Doko Tchatoka, Firmin (2011): Testing for partial exogeneity with weak identification.

PDF
MPRA_paper_39504.pdf Download (507kB)  Preview 
Abstract
We consider the following problem. A structural equation of interest contains two sets of explanatory variables which economic theory predicts may be endogenous. The researcher is interesting in testing the exogeneity of only one of them. Standard exogeneity tests are in general unreliable from the view point of size control to assess such a problem. We develop four alternative tests to address this issue in a convenient way. We provide a characterization of their distributions under both the null hypothesis (level) and the alternative hypothesis (power), with or without identification. We show that the usual chisquares critical values are still applicable even when identification is weak. So, all proposed tests can be described as robust to weak instruments. We also show that test consistency may still hold even if the overall identification fails, provided partial identification is satisfied. We present a Monte Carlo experiment which confirms our theory. We illustrate our theory with the widely considered returns to education example. The results underscore: (1) how the use of standard tests to assess partial exogeneity hypotheses may be misleading, and (2) the relevance of using our procedures when checking for partial exogeneity.
Item Type:  MPRA Paper 

Original Title:  Testing for partial exogeneity with weak identification 
Language:  English 
Keywords:  Subset of endogenous regressors; Generated structural equation; Robustness to weak identification; Consistency 
Subjects:  C  Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C1  Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General > C13  Estimation: General C  Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C5  Econometric Modeling > C51  Model Construction and Estimation C  Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C5  Econometric Modeling > C52  Model Evaluation, Validation, and Selection C  Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C1  Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General > C12  Hypothesis Testing: General C  Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C3  Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models ; Multiple Variables > C30  General 
Item ID:  39504 
Depositing User:  Firmin Doko Tchatoka 
Date Deposited:  17 Jun 2012 01:06 
Last Modified:  30 Sep 2019 11:26 
References:  Anderson, T. W., Rubin, H., 1949. Estimation of the parameters of a single equation in a complete system of stochastic equations. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 20, 46–63. Andrews, D.W. K., Stock, 2006. Inferencewith weak instruments. In: R. Blundell,W. Newey, T. Pearson, eds, Advances in Economics and Econometrics, Theory and Applications, 9th Congress of the Econometric Society Vol. 3. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K., chapter 6. Bekker, P., 1994. Alternative approximations to the distributions of instrumental variable estimators. Econometrica 62, 657–681. Card, D., 1995. Using geographic variation in college proximity to estimate the return to schooling.. University of Toronto Press: in L. N. Christo. des, E. K. Grant, and R. Swidinsky (Eds.), Aspects of Labour Market Behaviour: Essays in Honour of John Vanderkamp. Choi, I., Phillips, P. C. B., 1992. Asymptotic and finite sample distribution theory for IV estimators and tests in partially identified structural equations. Journal of Econometrics 51, 113–150. Davidson, R., Mackinnon, J., 1993. Econometric Theory and Methods. Oxford University Press, New York, New York. Doko Tchatoka, F. , 2011. Subset hypotheses testing and instrument exclusion in the linear IV regression. Technical report, School of Economics and Finance, University of Tasmania Hobart, Australia. Doko Tchatoka, F., Dufour, J.M., 2011. Exogeneity tests and estimation in IV regressions. Technical report, Department of Economics, McGill University, Canada Montreal, Canada. Dufour, J.M. , 2003. Identification, weak instruments and statistical inference in econometrics. Canadian Journal of Economics 36(4), 767–808. Dufour, J.M., Hsiao, C., 2008. Identification. In: L. E. Blume, S. N. Durlauf, eds, The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics 2nd edn. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, Hampshire, England. forthcoming. Dufour, J.M. , Taamouti, M. , 2005. Projectionbased statistical inference in linear structural models with possibly weak instruments. Econometrica 73(4), 1351–1365. Dufour, J.M., Taamouti,M., 2007. Further results on projectionbased inference in IV regressionswith weak, collinear or missing instruments. Journal of Econometrics 139(1), 133–153. Durbin, J., 1954. Errors in variables. Review of the International Statistical Institute 22, 23–32. Engle, R. F., Hendry, D. F., Richard, J.F., 1982. Exogeneity. Econometrica 51, 277–304. Guggenberger, P., 2010. The impact of a Hausman pretest on the size of the hypothesis tests. Econometric Theory 156, 337–343. Guggenberger, P., Smith, R., 2005. Generalized empirical likelihood estimators and tests under partial, weak and strong identification. Econometric Theory 21, 667–709. Hahn, J., Ham, J., Moon, H. R., 2010. The Hausman test and weak instruments. Journal of Econometrics 160, 289–299. Hansen, C., Hausman, J., Newey,W., 2008. Estimation with many instrumental variables. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 26(4), 398–422. Hausman, J., 1978. Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica 46, 1251–1272. Kiviet, J. F., Niemczyk, J., 2007. The asymptotic and finitesample distributions of OLS and simple IV in simultaneous equations. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis 51, 3296–3318. Kleibergen, F., 2002. Pivotal statistics for testing structural parameters in instrumental variables regression. Econometrica 70(5), 1781–1803. Kleibergen, F., 2004. Testing subsets of structural coefficients in the IV regression model. Review of Economics and Statistics 86, 418–423. Kleibergen, F., 2005. Testing parameters in GMM without assuming that they are identified. Econometrica 73, 1103–1124. Moreira, M. J., 2003. A conditional likelihood ratio test for structural models. Econometrica 71(4), 1027– 1048. Nelson, C., Startz, R., 1990a. The distribution of the instrumental variable estimator and its tratio when the instrument is a poor one. The Journal of Business 63, 125–140. Nelson, C., Startz, R., 1990b. Some further results on the exact small properties of the instrumental variable estimator. Econometrica 58, 967–976. Phillips, P. C. B., 1989. Partially identified econometric models. Econometric Theory 5, 181–240. Revankar, N. S. , Hartley, M. J. , 1973. An independence test and conditional unbiased predictions in the context of simultaneous equation systems. International Economic Review 14, 625–631. Staiger, D. , Stock, J. H. , 1997. Instrumental variables regression with weak instruments. Econometrica 65(3), 557–586. Stock, J. H., Wright, J. H., 2000. GMM with weak identification. Econometrica 68, 1055–1096. Stock, J. H., Wright, J. H., Yogo, M., 2002. A survey of weak instruments and weak identification in generalized method of moments. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 20(4), 518–529. Wu, D.M., 1973. Alternative tests of independence between stochastic regressors and disturbances. Econometrica 41, 733–750. Wu, D.M., 1974. Alternative tests of independence between stochastic regressors and disturbances: Finite sample results. Econometrica 42, 529–546. 
URI:  https://mpra.ub.unimuenchen.de/id/eprint/39504 