IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ifs/cemmap/20-10.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is it different for zeros? Discriminating between models for non-negative data with many zeros

Author

Listed:
  • Joao Santos Silva Santos Silva

    (Institute for Fiscal Studies)

  • Silvana Tenreyro

    (Institute for Fiscal Studies)

  • Frank Windmeijer

    () (Institute for Fiscal Studies and University of Bristol)

Abstract

In many economic applications, the variate of interest is non-negative and its distribution is characterized by a mass-point at zero and a long right-tail. Many regression strategies have been proposed to deal with data of this type. Although there has been a long debate in the literature on the appropriateness of different models, formal statistical tests to choose between the competing specifications, or to assess the validity of the preferred model, are not often used in practice. In this paper we propose a novel and simple regression-based specification test that can be used to test these models against each other.

Suggested Citation

  • Joao Santos Silva Santos Silva & Silvana Tenreyro & Frank Windmeijer, 2010. "Is it different for zeros? Discriminating between models for non-negative data with many zeros," CeMMAP working papers CWP20/10, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  • Handle: RePEc:ifs:cemmap:20/10
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cemmap.ifs.org.uk/wps/cwp2010.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J. M. C. Santos Silva, 2001. "A score test for non-nested hypotheses with applications to discrete data models," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(5), pages 577-597.
    2. Santos Silva, J.M.C. & Tenreyro, Silvana, 2011. "Further simulation evidence on the performance of the Poisson pseudo-maximum likelihood estimator," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 220-222, August.
    3. J. M. C. Santos Silva & Silvana Tenreyro, 2006. "The Log of Gravity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 641-658, November.
    4. Costas Arkolakis & Arnaud Costinot & Andres Rodriguez-Clare, 2012. "New Trade Models, Same Old Gains?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 94-130, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alberto Alesina & Johann Harnoss & Hillel Rapoport, 2016. "Birthplace diversity and economic prosperity," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 101-138, June.
    2. Michalopoulos, Stelios & Papaioannou, Elias, 2010. "Divide and Rule or the Rule of the Divided? Evidence from Africa," CEPR Discussion Papers 8088, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Nico Voigtländer & Hans-Joachim Voth, 2012. "Persecution Perpetuated: The Medieval Origins of Anti-Semitic Violence in Nazi Germany," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 127(3), pages 1339-1392.
    4. Cooke, Edgar F A, 2011. "The impact of trade preferences on exports of developing countries: the case of the AGOA and CBI preferences of the USA," MPRA Paper 31439, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Stelios Michalopoulos & Elias Papaioannou, 2016. "The Long-Run Effects of the Scramble for Africa," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(7), pages 1802-1848, July.
    6. Prehn, Soren & Brümmer, Bernhard, 2011. "Estimation Issues In Single Commodity Gravity Trade Models," 51st Annual Conference, Halle, Germany, September 28-30, 2011 114524, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    7. Prehn, Soren & Brümmer, Bernhard, 2011. "Estimation Issues in Single Commodity Gravity Trade Models," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114776, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ifs:cemmap:20/10. 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: (Emma Hyman). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/cmifsuk.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.