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

Construction of Stationarity Tests with Less Size Distortions

  • Kurozumi, Eiji

We propose a (trend) stationarity test with a good finite sample size even when a process is (trend) stationary with strong persistence; this is useful for distinguishing between a (trend) stationary process with strong persistence and a unit root process. It could be considered as a modified version of Leybourne and McCabe's test (1994, LMC), but with adi fferent correction method for serial correlation. A Monte Carlo simulation reveals that in terms of empirical size, our test is closer to the nominal one than the original LMC test and is more powerful than the LMC test with size-adjusted critical values.

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://hermes-ir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp/rs/bitstream/10086/17465/1/HJeco0500100870.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by Hitotsubashi University in its journal Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics.

Volume (Year): 50 (2009)
Issue (Month): 1 (June)
Pages: 87-105

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:hit:hitjec:v:50:y:2009:i:1:p:87-105
Contact details of provider: Phone: +81-42-580-8000
Web page: http://www.econ.hit-u.ac.jp/
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. Elliott, Graham & Rothenberg, Thomas J & Stock, James H, 1996. "Efficient Tests for an Autoregressive Unit Root," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(4), pages 813-36, July.
  2. Jansson, Michael, 2004. "Stationarity Testing With Covariates," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(01), pages 56-94, February.
  3. Choi, In, 1994. "Residual-Based Tests for the Null of Stationarity with Applications to U.S. Macroeconomic Time Series," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(3-4), pages 720-746, August.
  4. Caner, Mehmet & Kilian, Lutz, 2000. "Size Distortions Of Tests Of The Null Hypothesis Of Stationarity: Evidence And Implications For The PPP Debate," CEPR Discussion Papers 2425, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  5. Leybourne, S J & McCabe, B P M, 1994. "A Consistent Test for a Unit Root," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 12(2), pages 157-66, April.
  6. Leybourne, S J & McCabe, B P M, 1999. "Modified Stationarity Tests with Data-Dependent Model-Selection Rules," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 17(2), pages 264-70, April.
  7. Muller, Ulrich K., 2005. "Size and power of tests of stationarity in highly autocorrelated time series," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 128(2), pages 195-213, October.
  8. Yin-Wong Cheung & Menzie Chinn, 1995. "Further investigation of the uncertain unit root in GNP," Econometrics 9508002, EconWPA.
  9. Sargan, J D & Bhargava, Alok, 1983. "Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Regression Models with First Order Moving Average Errors When the Root Lies on the Unit Circle," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(3), pages 799-820, May.
  10. Philip Rothman, . "More Uncertainty About the Unit Root in U.S. Real GNP," Working Papers 9616, East Carolina University, Department of Economics.
  11. Andrews, Donald W K, 1991. "Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 817-58, May.
  12. Denis Kwiatkowski & Peter C.B. Phillips & Peter Schmidt, 1991. "Testing the Null Hypothesis of Stationarity Against the Alternative of a Unit Root: How Sure Are We That Economic Time Series Have a Unit Root?," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 979, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
  13. Serena Ng & Pierre Perron, 2001. "LAG Length Selection and the Construction of Unit Root Tests with Good Size and Power," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(6), pages 1519-1554, November.
  14. Davis, Richard A. & Dunsmuir, William T.M., 1996. "Maximum Likelihood Estimation for MA(1) Processes with a Root on or near the Unit Circle," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(01), pages 1-29, March.
  15. Lanne, Markku & Saikkonen, Pentti, 2000. "Reducing size distortions of parametric stationarity tests," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 2000,12, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
  16. Kuo, Biing-Shen & Mikkola, Anne, 1999. "Re-examining long-run purchasing power parity," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 251-266, February.
  17. Saikkonen, Pentti & Luukkonen, Ritva, 1993. "Point Optimal Tests for Testing the Order of Differencing in ARIMA Models," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(03), pages 343-362, June.
  18. Hansen, Bruce E., 1992. "Convergence to Stochastic Integrals for Dependent Heterogeneous Processes," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(04), pages 489-500, December.
  19. Tanaka, Katsuto, 1990. "Testing for a Moving Average Unit Root," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(04), pages 433-444, December.
  20. McCabe, B.P.M. & Leybourne, S.J., 1998. "On Estimating An Arma Model With An Ma Unit Root," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(03), pages 326-338, June.
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:hit:hitjec:v:50:y:2009:i:1:p:87-105. 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: (Digital Resources Section, Hitotsubashi University Library)

The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Digital Resources Section, Hitotsubashi University Library to update the entry or send us the correct address

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.