Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-wvcvf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-21T11:56:35.957Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Asymptotically Optimal Tests Using Limited Information and Testing for Exogeneity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Richard J. Smith
Richard J. Smith
Affiliation:
Gonville and Caius College and University of Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

By appropriately partitioning the joint hypothesis of weak exogeneity and the maintained overidentifying restrictions in the linear dynamic simultaneous equations model and showing that the component subhypotheses are separable, asymptotically optimal tests for the weak exogeneity hypothesis may be constructed using limited information statistics. A necessary and sufficient condition for the separability of parametric hypotheses of the mixed implicit function and constraint equation type is derived which generalizes conditions previously obtained in the literature. Consequently, limited and full information procedures for testing the weak exogeneity hypothesis are asymptotically equivalent. The impact of these results for testing strong exogeneity in the linear dynamic simultaneous equations model is also explored.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Econometric Theory , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , March 1994 , pp. 53 - 69
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1.Aitchison, J.Large-sample restricted parametric tests. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society (Series B) 24 (1962): 234–250.Google Scholar
2.Anderson, T.W.The Statistical Analysis of Time Series. New York: Wiley, 1971.Google Scholar
3.Cox, D.R. & Hinkley, D.V.. Theoretical Statistics. London: Chapman Hall, 1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Darroch, J.N. & Silvey, S.D.. On testing more than one hypothesis. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 34 (1963): 555–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Durbin, J.Errors in variables. Revièw of the International Statistical Institute 22 (1954): 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Engle, R.F.A general approach to Lagrange multiplier model diagnostics. Journal of Econometrics 20 (1982): 83–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Engle, R.F. Wald, likelihood ratio, and Lagrange multiplier tests. In Griliches, Z. & Intrilligator, M.D. (eds.), Handbook of Econometrics, Vol. 2, Chapter 13. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1984.Google Scholar
8.Engle, R.F. & Hendry, D.F.. Testing superexaogeneity and invariance in regression models. Journal of Econometrics 56 (1993): 119–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Engle, R.F., Hendry, D.F. & Richard, J-F.. Exogeneity. Econometrica 51 (1983): 277–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Gourieroux, C. & Monfort, A.. A general framework for testing a null hypothesis in a “mixed form.” Econometric Theory 5 (1989): 63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Hausman, J.A.Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica 46 (1978): 1251–1271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Hogg, R.V.On the resolution of statistical hypotheses. Journal of the American Statistical Association 56 (1961): 978–989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Holly, A. A simple procedure for testing whether a subset of endogenous variables is independent of the disturbance term in a structural equation. Cahiers de Récherche Economique No. 8209, Université de Lausanne, 1982.Google Scholar
14.Hwang, H-S. Tests of the independence between a subset of stochastic regressors and disturbances. International Economic Review 21 (1980): 749–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Mizon, G.E.Inferential procedures in non-linear models: an application in a UK industrial cross section study of factor substitution and returns to scale. Econometrica 45 (1977): 1221–1242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Monfort, A. & Rabemananjara, R.. From a VAR model to a structural model, with an application to the wage-price spiral. Journal of Applied Econometrics 5 (1990): 203–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Pesaran, M.H. & Smith, R.J.. A unified approach to estimation and orthogonality tests in linear single equation econometric models. Journal of Econometrics 44 (1990): 41–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Rao, C.R. & Mitra, S.K.. Generalized Inverse of Matrices and its Applications. New York: Wiley, 1971.Google Scholar
19.Richard, J-F. Models with several regimes and changes in exogeneity. Review of Economic Studies 47 (1980): 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Richard, J-F. Classical and Bayesian inference in incomplete simultaneous equation models. In Hendry, D.F. & Wallis, K.F. (eds.), Econometrics and Quantitative Economics, Chapter 4. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1984.Google Scholar
21.Sargan, J.D.Some tests of dynamic specification for a single equation. Econometrica 48 (1980): 879–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Savin, N.E.The Bonferroni and the Scheffé multiple comparison procedures. Review of Economic Studies 47 (1980): 255–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Seber, G.A.F.The linear hypothesis and large sample theory. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 35 (1964): 773–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24.Smith, R.J.On the classical nature of the Wu-Hausman statistics for the independence of stochastic regressors and disturbance. Economics Letters 11 (1983): 357–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Smith, R.J.Wald tests for the independence of stochastic variables and disturbance of a single linear stochastic simultaneous equation. Economics Letters 17 (1985): 87–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Smith, R.J. & Blundell, R.W.. An exogeneity test for a simultaneous equation Tobit model with an application to labour supply. Econometrica 54 (1986): 679–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27.Szroeter, J.Generalized Wald methods for testing nonlinear implicit and overidentifying restrictions. Econometrica 51 (1983): 335–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.Wu, D-M.Alternative tests of independence between stochastic regressors and disturbance. Econometrica 41 (1973): 733–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar