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

Rule-of-thumb consumers, productivity and hours

In this paper we study the transmission mechanisms of productivity shocks in a model with rule-of-thumb consumers. In the literature, this financial friction has been studied only with reference to fiscal shocks. We show that the presence of rule-of-thumb consumers is also very helpful in accounting for recent empirical evidence on productivity shocks. Rule-of-thumb agents, together with nominal and real rigidities, play an important role in reproducing the negative response of hours and the delayed responses of output and consumption after a productivity shock.

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.norges-bank.no/en/Published/Papers/Working-Papers/2007/WP-20075/
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Norges Bank in its series Working Paper with number 2007/05.

as
in new window

Length: 41 pages
Date of creation: 14 Nov 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:bno:worpap:2007_05
Contact details of provider: Postal: Postboks 1179 Sentrum, 0107 Oslo
Phone: +47 22 31 60 00
Fax: +47 22 41 31 05
Web page: http://www.norges-bank.no/
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. Gisle James Natvik, 2006. "Government Spending and the Taylor Principle," Working Paper 2006/11, Norges Bank.
  2. J. Galí & D. López-Salido & J. Vallés, 2003. "Understanding the effects of government spending on consumption," Proceedings, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  3. N. Gregory Mankiw, 2000. "The Savers-Spenders Theory of Fiscal Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 120-125, May.
  4. Jordi Gali & J. David Lopez-Salido & Javier Valles, 2002. "Technology Shocks and Monetary Policy: Assessing the Fed's Performance," NBER Working Papers 8768, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Taylor, John B., 1993. "Discretion versus policy rules in practice," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 195-214, December.
  6. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Robert Vigfusson, 2003. "What happens after a technology shock?," International Finance Discussion Papers 768, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  7. Francis, Neville & Ramey, Valerie A., 2005. "Is the technology-driven real business cycle hypothesis dead? Shocks and aggregate fluctuations revisited," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(8), pages 1379-1399, November.
  8. Christopher J. Erceg & Dale W. Henderson & Andrew T. Levin, 1999. "Optimal monetary policy with staggered wage and price contracts," International Finance Discussion Papers 640, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  9. Edward C. Prescott, 1986. "Theory ahead of business cycle measurement," Staff Report 102, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
  10. Kydland, Finn E & Prescott, Edward C, 1982. "Time to Build and Aggregate Fluctuations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(6), pages 1345-70, November.
  11. Mikael Carlsson, 2003. "Measures of Technology and the Short-run Response to Technology Shocks," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 105(4), pages 555-579, December.
  12. Torben Andersen, 2005. "Is there a Role for an Active Fiscal Stabilization Policy?," CESifo Working Paper Series 1447, CESifo Group Munich.
  13. Francesco Furlanetto & Martin Seneca, 2008. "Fiscal shocks and real rigidities," Working Paper 2008/10, Norges Bank.
  14. Rotemberg, Julio J, 1982. "Monopolistic Price Adjustment and Aggregate Output," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(4), pages 517-31, October.
  15. Marchetti, Domenico J. & Nucci, Francesco, 2005. "Price stickiness and the contractionary effect of technology shocks," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(5), pages 1137-1163, July.
  16. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:5:y:2004:i:3:p:1-8 is not listed on IDEAS
  17. Mikael Carlsson & Jon Smedsaas, 2007. "Technology Shocks and the Labor-Input Response: Evidence from Firm-Level Data," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 39(6), pages 1509-1520, 09.
  18. Günter Coenen & Roland Straub, 2005. "Does Government Spending Crowd in Private Consumption? Theory and Empirical Evidence for the Euro Area," IMF Working Papers 05/159, International Monetary Fund.
  19. Florin Bilbiie, 2005. "Limited Asset Markets Participation, Monetary Policy and (Inverted) Keynesian Logic," Economics Papers 2005-W09, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
  20. Miles S. Kimball & John G. Fernald & Susanto Basu, 2006. "Are Technology Improvements Contractionary?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1418-1448, December.
  21. Peter N. Ireland, 2002. "Endogenous Money or Sticky Prices?," NBER Working Papers 9390, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  22. Francesco FURLANETTO, 2007. "Fiscal Shocks and the Consumption Response when Wages are Sticky," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'Econométrie et d'Economie politique (DEEP) 07.11, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, DEEP.
  23. Christopher J. Erceg & Luca Guerrieri & Christopher Gust, 2005. "Expansionary fiscal shocks and the trade deficit," International Finance Discussion Papers 825, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  24. Jordi Gali & J. David Lopez-Salido & Javier Valles, 2004. "Rule-of-Thumb Consumers and the Design of Interest Rate Rules," NBER Working Papers 10392, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  25. Calvo, Guillermo A., 1983. "Staggered prices in a utility-maximizing framework," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 383-398, September.
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:bno:worpap:2007_05. 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: ()

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.