IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/jecome/v4y2015i1p9n7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Percentile and Percentile-t Bootstrap Confidence Intervals: A Practical Comparison

Author

Listed:
  • Elias Christopher J.

    (Department of Economics, 703 Pray-Harrold, Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti, MI, 48197, USA)

Abstract

This paper employs a Monte Carlo study to compare the performance of equal-tailed bootstrap percentile-t, symmetric bootstrap percentile-t, bootstrap percentile, and standard asymptotic confidence intervals in two distinct heteroscedastic regression models. Bootstrap confidence intervals are constructed with both the XY and wild bootstrap algorithm. Theory implies that the percentile-t methods will outperform the other methods, where performance is based on the convergence rate of empirical coverage to the nominal level. Results are consistent across models, in that in the case of the XY bootstrap algorithm the symmetric percentile-t method outperforms the other methods, but in the case of the wild bootstrap algorithm the two percentile-t methods perform similarly and outperform the other methods. The implication is that practitioners that employ the XY algorithm should utilize the symmetric percentile-t interval, while those who opt for the wild algorithm should use either of the percentile-t methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Elias Christopher J., 2015. "Percentile and Percentile-t Bootstrap Confidence Intervals: A Practical Comparison," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 153-161, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:jecome:v:4:y:2015:i:1:p:9:n:7
    DOI: 10.1515/jem-2013-0015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/jem-2013-0015
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/jem-2013-0015?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
    2. Flachaire, Emmanuel, 2005. "Bootstrapping heteroskedastic regression models: wild bootstrap vs. pairs bootstrap," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 361-376, April.
    3. David Brownstone & Robert Valletta, 2001. "The Bootstrap and Multiple Imputations: Harnessing Increased Computing Power for Improved Statistical Tests," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 129-141, Fall.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Torben Klarl, 2014. "Is Spatial Bootstrapping A Panacea For Valid Inference?," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 304-312, March.
    2. Pötscher, Benedikt M. & Preinerstorfer, David, 2023. "How Reliable Are Bootstrap-Based Heteroskedasticity Robust Tests?," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(4), pages 789-847, August.
    3. Cyrus J. DiCiccio & Joseph P. Romano & Michael Wolf, 2016. "Improving weighted least squares inference," ECON - Working Papers 232, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Nov 2017.
    4. A. Colin Cameron & Jonah B. Gelbach & Douglas L. Miller, 2008. "Bootstrap-Based Improvements for Inference with Clustered Errors," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(3), pages 414-427, August.
    5. Romano, Joseph P. & Wolf, Michael, 2017. "Resurrecting weighted least squares," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 197(1), pages 1-19.
    6. Godfrey, L.G., 2006. "Tests for regression models with heteroskedasticity of unknown form," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 50(10), pages 2715-2733, June.
    7. Olivier Armantier, 2006. "Estimates of Own Lethal Risks and Anchoring Effects," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 37-56, January.
    8. Flachaire, Emmanuel, 2005. "Bootstrapping heteroskedastic regression models: wild bootstrap vs. pairs bootstrap," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 361-376, April.
    9. Oc, Burak & Daniels, Michael A. & Diefendorff, James M. & Bashshur, Michael R. & Greguras, Gary J., 2020. "Humility breeds authenticity: How authentic leader humility shapes follower vulnerability and felt authenticity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 112-125.
    10. repec:lan:wpaper:2454 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. repec:lan:wpaper:2375 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Yang He & Otávio Bartalotti, 2020. "Wild bootstrap for fuzzy regression discontinuity designs: obtaining robust bias-corrected confidence intervals," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 23(2), pages 211-231.
    13. Eric S. Lin & Ta-Sheng Chou, 2018. "Finite-sample refinement of GMM approach to nonlinear models under heteroskedasticity of unknown form," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 1-28, January.
    14. Emmanuel Flachaire, 2005. "More Efficient Tests Robust to Heteroskedasticity of Unknown Form," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 219-241.
    15. Pavlidis Efthymios G & Paya Ivan & Peel David A, 2010. "Specifying Smooth Transition Regression Models in the Presence of Conditional Heteroskedasticity of Unknown Form," Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(3), pages 1-40, May.
    16. Jianghao Chu & Tae-Hwy Lee & Aman Ullah & Haifeng Xu, 2020. "Exact Distribution of the F-statistic under Heteroskedasticity of Unknown Form for Improved Inference," Working Papers 202027, University of California at Riverside, Department of Economics.
    17. A. Colin Cameron & Jonah B. Gelbach & Douglas L. Miller, 2008. "Bootstrap-Based Improvements for Inference with Clustered Errors," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(3), pages 414-427, August.
    18. James G. MacKinnon, 2012. "Thirty Years Of Heteroskedasticity-robust Inference," Working Paper 1268, Economics Department, Queen's University.
    19. Godfrey, L.G. & Tremayne, A.R., 2005. "The wild bootstrap and heteroskedasticity-robust tests for serial correlation in dynamic regression models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 377-395, April.
    20. repec:lan:wpaper:2596 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Francisco Cribari-Neto & Maria Lima, 2010. "Sequences of bias-adjusted covariance matrix estimators under heteroskedasticity of unknown form," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 62(6), pages 1053-1082, December.
    22. repec:lan:wpaper:2373 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. DiCiccio, Cyrus J. & Romano, Joseph P. & Wolf, Michael, 2019. "Improving weighted least squares inference," Econometrics and Statistics, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 96-119.
    24. Yamile Díaz Torres & Paride Gullo & Hernán Hernández Herrera & Migdalia Torres del Toro & Mario A. Álvarez Guerra & Jorge Iván Silva Ortega & Arne Speerforck, 2022. "Statistical Analysis of Design Variables in a Chiller Plant and Their Influence on Energy Consumption and Life Cycle Cost," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-19, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    bootstrap; confidence interval; Monte Carlo;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C01 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - Econometrics
    • C12 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Hypothesis Testing: General
    • C15 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Statistical Simulation Methods: General
    • C20 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - General
    • C23 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:jecome:v:4:y:2015:i:1:p:9:n:7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.