IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Exogeneity Tests, Incomplete Models, Weak Identification and Non-Gaussian Distributions : Invariance and Finite-Sample Distributional Theory

Listed author(s):
  • Firmin DOKO TCHATOKA
  • Jean-Marie DUFOUR

We study the distribution of Durbin-Wu-Hausman (DWH) and Revankar-Hartley (RH) tests for exogeneity from a finite-sample viewpoint, under the null and alternative hypotheses. We consider linear structural models with possibly non-Gaussian errors, where structural parameters may not be identified and where reduced forms can be incompletely specified (or nonparametric). On level control, we characterize the null distributions of all the test statistics. Through conditioning and invariance arguments, we show that these distributions do not involve nuisance parameters. In particular, this applies to several test statistics for which no finite-sample distributional theory is yet available, such as the standard statistic proposed by Hausman (1978). The distributions of the test statistics may be non-standard – so corrections to usual asymptotic critical values are needed – but the characterizations are sufficiently explicit to yield finite-sample (Monte-Carlo) tests of the exogeneity hypothesis. The procedures so obtained are robust to weak identification, missing instruments or misspecified reduced forms, and can easily be adapted to allow for parametric non-Gaussian error distributions. We give a general invariance result (block triangular invariance) for exogeneity test statistics. This property yields a convenient exogeneity canonical form and a parsimonious reduction of the parameters on which power depends. In the extreme case where no structural parameter is identified, the distributions under the alternative hypothesis and the null hypothesis are identical, so the power function is flat, for all the exogeneity statistics. However, as soon as identification does not fail completely, this phenomenon typically disappears. We present simulation evidence which confirms the finite-sample theory. The theoretical results are illustrated with two empirical examples: the relation between trade and economic growth, and the widely studied problem of the return of education to earnings.

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.cireqmontreal.com/wp-content/uploads/cahiers/14-2016-cah.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ in its series Cahiers de recherche with number 14-2016.

as
in new window

Length: 59 pages
Date of creation: 2016
Handle: RePEc:mtl:montec:14-2016
Contact details of provider: Postal:
C.P. 6128, Succ. centre-ville, Montréal (PQ) H3C 3J7

