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

Are Unit Root Tests Useful in the Debate over the (Non)Stationarity of Hours Worked?

  • Amélie Charles

    (Audencia Nantes, School of Management - Audencia, School of Management)

  • Olivier Darné

    (LEMNA - Laboratoire d'économie et de management de Nantes Atlantique - Université de Nantes : EA4272)

  • Fabien Tripier

    (LEMNA - Laboratoire d'économie et de management de Nantes Atlantique - Université de Nantes : EA4272)

This article compares the performances of some non-stationarity tests on simulated series, using the business-cycle model of Chang et al. (2007) [Y. Chang, T. Doh, F. Schorfheide, (2007). Non-stationary Hours in a DSGE Model. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 39, 357-1373] as data generating process. Overall, Monte Carlo simulations show that the efficient unit root tests of Ng and Perron (2001) [Ng, S., Perron, P. (2001). Lag length selection and the construction of unit root tests with good size and power. Econometrica 69, 1519-1554] are more powerful than the standard non-stationarity tests (ADF and KPSS). More precisely, these efficient tests are able to reject frequently the unit-root hypothesis on simulated series using the best specification of business-cycle model found by Chang et al. (2007), in which hours worked are stationary with adjustment costs.

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 HAL in its series Working Papers with number hal-00527122.

in new window

Date of creation: 18 Oct 2010
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-00527122
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server:
Contact details of provider: Web page:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

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:hal:wpaper:hal-00527122. 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: (CCSD)

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.