IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/etheor/v8y1992i02p258-275_01.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Bias of Bootstrapped Versus Conventional Standard Errors in the General Linear and SUR Models

Author

Listed:
  • Atkinson, Scott E.
  • Wilson, Paul W.

Abstract

When estimating the seemingly unrelated regression (SUR) model in small samples, the bootstrap feasible generalized least-squares (FGLS) covariance estimator has been widely advocated as less biased than the conventional FGLS covariance estimator obtained by evaluating the asymptotic covariance matrix. Assuming multivariate normal errors and an unbiased estimator of the error covariance, Eaton proves that the conventional estimator is biased downward for a general SUR model. Ignoring terms O(T–2) for this model, we prove that the bootstrap estimator is also biased downward. However, from these results, the relative magnitude of these two biases is indeterminant in general. By ignoring terms O(T–2) for Zellner's two-equation, orthogonal regressor model with bivariate normal errors, we show that the bias of both estimators is downward and that the bootstrap estimator exhibits a smaller bias than the conventional estimator. Monte Carlo simulation results indicate that, in general, neither estimator uniformly dominates the other.

Suggested Citation

  • Atkinson, Scott E. & Wilson, Paul W., 1992. "The Bias of Bootstrapped Versus Conventional Standard Errors in the General Linear and SUR Models," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 258-275, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:etheor:v:8:y:1992:i:02:p:258-275_01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0266466600012792/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Wanat, Stanisław & Papież, Monika & Śmiech, Sławomir, 2016. "Insurance Market Development and Economic Growth in Transition Countries: Some new evidence based on bootstrap panel Granger causality test," MPRA Paper 69051, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Dufour, Jean-Marie & Khalaf, Lynda, 2002. "Simulation based finite and large sample tests in multivariate regressions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 303-322, December.
    3. Cela, Enian & Kaneko, Shinji, 2011. "Determining the effectiveness of the Danish packaging tax policy: The case of paper and paperboard packaging imports," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(9), pages 836-841.
    4. Kristian Jönsson, 2005. "Cross‐sectional Dependency and Size Distortion in a Small‐sample Homogeneous Panel Data Unit Root Test," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 67(3), pages 369-392, June.
    5. Léopold Simar & Paul Wilson, 1999. "Some Problems with the Ferrier/Hirschberg Bootstrap Idea," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 67-80, February.
    6. Bergström, Pål, 1999. "Bootstrap Methods and Applications in Econometrics - A Brief Survey," Working Paper Series 1999:2, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
    7. Śmiech, Sławomir & Papież, Monika, 2014. "Energy consumption and economic growth in the light of meeting the targets of energy policy in the EU: The bootstrap panel Granger causality approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 118-129.
    8. Monika Papiez & Slawomir Smiech, 2013. "Economic Growth and Energy Consumption in Post-Communist Countries: a Bootstrap Panel Granger Causality Analysis," Dynamic Econometric Models, Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika, vol. 13, pages 51-68.

    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:cup:etheor:v:8:y:1992:i:02:p:258-275_01. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ect .

    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.