A Review And Comparison Of Tests Of Cross-Section Independence In Panels
In this paper we review and compare diagnostic tests of cross-section independence in the disturbances of panel regression models. We examine tests based on the sample pairwise correlation coefficient or on its transformations, and tests based on the theory of spacings. The ultimate goal is to shed some light on the appropriate use of existing diagnostic tests for cross-equation error correlation. Our discussion is supported by means of a set of Monte Carlo experiments and a small empirical study on health. Results show that tests based on the average of pairwise correlation coefficients work well when the alternative hypothesis is a factor model with non-zero mean loadings. Tests based on spacings are powerful in identifying various forms of strong cross-section dependence, but have low power when they are used to capture spatial correlation. Copyright © 2009 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
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.
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): 23 (2009)
Issue (Month): 3 (07)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0950-0804|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/subs.asp?ref=0950-0804|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jecsur:v:23:y:2009:i:3:p:528-561. 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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)or (Christopher F. Baum)
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.