Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/171919
Authors: 
Quineche, Ricardo
Rodríguez, Gabriel
Year of Publication: 
2017
Citation: 
[Journal:] Econometrics [ISSN:] 2225-1146 [Volume:] 5 [Year:] 2017 [Issue:] 2 [Pages:] 1-10
Abstract: 
This is a simulation-based warning note for practitioners who use the MGLS unit root tests in the context of structural change using different selection lag length criteria. With T=100 , we find severe oversize problems when using some criteria, while other criteria produce an undersizing behavior. In view of this dilemma, we do not recommend using these tests. While such behavior tends to disappear when T=250 , it is important to note that most empirical applications use smaller sample sizes such as T=100 or T=150 . The ADFGLS test does not present an oversizing or undersizing problem. The only disadvantage of the ADFGLS test arises in the presence of MA(1) negative correlation, in which case the MGLS tests are preferable, but in all other cases they are very undersized. When there is a break in the series, selecting the breakpoint using the Supremum method greatly improves the results relative to the Infimum method.
Subjects: 
unit root tests
structural change
truncation lag
GLS detrending
information criteria
sequential general to specific t-sig method
JEL: 
C22
C52
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Document Type: 
Article

Files in This Item:
File
Size
279.73 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.