AtiqurRehman, AtiqurRehman and Zaman, Asad (2009): Impact of Model Specification Decisions on Unit Root Tests.

PDF
MPRA_paper_19963.pdf Download (214kB)  Preview 
Abstract
Performance of unit tests depends on several specification decisions prior to their application e.g., whether or not to include a deterministic trend. Since there is no standard procedure for making such decisions, therefore the practitioners routinely make several arbitrary specification decisions. In Monte Carlo studies, the design of DGP supports these decisions, but for real data, such specification decisions are often unjustifiable and sometimes incompatible with data. We argue that the problems posed by choice of initial specification are quite complex and the existing voluminous literature on this issue treats only certain superficial aspects of this choice. We also show how these initial specifications affect the performance of unit root tests and argue that Monte Carlo studies should include these preliminary decisions to arrive at a better yardstick for evaluating such tests.
Item Type:  MPRA Paper 

Original Title:  Impact of Model Specification Decisions on Unit Root Tests 
Language:  English 
Keywords:  model specification, trend stationary, difference stationary 
Subjects:  C  Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C1  Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General > C15  Statistical Simulation Methods: General C  Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C2  Single Equation Models ; Single Variables > C22  TimeSeries Models ; Dynamic Quantile Regressions ; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models ; Diffusion Processes C  Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C0  General > C01  Econometrics 
Item ID:  19963 
Depositing User:  Atiqur Rehman 
Date Deposited:  13. Jan 2010 14:37 
Last Modified:  12. Feb 2013 11:11 
References:  Andreou, E. and A. Spanos, 2003, Statistical Adequacy and the Testing of Trend versus Difference Stationarity, Econometric Reviews 223, 217 – 237. Ayat, L. and P. Burridge, (2000), Unit root tests in the presence of uncertainty about the nonstochastic trend, Journal of Econometrics 95, 7196. Banerjee, A., R. Lumsdaine and J. Stock, 1992. Recursive and sequential tests of unitroot and the trend break hypotheses: theory and international evidence. Journal of Business Economics and Statistics, 10, 271287. Campbell, J., and P. Perron, 1991, Pitfalls and opportunities: what macroeconomists should know about unit roots? NBER Macroeconomics Annual 6, 141–201. Cati, R., M. Garcia and P. Perron, 1999, Unit roots in the presence of abrupt governmental interventions with an application to Brazilian data. Journal of Applied Econometrics 14, 27–56. Cavaliere, G., 2005, Unit Root Tests under TimeVarying Variances. Econometric Reviews, 23, 259 – 292. Christiano, L., 1992, Searching for a break in GNP. Journal of Business Economics and Statistics, 10, 237250. Cocharane., H. 1987., "A Critique of the Application of Unit Root Tests," mimeo, University of Chicago. Dickey, D. and W. Fuller, 1979. Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 427431. Dickey, D. and W. Fuller, 1981. Likelihood Ratio Statistics for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root, Econometrica, 49, 10571072. Diebold, F. and A. Senhadji, 1996. The Uncertain Root in Real GNP: Comment. American Economic Review, 86, 12911298. Elder J. and P. Kennedy, 2001, Testing for Unit Roots: What Should Students Be Taught? Journal of Economic Education, 322, 13746. Elliott, G., T. Rothenberg, and J. Stock, J. H. (1996), Efficient Tests for an Autoregressive Unit Root, Econometrica 64, 813–836. Enders, W., 2004, Applied Econometric Time Series, Second Edition. John Wiley & Sons, United States. Hacker. R. and . A. HatemiJ, 2006, The Properties of Procedures Dealing with Uncertainty about Intercept and Deterministic Trend in Unit Root Testing, unpublished manuscript Hamilton J., 1994, Time Series Analysis. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. Holden, D. and Perman, R. (1994) “Unit roots and cointegration for the economist.” In B. B. Rao, (Ed) Cointegration for the Applied Economist, New York, pp. 47112 Kilian, L. and L. Ohanian, 2002, Unit Roots, Trend Breaks and Transitory Dynamics: A Macroeconomic Perspective. Macroeconomic Dynamics, 6, 614631. Kim, T., S. Leybourne and P. Newbold, 2002. Unit root tests with a break in innovation variance. Journal of Econometrics, 109, 365–387. Libanio, G. 2005, Unit roots in macroeconomic time series: theory, implications and evidence. nova Economia Belo Horizonte15, 3145176 Loretan, M. and P. Phillips, 1994, Testing covariance stationarity under moment condition failure with an application to common stock returns. Journal of Empirical Finance 1, 211–248 Lumsdaine, R. and D. Papell, 1997. Multiple trend breaks and the unit root hypothesis. Review of Economics and Statistics, 79, 212218. MacKinnon, J., (1991), Critical Values for Cointegration Tests, in: Engle, R. and Granger, C. (Eds), Longrun Economic Relationships, Readings in Cointegration, Oxford University Press, pp 267276. McConnell, M. and P. Quiros, 2000. Output fluctuations in the United States, what has changed since the early 1980s? American Economic Review. 90, 1464–1476. Murray, C. and C. Nelson, 2000. The uncertain trend in U.S. GDP. Journal of Monetary Economics 46, 79–95. Nelson, C.R & Kang, H., 1984. ‘Pitfalls in the Use of Time as an Explanatory Variable in Regression’, Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 2(1), pages 7382, . Nelson & Kang, Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 1984, pp 7382 Nelson, C. R. and C. I. Plossor, 1982, Trend sand random walks in macroeconomics time series: some evidence and implications. Journal of Monetary Economics 10, 139–162. Ng, S. and P. Perron, 2001, Lag length selection and the construction of unit root tests with good size and power. Econometrica 69, 1519–1554. Nunes, L., C. Kuan and P. Newbold 1997. Spurious regression. Econometric Theory, 11, 73649. Pagan, A. R., Schwert, G. W. (1990). Testing for covariance stationarity in stock market data. Economics letters 33, 165–170. Papell, D. H. and R. Prodan, 2003. Restricted Structural Change and the Unit Root Hypothesis. Working paper, University of Houston Perron, P., 1988, Trends and random walks in macroeconomic time series. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 12 (12): 297332. Perron, P., 1989, The great crash, the oil price shock and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica, 57, 13611401. Perron, P., 1990, Testing for a unit root in a time series with a changing mean. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics (8) 153162. Perron, P., 2003. Comment on "Statistical Adequacy and the Testing of Trend Versus Difference Stationarity" by Andreou and Spanos (Number 1., Econometric Reviews, 22, 3, 239245 Perron, P. 2006, Dealing with Structural Breaks, Mimeo forthcoming in the Handbook of Econometrics, Econometric Theory. Rudebusch, G., 1993, The Uncertain Unit Root in Real GNP. The American Economic Review, 83, 264272. Said, S. and D. Dickey, 1984, Testing for unit roots in autoregressive moving average models of unknown order. Biometrika, 71, 599607. Spanos A. and Anya McGuirk, 2006. Revisiting the foundations of unit root testing: why the AR(1). model does not nest the unit root, Virginia Tech working paper series van Dijk, D., D.R. Osborn, and M. Sensier, 2002. Changes in variability of the business cycle in the G7 countries, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Econometric Institute Report EI 200228. Watson, M. W. 1999. Explaining the increased variability in longterm interest rates. Richmond Economic Quarterly, 85, 71–96. Zivot, E. and D. Andrews, 1992, Further evidence on the great crash, the oil price shock and the unit root hypothesis. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 10, 251270. 
URI:  https://mpra.ub.unimuenchen.de/id/eprint/19963 