IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecosta/v25y2023icp1-22.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Instrument-free inference under confined regressor endogeneity and mild regularity

Author

Listed:
  • Kiviet, Jan F.

Abstract

The instrument-free approach adopts flexible bounds on the correlation between regressors and disturbances, instead of exploiting instruments presupposing their asymptotic uncorrelatedness with the model errors. Earlier findings on such instrument-free inference methods assumed the observations to be mesokurtic and independent and identically distributed. Adopting substantially weaker regularity, this alternative to Two-Stage Least-Squares (TSLS) is developed and simulated for general linear regression models, permitting time-dependent regressors with heterogeneous excess kurtosis. Replicating three prominent empirical studies TSLS is shown to be based on untenable exclusion restrictions, whereas instrument-free inference can arguably be more credible, while potentially producing narrower confidence intervals than (weak-instrument robust) TSLS.

Suggested Citation

  • Kiviet, Jan F., 2023. "Instrument-free inference under confined regressor endogeneity and mild regularity," Econometrics and Statistics, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 1-22.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecosta:v:25:y:2023:i:c:p:1-22
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecosta.2021.12.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452306221001623
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only. Contains open access articles

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecosta.2021.12.008?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. Arthur Lewbel, 2012. "Using Heteroscedasticity to Identify and Estimate Mismeasured and Endogenous Regressor Models," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(1), pages 67-80.
    2. Murray Michael P., 2017. "Linear Model IV Estimation When Instruments Are Many or Weak," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-22, January.
    3. Doko Tchatoka, Firmin & Dufour, Jean-Marie, 2020. "Exogeneity tests, incomplete models, weak identification and non-Gaussian distributions: Invariance and finite-sample distributional theory," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 218(2), pages 390-418.
    4. Phillips, Garry D.A. & Liu-Evans, Gareth, 2016. "Approximating and reducing bias in 2SLS estimation of dynamic simultaneous equation models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 734-762.
    5. Donald W. K. Andrews & Vadim Marmer & Zhengfei Yu, 2019. "On optimal inference in the linear IV model," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(2), pages 457-485, May.
    6. Aviv Nevo & Adam M. Rosen, 2012. "Identification With Imperfect Instruments," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(3), pages 659-671, August.
    7. Kiviet, Jan F. & Phillips, Garry D.A., 2012. "Higher-order asymptotic expansions of the least-squares estimation bias in first-order dynamic regression models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(11), pages 3705-3729.
    8. Jan F. Kiviet, 2013. "Identification and inference in a simultaneous equation under alternative information sets and sampling schemes," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 16(1), pages 24-59, February.
    9. Kathryn Graddy, 2006. "Markets: The Fulton Fish Market," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 207-220, Spring.
    10. David H. Romer & Jeffrey A. Frankel, 1999. "Does Trade Cause Growth?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 379-399, June.
    11. Kiviet, Jan F., 2016. "When is it really justifiable to ignore explanatory variable endogeneity in a regression model?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 192-195.
    12. Kiviet Jan F., 2017. "Discriminating between (in)valid External Instruments and (in)valid Exclusion Restrictions," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-9, January.
    13. Timothy G. Conley & Christian B. Hansen & Peter E. Rossi, 2012. "Plausibly Exogenous," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(1), pages 260-272, February.
    14. Federico A. Bugni & Ivan A. Canay & Xiaoxia Shi, 2017. "Inference for subvectors and other functions of partially identified parameters in moment inequality models," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 8(1), pages 1-38, March.
    15. Kiviet, Jan F. & Kripfganz, Sebastian, 2021. "Instrument approval by the Sargan test and its consequences for coefficient estimation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    16. Sebastian Kripfganz & Jan F. Kiviet, 2021. "kinkyreg: Instrument-free inference for linear regression models with endogenous regressors," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 21(3), pages 772-813, September.
    17. Imbens, Guido W., 2014. "Instrumental Variables: An Econometrician's Perspective," IZA Discussion Papers 8048, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Stock, James H & Wright, Jonathan H & Yogo, Motohiro, 2002. "A Survey of Weak Instruments and Weak Identification in Generalized Method of Moments," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(4), pages 518-529, October.
    19. Christian Bontemps & Thierry Magnac, 2017. "Set Identification, Moment Restrictions, and Inference," Post-Print hal-02137347, HAL.
    20. Kathryn Graddy & Peter Kennedy, 2010. "When Are Supply And Demand Determined Recursively Rather Than Simultaneously?," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 36(2), pages 188-197, Spring.
    21. Tomomi Tanaka & Colin F. Camerer & Quang Nguyen, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences: Linking Experimental and Household Survey Data from Vietnam," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 557-571, March.
    22. Kiviet, Jan F., 2020. "Testing the impossible: Identifying exclusion restrictions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 218(2), pages 294-316.
    23. Liu-Evans, Gareth & Phillips, Garry D.A., 2018. "On the use of higher order bias approximations for 2SLS and k-class estimators with non-normal disturbances and many instruments," Econometrics and Statistics, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 90-105.
    24. Donald W. K. Andrews & Gustavo Soares, 2010. "Inference for Parameters Defined by Moment Inequalities Using Generalized Moment Selection," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(1), pages 119-157, January.
    25. Quang Nguyen & Colin Camerer & Tomomi Tanaka, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences Linking Experimental and Household Data from Vietnam," Post-Print halshs-00547090, HAL.
    26. Aart Kraay, 2012. "Instrumental variables regressions with uncertain exclusion restrictions: a Bayesian approach," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(1), pages 108-128, January.
    27. Christian Bontemps & Thierry Magnac, 2017. "Set Identification, Moment Restrictions, and Inference," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 9(1), pages 103-129, September.
    28. Kathryn Graddy, 1995. "Testing for Imperfect Competition at the Fulton Fish Market," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 26(1), pages 75-92, Spring.
    29. Patrik Guggenberger & Frank Kleibergen & Sophocles Mavroeidis, 2019. "A more powerful subvector Anderson Rubin test in linear instrumental variables regression," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(2), pages 487-526, May.
    30. Jinyong Hahn & Jerry Hausman, 2003. "Weak Instruments: Diagnosis and Cures in Empirical Econometrics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(2), pages 118-125, May.
    31. Joshua D. Angrist & Kathryn Graddy & Guido W. Imbens, 2000. "The Interpretation of Instrumental Variables Estimators in Simultaneous Equations Models with an Application to the Demand for Fish," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 67(3), pages 499-527.
    32. Romano, Joseph P. & Wolf, Michael, 2017. "Resurrecting weighted least squares," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 197(1), pages 1-19.
    33. Michael P. Murray, 2006. "Avoiding Invalid Instruments and Coping with Weak Instruments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 111-132, Fall.
    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. Fang, Ming & Njangang, Henri & Padhan, Hemachandra & Simo, Colette & Yan, Cheng, 2023. "Social media and energy justice: A global evidence," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).

