Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Further Investigation of the Uncertain Unit Root in GNP

Contents:

Author Info

  • Yin-Wong Cheung
  • Menzie D. Chinn

Abstract

A more powerful version of the ADF test and a test that has trend stationarity as the null are applied to U.S. GNP. Simulated critical values generated from plausible trend and difference stationary models are used in order to minimize possible finite sample biases. The discriminatory power of the two tests is evaluated using alternative-specific rejection frequencies. For post-War quarterly data, these two tests do not provide a definite conclusion. However, when analyzing annual data over the 1869-1986 period, the unit root null is rejected, while the trend stationary null is not.

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.nber.org/papers/t0206.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Technical Working Papers with number 0206.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: Nov 1996
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberte:0206

Note: IFM
Contact details of provider:
Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.
Phone: 617-868-3900
Email:
Web page: http://www.nber.org
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

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. Rudebusch, Glenn D, 1993. "The Uncertain Unit Root in Real GNP," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(1), pages 264-72, March.
  2. Pierre Perron & Robert J. Shiller, 1984. "Testing the Random Walk Hypothesis: Power Versus Frequency of Observation," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 732, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
  3. Balke, Nathan S & Gordon, Robert J, 1989. "The Estimation of Prewar Gross National Product: Methodology and New Evidence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(1), pages 38-92, February.
  4. Stock, James H. & Watson, Mark W., 1986. "Does GNP have a unit root?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 22(2-3), pages 147-151.
  5. Glenn D. Rudebusch, 1990. "Trends and random walks in macroeconomic time series: a re-examination," Working Paper Series / Economic Activity Section 105, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  6. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum, 1989. "Unit Roots in Real GNP: Do We Know, and Do We Care?," NBER Working Papers 3130, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  7. Campbell, John & Mankiw, Gregory, 1987. "Are Output Fluctuations Transitory?," Scholarly Articles 3122545, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  8. Cheung, Yin-Wong & Lai, Kon S, 1995. "Lag Order and Critical Values of a Modified Dickey-Fuller Test," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 57(3), pages 411-19, August.
  9. Kwiatkowski, Denis & Phillips, Peter C. B. & Schmidt, Peter & Shin, Yongcheol, 1992. "Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root : How sure are we that economic time series have a unit root?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 54(1-3), pages 159-178.
  10. Perron, Pierre & Phillips, Peter C. B., 1987. "Does GNP have a unit root? : A re-evaluation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 139-145.
  11. Leybourne, S J & McCabe, B P M, 1994. "A Consistent Test for a Unit Root," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 12(2), pages 157-66, April.
  12. 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.
  13. Cheung, Yin-Wong & Chinn, Menzie David, 1996. "Deterministic, Stochastic, and Segmented Trends in Aggregate Output: A Cross-Country Analysis," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 48(1), pages 134-62, January.
  14. Perron,P., 1988. "Testing For A Random Walk: A Simulation Experiment Of Power When The Simpling Interval Is Varied," Papers 336, Princeton, Department of Economics - Econometric Research Program.
  15. 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.
  16. DeJong, David N, et al, 1992. "Integration versus Trend Stationarity in Time Series," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 423-33, March.
  17. Hall, Alastair R, 1994. "Testing for a Unit Root in Time Series with Pretest Data-Based Model Selection," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 12(4), pages 461-70, October.
  18. Stock, James H., 1991. "Confidence intervals for the largest autoregressive root in U.S. macroeconomic time series," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 435-459, December.
  19. Nelson, Charles R. & Plosser, Charles I., 1982. "Trends and random walks in macroeconmic time series : Some evidence and implications," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 139-162.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Blog mentions

As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
  1. [??]????????…?????
    by himaginary in himaginaryの日記 on 2009-03-08 08:00:00
Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.

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:nbr:nberte:0206

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

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.