Unit Root Test Popularity among Economists: Sampling the Literature
A commonly encountered problem in empirical research involves the choices researchers have to make with respect to data, research methodologies, and/or econometric estimation techniques. In many cases researchers are having to make these choices with less than perfect information. In such cases, it may be useful for researchers to have an idea of which econometric techniques are being used in the profession, especially in their area of specialization. To illustrate this problem this paper investigates the use of 17 different tests for a unit root. The use of these tests was surveyed for 13 journals in the areas of economic growth and development, macroeconomics, and international economics for the period 1997-2000. The results are reported both in terms of the frequency of the use of these tests and the number of different tests employed in each area of specialization and for each journal (breadth). It was found that the use of these tests is not uniform among the three areas with respect to both frequency and breadth. Further, journals within a particular area of specialization differ noticeably in the use of unit root tests. This type of information should be useful to researchers in these three areas and provide a useful way to present information on other types of empirical problems.
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Volume (Year): 55 (2002)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Via Garibaldi 4, 16124 Genova, Italy|
Phone: +39 010 27041
Fax: +39 010 2704222
Web page: http://www.ge.camcom.it/IT/Tool/Modulistica
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ris:ecoint:0196. 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: (Angela Procopio)
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.