IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/stapro/v70y2004i3p175-182.html

On the finite-sample size distortion of smooth transition unit root tests

Author

Listed:
  • Cook, Steven
  • Vougas, Dimitrios

Abstract

The finite-sample size properties of smooth transition unit root tests are examined when applied to unit root processes subject to breaks in either level or drift. In contrast to the weighted symmetric and recursively mean-adjusted unit root tests which have been shown to be robust in these circumstances, it is found that the empirical sizes of smooth transition tests are dependent upon the form, location and magnitude of the break imposed. It is concluded that while smooth transition unit root tests are capable of capturing breaks under an alternative hypothesis of stationarity, spurious rejection can occur when breaks occur under the null.

Suggested Citation

  • Cook, Steven & Vougas, Dimitrios, 2004. "On the finite-sample size distortion of smooth transition unit root tests," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 175-182, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:stapro:v:70:y:2004:i:3:p:175-182
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-7152(04)00252-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zivot, Eric & Andrews, Donald W K, 2002. "Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 25-44, January.
    2. Stephen J. Leybourne And Paul Newbold, 2000. "Behaviour of the standard and symmetric Dickey-Fuller-type tests when there is a break under the null hypothesis," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 3(1), pages 1-15.
    3. Stephen Leybourne & Paul Newbold & Dimitrios Vougas, 1998. "Unit roots and smooth transitions," Journal of Time Series Analysis, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(1), pages 83-97, January.
    4. Perron, P, 1993. "Erratum [The Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock and the Unit Root Hypothesis]," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(1), pages 248-249, January.
    5. Leybourne, Stephen J. & C. Mills, Terence & Newbold, Paul, 1998. "Spurious rejections by Dickey-Fuller tests in the presence of a break under the null," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 191-203, August.
    6. Cook, Steven, 2002. "Correcting size distortion of the Dickey-Fuller test via recursive mean adjustment," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 75-79, November.
    7. 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

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


    Cited by:

    1. Vougas, Dimitrios V., 2006. "On unit root testing with smooth transitions," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 797-800, November.
    2. P. S. Sephton, 2010. "Unit roots and purchasing power parity: another kick at the can," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(27), pages 3439-3453.

    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. Wilton Bernardino & João B. Amaral & Nelson L. Paes & Raydonal Ospina & José L. Távora, 2022. "A statistical investigation of a stock valuation model," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(8), pages 1-25, August.
    2. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:3:y:2004:i:24:p:1-11 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Olivier Darné & Amélie Charles, 2011. "Large shocks in U.S. macroeconomic time series: 1860-1988," Cliometrica, Journal of Historical Economics and Econometric History, Association Française de Cliométrie (AFC), vol. 5(1), pages 79-100, January.
    4. Chen, Shyh-Wei & Hsu, Chi-Sheng, 2016. "Threshold, smooth transition and mean reversion in inflation: New evidence from European countries," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 23-36.
    5. Kim, Dukpa & Perron, Pierre, 2009. "Unit root tests allowing for a break in the trend function at an unknown time under both the null and alternative hypotheses," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 1-13, January.
    6. Markku Lanne & Helmut Lütkepohl & Pentti Saikkonen, 2003. "Test Procedures for Unit Roots in Time Series with Level Shifts at Unknown Time," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 65(1), pages 91-115, February.
    7. Foster, Neil & Stehrer, Robert, 2007. "Modeling transformation in CEECs using smooth transitions," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 57-86, March.
    8. Cerrato, Mario & Kim, Hyunsok & MacDonald, Ronald, 2013. "Equilibrium exchange rate determination and multiple structural changes," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 52-66.
    9. Olivier Darné & Claude Diebolt, 2006. "Chocs temporaires et permanents dans le PIB de la France, du Royaume-Uni et des États-Unis," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 116(1), pages 65-78.
    10. Razvan Pascalau, 2010. "Unit root tests with smooth breaks: an application to the Nelson-Plosser data set," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(6), pages 565-570.
    11. Charles, Amélie & Darné, Olivier, 2012. "Trends and random walks in macroeconomic time series: A reappraisal," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 167-180.
    12. Paulo M. M. Rodrigues, 2013. "Recursive adjustment, unit root tests and structural breaks," Journal of Time Series Analysis, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1), pages 62-82, January.
    13. Tolga Omay & Muhammad Shahbaz & Chris Stewart, 2021. "Is there really hysteresis in the OECD unemployment rates? New evidence using a Fourier panel unit root test," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 48(4), pages 875-901, November.
    14. David Harvey & Terence Mills, 2002. "Unit roots and double smooth transitions," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(5), pages 675-683.
    15. John D. Levendis, 2018. "Time Series Econometrics," Springer Texts in Business and Economics, Springer, number 978-3-319-98282-3, January.
    16. Aparicio, Felipe M. & Escribano, Álvaro & García, Ana, 2003. "Range unit root tests," DES - Working Papers. Statistics and Econometrics. WS ws031126, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Estadística.
    17. Vougas, Dimitrios V., 2006. "On unit root testing with smooth transitions," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 797-800, November.
    18. Nelson, Charles R & Piger, Jeremy & Zivot, Eric, 2001. "Markov Regime Switching and Unit-Root Tests," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 19(4), pages 404-415, October.
    19. Giorgio Canarella & Stephen M. Miller & Stephen K. Pollard, 2010. "Unit Roots and Structural Change: An Application to US House-Price Indices," Working Papers 1004, University of Nevada, Las Vegas , Department of Economics.
    20. D. Ventosa-Santaulària, 2009. "Spurious Regression," Journal of Probability and Statistics, Hindawi, vol. 2009, pages 1-27, August.
    21. Vougas, Dimitrios V., 2007. "Is the trend in post-WW II US real GDP uncertain or non-linear?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 348-355, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:stapro:v:70:y:2004:i:3:p:175-182. 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: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/622892/description#description .

    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.