IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/emjrnl/v17y2014i2ps39-s58.html

Confidence sets based on inverting Anderson–Rubin tests

Author

Listed:
  • Russell Davidson
  • James G. MacKinnon

Abstract

Economists are often interested in the coefficient of a single endogenous explanatory variable in a linear simultaneous‐equations model. One way to obtain a confidence set for this coefficient is to invert the Anderson–Rubin (AR) test. The AR confidence sets that result have correct coverage under classical assumptions. However, AR confidence sets also have many undesirable properties. It is well known that they can be unbounded when the instruments are weak, as is true of any test with correct coverage. However, even when they are bounded, their length may be very misleading, and their coverage conditional on quantities that the investigator can observe (notably, the Sargan statistic for overidentifying restrictions) can be far from correct. A similar property manifests itself, for similar reasons, when a confidence set for a single parameter is based on inverting an F‐test for two or more parameters.

Suggested Citation

  • Russell Davidson & James G. MacKinnon, 2014. "Confidence sets based on inverting Anderson–Rubin tests," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 17(2), pages 39-58, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:emjrnl:v:17:y:2014:i:2:p:s39-s58
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/ectj.12015
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Khalaf, Lynda & Lin, Zhenjiang, 2021. "Projection-based inference with particle swarm optimization," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    2. MacKinnon, James G., 2011. "Thirty Years of Heteroskedasticity-Robust Inference," Queen's Economics Department Working Papers 273816, Queen's University - Department of Economics.
    3. Nakashima, Kiyotaka & Takahashi, Koji, 2018. "The real effects of bank-driven termination of relationships: Evidence from loan-level matched data," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 46-65.
    4. Masakure, Oliver, 2016. "The effect of employee loyalty on wages," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 274-298.
    5. Jeremy Edwards & Sheilagh Ogilvie, 2022. "The Black Death and the origin of the European marriage pattern," Oxford Economic and Social History Working Papers _204, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    6. Sheng Wang & Hyunseung Kang, 2022. "Weak‐instrument robust tests in two‐sample summary‐data Mendelian randomization," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(4), pages 1699-1713, December.
    7. Martin Emil Jakobsen & Jonas Peters, 2022. "Distributional robustness of K-class estimators and the PULSE [The colonial origins of comparative development: An empirical investigation]," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 25(2), pages 404-432.
    8. Russell Davidson & James G. MacKinnon, 2014. "Bootstrap Confidence Sets with Weak Instruments," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(5-6), pages 651-675, August.
    9. Taner Osman & Tom Kemeny, 2022. "Local job multipliers revisited," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(1), pages 150-170, January.
    10. Theodore F. Figinski & Alicia Lloro & Avinash Moorthy, 2022. "Revisiting the Effect of Education on Later Life Health," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2022-007, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C26 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Instrumental Variables (IV) Estimation
    • C36 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Instrumental Variables (IV) Estimation
    • C15 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Statistical Simulation Methods: General

    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:wly:emjrnl:v:17:y:2014:i:2:p:s39-s58. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.html .

    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.