IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Measuring the Slowly Evolving Trend in US Inflation with Professional Forecasts

  • James M. Nason

    ()

    (North Carolina State University)

  • Gregor W. Smith

    ()

    (Queen's University)

Much research studies US inflation history with a trend-cycle model with unobserved components. A key feature of this model is that the trend may be viewed as the Fed's evolving inflation target or long-horizon expected inflation. We provide a new way to measure the slowly evolving trend and the cycle (or inflation gap), based on forecasts from the Survey of Professional Forecasters. These forecasts may be treated either as rational expectations or as adjusting to those with sticky information. We find considerable evidence of inflation-gap persistence and some evidence of implicit sticky information. But statistical tests show we cannot reconcile these two widely used perspectives on US inflation and professional forecasts, the unobserved-components model and the sticky-information model.

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://qed.econ.queensu.ca/working_papers/papers/qed_wp_1316.pdf
File Function: First version 2013
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Queen's University, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 1316.

as
in new window

Length: 43 pages
Date of creation: Oct 2013
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:qed:wpaper:1316
Contact details of provider: Postal: Kingston, Ontario, K7L 3N6
Phone: (613) 533-2250
Fax: (613) 533-6668
Web page: http://qed.econ.queensu.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. Carlos Capistrán & Allan Timmermann, 2009. "Disagreement and Biases in Inflation Expectations," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 41(2-3), pages 365-396, 03.
  2. Khan, Hashmat & Zhu, Zhenhua, 2006. "Estimates of the Sticky-Information Phillips Curve for the United States," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 38(1), pages 195-207, February.
  3. Sharon Kozicki & P. A. Tinsley, 2012. "Effective Use of Survey Information in Estimating the Evolution of Expected Inflation," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 44(1), pages 145-169, 02.
  4. N. Gregory Mankiw & Ricardo Reis, 2001. "Sticky Information Versus Sticky Prices: A Proposal to Replace the New Keynesian Phillips Curve," NBER Working Papers 8290, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Ricardo Reis, 2005. "Inattentive Producers," 2005 Meeting Papers 290, Society for Economic Dynamics.
  6. James H. Stock & Mark W. Watson, 2007. "Erratum to "Why Has U.S. Inflation Become Harder to Forecast?"," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 39(7), pages 1849-1849, October.
  7. Olivier Coibion, 2007. "Testing the Sticky Information Phillips Curve," Working Papers 61, Department of Economics, College of William and Mary.
  8. Spencer D. Krane, 2011. "Professional Forecasters' View of Permanent and Transitory Shocks to GDP," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 184-211, January.
  9. Andrade, Philippe & Le Bihan, Hervé, 2013. "Inattentive professional forecasters," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(8), pages 967-982.
  10. Michael Kiley, 2005. "A Quantitative Comparison Of Sticky-Price And Sticky-Information Models Of Price Setting," Computing in Economics and Finance 2005 183, Society for Computational Economics.
  11. Yuriy Gorodnichenko & Olivier Coibion, 2010. "What can survey forecasts tell us about informational rigidities?," 2010 Meeting Papers 277, Society for Economic Dynamics.
  12. Keane, Michael P & Runkle, David E, 1990. "Testing the Rationality of Price Forecasts: New Evidence from Panel Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(4), pages 714-35, September.
  13. Olivier Coibion & Yuriy Gorodnichenko, 2012. "Information Rigidity and the Expectations Formation Process; A Simple Framework and New Facts," IMF Working Papers 12/296, International Monetary Fund.
  14. Patton, Andrew J. & Timmermann, Allan, 2010. "Why do forecasters disagree? Lessons from the term structure of cross-sectional dispersion," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(7), pages 803-820, October.
  15. Hashmat Khan & Zhenhua Zhu, 2002. "Estimates of the Sticky-Information Phillips Curve for the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom," Working Papers 02-19, Bank of Canada.
  16. Christopher D. Carroll, 2003. "Macroeconomic Expectations Of Households And Professional Forecasters," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 118(1), pages 269-298, February.
  17. Edge, Rochelle M & Gürkaynak, Refet S., 2010. "How Useful Are Estimated DSGE Model Forecasts for Central Bankers?," CEPR Discussion Papers 8158, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  18. James H. Stock & Mark W. Watson, 2007. "Why Has U.S. Inflation Become Harder to Forecast?," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 39(s1), pages 3-33, 02.
  19. Devereux, Michael B & Yetman, James, 2001. "Predetermined Prices and the Persistent Effects of Money on Output," CEPR Discussion Papers 2917, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  20. Clark, Todd E. & Davig, Troy, 2011. "Decomposing the declining volatility of long-term inflation expectations," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 981-999, July.
  21. Elmar Mertens, 2011. "Measuring the level and uncertainty of trend inflation," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2011-42, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  22. Beveridge, Stephen & Nelson, Charles R., 1981. "A new approach to decomposition of economic time series into permanent and transitory components with particular attention to measurement of the `business cycle'," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 151-174.
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:qed:wpaper:1316. 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: (Mark Babcock)

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.