The Linear Regression Model With Autocorrelated Errors: Just Say No To Error Autocorrelation
This paper focuses on the practice of serial correlation correcting of the Linear Regression Model (LRM) by modeling the error. Simple Monte Carlo experiments are used to demonstrate the following points regarding this practice. First, the common factor restrictions implicitly imposed on the temporal structure of yt and xt appear to be completely unreasonable for any real world application. Second, when one compares the Autocorrelation-Corrected LRM (ACLRM) model estimates with estimates from the (unrestricted) Dynamic Linear Regression Model (DLRM) encompassing the ACLRM there is no significant gain in efficiency! Third, as expected, when the common factor restrictions do not hold the LRM model gives poor estimates of the true parameters and estimation of the ACLRM simply gives rise to different misleading results! On the other hand, estimates from the DLRM and the corresponding VAR model are very reliable. Fourth, the power of the usual Durbin Watson test (DW) of autocorrelation is much higher when the common factor restrictions do hold than when they do not. But, a more general test of autocorrelation is shown to perform almost as well as the DW when the common factor restrictions do hold and significantly better than the DW when the restrictions do not hold. Fifth, we demonstrate how simple it is to, at least, test the common factor restrictions imposed and we illustrate how powerful this test can be.
|Date of creation:||2002|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202|
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
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.:
- Spanos, Aris & McGuirk, Anya, 2002. "The problem of near-multicollinearity revisited: erratic vs systematic volatility," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 365-393, June.
- Hoover, Kevin D, 1988. "On the Pitfalls of Untested Common-Factor Restrictions: The Case of the Inverted Fisher Hypothesis," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 50(2), pages 125-138, May.
- Sargan, J D, 1980. "Some Tests of Dynamic Specification for a Single Equation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 879-897, May.
- Hendry, David F & Mizon, Grayham E, 1978. "Serial Correlation as a Convenient Simplification, not a Nuisance: A Comment on a Study of the Demand for Money by the Bank of England," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 88(351), pages 549-563, September.
- Spanos, Aris, 1995. "On theory testing in econometrics : Modeling with nonexperimental data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 189-226, May.
- Spanos,Aris, 1986. "Statistical Foundations of Econometric Modelling," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521269124, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaea02:19905. 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: (AgEcon Search)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.