Technology: Theory-driven experimentation and combinatorial salience

Recombination has long been seen as a central mechanism for explaining technological evolution and economic growth. Yet this view suggests several puzzles. First, the set of potential combinations is astronomically large, raising the question of how humans somehow arrive at useful combinations (amongst indefinite possibilities). And second, just as possible combinations are “unprestatable” in advance, the same goes for the elements or components that might serve as building blocks of combination. The central question, then, is how actors generate salience for useful combinations as well as plausible combinatorial components. We argue that theory-driven experimentation generates combinatorial salience by providing a shortcut for brute force search—making the combinatorial explosion analytically tractable. We link our argument to existing approaches to combination and technology, in particular, Koppl et al.’s Explaining Technology. We augment long-run, evolutionary explanations of combinatorial technology with a more decision-oriented approach.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Economic Review
Published
2025-10-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2025.105186
Primary Topic
Philosophy and History of Science
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Technology: Theory-driven experimentation and combinatorial salience

Teppo Felin, Madison Singell
European Economic Review
Philosophy and History of Science
article

Technology: Theory-driven experimentation and combinatorial salience

Teppo Felin, Madison Singell
article en

Abstract

Recombination has long been seen as a central mechanism for explaining technological evolution and economic growth. Yet this view suggests several puzzles. First, the set of potential combinations is astronomically large, raising the question of how humans somehow arrive at useful combinations (amongst indefinite possibilities). And second, just as possible combinations are “unprestatable” in advance, the same goes for the elements or components that might serve as building blocks of combination. The central question, then, is how actors generate salience for useful combinations as well as plausible combinatorial components. We argue that theory-driven experimentation generates combinatorial salience by providing a shortcut for brute force search—making the combinatorial explosion analytically tractable. We link our argument to existing approaches to combination and technology, in particular, Koppl et al.’s Explaining Technology. We augment long-run, evolutionary explanations of combinatorial technology with a more decision-oriented approach.

European Economic ReviewVol. 181
University of Utah (US), University of Oxford (GB), Stanford University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
Philosophy and History of Science
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.