F versus t tests for unit roots
AbstractF tests which test jointly for a unit root and a zero intercept, and so compete against Dickey-Fuller t tests, are shown not to enhance power because they are invariant to the intercept value in the absence of a unit root. Monte Carlo results in the literature that indicate otherwise are shown to have resulted from the use of special starting values. Testing procedures that employ these F tests to enhance power should be revised.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by AccessEcon in its journal Economics Bulletin.
Volume (Year): 3 (2001)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Contact details of provider:
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Dickey, David A & Fuller, Wayne A, 1981. "Likelihood Ratio Statistics for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 49(4), pages 1057-72, June.
- Perron, Pierre, 1988.
"Trends and random walks in macroeconomic time series : Further evidence from a new approach,"
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier,
Elsevier, vol. 12(2-3), pages 297-332.
- Perron, P., 1986. "Trends and Random Walks in Macroeconomic Time Series: Further Evidence From a New Approach," Cahiers de recherche, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques 8650, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
- Ayat, Leila & Burridge, Peter, 2000.
"Unit root tests in the presence of uncertainty about the non-stochastic trend,"
Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier,
Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 71-96, March.
- Ayat, L. & Burridge, P., 1996. "Unit Root Tests in the presence of Uncertainty about the Non-Stochastic Trends," Discussion Papers, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham 96-28, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham.
- repec:ebl:ecbull:v:3:y:2004:i:37:p:1-6 is not listed on IDEAS
- Don Bredin & John Elder & Stilianos Fountas, 2010.
"Oil Volatility and the Option Value of Waiting: An analysis of the G-7,"
Discussion Paper Series
2010_05, Department of Economics, University of Macedonia, revised Apr 2010.
- Don Bredin & John Elder & Stilianos Fountas, 2010. "Oil Volatility and the Option Value of Waiting: An analysis of the G-7," Working Papers, Geary Institute, University College Dublin 201004, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
- Fuerst, Michael E., 2006. "Investor risk premia and real macroeconomic fluctuations," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 540-563, September.
- repec:ebl:ecbull:v:3:y:2004:i:12:p:1-7 is not listed on IDEAS
- Elder, John & Serletis, Apostolos, 2009. "Oil price uncertainty in Canada," Energy Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 852-856, November.
- Peter E. Kennedy & John Elder, 2004. "More on F versus t tests for unit roots when there is no trend," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(37), pages 1-6.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (John P. Conley).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.