This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Three Models of Retirement: Computational Complexity Versus Predictive Validity

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Robin L. Lumsdaine
James H. Stock
David A. Wise

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

Empirical analysis often raises questions of approximation to underlying individual behavior. Closer approximation may require more complex statistical specifications, On the other hand, more complex specifications may presume computational facility that is beyond the grasp of most real people and therefore less consistent with the actual rules that govern their behavior, even though economic theory may push analysts to increasingly more complex specifications. Thus the issue is not only whether more complex models are worth the effort, but also whether they are better. We compare the in-sample and out-of-sample predictive performance of three models of retirement -- "option value," dynamic programming, and probit -- to determine which of the retirement rules most closely matches retirement behavior in a large firm. The primary measure of predictive validity is the correspondence between the model predictions and actual retirement under the firm's temporary early retirement window plan. The "option value" and dynamic programming models are considerably more successful than the less complex probit model in approximating the rules individuals use to make retirement decisions, but the more complex dynamic programming rule approximates behavior no better than the simpler option value rule.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w3558.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: Access to the full text is generally limited to series subscribers, however if the top level domain of the client browser is in a developing country or transition economy free access is provided. More information about subscriptions and free access is available at http://www.nber.org/wwphelp.html.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Publisher Info
Paper provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Working Papers with number 3558.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: Nov 1992
Date of revision:
Publication status: published as Robin L. Lumsdaine, James H. Stock, David A. Wise. "Three Models of Retirement: Computational Complexity versus Predictive Validity," in David A. Wise, editor, "Topics in the Economics of Aging" University of Chicago Press (1992)
Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:3558

Note: AG
Contact details of provider:
Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.
Phone: 617-868-3900
Email:
Web page: http://www.nber.org
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: ().

Related research
Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Burtless, Gary, 1986. "Social Security, Unanticipated Benefit Increases, and the Timing of Retirement," Review of Economic Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 53(5), pages 781-805, October. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Berkovec, James & Stern, Steven, 1991. "Job Exit Behavior of Older Men," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(1), pages 189-210, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Alan L. Gustman & Thomas L. Steinmeier, 1986. "A Structural Retirement Model," NBER Working Papers 1237, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Gustman, Alan L & Steinmeier, Thomas L, 1986. "A Structural Retirement Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(3), pages 555-84, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Laurence J. Kotlikoff & David A. Wise, 1987. "The Incentive Effects of Private Pension Plans," NBER Chapters, in: Issues in Pension Economics, pages 283-340 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? IDEAS also computes impact factors for journals and working paper series.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-7.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.