IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Testing Normality: A GMM Approach

  • Christian Bontemps
  • Nour Meddahi

In this paper, we consider testing marginal normal distributional assumptions. More precisely, we propose tests based on moment conditions implied by normality. These moment conditions are known as the Stein (1972) equations. They coincide with the first class of moment conditions derived by Hansen and Scheinkman (1995) when the random variable of interest is a scalar diffusion. Among other examples, Stein equation implies that the mean of Hermite polynomials is zero. The GMM approach we adopted is well suited for two reasons. It allows us to study in detail the parameter uncertainty problem, i.e., when the tests depend on unknown parameters that have to be estimated. In particular, we characterize the moment conditions that are robust against parameter uncertainty and show that Hermite polynomials are special examples. This is the main contribution of the paper. The second reason for using GMM is that our tests are also valid for time series. In this case, we adopt a Heteroskedastic-Autocorrelation-Consistent approach to estimate the weighting matrix when the dependence of the data is unspecified. We also make a theoretical comparison of our tests with Jarque and Bera (1980) and OPG regression tests of Davidson and MacKinnon (1993). Finite sample properties of our tests are derived through a comprehensive Monte Carlo study. Finally, three applications to GARCH and realized volatility models are presented. Dans cet article, nous testons des hypothèses de normalité marginale. Plus précisément, nous proposons des tests fondés sur des conditions de moments connues sous le nom d?équations de Stein. Ces conditions coïncident avec la première classe de conditions de moments obtenues par Hansen et Scheinkman (1995) quand la variable d?intérêt est une diffusion. L?équation de Stein implique, par exemple, que l?espérance de chaque polynôme de Hermite est nulle. L?approche GMM est utile pour deux raisons. Elle nous permet de tenir compte du problème d?incertitude des paramètres préalablement estimés. En particulier, nous caractérisons les conditions de moments qui sont robustes à ce problème et montrons que c?est le cas des polynômes de Hermite. C?est la principale contribution de l?article. Le second avantage de l?approche GMM est que nos tests sont aussi valides pour des séries temporelles. Dans ce cas, nous adoptons une approche HAC (Heteroskedastic-Autocorrelation-Consistent) pour estimer la matrice de poids qui intervient dans la statistique de test quand la forme sérielle des données n?est pas spécifiée. Nous comparons nos tests de manière théorique avec les tests de Jarque et Bera (1981) et les tests dits OPG de Davidson et MacKinnon (1993). Les propriétés de petits échantillons de nos tests sont étudiées par simulation. Finalement, nous appliquons nos tests à trois exemples de modèles de volatilité GARCH et volatilité réalisée.

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:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by CIRANO in its series CIRANO Working Papers with number 2002s-63.

in new window

Length: 53 pages
Date of creation: 01 Jul 2002
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cir:cirwor:2002s-63
Contact details of provider: Postal: 1130 rue Sherbrooke Ouest, suite 1400, Montréal, Quéc, H3A 2M8
Phone: (514) 985-4000
Fax: (514) 985-4039
Web page:

