USING THE WILD BOOTSTRAP TO IMPLEMENT HETEROSKEDASTICITY-ROBUST TESTS FOR SERIAL CORRELATION IN DYNAMIC REGRESSION MODELS* April 2003.
|
|
- Lionel McCarthy
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 USING THE WILD BOOTSTRAP TO IMPLEMENT HETEROSKEDASTICITY-ROBUST TESTS FOR SERIAL CORRELATION IN DYNAMIC REGRESSION MODELS* by L.G. Godfrey 1 and A.R. Tremayne 1,2 April 2003 Abstract Conditional heteroskedasticity is a common feature of financial and macroeconomic time series data. When such data are used to estimate dynamic regression models, standard checks for serial correlation are inappropriate. In such circumstances, it is obviously important to have valid tests that are reliable in finite samples. Generalizations of the standard Lagrange multiplier test and a Hausman-type check are examined, as is a new procedure. Monte Carlo results on significance levels and power are reported. Asymptotic critical valuesfailtogivegoodcontrolof finite sample significance levels. It is, however, found that, if a particularly simple form of the wild bootstrap is used, it is possible to obtain well-behaved tests that are asymptotically robust to conditional heteroskedasticity of unspecified form. Keywords: heteroskedasticity; serial correlation; wild bootstrap JEL classification: C22,C52 1 Department of Economics, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom 2 School of Economics and Political Science, University of Sydney, Sydney NSW 2006, Australia * We are grateful to Peter N. Smith for helpful suggestions. 1
2 1 Introduction The importance of testing for serial correlation after the least squares estimation of a dynamic regression model has been understood for many years. Lagrange Multiplier (LM) tests allow for flexibility in the choice of alternative hypothesis, are easily implemented, and are now used as a matter of routine in estimation programmes. However, these tests, along with many others, were derived under the assumption of homoskedasticity. It is now recognized that conditional heteroskedasticity may be common, especially (but certainly not exclusively) when the data relate to financial variables. In the presence of conditional heteroskedasticity, standard checks for serial correlation cannot be assumed to be asymptotically valid and may lead to misleading inferences. There is therefore a need to examine heteroskedasticity-robust (HR) procedures. An obvious way to derive LM-type checks that are asymptotically HR is to employ heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimates (HCCME) as discussed by White (1980). The basic idea of using HCCME to obtain diagnostic tests is long established; see, for example, Pagan and Hall (1983). Details of a specific application of HCCME to testing for serial correlation are given by Godfrey (1994). However, there is a considerable body of evidence indicating that tests derived from the HCCME can have finite sample distributions that are quite unlike those predicted by asymptotic theory. In particular, finite sample significance levels can be far from what is desired. The main purpose of this paper is to report how the wild bootstrap approach can be employed to obtain control of the finite sample significance levels of serial correlation tests based upon HCCME. Given the significant increases in the availability of cheap and powerful computers in the last few years, this approach is attractive. Once implemented in standard programmes, it could be used not only for serial correlation tests, but also for other variable addition diagnostic checks, e.g. the RESET 2
3 test. Thus the wild bootstrap described below provides a way for applied workers to obtain misspecification tests that are asymptotically robust to heteroskedasticity (and nonnormality) with the bootstrap being used to improve upon the approximation provided by asymptotic theory. This combination of features matches Hansen s (1999) recommendations for good econometric practice. In order to assess the marginal value of the results given below, reference should be made to the existing body of published work. 1 There are relatively few contributions. Robinson (1991) considers a static linear regression model and derives a LM test for serial correlation that is asymptotically valid under dynamic conditional heteroskedasticity and nonnormality. No evidence on finite sample performance is provided and, as noted by Robinson, the test is inappropriate in the presence of lagged dependent variables. Whang (1998) derives tests for serial correlation in dynamic models that are asymptotically valid in the presence of heteroskedasticity of unknown form. Thus his test serves the role for which the tests of this paper are designed. However, Whang (1998) does not use the HCCME approach. Instead his test statistic involves a nonparametric kernel estimate of the unknown variance function, and his technique requires the specification of kernel and trimming functions. He reports Monte Carlo results for his asymptotic tests based upon a static simple regression. His estimates show that asymptotic theory cannot be relied upon to give a very good approximation. For example, with 50 observations and a nominal 1 Binbin Guo and Peter Phillips have kindly supplied a copy of unpublished work. Guo and Phillips (2000) provide tests that are asymptotically valid in the presence of conditional heteroskedasticity of unspecified form, either when there are only exogenous regressors, or when there are only lagged dependent variables, as regressors. They report Monte Carlo results for a model of the latter type. The use of asymptotic critical values produces mixed results with some evidence of tests being undersized. 3
4 significance level of 5%, the majority of his estimates are between 2% and 3.5%. The use of HCCME can also be avoided if there is precise information about the error variances. Given such information, more specific adjustments can be made to obtain HR checks for serial correlation. Silvapulle and Evans (1998) give a discussion of ARCH-corrected tests. However, such an approach suffers from the general drawback that applied researchers are in reality not likely to have accurate information about the precise form of heteroskedasticity. Mistakes made in the specification of the variance model will, in general, lead to asymptotically invalid inferences. Moreover, contrary to what is asserted by Silvapulle and Evans (1998, page 35), the Box-Pierce and Ljung-Box portmanteau tests are not asymptotically valid when exogenous variables and lagged values of the dependent variable are both included amongst the regressors. Consequently their Monte Carlo analysis includes inappropriate tests and the corresponding results must be treated with caution. In view of the above, the novel features of our study are: principally, the use of a wild bootstrap to gain better control over significance levels than is provided by asymptotic theory; the use in Monte Carlo designs of dynamic regression models with exogenous variables; and in addition a new test is derived as a modification of the HR version of the LM statistic. The paper consists of six sections. Section 2 contains descriptions of models and tests, including the new variant of the LM test. Bootstrap methods are explained in Section 3. The design of the Monte Carlo experiments is provided in Section 4. Results from these experiments are summarized in Section 5. Finally, Section 6 contains the conclusions. 2 Models and test procedures The dynamic regression model is written as 4
5 y t = Y 0 tα + X 0 tβ+² t = W 0 tγ+² t, (1) in which: Y 0 t =(y t 1,..., y t P ) with P 1; α 0 =(α 1,..., α P ) with the coefficients α i being such that the roots of z P α 1 z P 1... α P =0 are all strictly inside the unit circle; X t is L by 1 and is a typical observation vector on regressors that are either nonrandom or strictly exogenous; W 0 t=(y 0 t, X0 t); and γ 0 =(α 0, β 0 ). Let K = P + L denote the number of regression coefficients in (1) and T denote the number of observations available for estimation. The null hypothesis to be tested is that the errors ² t are serially uncorrelated. It will be argued that the use of a wild bootstrap is very important to the reliable assessment of the statistical significance of HR variants of the LM tests of Breusch (1978) and Godfrey (1978), and the Hausman-type test of Godfrey (1997). Consequently the regularity conditions must not only support the usual HCCME and associated asymptotic tests, but also validate the bootstrap procedure. All tests are constructed using the results of ordinary least squares (OLS) estimation of (1). It is essential that the OLS estimators are consistent under the null hypothesis. Consequently it is assumed that RSS j, the residual sum of squares from the artificial regression of the j th variable of W t on all other regressors, is at least O p (T ). Restrictions on the coefficients of the lagged dependent variables of Y t have been given above. The exogenous variables of X t are not restricted to be nonstochastic or covariance-stationary I(0) terms; see Wooldridge (1999) for a discussion of nonstationary regressors in the context of testing for serial correlation. Let eγ 0 =(eα 0, e β 0 ) denote the OLS coefficient estimator for (1) and e t = y t Wt 0 eγ be a typical residual derived from this estimator. 5
