IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cda/wpaper/06-20.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Empirical Significance of Econometric Models

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Mayer

    (Department of Economics, University of California Davis)

Abstract

This essay discusses some, but by no means all the important problems that arise in econometric testing of econometric models. Specifically, it disusses the reliabilty of the underlying data and their processing, the problem of relating theories and data, ceteris paribus conditions and testability, data mining and the misuse of significance test.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Mayer, 2006. "The Empirical Significance of Econometric Models," Working Papers 620, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:cda:wpaper:06-20
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://wp.econ.ucdavis.edu/06-20.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kevin Hoover & Stephen Perez, 2001. "Three attitudes towards data mining," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 195-210.
    2. McCullough, B. D., 2000. "Is it safe to assume that software is accurate?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 349-357.
    3. Atsushi Inoue & Lutz Kilian, 2005. "In-Sample or Out-of-Sample Tests of Predictability: Which One Should We Use?," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(4), pages 371-402.
    4. Adrian Pagan & Michael Veall, 2001. "Data mining and the econometrics industry: comments on the papers of Mayer and of Hoover and Perez," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 211-216.
    5. Keuzenkamp, H.A. & Magnus, J.R., 1995. "On tests and significance in econometrics," Other publications TiSEM 1808e2e0-3805-4999-b9a1-5, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Jan R. Magnus & J. Durbin, 1999. "Estimation of Regression Coefficients of Interest When Other Regression Coefficients Are of No Interest," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(3), pages 639-644, May.
    7. David F. Hendry & Neil R. Ericsson, 1989. "An econometric analysis of UK money demand in MONETARY TRENDS IN THE UNITED STATES AND THE UNITED KINGDOM by Milton Friedman and Anna J. Schwartz," International Finance Discussion Papers 355, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    8. Roger Backhouse & Mary Morgan, 2001. "Introduction: is data mining a methodological problem?," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 171-181.
    9. Kevin Hoover & Mark Siegler, 2008. "Sound and fury: McCloskey and significance testing in economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 1-37.
    10. Zellner, A., 1992. "Statistics, Science and Public Policy," Papers 92-21, California Irvine - School of Social Sciences.
    11. Robert S. Goldfarb & H. O. Stekler, 2000. "Why Do Empirical Results Change? Forecasts as Tests of Rational Expectations," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 32(5), pages 95-116, Supplemen.
    12. H. D. Vinod & B. D. McCullough, 1999. "The Numerical Reliability of Econometric Software," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 37(2), pages 633-665, June.
    13. Margaret M. McConnell & Gabriel Perez-Quiros, 2000. "Output fluctuations in the United States: what has changed since the early 1980s?," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, issue Mar.
    14. Kennedy, Peter E, 2002. " Sinning in the Basement: What Are the Rules? The Ten Commandments of Applied Econometrics," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 569-589, September.
    15. Thomas Mayer, 2001. "The role of ideology in disagreements among economists: a quantitative analysis," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 253-273.
    16. Robert Goldfarb, 1995. "The economist-as-audience needs a methodology of plausible inference," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(2), pages 201-222.
    17. Hausman,Daniel M., 1992. "The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521415019.
    18. McAleer, Michael & Pagan, Adrian R & Volker, Paul A, 1985. "What Will Take the Con out of Econometrics?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 293-307, June.
    19. Keuzenkamp, Hugo A. & Magnus, Jan R., 1995. "On tests and significance in econometrics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 5-24, May.
    20. Aris Spanos, 2001. "Revisiting data mining: 'hunting' with or without a license," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 231-264.
    21. Hausman,Daniel M., 1992. "The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521425230.
    22. Lovell, Michael C & Selover, David D, 1994. "Software Reviews," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(424), pages 713-726, May.
    23. Backhouse, R.E., 1992. "The Significance of Replication in Econometrics," Discussion Papers 92-23, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham.
    24. Leontief, Wassily, 1971. "Theoretical Assumptions and Nonobserved Facts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 1-7, March.
    25. Keuzenkamp, Hugo A & McAleer, Michael, 1995. "Simplicity, Scientific Interference and Econometric Modelling," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(428), pages 1-21, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    econometric; models; theories;

    JEL classification:

    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General
    • C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments

    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:cda:wpaper:06-20. 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: (Scott Dyer). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/educdus.html .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.