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. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G, 1992. "A New Form of the Information Matrix Test," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(1), pages 145-57, January.
  2. Klaauw, B. van der & Koning, R.H., 2000. "Testing the normality assumption in the sample selection model with an application to travel demand," Research Report 00F37, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
  3. Sangjoon Kim, Neil Shephard & Siddhartha Chib, . "Stochastic volatility: likelihood inference and comparison with ARCH models," Economics Papers W26, revised version of W, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
  4. Jushan Bai & Serena Ng, 2001. "Tests for Skewness, Kurtosis, and Normality for Time Series Data," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 501, Boston College Department of Economics.
  5. Christoffersen, Peter F, 1998. "Evaluating Interval Forecasts," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(4), pages 841-62, November.
  6. White, Halbert, 1982. "Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Misspecified Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 1-25, January.
  7. Xiaohong Chen & Lars Peter Hansen & Jos´e A. Scheinkman, 2005. "Principal Components and the Long Run," Levine's Bibliography 122247000000000997, UCLA Department of Economics.
  8. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G, 1984. "Model Specification Tests Based on Artificial Linear Regressions," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 25(2), pages 485-502, June.
  9. Jean-Marie Dufour & Abdeljelil Farhat & Lucien Gardiol & Lynda Khalaf, 1998. "Simulation-based finite sample normality tests in linear regressions," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 1(Conferenc), pages C154-C173.
  10. Anderson, Torben G. & Bollerslev, Tim & Diebold, Francis X. & Labys, Paul, 2002. "Modeling and Forecasting Realized Volatility," Working Papers 02-12, Duke University, Department of Economics.
  11. Hansen, Lars Peter, 1982. "Large Sample Properties of Generalized Method of Moments Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 1029-54, July.
  12. Hong, Yongmiao & Li, Haitao, 2002. "Nonparametric specification testing for continuous-time models with application to spot interest rates," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 2002,32, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
  13. Andrews, Donald W K, 1991. "Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 817-58, May.
  14. Kilian, Lutz & Demiroglu, Ufuk, 2000. "Residual-Based Tests for Normality in Autoregressions: Asymptotic Theory and Simulation Evidence," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 18(1), pages 40-50, January.
  15. Ole E. Barndorff-Nielsen & Neil Shephard, 2002. "Estimating quadratic variation using realized variance," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(5), pages 457-477.
  16. Jarque, Carlos M. & Bera, Anil K., 1980. "Efficient tests for normality, homoscedasticity and serial independence of regression residuals," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 255-259.
  17. Bollerslev, Tim, 1986. "Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 307-327, April.
  18. Thomakos, Dimitrios D. & Wang, Tao, 2003. "Realized volatility in the futures markets," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 321-353, May.
  19. BONTEMPS, Christian & MEDDAHI, Nour, 2002. "Testing Normality : A GMM Approach," Cahiers de recherche 2002-14, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
  20. Ronald Gallant, A. & Tauchen, George, 1999. "The relative efficiency of method of moments estimators1," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 149-172, September.
  21. Engle, Robert F, 1982. "Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity with Estimates of the Variance of United Kingdom Inflation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 987-1007, July.
  22. Jacquier, Eric & Polson, Nicholas G & Rossi, Peter E, 2002. "Bayesian Analysis of Stochastic Volatility Models," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 69-87, January.
  23. Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., 1990. "A Unified Approach to Robust, Regression-Based Specification Tests," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(01), pages 17-43, March.
  24. Richardson, Matthew & Smith, Tom, 1993. "A Test for Multivariate Normality in Stock Returns," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 66(2), pages 295-321, April.
  25. Bollerslev, Tim, 1987. "A Conditionally Heteroskedastic Time Series Model for Speculative Prices and Rates of Return," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(3), pages 542-47, August.
  26. Yacine Ait-Sahalia, 1995. "Testing Continuous-Time Models of the Spot Interest Rate," NBER Working Papers 5346, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  27. Amemiya, Takeshi, 1977. "The Maximum Likelihood and the Nonlinear Three-Stage Least Squares Estimator in the General Nonlinear Simultaneous Equation Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(4), pages 955-68, May.