6 Turning to assumptions that are made, under H 0, about the errors of (1), the following, provided by Gonçalves and Kilian (2002) for wild bootstraps, are adopted for the case of conditional heteroskedasticity: a. E(² t F t 1 )=0,almostsurely,whereF t 1 is the sigma-field generated by (² t 1,² t 2,...). b. E(² 2 t )=σ 2, 0 < σ 2 <. c. lim T T P 1 T t=1 E(²2 t F t 1 )=σ 2 in probability. d. E(² 2 t ² t r ² t s )=0for all r 6= s, forallt, r 1,s 1. e. lim T T P 1 T t=1 ² t r² t s E(² 2 t F t 1 )=0in probability for any r 1,s 1. f. E( ² t 4r ) is uniformly bounded for some r 2 and all t. These assumptions are somewhat stronger than those required for the asymptotic validity of the HCCME and, in particular, require that at least eight, rather than at least four, moments exist. For the case of unconditional heteroskedasticity, conditions for models with strictly exogenous regressors are available in the statistics literature; see Liu (1988) and Mammen (1993). Suppose that the null hypothesis is to be tested against the alternative of Q th order autocorrelation, Q 1. 2 A convenient variable addition form of the LM test is a test of λ =(λ 1,..., λ Q ) 0 = 0 in the augmented model y t = Y 0 tα + X 0 tβ + E 0 tλ+² t = W 0 tγ + E 0 tλ + ² t, (2) in which E 0 t =(e t 1,..., e t Q ) and e t q is set equal to zero when t q 0. 3 Let the OLS estimator of the regression coefficients for (2) be denoted by ˆγ and ˆλ. The Breusch-Godfrey test is then a check of the joint significance of the elements of ˆλ. 2 The Q th order autoregression (AR(Q)) and Q th order moving average (MA(Q)) alternatives lead to the same test statistic. 3 Restricted alternatives, e.g. simple AR(Q) schemes, can easily be accommodated by omitting irrelevant terms from E t. 6
7 Although Breusch (1978) and Godfrey (1978) proposed a large sample χ 2 form of the test, subsequent investigations by Kiviet (1986) revealed that better finite sample behaviour was achieved by using an approximate F statistic. Kiviet s version of the test is denoted by LM F anditisthisformthatwillbeshowntobevulnerableto dynamic heteroskedasticity. An alternative check for serial correlation is derived by Godfrey (1997) as an extension of the work by Dezhbakhsh and Thursby (1994). The test is a check of the significance of the difference between the estimators of α from (1) and (2), i.e. (eα ˆα). Godfrey (1997) gives a formula based upon a direct application of Hausman s (1978) general result for the variance-covariance matrix of estimator contrasts. However, a variable addition form is also available. Let A denote the cross-product moment matrix for the regressors of (2), i.e. Y 0 Y Y 0 X Y 0 E A =T 1 X 0 Y X 0 X X 0 E E 0 Y E 0 X E 0 E in which Y is T by P with typical row Yt, 0 X is T by L with typical row X 0 t, and E is T by Q with typical row E 0 t. The submatrices of the inverse of A corresponding to partitioning by lagged endogenous regressors, exogenous regressors, and lagged residuals are denoted by A YY, A YX, A YE etc. The variable addition form of Godfrey s (1997, p. 201, eq. 2.6) test is then obtained by testing δ =(δ 1,..., δ P ) 0 = 0 in the extended model y t = Ytα 0 + X 0 tβ +(A YE E t ) 0 δ + ² t = Wtγ 0 + J 0 tδ + ² t, (3) i.e. the test variables are the P linear combinations of the terms in E t given by J t = A YE E t. If P Q with rank(a YE )= Q, the test variables of (3) are (omitting 7
8 any redundant terms) equivalent to those of (2). If P<Qwith rank(a YE )= P,the Hausman and LM tests are not asymptotically equivalent and there is no generally valid ranking of these procedures by asymptotic local power; see, e.g., Holly (1982). Using White s (1980) general formula for the HCCME, the HR version of the LM statistic can be shown to be LM HR = e 0 E{E 0 M(W)eΩM(W)E} 1 E 0 e, (4) where e is the T -dimensional OLS residual vector with typical element e t, e Ω diag(e 2 1,..., e 2 T ), and is M(W) =I T P(W) =I T W(W 0 W) 1 W 0, in which W is the T by K matrix with typical row Wt. 0 The calculation of the HR- Hausman test of δ = 0 in (3), when P<Q, is carried out in a similar fashion. The test statistic for this procedure will be denoted by HA HR and is given by HA HR = e 0 J{J 0 M(W) ΩM(W)J} e 1 J 0 e, (5) where J is the T P matrix with typical row J 0 t. It should be noted that the terms e 2 t are used to compute the HCCME for both robust serial correlation tests. This corresponds to using the squared residuals from restricted (under the null hypothesis) estimation and, compared to using the unrestricted squared residuals, has been found elsewhere to give superior finite sample performance; e.g. see Davidson and MacKinnon (1985) and Godfrey and Orme (2002). 4 4 HCCME are sometimes derived by multiplying squared residuals by terms that tend to unity; see, e.g., Davidson and MacKinnon (1985). Davidson and MacKinnon (1985) report that, when restricted residuals are used, such adjustments lead only to slight changes. The simplest version is, therefore, used. 8
9 e 2 t Consideration of finite sample performance suggests that, in addition to using in expressions for HCCME, it may be useful to examine devices that reduce the sampling variability of the HCCME. One such device is used here to derive a modified version of LM HR. The basic idea is to eliminate asymptotically negligible terms. To identify and remove such terms, partition W as (W 1, W 2 ), where, under the null hypothesis, p lim T 1 W 0 1E 6= 0 and p lim T 1 W 0 2E = 0, so that W 1 contains terms like y t j,j =1,..., min(p, Q), andw 2 contains the exogenous regressors of X t and any terms y t j with j>q. Standard results on projection matrices imply that M(W) =M( f W 1 ) P(W 2 ), where f W 1 = M(W 2 )W 1,andM(W 2 ), M( f W 1 ) and P(W 2 ) have the meanings implied by the definitions of M(W) and P(W) in (4). Hence E 0 M(W) e ΩM(W)E = Ψ 1 + Ψ 2 +Ψ 0 2+Ψ 3, in which, Ψ 1 = Ě 0 e ΩĚ, Ψ2 = Ě 0 e ΩP(W2 )E, Ψ 3 = E 0 P(W 2 ) e ΩP(W 2 )E, and Ě denotes M( W f 1 )E. Since p lim T 1 W2E 0 = 0, Ψ 2 and Ψ 3 are both o p (T ) and are asymptotically negligible relative to Ψ 1 which is O p (T ). Hence the HR-variant of the LM test given by (4) is asymptotically equivalent to the modified procedure based upon MLM HR = e 0 E(Ě 0 e ΩĚ) 1 E 0 e. (6) 9
10 Under the null hypothesis, LM HR and MLM HR are asymptotically distributed as χ 2 (Q). When P < Q, the asymptotic null distribution of HA HR is χ 2 (P ). ( If P Q, all three tests are asymptotically equivalent.) Asymptotically valid tests are obtained by comparing sample values of tests statistics with critical values from the right-hand-tail of the appropriate χ 2 distributions. However, as illustrated by the results provided by Godfrey and Orme (2002), the finite sample distributions of HR statistics may differ appreciably from those predicted by asymptotic theory when several restrictions are being tested. Their results also indicate the potential usefulness of wild bootstrap methods and these techniques will be discussed in the next section. 3 Wild bootstrap methods In order to describe the wild bootstrap, it is useful to write the OLS estimated version of (1) as y t = W 0 t eγ + e t,t=1,..., T. (7) Let Z be the discrete random variable with the two-point distribution Z = ( 5 1)/2 with probability ( 5+1)/(2 5) (8) =( 5+1)/2, otherwise, so that E(Z) =0, E(Z 2 )=1, and E(Z 3 )=1. The conditions that E(Z) =0and E(Z 2 )=1are essential for the validity of the bootstrap procedure. The additional restriction pertaining to the third moment of (8) was suggested by Liu (1988). 5 The 5 After examining the distribution of a single linear combination of OLS estimators, Liu (1988) shows that, if E(Z 3 )=1, the wild bootstrap enjoys second order properties with the first three 10
11 wild bootstrap (termed the recursive-design wild bootstrap by Gonçalves and Kilian, 2002) is then implemented as follows. (i) For t =1,..., T, observations are generated by yt = α 1 yt α P yt P + X 0 e tβ + ² t, where bootstrap sample starting values are set equal to actual estimation sample starting values (see Li and Maddala, 1996, Section 2.3), and the errors ² t are given by ² t = e t Z t,z t being a drawing from (8). Note that, in contrast to the standard residual resampling scheme for iid errors, it is not necessary to centre the OLS residuals if the null model does not contain an intercept when using the wild bootstrap; see Liu (1988, pp ). (ii) Given the bootstrap data, the regression model is estimated and the associated values of the test statistics HA HR,LM HR, and MLM HR are calculated. (iii) Repeat (i) and (ii) B times in order to estimate the p-values of the observed statistics HA HR, LM HR,andMLM HR. The null hypothesis of serial independence is rejected for p-values that are sufficiently small. Several other distributions have been suggested as alternatives to (8); e.g. see Davidson and Flachaire (2000), henceforth DF, Liu (1988), and Mammen (1993). However, with the exception of the DF scheme, the use of these alternative wild bootstraps produced results in the Monte Carlo experiments of this paper that are markedly inferior to those produced by (8). Consequently detailed results are only provided below for (8) and the DF scheme which is given by the simple two-point distribution Z = 1 with probability 0.5, (9) = 1, otherwise. moments of the relevant test statistic being estimated correctly to O(T 1 ) by the bootstrap. 11
