This paper examines the performance of the Central Statistical Office's leading indicators for predicting turning points in the U.K. growth cycle. Three methods for extracting a signal are considered: a simple mechanical rule based upon the direction of consecutive movements in the leading indicator and two probabilistic models, namely a standard Bayesian procedure and the sequential probability model. The results suggest that usefulness of the shorter leading index is limited and typically outperformed by naive, nonindicator methods. The longer leading index performs only slightly better showing a lead time of between four and six months in relation to the reference cycle. Coauthors are Robin C. Bladen-Hovell, Denise R. Osborn, Graham W. Smith, and Wenda Zhang. Copyright 1995 by Royal Economic Society.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 47 (1995) Issue (Month): 3 (July) Pages: 397-417 Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML
(with abstract),
plain text
(with abstract),
BibTeX,
RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite),
ReDIF
Contact details of provider: Postal: Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK Fax: 01865 267 985 Email: Web page: http://oep.oupjournals.org/
Cited by: (explanations, 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.)