Phone: (514) 343-6557
Fax: (514) 343-7221
Web page: http://www.cireq.umontreal.ca
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. Lee, Yoonseok & Okui, Ryo, 2012. "Hahn–Hausman test as a specification test," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 167(1), pages 133-139.
  2. Joshua D. Angrist & Alan B. Keueger, 1991. "Does Compulsory School Attendance Affect Schooling and Earnings?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 106(4), pages 979-1014.
  3. Wu, De-Min, 1973. "Alternative Tests of Independence Between Stochastic Regressors and Disturbances," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 733-750, July.
  4. Kiviet, Jan F. & Niemczyk, Jerzy, 2007. "The asymptotic and finite sample distributions of OLS and simple IV in simultaneous equations," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(7), pages 3296-3318, April.
  5. Kiviet, Jan F. & Pleus, Milan, 2017. "The performance of tests on endogeneity of subsets of explanatory variables scanned by simulation," Econometrics and Statistics, Elsevier, vol. 2(C), pages 1-21.
  6. Joshua D. Angrist & Jörn-Steffen Pischke, 2009. "Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 8769.
  7. Smith, Richard J., 1994. "Asymptotically Optimal Tests Using Limited Information and Testing for Exogeneity," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(01), pages 53-69, March.
  8. Firmin Doko Tchatoka, 2015. "On bootstrap validity for specification tests with weak instruments," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 18(1), pages 137-146, February.
  9. Jan F. Kiviet, 2013. "Identification and inference in a simultaneous equation under alternative information sets and sampling schemes," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 16(1), pages 24-59, February.
  10. Jinyong Hahn & Jerry Hausman, 2002. "A New Specification Test for the Validity of Instrumental Variables," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(1), pages 163-189, January.
  11. Smith, Richard J, 1984. "A Note on Likelihood Ratio Tests for the Independence between a Subset of Stochastic Regressors and Disturbances," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 25(1), pages 263-269, February.
  12. Firmin Doko Tchatoka & Jean‐Marie Dufour, 2014. "Identification‐robust inference for endogeneity parameters in linear structural models," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 17(1), pages 165-187, February.
  13. Dufour, Jean-Marie, 2006. "Monte Carlo tests with nuisance parameters: A general approach to finite-sample inference and nonstandard asymptotics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 443-477, August.
  14. Irwin, Douglas A. & Tervio, Marko, 2002. "Does trade raise income?: Evidence from the twentieth century," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 1-18, October.
  15. Hwang, Hae-Shin, 1980. "Test of Independence between a Subset of Stochastic Regressors and Disturbances," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 21(3), pages 749-760, October.
  16. Smith, Richard J., 1985. "Wald tests for the independence of stochastic variables and disturbance of a single linear stochastic simultaneous equation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 17(1-2), pages 87-90.
  17. Carolina Caetano, 2015. "A Test of Exogeneity Without Instrumental Variables in Models With Bunching," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83(4), pages 1581-1600, July.
  18. Stock, James H & Wright, Jonathan H & Yogo, Motohiro, 2002. "A Survey of Weak Instruments and Weak Identification in Generalized Method of Moments," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(4), pages 518-529, October.
  19. Ruud, Paul A., 2000. "An Introduction to Classical Econometric Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195111644.
  20. Wu, De-Min, 1974. "Alternative Tests of Independence between Stochastic Regressors and Disturbances: Finite Sample Results," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 42(3), pages 529-546, May.
  21. Engle, Robert F., 1982. "A general approach to lagrange multiplier model diagnostics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 83-104, October.
  22. Tchatoka, Firmin Doko, 2015. "Subset Hypotheses Testing And Instrument Exclusion In The Linear Iv Regression," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(06), pages 1192-1228, December.
  23. Farebrother, R W, 1976. "A Remark on the Wu Test," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 44(3), pages 475-477, May.
  24. Revankar, Nagesh S, 1978. "Asymptotic Relative Efficiency Analysis of Certain Tests of Independence in Structural Systems," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 19(1), pages 165-179, February.
  25. Reynolds, Roger A, 1982. "Posterior Odds for the Hypothesis of Independence between Stochastic Regressors and Disturbances," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 23(2), pages 479-490, June.
  26. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G., 1993. "Estimation and Inference in Econometrics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195060119.
  27. Hwang, Hae-shin, 1985. "The equivalence of Hausman and Lagrange Multiplier tests of independence between disturbance and a subset of stochastic regressors," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 17(1-2), pages 83-86.
  28. Revankar, Nagesh S & Hartley, Michael J, 1973. "An Independence Test and Conditional Unbiased Predictions in the Context of Simultaneous Equation Systems," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 14(3), pages 625-631, October.
  29. Richard Blundell & Joel L. Horowitz, 2007. "A Non-Parametric Test of Exogeneity," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 74(4), pages 1035-1058.
  30. Wu, De-Min, 1983. "A remark on a generalized specification test," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 365-370.
  31. Jeong, Jinook & Yoon, Byung, 2007. "The Effect of Pseudo-exogenous Instrumental Variables on Hausman Test," MPRA Paper 9792, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  32. Pesaran, M. Hashem & Smith, Richard J., 1990. "A unified approach to estimation and orthogonality tests in linear single-equation econometric models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1-2), pages 41-66.
  33. Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., 2014. "Quasi-maximum likelihood estimation and testing for nonlinear models with endogenous explanatory variables," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 182(1), pages 226-234.
  34. N. Gregory Mankiw & David Romer & David N. Weil, 1992. "A Contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 107(2), pages 407-437.
  35. Davidson, Russell & Godfrey, Leslie & MacKinnon, James G, 1985. "A Simplified Version of the Differencing Test," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 26(3), pages 639-647, October.
  36. Angrist, Joshua D & Krueger, Alan B, 1995. "Split-Sample Instrumental Variables Estimates of the Return to Schooling," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 13(2), pages 225-235, April.
  37. Nakamura, Alice & Nakamura, Masao, 1981. "On the Relationships among Several Specification Error Tests Presented by Durbin, Wu, and Hausman," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(6), pages 1583-1588, November.
  38. Marcelo J. Moreira, 2003. "A Conditional Likelihood Ratio Test for Structural Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(4), pages 1027-1048, July.
  39. Rivers, Douglas & Vuong, Quang H., 1988. "Limited information estimators and exogeneity tests for simultaneous probit models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 347-366, November.
  40. Hausman, Jerry A. & Taylor, William E., 1981. "A generalized specification test," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 239-245.
  41. Chmelarova, Viera & Hill, R. Carter, 2010. "The Hausman pretest estimator," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 96-99, July.
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:mtl:montec:14-2016. 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: (Sharon BREWER)

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.