IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/emetrv/v35y2016i8-10p1562-1581.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Moment and IV Selection Approaches: A Comparative Simulation Study

Author

Listed:
  • Mehmet Caner
  • Esfandiar Maasoumi
  • Juan Andrés Riquelme

Abstract

We compare three moment selection approaches, followed by post-selection estimation strategies. The first is adaptive least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (ALASSO) of Zou (2006), recently extended by Liao (2013) to possibly invalid moments in GMM. In this method, we select the valid instruments with ALASSO. The second method is based on the J test, as in Andrews and Lu (2001). The third one is using a Continuous Updating Objective (CUE) function. This last approach is based on Hong et al. (2003), who propose a penalized generalized empirical likelihood-based function to pick up valid moments. They use empirical likelihood, and exponential tilting in their simulations. However, the J-test-based approach of Andrews and Lu (2001) provides generally better moment selection results than the empirical likelihood and exponential tilting as can be seen in Hong et al. (2003). In this article, we examine penalized CUE as a third way of selecting valid moments.Following a determination of valid moments, we run unpenalized generalized method of moments (GMM) and CUE and model averaging technique of Okui (2011) to see which one has better postselection estimator performance for structural parameters. The simulations are aimed at the following questions: Which moment selection criterion can better select the valid ones and eliminate the invalid ones? Given the chosen instruments in the first stage, which strategy delivers the best finite sample performance?We find that the ALASSO in the model selection stage, coupled with either unpenalized GMM or moment averaging of Okui delivers generally the smallest root mean square error (RMSE) for the second stage coefficient estimators.

Suggested Citation

  • Mehmet Caner & Esfandiar Maasoumi & Juan Andrés Riquelme, 2016. "Moment and IV Selection Approaches: A Comparative Simulation Study," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(8-10), pages 1562-1581, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:emetrv:v:35:y:2016:i:8-10:p:1562-1581
    DOI: 10.1080/07474938.2015.1092804
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/07474938.2015.1092804
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/07474938.2015.1092804?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alexandre Belloni & Victor Chernozhukov & Christian Hansen, 2010. "LASSO Methods for Gaussian Instrumental Variables Models," Papers 1012.1297, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2011.
    2. Donald W. K. Andrews, 1999. "Consistent Moment Selection Procedures for Generalized Method of Moments Estimation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(3), pages 543-564, May.
    3. Xu Cheng & Zhipeng Liao, 2012. "Select the Valid and Relevant Moments: A One-Step Procedure for GMM with Many Moments," PIER Working Paper Archive 12-045, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Nandana Sengupta & Fallaw Sowell, 2019. "The Ridge Path Estimator for Linear Instrumental Variables," Papers 1908.09237, arXiv.org.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mehmet Caner & Xu Han & Yoonseok Lee, 2018. "Adaptive Elastic Net GMM Estimation With Many Invalid Moment Conditions: Simultaneous Model and Moment Selection," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 24-46, January.
    2. Lemos Sara, 2005. "Political Variables as Instruments for the Minimum Wage," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-33, December.
    3. In Choi, 2019. "Unit Root Tests for Dependent Micropanels," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 70(2), pages 145-167, June.
    4. Shantanu Gupta & Zachary C. Lipton & David Childers, 2021. "Efficient Online Estimation of Causal Effects by Deciding What to Observe," Papers 2108.09265, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2021.
    5. Caner, Mehmet & Fan, Qingliang, 2015. "Hybrid generalized empirical likelihood estimators: Instrument selection with adaptive lasso," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 256-274.
    6. Tobias Rühl, 2015. "Taylor rules revisited: ECB and Bundesbank in comparison," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 951-967, May.
    7. Felipe González & Magdalena Larreboure, 2021. "The Impact of the Women’s March on the U.S. House Election," Documentos de Trabajo 560, Instituto de Economia. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile..
    8. Xiaoran Liang & Eleanor Sanderson & Frank Windmeijer, 2022. "Selecting Valid Instrumental Variables in Linear Models with Multiple Exposure Variables: Adaptive Lasso and the Median-of-Medians Estimator," Papers 2208.05278, arXiv.org.
    9. Frank Windmeijer & Helmut Farbmacher & Neil Davies & George Davey Smith, 2019. "On the Use of the Lasso for Instrumental Variables Estimation with Some Invalid Instruments," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 114(527), pages 1339-1350, July.
    10. Jean-Bernard Chatelain & Jean-Christophe Teurlai, 2004. "The impact of the cost of capital and of the decision to invest or to divest on investment behaviour: an empirical investigation using a panel of French services firms," Money Macro and Finance (MMF) Research Group Conference 2003 13, Money Macro and Finance Research Group.
    11. Fernanda Peixe & Alastair Hall & Kostas Kyriakoulis, 2006. "The Mean Squared Error of the Instrumental Variables Estimator When the Disturbance Has an Elliptical Distribution," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 117-138.
    12. Chatelain, Jean-Bernard, 2007. "Improving consistent moment selection procedures for generalized method of moments estimation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 380-385, June.
    13. Jaedo Choi & Jin Seo Cho & Hyungsik Roger Moon, 2020. "Sequentially Estimating the Structural Equation by Power Transformation," Working papers 2020rwp-162, Yonsei University, Yonsei Economics Research Institute.
    14. Ernestas Virbickas, 2012. "New Keynesian Phillips Curve in Lithuania," Bank of Lithuania Working Paper Series 14, Bank of Lithuania.
    15. Antoine, Bertille & Bonnal, Helene & Renault, Eric, 2007. "On the efficient use of the informational content of estimating equations: Implied probabilities and Euclidean empirical likelihood," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 138(2), pages 461-487, June.
    16. Chatelain, Jean-Bernard & Ralf, Kirsten, 2021. "Inference on time-invariant variables using panel data: A pretest estimator," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 157-166.
    17. De Wachter, Stefan & Tzavalis, Elias, 2012. "Detection of structural breaks in linear dynamic panel data models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(11), pages 3020-3034.
    18. Nicolas Apfel & Helmut Farbmacher & Rebecca Groh & Martin Huber & Henrika Langen, 2022. "Detecting Grouped Local Average Treatment Effects and Selecting True Instruments," Papers 2207.04481, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    19. Gyuhyeong Goh & Jisang Yu, 2022. "Causal inference with some invalid instrumental variables: A quasi‐Bayesian approach," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 84(6), pages 1432-1451, December.
    20. Timo Mitze, 2009. "Endogeneity in Panel Data Models with Time-Varying and Time-Fixed Regressors: To IV or not IV?," Ruhr Economic Papers 0083, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:emetrv:v:35:y:2016:i:8-10:p:1562-1581. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/LECR20 .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.