12 (The Monte Carlo results for all wild bootstrap schemes are available on request.) The distribution of (9) satisfies the essential requirements that E(Z) =0and E(Z 2 )=1, but has E(Z 3 )=0, rather than E(Z 3 )=1as in (8). Provided the regularity conditions mentioned in Section 2 are satisfied, the wild bootstrap can be used for either conditional or unconditional heteroskedasticity. If the regressors are strictly exogenous and the variances exhibit unconditional heteroskedasticity, with variances being functions of regressor values, a paired bootstrap can be used; see Flachaire (1999). Brownstone and Valetta (2001) discuss why the wild bootstrap is likely to be more accurate than the paired bootstrap when both are appropriate. 4 Monte Carlo Design The number of Monte Carlo replications for each experiment is R = 25000, withthe number of bootstraps being B =399. MacKinnon (2002) remarks that, while he would not recommend using B =399in genuine applications, sampling errors associated with this value tend to cancel out in Monte Carlo experiments. In empirical work, B =999could be used without incurring important waiting times, given the power of modern personal computers. The dynamic regression model upon which experiments are based is y t = α 1 y t 1 + α 2 y t 2 + β 1 + β 2 x t + ² t,t=1,..., T, (10) in which x t is a scalar variable and T equals 40 or 80. This model corresponds to (7) of Dezhbakhsh (1990). The values used for (α 1, α 2 ) are (0.5, 0.3), (0.7, -0.2), (1.0, -0.2), (1.3, -0.5), (0.9, -0.3), and (0.6, 0.2) which are regarded by Dezhbakhsh and Thursby (1995) as typical of values observed in applied work. In all experiments, β 1 = β 2 =1. The exogenous variable x t is constructed in two ways. First, it is 12
13 generated as an artificial variable according to the first order autoregression x t = θx t 1 + v t, (11) with v t being NID(0, σ 2 v), θ =0.5 or 0.9, and σ 2 v selected, given the value of θ, sothat Var(x t )=1. 6 The starting value x 0 is a drawing from a standard normal distribution. Second, x t is obtained by standardizing the logs of quarterly observations for GDP in the UK, with the basic data being taken from the file GDP95.FIT in the Microfit 4.0 package (Pesaran and Pesaran, 1996). The transformed data appear to exhibit deterministic and stochastic trends, as might be expected for this type of macroeconomic variable. The starting values y 1 and y 0 are set equal to their unconditional mean with x =0, i.e. β 1 /(1 α 1 α 2 ). The effect of using these starting values is reduced by discarding the first 40 of any sequence of (T +40)generated values. The finite sample significance levels of versions of the tests described in Section 2 are estimated for nominal levels of 1% and 5%. As a useful example of testing using quarterly data, HR-tests LM HR and MLM HR of λ 1 = λ 2 = λ 3 = λ 4 =0in 4X y t = α 1 y t 1 + α 2 y t 2 + β 1 + β 2 x t + λ j e t j + error, (12) are used, with e t j being a typical lagged residual from the OLS estimation of (10). The Hausman-type test HA HR is a test of the joint significance of the estimator contrasts for α 1 and α 2 arising from a comparison of OLS estimates of (10) and (12), i.e. it is a special case of the test associated with (3). With conditional heteroskedasticity, the error terms ² t of (10) can be written as ² t = p h t ζ t, (13) where h t denotes a conditional variance and, under the null hypothesis, the terms ζ t are iid(0,1). Various distributions for ζ t are used. The normal distribution serves 6 All pseudo-random numbers are generated using subroutines from the NAG Library. j=1 13
14 as a benchmark and standardized forms of the t(5) and χ 2 (8) distributions are also employed. The t(5) distribution is used, following Gonçalves and Kilian (2002), to investigate robustness of the wild bootstrap methods to departures from condition (f) of Section 2. The χ 2 (8) distribution is used to provide evidence on the effects of skewness. This distribution, with a coefficient of skewness equal to 1, is heavily skewed, according to the arguments of Ramberg, Tadikamalla, Dudewicz and Mykytka (1979). The final component required to derive a typical error ² t,afterdrawingζ t, is the conditional standard deviation h t. Since the HR-tests for serial correlation are intended for general use, it is important to obtain evidence not only for several forms of heteroskedasticity, but also for the case of homoskedastic errors. The following five specifications for variance schemes are used. First, the h t are observation-invariant, i.e. the errors are homoskedastic with h t = σ 2,t=1,..., T, (14) σ 2 being set equal to 1 or 10. Second, the ARCH(1) process provides an important example of conditional heteroskedasticity and is used in the form h t = φ 0 + φ 1 ² 2 t 1, (15) in which φ 0 = σ 2 /(1 φ 1 ), φ 1 = 0.4 or 0.8, and σ 2 is defined as for (14). The GARCH(1, 1) model is also frequently used in applied studies. This variance scheme is written as h t = ψ 0 + ψ 1 ² 2 t 1 + ψ 2 h t 1, (16) where ψ 0 =1, ψ 1 =0.1, and ψ 2 =0.8; see Bollerslev (1986). The values of ψ 1 and ψ 2 are similar to those reported in empirical work. The average R 2 calculated from the simulations under this specification is about The average R 2 varies between 0.4 and 0.9 across the five variance schemes which seems consistent with values observed in applied work. 14
15 Given the widespread use of quarterly data in applied work, it seems apposite to examine seasonal schemes of heteroskedasticity. Consideration is, therefore, given to a fourth-order model taken from Engle s (1982) classic article. As in (38) of Engle (1982, page 1002), conditional variances h t are written as h t = φ 0 + φ 1 (0.4² 2 t ² 2 t ² 2 t ² 2 t 4), (17) in which φ 0 and φ 1 areasdefined for (15). The fifth and final model to be adopted has unconditional quarterly heteroskedasticity and can be written as (ω 2 1, ω 2 2, ω 2 3, ω 2 2σ 2 4)=( (1 + c), 2σ 2 (1 + c), 2cσ 2 (1 + c), 2cσ 2 ), (18) (1 + c) in which ω 2 j denotes the variance in quarter j, the average of these terms is σ 2, σ 2 is as specified in (14), and c equals 4 or 9. The model of (18) is similar in spirit to that used by Burridge and Taylor (2001, p. 104). Note that, although (18) generates unconditional heteroskedasticity, its effects on serial correlation tests cannot be ignored. In the estimation of the covariance matrix of OLS estimators for (12), the second moments of the errors are not asymptotically orthogonal to the squared regressors e 2 t j,j =1,..., 4, so that the conventional (homoskedasticity-based) estimator is not consistent; see White (1980, p. 826). In addition to significance levels, the sensitivity of tests to serial correlation is clearly of interest. For experiments designed to provide evidence on power, various alternatives are used, some of which involve a combination of conditional heteroskedasticity and serial correlation. Five alternatives with homoskedastic errors are obtained as special cases of the stationary fifth-order autoregession 5X ² t = ρ j ² t j + ζ t, (19) j=1 which replaces (13). The coefficient vectors ρ 0 =(ρ 1, ρ 2, ρ 3, ρ 4, ρ 5 ) of these special cases are as follows: 15
16 ρ 0 (1) =(0.7, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0); (20) ρ 0 (2) =(0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.7, 0.0); (21) ρ 0 (3) =(1.4, 0.71, 0.15, 0.1, 0.0); (22) ρ 0 (4) =(0.8, 0.0, 0.2, 0.06, 0.0); and (23) ρ 0 (5) =(0.5, 0.0, 0.0, 0.5, 0.25). (24) Thus the alternative hypothesis of the tests LM HR and MLM HR from (12) is overspecified for the first two cases and is underspecified for the final case. 8 The roots of the polynomial equations z 4 ρ 1 z 3... ρ 4 =0implied by the coefficients of (22) and (23) are (0.5, 0.4, 0.3, 0.2) and (0.5, -0.5, 0.4 ±0.3i), respectively. In order to derive power estimates in the presence of ARCH errors, the general random coefficient specification discussed by Bera and Higgins (1993) is adopted. The two specific errormodelsusedinthemontecarloexperiments are ² t =( τ t )² t 1 + ζ t, (25) and ² t =( τ t )² t 4 + ζ t, (26) in which the τ t are NID(0, 1) and are independent of ζ s for all s and t. Clearly the probability that the random coefficient of the serial correlation process is strictly between 0 and 1 is high for equations (25) and (26). 8 In practical situations, there is little information about the nature of serial correlation and so it is useful to examine overspecified and underspecified tests. 16
