IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Impact of Model Specification Decisions on Unit Root Tests

  • Atiq-ur-Rehman

    ()

    (International Islamic University)

Performance of unit root tests depends on several specification decisions prior to their application, e.g., whether or not to include a deterministic trend. Since there is no standard procedure for making such decisions; therefore, the practitioners routinely make several arbitrary specification decisions. In Monte Carlo studies, the design of data generating process supports these decisions, but for real data, such specification decisions are often unjustifiable and sometimes incompatible with data. We argue that the problems posed by choice of initial specification are quite complex and the existing voluminous literature on this issue treats only certain superficial aspects of this choice. Outcomes of unit root tests are very sensitive to both choice and sequencing of these arbitrary specifications. This means that we can obtain results of our choice from unit root tests by varying these specifications.

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.era.org.tr/makaleler/11080064.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by Econometric Research Association in its journal International Econometric Review.

Volume (Year): 3 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 (September)
Pages: 22-33

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:erh:journl:v:3:y:2011:i:2:p:22-33
Contact details of provider: Postal: Sairler Sokak, No:32/C, Gaziosmanpasa, Ankara, Turkey
Phone: + 90 312 447 51 95
Fax: + 90 312 447 51 95
Web page: http://www.era.org.tr/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

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. Eric Zivot & Donald W.K. Andrews, 1990. "Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock, and the Unit Root Hypothesis," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 944, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
  2. Perron, P, 1988. "The Great Crash, The Oil Price Shock And The Unit Root Hypothesis," Papers 338, Princeton, Department of Economics - Econometric Research Program.
  3. James G. MacKinnon, 1990. "Critical Values for Cointegration Tests," Working Papers 1227, Queen's University, Department of Economics.
  4. Gilberto Libanio, 2005. "Unit roots in macroeconomic time series: theory, implications, and evidence," Nova Economia, Economics Department, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (Brazil), vol. 15(3), pages 145-176, September.
  5. Perron, Pierre, 1988. "Trends and random walks in macroeconomic time series : Further evidence from a new approach," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 12(2-3), pages 297-332.
  6. Mark W. Watson, 1999. "Explaining the increased variability in long-term interest rates," Economic Quarterly, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, issue Fall, pages 71-96.
  7. Atiq-ur-Rehman, 2011. "Impact of Model Specification Decisions on Unit Root Tests," International Econometric Review (IER), Econometric Research Association, vol. 3(2), pages 22-33, September.
  8. Ayat, Leila & Burridge, Peter, 2000. "Unit root tests in the presence of uncertainty about the non-stochastic trend," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 71-96, March.
  9. Murray, Christian J. & Nelson, Charles R., 2000. "The uncertain trend in U.S. GDP," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 79-95, August.
  10. Dickey, David A & Fuller, Wayne A, 1981. "Likelihood Ratio Statistics for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(4), pages 1057-72, June.
  11. Lawrence J. Christiano, 1988. "Searching For a Break in GNP," NBER Working Papers 2695, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  12. Kim, Tae-Hwan & Leybourne, Stephen & Newbold, Paul, 2002. "Unit root tests with a break in innovation variance," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 365-387, August.
  13. Campbell, J.Y. & Perron, P., 1991. "Pitfalls and Opportunities: What Macroeconomics should know about unit roots," Papers 360, Princeton, Department of Economics - Econometric Research Program.
  14. Perron, P., 1989. "Testing For A Unit Root In A Time Series With A Changing Mean," Papers 347, Princeton, Department of Economics - Econometric Research Program.
  15. Kilian, Lutz & Ohanian, Lee E., 2002. "Unit Roots, Trend Breaks, And Transitory Dynamics: A Macroeconomic Perspective," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(05), pages 614-632, November.
  16. Charles R. Nelson & Heejoon Kang, 1983. "Pitfalls in the use of Time as an Explanatory Variable in Regression," NBER Technical Working Papers 0030, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  17. 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.
  18. Giuseppe Cavaliere, 2005. "Unit Root Tests under Time-Varying Variances," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 259-292.
  19. Diebold, Francis X & Senhadji, Abdelhak S, 1996. "The Uncertain Unit Root in Real GNP: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(5), pages 1291-98, December.
  20. Cati, Regina Celia & Garcia, Marcio G P & Perron, Pierre, 1999. "Unit Roots in the Presence of Abrupt Governmental Interventions with an Application to Brazilian Data," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(1), pages 27-56, Jan.-Feb..
  21. Hacker, Scott & Hatemi-J, Abdulnasser, 2010. "The Properties of Procedures Dealing with Uncertainty about Intercept and Deterministic Trend in Unit Root Testing," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 214, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
  22. Serena Ng & Pierre Perron, 1997. "Lag Length Selection and the Construction of Unit Root Tests with Good Size and Power," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 369, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 01 Sep 2000.
  23. Glenn D. Rudebusch, 1992. "The uncertain unit root in real GNP," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 193, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  24. Graham Elliott & Thomas J. Rothenberg & James H. Stock, 1992. "Efficient Tests for an Autoregressive Unit Root," NBER Technical Working Papers 0130, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  25. Pagan, Adrian R. & Schwert, G. William, 1990. "Testing for covariance stationarity in stock market data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 165-170, June.
  26. Engle, R. F. & Granger, C. W. J. (ed.), 1991. "Long-Run Economic Relationships: Readings in Cointegration," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198283393.
  27. Banerjee, Anindya & Lumsdaine, Robin L & Stock, James H, 1992. "Recursive and Sequential Tests of the Unit-Root and Trend-Break Hypotheses: Theory and International Evidence," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 10(3), pages 271-87, July.
  28. Elena Andreou & Aris Spanos, 2003. "Statistical Adequacy and the Testing of Trend Versus Difference Stationarity," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(3), pages 217-237, January.
  29. Nunes, Luis C. & Kuan, Chung-Ming & Newbold, Paul, 1995. "Spurious Break," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(04), pages 736-749, August.
  30. John Elder & Peter E. Kennedy, 2001. "Testing for Unit Roots: What Should Students Be Taught?," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(2), pages 137-146, January.
  31. David H Papell & Ruxandra Prodan, 2007. "Restricted Structural Change And The Unit Root Hypothesis," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(4), pages 834-853, October.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:erh:journl:v:3:y:2011:i:2:p:22-33. 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: (M. F. Cosar)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.