  28. Lars Peter Hansen & Jose Alexandre Scheinkman, 1993. "Back to the Future: Generating Moment Implications for Continuous-Time Markov Processes," NBER Technical Working Papers 0141, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  29. Gabriele Fiorentini & Enrique Sentana & Giorgio Calzolari, 2000. "The Score Of Conditionally Heteroskedastic Dynamic Regression Models With Student T Innovations, An Lm Test For Multivariate Normality," Working Papers. Serie AD 2000-33, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
  30. Andersen T. G & Bollerslev T. & Diebold F. X & Labys P., 2001. "The Distribution of Realized Exchange Rate Volatility," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 96, pages 42-55, March.
  31. Bollerslev, Tim & Engle, Robert F. & Nelson, Daniel B., 1986. "Arch models," Handbook of Econometrics, in: R. F. Engle & D. McFadden (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 49, pages 2959-3038 Elsevier.
  32. Kiefer, Nicholas M. & Salmon, Mark, 1983. "Testing normality in econometric models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 11(1-2), pages 123-127.
  33. Fiorentini, Gabriele & Sentana, Enrique & Calzolari, Giorgio, 2003. "Maximum Likelihood Estimation and Inference in Multivariate Conditionally Heteroscedastic Dynamic Regression Models with Student t Innovations," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 21(4), pages 532-46, October.
  34. Valentina Corradi & Norman R. Swanson, 2003. "Bootstrap Specification Tests for Diffusion Processes," Departmental Working Papers 200321, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
  35. Conley, Timothy G, et al, 1997. "Short-Term Interest Rates as Subordinated Diffusions," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 10(3), pages 525-77.
  36. Ole Barndorff-Nielsen & Neil Shephard, 2000. "Non-Gaussian OU based models and some of their uses in financial economics," OFRC Working Papers Series 2000mf01, Oxford Financial Research Centre.
  37. Kilian, L. & Demiroglu, U., 1997. "Residual-Based Bootstrap Tests for Normality in Autoregressions," Papers 97-14, Michigan - Center for Research on Economic & Social Theory.
  38. Andersen, Torben G & Bollerslev, Tim, 1998. "Answering the Skeptics: Yes, Standard Volatility Models Do Provide Accurate Forecasts," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(4), pages 885-905, November.
  39. Nelson, Daniel B, 1991. "Conditional Heteroskedasticity in Asset Returns: A New Approach," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(2), pages 347-70, March.
  40. Tauchen, George, 1985. "Diagnostic testing and evaluation of maximum likelihood models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1-2), pages 415-443.
  41. Bera, Anil K. & Jarque, Carlos M., 1981. "Efficient tests for normality, homoscedasticity and serial independence of regression residuals : Monte Carlo Evidence," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 313-318.
  42. Andersen, Torben G. & Chung, Hyung-Jin & Sorensen, Bent E., 1999. "Efficient method of moments estimation of a stochastic volatility model: A Monte Carlo study," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 61-87, July.
  43. Torben Andersen & Tim Bollerslev & Francis X. Diebold & Paul Labys, 1999. "The Distribution of Exchange Rate Volatility," NBER Working Papers 6961, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  44. Newey, Whitney & West, Kenneth, 2014. "A simple, positive semi-definite, heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation consistent covariance matrix," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 33(1), pages 125-132.
  45. K. Newey, Whitney, 1985. "Generalized method of moments specification testing," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 229-256, September.
  46. Jushan Bai, 2003. "Testing Parametric Conditional Distributions of Dynamic Models," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(3), pages 531-549, August.
  47. Tim Bollerslev & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 1988. "Quasi-Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Dynamic Models with Time-Varying Covariances," Working papers 505, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
  48. Berkowitz, Jeremy, 2001. "Testing Density Forecasts, with Applications to Risk Management," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 19(4), pages 465-74, October.
  49. Fiorentini, G. & Sentana, E. & Calzolari, G., 2000. "The Score of Condionally Heteroskedastic Dynamic Regression Models with Student T Innovations, and an LM Test for Multivariate Normality," Papers 0007, Centro de Estudios Monetarios Y Financieros-.
  50. Jacquier, Eric & Polson, Nicholas G & Rossi, Peter E, 1994. "Bayesian Analysis of Stochastic Volatility Models: Comments: Reply," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 12(4), pages 413-17, October.
  51. Diebold, Francis X & Gunther, Todd A & Tay, Anthony S, 1998. "Evaluating Density Forecasts with Applications to Financial Risk Management," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(4), pages 863-83, November.
  52. Harvey, Andrew & Ruiz, Esther & Shephard, Neil, 1994. "Multivariate Stochastic Variance Models," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 247-64, April.
  53. Ole E. Barndorff-Nielsen & Neil Shephard, 2001. "Non-Gaussian Ornstein-Uhlenbeck-based models and some of their uses in financial economics," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 63(2), pages 167-241.
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:cir:cirwor:2002s-63. 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: (Webmaster)

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.