17 5 Monte Carlo results The estimates of significance levels provide clear evidence of the following main features. (i) As expected from the work of Kiviet (1986), the standard LM F test is wellbehaved when there is neither conditional nor unconditional heteroskedasticity. However, in the presence of either of these forms of heteroskedasticity, LM F rejects too frequently relative to the nominal value. The extent of the problem usually increases with the sample size, markedly so in the case of some forms of conditional heteroskedasticity. The error distribution does not appear to have any important effects on rejection rates. (ii) The estimates for MLM HR are quite similar to those for LM HR, whichever of the three methods is used to obtain the critical value. When the asymptotic χ 2 (4) distribution is used, LM HR and MLM HR are both markedly undersized at 1% and 5% levels. The problem is especially severe when the nominal size is 1%, as might be appropriate when a check for serial correlation is one of a battery of misspecification tests. When PD 1 is used in the wild bootstrap, LM HR and MLM HR have estimates that are slightly greater than required values. The use of PD 2 leads to better agreement between estimates and nominal values. 9 Indeed all the evidence suggests that using PD 2 leads to very good control of finite sample significance levels. (iii) The Hausman-type test HA HR is, like LM HR and MLM HR, undersized at the nominal 1% level when asymptotic critical values are used. However, asymptotic critical values produce estimates close to the nominal significance level of 5%. It might be conjectured that the improved performance of asymptotic theory reflects the reduction in the number of restrictions being tested, i.e. two rather than four. 9 This ranking of PD 1 and PD 2 by errors in estimated rejection probabilities conflicts with Liu s (1988) asymptotically valid results for a quasi-t test. 17
18 The use of PD 1 again leads to slightly oversized tests and good control is derived when PD 2 is employed. The full set of Monte Carlo results is available on request, but, in order to save space, only a representative sample is provided below. This sample is obtained from five cases. Details of these cases are given in Table 1. The cases cover all variance models and both types of exogenous regressor sequence. For variance models (15), (17) and (18), there is a choice between two levels of heteroskedasticity. The stronger of the two forms has been used in all cases in order to obtain stringent checks of the efficacy of the wild bootstrap. For the artificial AR(1) regressor of (11), the smaller value of θ, i.e. θ =0.5, is used so that the time series behaviour of this variable is not similar to that of the standardized log(uk GDP) series which can be modelled by an I(1) process. All the cases in Table 1 are for (10) with (α 1 =0.5, α 2 =0.3). Different choices of (α 1, α 2 ) from the pairs of values given in Section 4 do not lead to important changes in results; see Godfrey and Tremayne (2002). When using the cases of Table 1 to obtain information about HR-tests, estimates are only used for T =40in order to show just how well the wild bootstrap with PD 2 works in small samples. 18
19 Table 1 Sample of cases used in Tables 2-5 Variance model Regressor Case 1 (14) with σ 2 =1 log(uk GDP) a Case 2 (15) with φ 1 =0.8 (11) with θ =0.5 Case 3 (16) with ψ 1 =0.1, and ψ 2 =0.8 log(uk GDP) a Case 4 (17) with ψ 1 =0.1, and ψ 2 =0.8 (11) with θ =0.5 Case 5 (18) with c =9 log(uk GDP) a Note a These data are standardized before OLS estimation. Tables 2 to 5, constructed from estimates from Cases 1 to 5, contain examples that reflect the general findings (i) to (iii). In particular, the departures from nominal significance levels observed when LM F is asymptotically inappropriate indicate the vulnerability of this well-known standard check to ARCH and GARCH forms of conditional heteroskedasticity and to seasonal unconditional heteroskedasticity. The contents of Tables 3 to 5 show very clearly that asymptotic critical values cannot be relied upon when using HR tests. However, the combination of restricted residuals in the HCCME and the very simple PD 2 wild bootstrap gives tests with good finite sample behaviour. The results for the t(5) error distribution in Tables 3 to 5 indicate that the wild bootstrap can work well even when regularity condition (f) of Section 2isnotsatisfied. 19
20 Table 2 Estimated significance levels of LM F with T =40 nominal significance level 1% nominal significance level 5% sample size T =40 T =80 T =40 T =80 distribution for ζ t of (13) is N(0, 1) Case Case Case Case Case distribution for ζ t of (13) is standardized t(5) Case Case Case Case Case distribution for ζ t of (13) is standardized χ 2 (8) Case Case Case Case Case Notes Cases are as specified in Table 1. All estimates are given as percentages. 20
21 Table 3 Estimated significance levels of LM HR with T =40 nominal significance level 1% nominal significance level 5% critical value χ 2 (4) PD 1 PD 2 χ 2 (4) PD 1 PD 2 distribution for ζ t of (13) is N(0, 1) Case Case Case Case Case distribution for ζ t of (13) is standardized t(5) Case Case Case Case Case distribution for ζ t of (13) is standardized χ 2 (8) Case Case Case Case Case Notes Cases are as specified in Table 1.All estimates are given as percentages. 21
22 Table 4 Estimated significance levels of HA HR with T =40 nominal significance level 1% nominal significance level 5% critical value χ 2 (2) PD 1 PD 2 χ 2 (2) PD 1 PD 2 distribution for ζ t of (13) is N(0, 1) Case Case Case Case Case distribution for ζ t of (13) is standardized t(5) Case Case Case Case Case distribution for ζ t of (13) is standardized χ 2 (8) Case Case Case Case Case Notes Cases are as specified in Table 1. All estimates are given as percentages. 22
23 Table 5 Estimated significance levels of MLM HR with T =40 nominal significance level 1% nominal significance level 5% critical value χ 2 (4) PD 1 PD 2 χ 2 (4) PD 1 PD 2 distribution for ζ t of (13) is N(0, 1) Case Case Case Case Case distribution for ζ t of (13) is standardized t(5) Case Case Case Case Case distribution for ζ t of (13) is standardized χ 2 (8) Case Case Case Case Case Notes Cases are as specified in Table 1.All estimates are given as percentages. 23
24 Turning to estimates of power derived from (19)-(26), results for the artificial regressor sequence of (11) with θ =0.5 are given in Table 6. The following features emerge from consideration of the contents of Table 6. (iv) When LM F is asymptotically valid, i.e. in the cases of panel (a), it is usually slightly more powerful than the HR variants LM HR and MLM HR. However, the cost of the insurance premium for robustness to unspecified forms of heteroskedasticity is not large. Estimates for LM F arenotgivenforthearchmodelsinpanel(b) because the test is asymptotically inappropriate; see Table 2. (v) As predicted by the results of Holly (1982), there is no generally valid ranking by power that applies to HA HR on the one hand and the asymptotically equivalent LM HR and MLM HR on the other. Differences between Hausman-type and LMtype tests vary in sign and are usually small. However, an important difference is observed in the cases of the simple AR(4) model defined by ρ (2) of (21) and the corresponding ARCH process (26). For these two cases, HA HR has manifestly inferior power. The insensitivity of HA HR to serial correlation is worrying even if the implied inconsistencies of OLS estimators are small. The usual HCCME is inappropriate in the presence of serial correlation; so that failure to detect serial correlation may lead to misleading inferences. Overall it may be safer to use either LM HR or MLM HR, the differences between the power estimates of these asymptotically equivalent tests being small. (vi) Finally, comparison of the first and second rows of results in panel (a) with the corresponding results in panel (b) suggests that power estimates are not greatly affected by the presence of random variation in AR coefficients. 24
25 Table 6 Estimates of power with T =40and T =80 Model is (10) with (α 1, α 2, β 1, β 2 )=(0.5, 0.3, 1.0, 1.0) AR(1) regressor with θ =0.5 (a) Errors ² t generated by stationary AR(5) model (19) with perturbations ζ t being NID(0,1) T =40 T =80 ρ (j) of LM F LM HR HA HR MLM HR LM F LM HR HA HR MLM HR (20) (21) (22) (23) (24) (b) Errors ² t generated by ARCH models (25) and (26) with perturbations ζ t being NID(0,1) T =40 T =80 ARCH model LM F LM HR HA HR MLM HR LM F LM HR HA HR MLM HR (25) n/a n/a (26) n/a n/a Notes All critical values estimated using PD 2 wild bootstrap, with nominal significance level of 5%. n/a denotes that the test LM F is inappropriate 25
