IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mts/wpaper/200503.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Detecting Neglected Parameter Heterogeneity with Chow Tests

Author

Listed:
  • Joachim Zietz

Abstract

The paper demonstrates through a number of Monte-Carlo experiments that, for the type of cross-section data sets typically encountered in applied economics, Chow tests on sorted variations of the data matrix can detect neglected parameter heterogeneity. The paper focuses on heterogeneity in the behavioral responses of economic actors that belong to different economically meaningful groups, such as the young, middle-aged, and old. Since the suggested methodology is easy to implement yet powerful, its routine use by applied economists would be desirable given the very significant estimation bias that can result from neglecting parameter heterogeneity.

Suggested Citation

  • Joachim Zietz, 2005. "Detecting Neglected Parameter Heterogeneity with Chow Tests," Working Papers 200503, Middle Tennessee State University, Department of Economics and Finance.
  • Handle: RePEc:mts:wpaper:200503
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://capone.mtsu.edu/berc/working/WP-March%202005-Zietz.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
    2. William A. Brock & Steven N. Durlauf, 2001. "Discrete Choice with Social Interactions," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 68(2), pages 235-260.
    3. Zietz, Joachim, 2001. " Heteroskedasticity and Neglected Parameter Heterogeneity," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 63(2), pages 263-273, May.
    4. Breusch, T S & Pagan, A R, 1979. "A Simple Test for Heteroscedasticity and Random Coefficient Variation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(5), pages 1287-1294, September.
    5. Godfrey, L G & Orme, C D, 1994. "The Sensitivity of Some General Checks to Omitted Variables in the Linear Model," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 35(2), pages 489-506, May.
    6. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G, 1992. "A New Form of the Information Matrix Test," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(1), pages 145-157, January.
    7. Chesher, Andrew D, 1984. "Testing for Neglected Heterogeneity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 865-872, July.
    8. Thursby, Jerry G., 1992. "A comparison of several exact and approximate tests for structural shift under heteroscedasticity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1-3), pages 363-386.
    9. Alastair Hall, 1987. "The Information Matrix Test for the Linear Model," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 54(2), pages 257-263.
    10. White, Halbert, 1982. "Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Misspecified Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 1-25, January.
    11. Chesher, Andrew & Spady, Richard, 1991. "Asymptotic Expansions of the Information Matrix Test Statistic," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 787-815, May.
    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. Ann-Sofie Isaksson, 2011. "Social divisions and institutions: assessing institutional parameter variation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 147(3), pages 331-357, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Parameter Heterogeneity; Chow Test; Cross-Section Data; Monte-Carlo Study;

    JEL classification:

    • C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models
    • C52 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Evaluation, Validation, and Selection

    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:mts:wpaper:200503. 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: (E. Anthon Eff). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/efmtsus.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.