    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. Kiviet, Jan, 2019. "Instrument-free inference under confined regressor endogeneity; derivations and applications," MPRA Paper 96839, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Kiviet, Jan F., 2020. "Testing the impossible: Identifying exclusion restrictions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 218(2), pages 294-316.
    3. Kiviet, Jan F., 2016. "When is it really justifiable to ignore explanatory variable endogeneity in a regression model?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 192-195.
    4. Doko Tchatoka, Firmin Sabro, 2012. "Specification Tests with Weak and Invalid Instruments," MPRA Paper 40185, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Doko Tchatoka, Firmin & Dufour, Jean-Marie, 2020. "Exogeneity tests, incomplete models, weak identification and non-Gaussian distributions: Invariance and finite-sample distributional theory," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 218(2), pages 390-418.
    6. Sarrias, Mauricio & Blanco, Alejandra, 2022. "Bodyweight and human capital development: Assessing the impact of obesity on socioemotional skills during childhood in Chile," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    7. Jan F. Kiviet, 2013. "Identification and inference in a simultaneous equation under alternative information sets and sampling schemes," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 16(1), pages 24-59, February.
    8. Wang, Haining & Cheng, Zhiming, 2022. "Kids eat free: School feeding and family spending on education," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 196-212.
    9. Patrik Guggenberger & Frank Kleibergen & Sophocles Mavroeidis, 2021. "A Powerful Subvector Anderson Rubin Test in Linear Instrumental Variables Regression with Conditional Heteroskedasticity," Papers 2103.11371, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2022.
    10. Liao, Yuan & Simoni, Anna, 2019. "Bayesian inference for partially identified smooth convex models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(2), pages 338-360.
    11. Graddy, Kathryn & Hall, George, 2011. "A dynamic model of price discrimination and inventory management at the Fulton Fish Market," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 6-19.
    12. Richard A. Ashley & Christopher F. Parmeter, 2020. "Sensitivity Analysis of an OLS Multiple Regression Inference with Respect to Possible Linear Endogeneity in the Explanatory Variables, for Both Modest and for Extremely Large Samples," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, March.
    13. Jan F. Kiviet, 2020. "Causes Of Haze And Its Health Effects In Singapore: A Replication Study," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 65(06), pages 1367-1387, December.
    14. Aglasan, Serkan & Rejesus, Roderick M., 2022. "Do Cover Crops Reduce Production Risk?," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 324776, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Chris Sakellariou, 2023. "The Effect of Body Image Perceptions on Life Satisfaction and Emotional Wellbeing of Adolescent Students:," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 16(4), pages 1679-1708, August.
    16. Seyed Morteza Emadi, 2024. "Testing the Exogeneity of Instrumental Variables and Regressors in Linear Regression Models Using Copulas," Papers 2401.15253, arXiv.org.
    17. Sunjae Won & Roderick M. Rejesus & Barry K. Goodwin & Serkan Aglasan, 2024. "Understanding the effect of cover crop use on prevented planting losses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(2), pages 659-683, March.
    18. Huber, Martin, 2012. "Statistical verification of a natural "natural experiment": Tests and sensitivity checks for the sibling sex ratio instrument," Economics Working Paper Series 1219, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    19. Herrmann, Tabea & Hübler, Olaf & Menkhoff, Lukas & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2016. "Allais for the poor," Kiel Working Papers 2036, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    20. Antoine, Bertille & Lavergne, Pascal, 2023. "Identification-robust nonparametric inference in a linear IV model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 235(1), pages 1-24.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    endogeneity robust inference; exclusion restrictions test; replication studies; sensitivity analysis;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C12 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Hypothesis Testing: General
    • C13 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Estimation: General
    • C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models
    • C22 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes
    • C26 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Instrumental Variables (IV) Estimation

    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:eee:ecosta:v:25:y:2023:i:c:p:1-22. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/econometrics-and-statistics .

    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.