26 6 Conclusions Time-varying heteroskedasticity is recognized as an important phenomenon in applied studies; see, e.g., the discussions in Bollerslev, Engle and Nelson (1994). It is shown that misleading inferences may be made when standard checks for serial correlation are applied to dynamic regression models in the presence of either conditional or seasonal heteroskedasticity. To be more precise, simulation evidence presented in this paper illustrates a tendency for the well-known Lagrange multiplier test to be oversized, sometimes by a substantial amount. This evidence is derived from Monte Carlo experiments designed to mimic quarterly empirical studies. In these experiments, heteroskedasticity-robust versions of the usual Lagrange multiplier test and a Hausman-type test are also examined, along with a modification of the former procedure. The modification is designed to improve performance by using a less variable estimate of the covariance matrix. It is clear from the Monte Carlo results that the use of asymptotic critical values cannot be recommended. Heteroskedasticity-robust tests conducted on this basis are found to be undersized. However, a wild bootstrap approach proves to be reliable, with good control over finite sample significance levels being provided by the simple two-point pick distribution discussed by Davidson and Flachaire (2000). Results on power are also reported. The original and modified forms of the Lagrange multiplier test are very similar in performance. Under several alternatives, the Hausman test rejects a false null with a frequency similar to the other two tests, but evidence is found that it has relatively weak power against simple fourth-order autocorrelation. Consequently it may be safer to use the Lagrange multiplier test in the form in which it is robust to heteroskedasticity of unspecified form, or the modified version of this test, rather than the Hausman test. 26
27 References Bera, A.K. and M.L. Higgins, ARCH Models: Properties, Estimation and Testing, Journal of Economic Surveys 7 (1993), Bollerslev, T., Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity, Journal of Econometrics 31 (1986), Bollerslev, T., R.F. Engle and D.B. Nelson, ARCH Models, in R.F. Engle and D.L. McFadden (eds.), Handbook of Econometrics, Volume IV (Amsterdam: North Holland, 1994). Breusch, T.S., Testing for Autocorrelation in Dynamic Linear Models, Australian Economic Papers 17 (1978), Brownstone, D. and R. Valletta, The bootstrap and multiple imputations: harnessing increased computing power for improved statistical tests, Journal of Economic Perspectives 15 (2001), Burridge, P. and A.M.R. Taylor, On regression-based tests for seasonal unit roots in the presence of periodic heteroscedasticity, Journal of Econometrics 104 (2001), Davidson, R. and E. Flachaire, The Wild Bootstrap, Tamed at Last, working paper, GREQAM (2000). Davidson, R. and J.G. MacKinnon, Heteroskedasticity-Robust Tests in Regression Directions, Annals de l INSEE 59/60 (1985), Dezhbakhsh, H., The Inappropriate Use of Serial Correlation Tests in Dynamic Linear Models, Review of Economics and Statistics 72 (1990), Dezhbakhsh, H. and J.G. Thursby, Testing for Autocorrelation in the Presence of Lagged Dependent Variables: A Specification Error Approach, Journal of Econometrics 60 (1994), Dezhbakhsh, H. and J.G. Thursby, A Monte Carlo Comparison of Tests Based on the Durbin-Watson Statistic with Other Autocorrelation Tests in Dynamic Models, 27
28 Econometric Reviews 14 (1995), Engle, R.F., Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity with Estimates of the Variance of U.K. Inflation, Econometrica 50 (1982), Flachaire, E., A better way to bootstrap pairs, Economics Letters 64 (1999), Godfrey, L.G., Testing Against General Autoregressive and Moving Average Error Models when the Regressors Include Lagged Dependent Variables, Econometrica 49 (1978), Godfrey, L.G., Testing for serial correlation by variable addition in dynamic models estimated by instrumental variables, Review of Economics and Statistics 76 (1994), Godfrey, L.G., Hausman Tests for Autocorrelation in the Presence of Lagged Dependent Variables: Some Further Results, Journal of Econometrics 82 (1997), Godfrey, L.G. and C.D. Orme, Significance Levels of Heteroskedasticity-Robust Tests for Specification and Misspecification: Some Results on the Use of the Wild Bootstrap, unpublished paper, University of York (2002). Godfrey, L.G. and A.R. Tremayne, Heteroskedasticity-robust testing for serial correlation in regression models with lagged dependent variables, unpublished paper, University of York (2002). Gonçalves, S. and L. Kilian, Bootstrapping autoregressions with conditional heteroskedasticity of unknown form, European Central Bank Working Paper no. 196 (2002). Guo, B.B. and P.C.B.Phillips, Testing for Autocorrelation and Unit Roots in the Presence of Conditional Heteroskedasticity of Unknown Form, unpublished paper, Yale University (2000). Hansen, B.E., Discussion of Data Mining Reconsidered, Econometrics Journal 28
29 2 (1999), Hausman, J.A., Specification Error Tests in Econometrics, Econometrica 46 (1978), Holly, A., A Remark on Hausman s Specification Test, Econometrica 50 (1982), Kiviet, J., On the rigour of some specification tests for modelling dynamic relationships, Review of Economic Studies 53 (1986), Li, H. and G.S. Maddala, Bootstrapping Time Series Models, Econometric Reviews 15 (1996), Liu, R.Y., Bootstrap Procedures under Some Non-IID Models, Annals of Statistics 16 (1988), MacKinnon, J.G., Bootstrap inference in econometrics, unpublished paper, Queen s University (2002). Mammen, E., Bootstrap and Wild Bootstrap for High Dimensional Linear Models, Annals of Statistics 21 (1993), Pagan, A.R. and A.D. Hall, Diagnostic tests as residual analysis, Econometric Reviews 2 (1983), Pesaran, M.H. and B. Pesaran, Microfit 4.0, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996). Ramberg, J.S., E.J. Dudewicz, P.R. Tadikamalla and E.F. Mykytka, A Probability Distribution and its Uses in Fit, Technometrics 21 (1979), Robinson, P.M., Testing for serial correlation and dynamic conditional heteroskedasticity in multiple regression, Journal of Econometrics 47 (1991), Silvapulle, P. and M. Evans, Testing for Serial Correlation in the Presence of Dynamic Heteroscedasticity, Econometric Reviews 17 (1998), Whang, Y.-J., A Test of Autocorrelation in the Presence of Heteroskedasticity of Unknown Form, Econometric Theory 14 (1998),
30 White, H., A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity, Econometrica 48 (1980), Wooldridge, J.M., Asymptotic Properties of Some Specification Tests in Linear Models with Integrated Processes, in R.F. Engle and H. White (eds.) Cointegration, Causality and Forecasting-Festschrift in Honour of Clive W.J. Granger (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999),
Bootstrapping Heteroskedasticity Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator
Bootstrapping Heteroskedasticity Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator by Emmanuel Flachaire Eurequa, University Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne December 2001 Abstract Recent results of Cribari-Neto and Zarkos
More informationLESLIE GODFREY LIST OF PUBLICATIONS
LESLIE GODFREY LIST OF PUBLICATIONS This list is in two parts. First, there is a set of selected publications for the period 1971-1996. Second, there are details of more recent outputs. SELECTED PUBLICATIONS,
More informationA better way to bootstrap pairs
A better way to bootstrap pairs Emmanuel Flachaire GREQAM - Université de la Méditerranée CORE - Université Catholique de Louvain April 999 Abstract In this paper we are interested in heteroskedastic regression
More informationThe Size and Power of Four Tests for Detecting Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity in the Presence of Serial Correlation
The Size and Power of Four s for Detecting Conditional Heteroskedasticity in the Presence of Serial Correlation A. Stan Hurn Department of Economics Unversity of Melbourne Australia and A. David McDonald
More informationBootstrapping heteroskedastic regression models: wild bootstrap vs. pairs bootstrap
Bootstrapping heteroskedastic regression models: wild bootstrap vs. pairs bootstrap Emmanuel Flachaire To cite this version: Emmanuel Flachaire. Bootstrapping heteroskedastic regression models: wild bootstrap
More informationModified Variance Ratio Test for Autocorrelation in the Presence of Heteroskedasticity
The Lahore Journal of Economics 23 : 1 (Summer 2018): pp. 1 19 Modified Variance Ratio Test for Autocorrelation in the Presence of Heteroskedasticity Sohail Chand * and Nuzhat Aftab ** Abstract Given that
More informationA Non-Parametric Approach of Heteroskedasticity Robust Estimation of Vector-Autoregressive (VAR) Models
Journal of Finance and Investment Analysis, vol.1, no.1, 2012, 55-67 ISSN: 2241-0988 (print version), 2241-0996 (online) International Scientific Press, 2012 A Non-Parametric Approach of Heteroskedasticity
More informationG. S. Maddala Kajal Lahiri. WILEY A John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., Publication
G. S. Maddala Kajal Lahiri WILEY A John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., Publication TEMT Foreword Preface to the Fourth Edition xvii xix Part I Introduction and the Linear Regression Model 1 CHAPTER 1 What is Econometrics?
