Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Impact of Model Specification Decisions on Unit Root Tests

Contents:

Author Info

  • Atiq-ur-Rehman

    ()
    (International Islamic University)

Abstract

Performance of unit root tests depends on several specification decisions prior to their application, e.g., whether or not to include a deterministic trend. Since there is no standard procedure for making such decisions; therefore, the practitioners routinely make several arbitrary specification decisions. In Monte Carlo studies, the design of data generating process supports these decisions, but for real data, such specification decisions are often unjustifiable and sometimes incompatible with data. We argue that the problems posed by choice of initial specification are quite complex and the existing voluminous literature on this issue treats only certain superficial aspects of this choice. Outcomes of unit root tests are very sensitive to both choice and sequencing of these arbitrary specifications. This means that we can obtain results of our choice from unit root tests by varying these specifications.

Download Info

If 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.
File URL: http://www.era.org.tr/makaleler/11080064.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Econometric Research Association in its journal International Econometric Review.

Volume (Year): 3 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 (September)
Pages: 22-33

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:erh:journl:v:3:y:2011:i:2:p:22-33

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Sairler Sokak, No:32/C, Gaziosmanpasa, Ankara, Turkey
Phone: + 90 312 447 51 95
Fax: + 90 312 447 51 95
Email:
Web page: http://www.era.org.tr/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Model Specification; Trend Stationary; Difference Stationary;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
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.:
as in new window
  1. Nunes, Luis C. & Kuan, Chung-Ming & Newbold, Paul, 1995. "Spurious Break," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(04), pages 736-749, August.
  2. Campbell, John & Perron, Pierre, 1991. "Pitfalls and Opportunities: What Macroeconomists Should Know about Unit Roots," Scholarly Articles 3374863, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  3. Kilian, Lutz & Ohanian, Lee E., 2002. "Unit Roots, Trend Breaks, And Transitory Dynamics: A Macroeconomic Perspective," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(05), pages 614-632, November.
  4. Engle, R. F. & Granger, C. W. J. (ed.), 1991. "Long-Run Economic Relationships: Readings in Cointegration," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198283393.
  5. Perron, Pierre, 1989. "The Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock, and the Unit Root Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1361-1401, November.
  6. Nelson, C-R & Murray, C-J, 1997. "The Uncertain Trend in U.S. GDP," Working Papers 97-05, University of Washington, Department of Economics.
  7. Kim, Tae-Hwan & Leybourne, Stephen & Newbold, Paul, 2002. "Unit root tests with a break in innovation variance," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 365-387, August.
  8. Zivot, Eric & Andrews, Donald W K, 2002. "Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 25-44, January.
  9. Hacker, Scott & Hatemi-J, Abdulnasser, 2010. "The Properties of Procedures Dealing with Uncertainty about Intercept and Deterministic Trend in Unit Root Testing," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 214, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
  10. Perron, P., 1989. "Testing For A Unit Root In A Time Series With A Changing Mean," Papers 347, Princeton, Department of Economics - Econometric Research Program.
  11. Perron, Pierre, 1988. "Trends and random walks in macroeconomic time series : Further evidence from a new approach," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 12(2-3), pages 297-332.
  12. Gilberto Libanio, 2005. "Unit roots in macroeconomic time series: theory, implications, and evidence," Nova Economia, Economics Department, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (Brazil), vol. 15(3), pages 145-176, September.
  13. Charles R. Nelson & Heejoon Kang, 1983. "Pitfalls in the use of Time as an Explanatory Variable in Regression," NBER Technical Working Papers 0030, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  14. Mark W. Watson, 1999. "Explaining the increased variability in long-term interest rates," Economic Quarterly, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, issue Fall, pages 71-96.
  15. Serena Ng & Pierre Perron, 2001. "LAG Length Selection and the Construction of Unit Root Tests with Good Size and Power," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(6), pages 1519-1554, November.
  16. Elliott, Graham & Rothenberg, Thomas J & Stock, James H, 1996. "Efficient Tests for an Autoregressive Unit Root," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(4), pages 813-36, July.
  17. Dickey, David A & Fuller, Wayne A, 1981. "Likelihood Ratio Statistics for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(4), pages 1057-72, June.
  18. Glenn D. Rudebusch, 1992. "The uncertain unit root in real GNP," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 193, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  19. Atiq-ur-Rehman, Atiq-ur-Rehman & Zaman, Asad, 2009. "Impact of Model Specification Decisions on Unit Root Tests," MPRA Paper 19963, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  20. Diebold, Francis X & Senhadji, Abdelhak S, 1996. "The Uncertain Unit Root in Real GNP: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(5), pages 1291-98, December.
  21. Christiano, Lawrence J, 1992. "Searching for a Break in GNP," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 10(3), pages 237-50, July.
  22. James G. MacKinnon, 1990. "Critical Values for Cointegration Tests," Working Papers 1227, Queen's University, Department of Economics.
  23. David H Papell & Ruxandra Prodan, 2007. "Restricted Structural Change And The Unit Root Hypothesis," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(4), pages 834-853, October.
  24. Pagan, Adrian R. & Schwert, G. William, 1990. "Testing for covariance stationarity in stock market data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 165-170, June.
  25. Ayat, Leila & Burridge, Peter, 2000. "Unit root tests in the presence of uncertainty about the non-stochastic trend," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 71-96, March.
  26. John Elder & Peter E. Kennedy, 2001. "Testing for Unit Roots: What Should Students Be Taught?," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(2), pages 137-146, January.
  27. Cati, Regina Celia & Garcia, Marcio G P & Perron, Pierre, 1999. "Unit Roots in the Presence of Abrupt Governmental Interventions with an Application to Brazilian Data," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(1), pages 27-56, Jan.-Feb..
  28. Anindya Banerjee & Robin L. Lumsdaine & James H. Stock, 1990. "Recursive and Sequential Tests of the Unit Root and Trend Break Hypothesis: Theory and International Evidence," NBER Working Papers 3510, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  29. Elena Andreou & Aris Spanos, 2003. "Statistical Adequacy and the Testing of Trend Versus Difference Stationarity," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(3), pages 217-237.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Atiq-ur-Rehman, 2011. "Impact of Model Specification Decisions on Unit Root Tests," International Econometric Review (IER), Econometric Research Association, vol. 3(2), pages 22-33, September.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:erh:journl:v:3:y:2011:i:2:p:22-33. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (M. F. Cosar).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.