UTC)
As someone who does A2 level Economics (UK) I would consider the axis the wrong way round. I've always been taught that price is Y, as you'd expect on all diagrams and would expect to loose marks in an exam if I did it the other way around.
I agree. The x and y axis should be switched. I will attempt to do this when I get enough time. Mdelves 23:50, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
I think price should be on the x-axis and quantity on the y-axis. The current diagram is a bit confusing... JKleo 16:59, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Fuck the douchebag who flipped the axes on that diagram. Get the price on the vertical axis.
- Although the axes are opposite of what's "normally" used in economic papers and textbooks, the graph is not technically incorrect and still provides information to the reader by visually showing the convergence case. I've reverted the page back to before the graph was removed. A better solution would be create a new image rather then remove it. Mdelves 01:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
I was taught (for some reason) that while Price usually goes on y and Quantity on x, for Cobweb Theory they are reversed to make visualisation easier - and the spiral goes anticlockwise (elasticity dependant). --poorsodtalk 12:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- Obviously it can be graphed with either quantity on the axis. I'm not so concerned about that. The reason I redid the old graph is that the sequence of points mapped out on the old graph was inconsistent with the verbal description of the mechanism in the article. If you want to see a reputable textbook graph that places the axes the same way I did, and shows a clockwise spiral, see Fig. 17.7 in Nicholson's Microeconomic Theory, 7th ed. --Rinconsoleao (talk) 21:51, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