More informationBootstrap Testing in Econometrics
Presented May 29, 1999 at the CEA Annual Meeting Bootstrap Testing in Econometrics James G MacKinnon Queen s University at Kingston Introduction: Economists routinely compute test statistics of which the
More informationDiagnostic Test for GARCH Models Based on Absolute Residual Autocorrelations
Diagnostic Test for GARCH Models Based on Absolute Residual Autocorrelations Farhat Iqbal Department of Statistics, University of Balochistan Quetta-Pakistan farhatiqb@gmail.com Abstract In this paper
More informationEconomics 536 Lecture 7. Introduction to Specification Testing in Dynamic Econometric Models
University of Illinois Fall 2016 Department of Economics Roger Koenker Economics 536 Lecture 7 Introduction to Specification Testing in Dynamic Econometric Models In this lecture I want to briefly describe
More informationDarmstadt Discussion Papers in Economics
Darmstadt Discussion Papers in Economics The Effect of Linear Time Trends on Cointegration Testing in Single Equations Uwe Hassler Nr. 111 Arbeitspapiere des Instituts für Volkswirtschaftslehre Technische
More informationLECTURE 10: MORE ON RANDOM PROCESSES
LECTURE 10: MORE ON RANDOM PROCESSES AND SERIAL CORRELATION 2 Classification of random processes (cont d) stationary vs. non-stationary processes stationary = distribution does not change over time more
More informationSupplemental Material for KERNEL-BASED INFERENCE IN TIME-VARYING COEFFICIENT COINTEGRATING REGRESSION. September 2017
Supplemental Material for KERNEL-BASED INFERENCE IN TIME-VARYING COEFFICIENT COINTEGRATING REGRESSION By Degui Li, Peter C. B. Phillips, and Jiti Gao September 017 COWLES FOUNDATION DISCUSSION PAPER NO.
More informationQED. Queen s Economics Department Working Paper No Heteroskedasticity-Robust Tests for Structural Change. James G. MacKinnon Queen s University
QED Queen s Economics Department Working Paper No. 717 Heteroskedasticity-Robust Tests for Structural Change James G. MacKinnon Queen s University Department of Economics Queen s University 94 University
More informationSize and Power of the RESET Test as Applied to Systems of Equations: A Bootstrap Approach
Size and Power of the RESET Test as Applied to Systems of Equations: A Bootstrap Approach Ghazi Shukur Panagiotis Mantalos International Business School Department of Statistics Jönköping University Lund
More informationContents. Part I Statistical Background and Basic Data Handling 5. List of Figures List of Tables xix
Contents List of Figures List of Tables xix Preface Acknowledgements 1 Introduction 1 What is econometrics? 2 The stages of applied econometric work 2 Part I Statistical Background and Basic Data Handling
More informationEconomic modelling and forecasting
Economic modelling and forecasting 2-6 February 2015 Bank of England he generalised method of moments Ole Rummel Adviser, CCBS at the Bank of England ole.rummel@bankofengland.co.uk Outline Classical estimation
More informationA radial basis function artificial neural network test for ARCH
Economics Letters 69 (000) 5 3 www.elsevier.com/ locate/ econbase A radial basis function artificial neural network test for ARCH * Andrew P. Blake, George Kapetanios National Institute of Economic and
More informationAnalytical derivates of the APARCH model
Analytical derivates of the APARCH model Sébastien Laurent Forthcoming in Computational Economics October 24, 2003 Abstract his paper derives analytical expressions for the score of the APARCH model of
More informationThe Number of Bootstrap Replicates in Bootstrap Dickey-Fuller Unit Root Tests
Working Paper 2013:8 Department of Statistics The Number of Bootstrap Replicates in Bootstrap Dickey-Fuller Unit Root Tests Jianxin Wei Working Paper 2013:8 June 2013 Department of Statistics Uppsala
More informationIntroduction to Eco n o m et rics
2008 AGI-Information Management Consultants May be used for personal purporses only or by libraries associated to dandelon.com network. Introduction to Eco n o m et rics Third Edition G.S. Maddala Formerly
More informationChristopher Dougherty London School of Economics and Political Science
Introduction to Econometrics FIFTH EDITION Christopher Dougherty London School of Economics and Political Science OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS Contents INTRODU CTION 1 Why study econometrics? 1 Aim of this
More informationInference in VARs with Conditional Heteroskedasticity of Unknown Form
Inference in VARs with Conditional Heteroskedasticity of Unknown Form Ralf Brüggemann a Carsten Jentsch b Carsten Trenkler c University of Konstanz University of Mannheim University of Mannheim IAB Nuremberg
More informationDiscussion of Bootstrap prediction intervals for linear, nonlinear, and nonparametric autoregressions, by Li Pan and Dimitris Politis
Discussion of Bootstrap prediction intervals for linear, nonlinear, and nonparametric autoregressions, by Li Pan and Dimitris Politis Sílvia Gonçalves and Benoit Perron Département de sciences économiques,
More informationEconometrics. Week 4. Fall Institute of Economic Studies Faculty of Social Sciences Charles University in Prague
Econometrics Week 4 Institute of Economic Studies Faculty of Social Sciences Charles University in Prague Fall 2012 1 / 23 Recommended Reading For the today Serial correlation and heteroskedasticity in
More informationNonsense Regressions due to Neglected Time-varying Means
Nonsense Regressions due to Neglected Time-varying Means Uwe Hassler Free University of Berlin Institute of Statistics and Econometrics Boltzmannstr. 20 D-14195 Berlin Germany email: uwe@wiwiss.fu-berlin.de
More informationLinear Regression with Time Series Data
Econometrics 2 Linear Regression with Time Series Data Heino Bohn Nielsen 1of21 Outline (1) The linear regression model, identification and estimation. (2) Assumptions and results: (a) Consistency. (b)
More informationThis chapter reviews properties of regression estimators and test statistics based on
Chapter 12 COINTEGRATING AND SPURIOUS REGRESSIONS This chapter reviews properties of regression estimators and test statistics based on the estimators when the regressors and regressant are difference
More informationA Gaussian IV estimator of cointegrating relations Gunnar Bårdsen and Niels Haldrup. 13 February 2006.
A Gaussian IV estimator of cointegrating relations Gunnar Bårdsen and Niels Haldrup 3 February 26. Abstract. In static single equation cointegration regression models the OLS estimator will have a non-standard
More informationCointegration Lecture I: Introduction
1 Cointegration Lecture I: Introduction Julia Giese Nuffield College julia.giese@economics.ox.ac.uk Hilary Term 2008 2 Outline Introduction Estimation of unrestricted VAR Non-stationarity Deterministic
More information1 Estimation of Persistent Dynamic Panel Data. Motivation
1 Estimation of Persistent Dynamic Panel Data. Motivation Consider the following Dynamic Panel Data (DPD) model y it = y it 1 ρ + x it β + µ i + v it (1.1) with i = {1, 2,..., N} denoting the individual
More informationEconometrics of Panel Data
Econometrics of Panel Data Jakub Mućk Meeting # 6 Jakub Mućk Econometrics of Panel Data Meeting # 6 1 / 36 Outline 1 The First-Difference (FD) estimator 2 Dynamic panel data models 3 The Anderson and Hsiao
More informationMore efficient tests robust to heteroskedasticity of unknown form
More efficient tests robust to heteroskedasticity of unknown form Emmanuel Flachaire To cite this version: Emmanuel Flachaire. More efficient tests robust to heteroskedasticity of unknown form. Econometric
More informationLecture 5: Unit Roots, Cointegration and Error Correction Models The Spurious Regression Problem
Lecture 5: Unit Roots, Cointegration and Error Correction Models The Spurious Regression Problem Prof. Massimo Guidolin 20192 Financial Econometrics Winter/Spring 2018 Overview Stochastic vs. deterministic
More informationDo Markov-Switching Models Capture Nonlinearities in the Data? Tests using Nonparametric Methods
Do Markov-Switching Models Capture Nonlinearities in the Data? Tests using Nonparametric Methods Robert V. Breunig Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Social Sciences and School of
More informationEcon 423 Lecture Notes: Additional Topics in Time Series 1
Econ 423 Lecture Notes: Additional Topics in Time Series 1 John C. Chao April 25, 2017 1 These notes are based in large part on Chapter 16 of Stock and Watson (2011). They are for instructional purposes
More informationLM threshold unit root tests
Lee, J., Strazicich, M.C., & Chul Yu, B. (2011). LM Threshold Unit Root Tests. Economics Letters, 110(2): 113-116 (Feb 2011). Published by Elsevier (ISSN: 0165-1765). http://0- dx.doi.org.wncln.wncln.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2010.10.014
More informationBootstrapping the Grainger Causality Test With Integrated Data
Bootstrapping the Grainger Causality Test With Integrated Data Richard Ti n University of Reading July 26, 2006 Abstract A Monte-carlo experiment is conducted to investigate the small sample performance
More informationEconomics 308: Econometrics Professor Moody
Economics 308: Econometrics Professor Moody References on reserve: Text Moody, Basic Econometrics with Stata (BES) Pindyck and Rubinfeld, Econometric Models and Economic Forecasts (PR) Wooldridge, Jeffrey
More informationDEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
ISSN 0819-64 ISBN 0 7340 616 1 THE UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS RESEARCH PAPER NUMBER 959 FEBRUARY 006 TESTING FOR RATE-DEPENDENCE AND ASYMMETRY IN INFLATION UNCERTAINTY: EVIDENCE FROM
More informationThe Wild Bootstrap, Tamed at Last. Russell Davidson. Emmanuel Flachaire
The Wild Bootstrap, Tamed at Last GREQAM Centre de la Vieille Charité 2 rue de la Charité 13236 Marseille cedex 02, France by Russell Davidson email: RussellDavidson@mcgillca and Emmanuel Flachaire Université
