Sunday, October 7, 2012

Dancing With the Econometricians

Let's talk about the two-step. Not the tango or the polka. The two-step!

More specifically let's talk about a particular two-step estimator that we use all of the time in econometrics. I want to clear up some misconceptions that I seem to encounter all too frequently when I read empirical "applied" papers.

Why is it that some people insist on using the term "Two Stage Least Squares" inappropriately? 

Let me explain what I mean.

Tuesday, October 2, 2012

Congratulations!

Congratulations to Ryan Godwin for successfully defending his Ph.D. dissertation yesterday. Ryan's dissertation was titled, "Econometric Analysis of Non-Standard Count Data", and you can find the abstract on the notice for his defense here.
 
Ryan is now on faculty in the Department of Economics at U. Manitoba.

I'm looking forward to working with Ryan in the future.
 
 
© 2012, David E. Giles

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

My "Must Read" List

I have to confess that the number of items on my list of papers that I really must read (very soon) is rather large. My excuse is the same as everyone else's - too many papers, too little time. However, here's a small selection of of some of the papers that I've added to that list recently:

Monday, September 24, 2012

The Journal of Econometric Methods

The first issue of the Journal of Econometric Methods is available online, and you can register for a FREE trial access if your library doesn't already subscribe to a package that includes this journal.

Edited by Jason Abrevaya, Bo Honoré, Atsushi Inoue, Jack Porter, and Jeff Wooldridge, the Journal of Econometric Methods promises to be a "must read" publication. For now, issues will be published once a year.

Here's an extract from the "Editorial" of the first issue:

Sunday, September 23, 2012

Different Views on Significance Testing

Econ Journal Watch is an online resource that provides "scholarly comments on academic economics". If you don't follow it, or at least browse it from time to time, then I urge you to do so. Yes, that includes econometricians!
 
In the September 2012 issue you'll find a piece by Thomas Mayer. It's titled, "Ziliak & McCloskey's Criticisms of Significance Tests: An Assessment", and you can download a pdf version of the full article for free.

 Here's the abstract of his article:

Sunday, September 16, 2012

Confidence Regions for Regression Coefficients

Let’s consider the usual linear regression model, with the full set of assumptions:


                     y = Xβ + ε ;    ε ~ N[0 , σ2In] , (1)

where X is a non-random (n × k) matrix with full column rank.

Recall that, under our usual set of assumptions for the linear regression model, the OLS coefficient estimator,  b = (X'X)-1X'y, has the following sampling distribution:

               b ~ N[β ,σ2(X'X)-1] .          (2)

From the form of the covariance matrix for the b vector, we see that, in general:

(i) The leading diagonal elements will not all be the same, so each element of b will usually have a different variance.

(ii) There is no reason for the off-diagonal elements of the covariance matrix to be zero in value, so the elements of the b vector will be pair-wise correlated with each other.

You'll also remember that when we develop a confidence interval for one of the elements of β, say βi, we start off with the following probability statement:

                  Pr.[-tc < (bi - βi) / s.e.(bi) < tc] = (1 - α) ,        (3)

where tc is chosen to ensure that the desired probability of (1 - α) is achieved. Equation (3) is then re-written (equivalently) as:

                 Pr.[βi - tcs.e.(bi) < bi < βi +tcs.e.(bi)] = (1 - α),       (4)

and we then manipulate the event whose probability of occurrence we were interested in, until we ended up with the following random interval which, if constructed many, many times, would cover the true (but unobserved) βi, 100(1 - α)% of the time:

                 [bi - tcs.e.(bi) , bi + tcs.e.(bi)] .          (5)

Notice that this interval is centered at bi. Making the interval symmetric about this point ensures that we get the shortest (and hence most informative) interval for any fixed values of n, the sample size, and α. (See here and here for more details.)

Now, suppose that we want to generalize the concept of a confidence interval (that applies to a single element of b) to that of a confidence region, that can be associated with two elements of b at once.

Saturday, September 15, 2012

Spherically Distributed Errors in Regression Models

Let's think about the standard linear regression model that we encounter in our introductory econometrics courses:
 
                                       y = Xβ + ε .                      (1)
 
By writing the model in this form, we've already made two assumptions about the stochastic relationship between the dependent variable, y, and the regressors (the columns of the X matrix). First, the relationship is a parametric one - hence the presence of the coefficient vector, β; and second, the relationship is a linear one. That's to say, the model is linear in these parameters. If it wasn't, we wouldn't be able to write the model in the form given in equation (1).
 
However, the model isn't fully specified until we lay out any assumptions that are being made about the regressors and the random error term, ε. Now, let's consider the full set of (rather stringent) assumptions that we usually begin with:

Friday, September 14, 2012

Dummy Variables - Again!

In a previous post (here) I had a few things to say about the dummy variables that we often use in regression analysis. I'm currently making changes to a related paper of mine that's at the "revise and re-submit" stage with a journal. So, to get further feedback, I presented the material in my department's Brown Bag seminar series earlier this week.

If you're interested, you can download the slides for that presentation from here.


© 2012, David E. Giles

Thursday, September 13, 2012

Granger Causality Testing With Panel Data

Some of my previous posts on testing for Granger causality (for example, here, here, and here) have drawn quite a lot of interest. That being the case, I'm sure that readers of this blog will enjoy reading a new paper by two of my colleagues, and a former graduate student of theirs.

The paper, by Weichun Chen, Judith Clark, and Nilanjana Roy is titled "Health and Wealth: Short Panel Granger Causality Tests for Developing Countries". Here's the abstract of their paper:

Monday, September 10, 2012

Guy Medal for David Firth

At the recent annual conference of the Royal Statistical Society, the Guy Medal, in Silver, was awarded to Professor David Firth, Head of the Department of Statistics at of the University of Warwick.

Alert readers of this blog will recall David's name appearing in a recent post about bias correction. David, a Fellow of the British Academy, was previously awarded the Guy Medal, in Bronze, in 1998.

You can find a full list of all winners of the Guy medals, in Gold, Silver, and Bronze, here. Econometricians will see lost of very familiar names on the lists!


© 2012, David E. Giles