Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorGumbau-Brisa, Fabiàen_US
dc.contributor.authorLie, Dennyen_US
dc.contributor.authorOlivei, Giovanni P.en_US
dc.description.abstractIn their 2010 comment (which we refer to as CS10), Cogley and Sbordone argue that: (1) our estimates are not entirely closed form, and hence are arbitrary; (2) we cannot guarantee that our estimates are valid, while their estimates (Cogley and Sbordone 2008, henceforth CS08) always are; and (3) the estimates in CS08, in terms of goodness of fit, are just as good as other, much different estimates in our paper. We show in this reply that the exact closed-form estimates are virtually the same as the quasi closed-form estimates. Our estimates are consistent with the implicit assumptions underlying the first-stage VAR used to form expectations, while the estimates in CS08 are not. As a result, the estimates in CS08 point towards model misspecification. We also rebut the goodness of fit comparisons in CS10, and provide a more credible exercise that illustrates that our estimates outperform CS08's estimates.en_US
dc.publisher|aFederal Reserve Bank of Boston |cBoston, MAen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries|aWorking paper series // Federal Reserve Bank of Boston |x11-4en_US
dc.subject.keywordclosed formen_US
dc.subject.keywordmodel-consistent expectationsen_US
dc.subject.keywordNew Keynesian Phillips curveen_US
dc.subject.keywordforward-looking Euler equationen_US
dc.subject.keywordtime-varying trend inflationen_US
dc.titleA response to Cogley and Sbordone's comment on Closed-form estimates of the new Keynesian Phillips curve with time-varying trend inflationen_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US

Files in This Item:
311.35 kB

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