Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-fvjsw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T03:51:11.844Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Alternative Bias Approximations in Regressions with a Lagged-Dependent Variable

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Jan F. Kiviet and
Garry D.A. Phillips
Jan F. Kiviet
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam
Garry D.A. Phillips
Affiliation:
University of Bristol and University of Exeter
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The small sample bias of the least-squares coefficient estimator is examined in the dynamic multiple linear regression model with normally distributed whitenoise disturbances and an arbitrary number of regressors which are all exogenous except for the one-period lagged-dependent variable. We employ large sample (T → ∞) and small disturbance (σ → 0) asymptotic theory and derive and compare expressions to O(T−1) and to O(σ2), respectively, for the bias in the least-squares coefficient vector. In some simulations and for an empirical example, we examine the mean (squared) error of these expressions and of corrected estimation procedures that yield estimates that are unbiased to O(T−l) and to O(σ2), respectively. The large sample approach proves to be superior, easily applicable, and capable of generating more efficient and less biased estimators.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Econometric Theory , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , January 1993, pp. 62 - 80
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

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.Grubb, D. & Symons, J.. Bias in regressions with a lagged dependent variable. Econometric Theory 3 (1987): 371–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Gujarati, D.N.Basic Econometrics, 2nd ed.New York: McGraw-Hill, 1989.Google Scholar
3.Kadane, J.B.Comparison of k-class estimators when the disturbances are small. Econometrica 39 (1971): 723–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Kiviet, J.F. & Phillips, G.D.A.. Bias correction in lagged dependent variable models. Report AE 17/86, University of Amsterdam (presented at ESEM-1986, Budapest).Google Scholar
5.Kiviet, J.F. & Phillips, G.D.A.. Bias reduction in a dynamic regression model: a comparison of jackknifed and bias corrected least squares estimators. Report AE 11/88, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
6.Maasoumi, E.On the relevance of finite sample distribution theory. Econometric Reviews 2 (1983): 61–69.Google Scholar
7.Nagar, A.L.The bias and moment matrix of the general k-class estimators of the parameters in simultaneous equations. Econometrica 27 (1959): 575–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Maekawa, K.Edgeworth expansion for the OLS estimator in a time series regression model. Econometric Theory 1 (1985): 223–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Phillips, P.C.B. & Park, J.Y.. On the formulation of Wald tests of nonlinear restrictions. Econometrica 56 (1988): 1065–1083.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Taylor, W.E.On the relevance of finite sample distribution theory. Econometric Reviews 2 (1983): 1–39 (followed by discussion: 41–84).CrossRefGoogle Scholar