More informationEconometrics. Week 11. Fall Institute of Economic Studies Faculty of Social Sciences Charles University in Prague
Econometrics Week 11 Institute of Economic Studies Faculty of Social Sciences Charles University in Prague Fall 2012 1 / 30 Recommended Reading For the today Advanced Time Series Topics Selected topics
More informationTesting an Autoregressive Structure in Binary Time Series Models
ömmföäflsäafaäsflassflassflas ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff Discussion Papers Testing an Autoregressive Structure in Binary Time Series Models Henri Nyberg University of Helsinki and HECER Discussion
More informationBootstrap Methods in Econometrics
Bootstrap Methods in Econometrics Department of Economics McGill University Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 2T7 by Russell Davidson email: russell.davidson@mcgill.ca and James G. MacKinnon Department of Economics
More informationBirkbeck Working Papers in Economics & Finance
ISSN 1745-8587 Birkbeck Working Papers in Economics & Finance Department of Economics, Mathematics and Statistics BWPEF 1809 A Note on Specification Testing in Some Structural Regression Models Walter
More informationThe Role of "Leads" in the Dynamic Title of Cointegrating Regression Models. Author(s) Hayakawa, Kazuhiko; Kurozumi, Eiji
he Role of "Leads" in the Dynamic itle of Cointegrating Regression Models Author(s) Hayakawa, Kazuhiko; Kurozumi, Eiji Citation Issue 2006-12 Date ype echnical Report ext Version publisher URL http://hdl.handle.net/10086/13599
More informationMULTIPLE REGRESSION AND ISSUES IN REGRESSION ANALYSIS
MULTIPLE REGRESSION AND ISSUES IN REGRESSION ANALYSIS Page 1 MSR = Mean Regression Sum of Squares MSE = Mean Squared Error RSS = Regression Sum of Squares SSE = Sum of Squared Errors/Residuals α = Level
More informationARDL Cointegration Tests for Beginner
ARDL Cointegration Tests for Beginner Tuck Cheong TANG Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics & Administration University of Malaya Email: tangtuckcheong@um.edu.my DURATION: 3 HOURS On completing
More informationE 4101/5101 Lecture 9: Non-stationarity
E 4101/5101 Lecture 9: Non-stationarity Ragnar Nymoen 30 March 2011 Introduction I Main references: Hamilton Ch 15,16 and 17. Davidson and MacKinnon Ch 14.3 and 14.4 Also read Ch 2.4 and Ch 2.5 in Davidson
More informationECON3327: Financial Econometrics, Spring 2016
ECON3327: Financial Econometrics, Spring 2016 Wooldridge, Introductory Econometrics (5th ed, 2012) Chapter 11: OLS with time series data Stationary and weakly dependent time series The notion of a stationary
More informationHeteroskedasticity-Robust Inference in Finite Samples
Heteroskedasticity-Robust Inference in Finite Samples Jerry Hausman and Christopher Palmer Massachusetts Institute of Technology December 011 Abstract Since the advent of heteroskedasticity-robust standard
More informationFinQuiz Notes
Reading 10 Multiple Regression and Issues in Regression Analysis 2. MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION Multiple linear regression is a method used to model the linear relationship between a dependent variable
More informationOn Consistency of Tests for Stationarity in Autoregressive and Moving Average Models of Different Orders
American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics 2016; 5(3): 146-153 http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/j/ajtas doi: 10.11648/j.ajtas.20160503.20 ISSN: 2326-8999 (Print); ISSN: 2326-9006 (Online)
More informationTrends and Unit Roots in Greek Real Money Supply, Real GDP and Nominal Interest Rate
European Research Studies Volume V, Issue (3-4), 00, pp. 5-43 Trends and Unit Roots in Greek Real Money Supply, Real GDP and Nominal Interest Rate Karpetis Christos & Varelas Erotokritos * Abstract This
More informationDynamic Regression Models (Lect 15)
Dynamic Regression Models (Lect 15) Ragnar Nymoen University of Oslo 21 March 2013 1 / 17 HGL: Ch 9; BN: Kap 10 The HGL Ch 9 is a long chapter, and the testing for autocorrelation part we have already
More informationOil price and macroeconomy in Russia. Abstract
Oil price and macroeconomy in Russia Katsuya Ito Fukuoka University Abstract In this note, using the VEC model we attempt to empirically investigate the effects of oil price and monetary shocks on the
More information1 Motivation for Instrumental Variable (IV) Regression
ECON 370: IV & 2SLS 1 Instrumental Variables Estimation and Two Stage Least Squares Econometric Methods, ECON 370 Let s get back to the thiking in terms of cross sectional (or pooled cross sectional) data
More informationTesting for Unit Roots with Cointegrated Data
Discussion Paper No. 2015-57 August 19, 2015 http://www.economics-ejournal.org/economics/discussionpapers/2015-57 Testing for Unit Roots with Cointegrated Data W. Robert Reed Abstract This paper demonstrates
More informationA TIME SERIES PARADOX: UNIT ROOT TESTS PERFORM POORLY WHEN DATA ARE COINTEGRATED
A TIME SERIES PARADOX: UNIT ROOT TESTS PERFORM POORLY WHEN DATA ARE COINTEGRATED by W. Robert Reed Department of Economics and Finance University of Canterbury, New Zealand Email: bob.reed@canterbury.ac.nz
More informationA Bootstrap Test for Causality with Endogenous Lag Length Choice. - theory and application in finance
CESIS Electronic Working Paper Series Paper No. 223 A Bootstrap Test for Causality with Endogenous Lag Length Choice - theory and application in finance R. Scott Hacker and Abdulnasser Hatemi-J April 200
More informationStudies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics
Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics Volume 9, Issue 2 2005 Article 4 A Note on the Hiemstra-Jones Test for Granger Non-causality Cees Diks Valentyn Panchenko University of Amsterdam, C.G.H.Diks@uva.nl
More information10. Time series regression and forecasting
10. Time series regression and forecasting Key feature of this section: Analysis of data on a single entity observed at multiple points in time (time series data) Typical research questions: What is the
More informationLECTURE 11. Introduction to Econometrics. Autocorrelation
LECTURE 11 Introduction to Econometrics Autocorrelation November 29, 2016 1 / 24 ON PREVIOUS LECTURES We discussed the specification of a regression equation Specification consists of choosing: 1. correct
More informationLinear Regression with Time Series Data
u n i v e r s i t y o f c o p e n h a g e n d e p a r t m e n t o f e c o n o m i c s Econometrics II Linear Regression with Time Series Data Morten Nyboe Tabor u n i v e r s i t y o f c o p e n h a g
More informationSection 2 NABE ASTEF 65
Section 2 NABE ASTEF 65 Econometric (Structural) Models 66 67 The Multiple Regression Model 68 69 Assumptions 70 Components of Model Endogenous variables -- Dependent variables, values of which are determined
More informationThe Bootstrap: Theory and Applications. Biing-Shen Kuo National Chengchi University
The Bootstrap: Theory and Applications Biing-Shen Kuo National Chengchi University Motivation: Poor Asymptotic Approximation Most of statistical inference relies on asymptotic theory. Motivation: Poor
More informationNumerical Distribution Functions of. Likelihood Ratio Tests for Cointegration. James G. MacKinnon. Alfred A. Haug. Leo Michelis
Numerical Distribution Functions of Likelihood Ratio Tests for Cointegration by James G. MacKinnon Department of Economics Queen s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6 jgm@qed.econ.queensu.ca Alfred
More informationThe Seasonal KPSS Test When Neglecting Seasonal Dummies: A Monte Carlo analysis. Ghassen El Montasser, Talel Boufateh, Fakhri Issaoui
EERI Economics and Econometrics Research Institute The Seasonal KPSS Test When Neglecting Seasonal Dummies: A Monte Carlo analysis Ghassen El Montasser, Talel Boufateh, Fakhri Issaoui EERI Research Paper
More informationLATVIAN GDP: TIME SERIES FORECASTING USING VECTOR AUTO REGRESSION
LATVIAN GDP: TIME SERIES FORECASTING USING VECTOR AUTO REGRESSION BEZRUCKO Aleksandrs, (LV) Abstract: The target goal of this work is to develop a methodology of forecasting Latvian GDP using ARMA (AutoRegressive-Moving-Average)
More informationMoreover, the second term is derived from: 1 T ) 2 1
170 Moreover, the second term is derived from: 1 T T ɛt 2 σ 2 ɛ. Therefore, 1 σ 2 ɛt T y t 1 ɛ t = 1 2 ( yt σ T ) 2 1 2σ 2 ɛ 1 T T ɛt 2 1 2 (χ2 (1) 1). (b) Next, consider y 2 t 1. T E y 2 t 1 T T = E(y
More informationFINITE SAMPLE TESTS FOR ARCH EFFECTS AND VARIANCE CHANGE-POINTS IN LINEAR REGRESSIONS
FINITE SAMPLE TESTS FOR ARCH EFFECTS AND VARIANCE CHANGE-POINTS IN LINEAR REGRESSIONS Jean-Marie Dufour a, Lynda Khalaf b, Jean-Thomas Bernard c and Ian Genest d a CIRANO, CIREQ, and Département de sciences
More informationAn Improved Specification Test for AR(1) versus MA(1) Disturbances in Linear Regression Models
An Improved Specification Test for AR(1) versus MA(1) Disturbances in Linear Regression Models Pierre Nguimkeu Georgia State University Abstract This paper proposes an improved likelihood-based method
More informationGLS detrending and unit root testing
Economics Letters 97 (2007) 222 229 www.elsevier.com/locate/econbase GLS detrending and unit root testing Dimitrios V. Vougas School of Business and Economics, Department of Economics, Richard Price Building,
More information7 Introduction to Time Series Time Series vs. Cross-Sectional Data Detrending Time Series... 15
Econ 495 - Econometric Review 1 Contents 7 Introduction to Time Series 3 7.1 Time Series vs. Cross-Sectional Data............ 3 7.2 Detrending Time Series................... 15 7.3 Types of Stochastic
More informationRobust Nonnested Testing and the Demand for Money
Robust Nonnested Testing and the Demand for Money Hwan-sik Choi Cornell University Nicholas M. Kiefer Cornell University October, 2006 Abstract Non-nested hypothesis testing procedures have been recently
More informationThis is a repository copy of The Error Correction Model as a Test for Cointegration.
This is a repository copy of The Error Correction Model as a Test for Cointegration. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/9886/ Monograph: Kanioura, A. and Turner,
More informationE 4160 Autumn term Lecture 9: Deterministic trends vs integrated series; Spurious regression; Dickey-Fuller distribution and test
E 4160 Autumn term 2016. Lecture 9: Deterministic trends vs integrated series; Spurious regression; Dickey-Fuller distribution and test Ragnar Nymoen Department of Economics, University of Oslo 24 October
More informationStationary and nonstationary variables
Stationary and nonstationary variables Stationary variable: 1. Finite and constant in time expected value: E (y t ) = µ < 2. Finite and constant in time variance: Var (y t ) = σ 2 < 3. Covariance dependent
More informationCentral Bank of Chile October 29-31, 2013 Bruce Hansen (University of Wisconsin) Structural Breaks October 29-31, / 91. Bruce E.
Forecasting Lecture 3 Structural Breaks Central Bank of Chile October 29-31, 2013 Bruce Hansen (University of Wisconsin) Structural Breaks October 29-31, 2013 1 / 91 Bruce E. Hansen Organization Detection
More informationGARCH Models. Eduardo Rossi University of Pavia. December Rossi GARCH Financial Econometrics / 50
GARCH Models Eduardo Rossi University of Pavia December 013 Rossi GARCH Financial Econometrics - 013 1 / 50 Outline 1 Stylized Facts ARCH model: definition 3 GARCH model 4 EGARCH 5 Asymmetric Models 6
More informationTaking a New Contour: A Novel View on Unit Root Test 1
Taking a New Contour: A Novel View on Unit Root Test 1 Yoosoon Chang Department of Economics Rice University and Joon Y. Park Department of Economics Rice University and Sungkyunkwan University Abstract
More informationLinear Regression with Time Series Data
u n i v e r s i t y o f c o p e n h a g e n d e p a r t m e n t o f e c o n o m i c s Econometrics II Linear Regression with Time Series Data Morten Nyboe Tabor u n i v e r s i t y o f c o p e n h a g
More informationTHE LONG RUN RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SAVING AND INVESTMENT IN INDIA
THE LONG RUN RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SAVING AND INVESTMENT IN INDIA Dipendra Sinha Department of Economics Macquarie University Sydney, NSW 2109 AUSTRALIA and Tapen Sinha Center for Statistical Applications
More informationDEPARTMENT OF STATISTICS
Tests for causaly between integrated variables using asymptotic and bootstrap distributions R Scott Hacker and Abdulnasser Hatemi-J October 2003 2003:2 DEPARTMENT OF STATISTICS S-220 07 LUND SWEDEN Tests
More information13. Time Series Analysis: Asymptotics Weakly Dependent and Random Walk Process. Strict Exogeneity
Outline: Further Issues in Using OLS with Time Series Data 13. Time Series Analysis: Asymptotics Weakly Dependent and Random Walk Process I. Stationary and Weakly Dependent Time Series III. Highly Persistent
More informationFinite Sample and Optimal Inference in Possibly Nonstationary ARCH Models with Gaussian and Heavy-Tailed Errors
Finite Sample and Optimal Inference in Possibly Nonstationary ARCH Models with Gaussian and Heavy-Tailed Errors J and E M. I Université de Montréal University of Alicante First version: April 27th, 2004
More informationIntroduction to Econometrics
Introduction to Econometrics T H I R D E D I T I O N Global Edition James H. Stock Harvard University Mark W. Watson Princeton University Boston Columbus Indianapolis New York San Francisco Upper Saddle
More informationDEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY CHRISTCHURCH, NEW ZEALAND
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY CHRISTCHURCH, NEW ZEALAND Testing For Unit Roots With Cointegrated Data NOTE: This paper is a revision of
More informationEconometric Methods for Panel Data
Based on the books by Baltagi: Econometric Analysis of Panel Data and by Hsiao: Analysis of Panel Data Robert M. Kunst robert.kunst@univie.ac.at University of Vienna and Institute for Advanced Studies
More informationVolatility. Gerald P. Dwyer. February Clemson University
Volatility Gerald P. Dwyer Clemson University February 2016 Outline 1 Volatility Characteristics of Time Series Heteroskedasticity Simpler Estimation Strategies Exponentially Weighted Moving Average Use
More informationWeek 11 Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation
Week 11 Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation İnsan TUNALI Econ 511 Econometrics I Koç University 27 November 2018 Lecture outline 1. OLS and assumptions on V(ε) 2. Violations of V(ε) σ 2 I: 1. Heteroskedasticity
More informationECON2228 Notes 10. Christopher F Baum. Boston College Economics. cfb (BC Econ) ECON2228 Notes / 48
ECON2228 Notes 10 Christopher F Baum Boston College Economics 2014 2015 cfb (BC Econ) ECON2228 Notes 10 2014 2015 1 / 48 Serial correlation and heteroskedasticity in time series regressions Chapter 12:
More informationImproving GMM efficiency in dynamic models for panel data with mean stationarity
Working Paper Series Department of Economics University of Verona Improving GMM efficiency in dynamic models for panel data with mean stationarity Giorgio Calzolari, Laura Magazzini WP Number: 12 July
More informationTesting Overidentifying Restrictions with Many Instruments and Heteroskedasticity
Testing Overidentifying Restrictions with Many Instruments and Heteroskedasticity John C. Chao, Department of Economics, University of Maryland, chao@econ.umd.edu. Jerry A. Hausman, Department of Economics,
More informationEconometrics - 30C00200
Econometrics - 30C00200 Lecture 11: Heteroskedasticity Antti Saastamoinen VATT Institute for Economic Research Fall 2015 30C00200 Lecture 11: Heteroskedasticity 12.10.2015 Aalto University School of Business
More informationLeast Absolute Value vs. Least Squares Estimation and Inference Procedures in Regression Models with Asymmetric Error Distributions
Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods Volume 8 Issue 1 Article 13 5-1-2009 Least Absolute Value vs. Least Squares Estimation and Inference Procedures in Regression Models with Asymmetric Error
More information7 Introduction to Time Series
Econ 495 - Econometric Review 1 7 Introduction to Time Series 7.1 Time Series vs. Cross-Sectional Data Time series data has a temporal ordering, unlike cross-section data, we will need to changes some
More informationA Guide to Modern Econometric:
A Guide to Modern Econometric: 4th edition Marno Verbeek Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University, Rotterdam B 379887 )WILEY A John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Publication Contents Preface xiii 1 Introduction
More informationGoodness-of-Fit Tests for Time Series Models: A Score-Marked Empirical Process Approach
Goodness-of-Fit Tests for Time Series Models: A Score-Marked Empirical Process Approach By Shiqing Ling Department of Mathematics Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Let {y t : t = 0, ±1, ±2,
More information