IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jns/jbstat/v228y2008i4p394-405.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Hausman Test Statistic can be Negative even Asymptotically

Author

Listed:
  • Schreiber Sven

    (Goethe University Frankfurt, House of Finance, Grüneburgplatz 1, 60323 Frankfurt am Main, Germany)

Abstract

We show that under the alternative hypothesis the Hausman chi-square test statistic can be negative not only in small samples but even asymptotically. Therefore in large samples such a result is only compatible with the alternative and should be interpreted accordingly. Applying a known insight from finite samples, this can only occur if the different estimation precisions (often the residual variance estimates) under the null and the alternative both enter the test statistic. In finite samples, using the absolute value of the test statistic is a remedy that does not alter the null distribution and is thus admissible. Even for positive test statistics the relevant covariance matrix difference should be routinely checked for positive semi-definiteness, because we also show that otherwise test results may be misleading. Of course the preferable solution still is to impose the same nuisance parameter (i.e., residual variance) estimate under the null and alternative hypotheses, if the model context permits that with relative ease. We complement the likelihood-based exposition by a formal proof in an omitted-variable context, we present simulation evidence for the test of panel random effects, and we illustrate the problems with a panel homogeneity test.

Suggested Citation

  • Schreiber Sven, 2008. "The Hausman Test Statistic can be Negative even Asymptotically," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 228(4), pages 394-405, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:jns:jbstat:v:228:y:2008:i:4:p:394-405
    DOI: 10.1515/jbnst-2008-0407
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/jbnst-2008-0407
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/jbnst-2008-0407?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pesaran, M. Hashem & Smith, Ron, 1995. "Estimating long-run relationships from dynamic heterogeneous panels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 79-113, July.
    2. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
    3. Ai, Chunrong, 1995. "A Positive Semi-definite Covariance Matrix for Hausman Specification Tests of Conditional and Marginal Densities," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 57(2), pages 277-281, May.
    4. Mizon, Grayham E & Richard, Jean-Francois, 1986. "The Encompassing Principle and Its Application to Testing Non-nested Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(3), pages 657-678, May.
    5. Holly, Alberto, 1982. "A Remark on Hausman's Specification Test," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 749-759, May.
    6. Hausman, Jerry A. & Taylor, William E., 1981. "A generalized specification test," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 239-245.
    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. Doko Tchatoka, Firmin & Dufour, Jean-Marie, 2020. "Exogeneity tests, incomplete models, weak identification and non-Gaussian distributions: Invariance and finite-sample distributional theory," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 218(2), pages 390-418.
    2. Jiao, Xiyu & Pretis, Felix & Schwarz, Moritz, 2024. "Testing for coefficient distortion due to outliers with an application to the economic impacts of climate change," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 239(1).
    3. Doko Tchatoka, Firmin, 2012. "Specification tests with weak and invalid instruments," Working Papers 15063, University of Tasmania, Tasmanian School of Business and Economics, revised 26 Jun 2012.
    4. Catherine Dehon & Marjorie Gassner & Vincenzo Verardi, 2005. "Robustness or Efficiency, A Test to Solve the Dilemma," Econometrics 0508011, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. MacKinnon, James G, 1992. "Model Specification Tests and Artificial Regressions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(1), pages 102-146, March.
    6. Nawata, Kazumitsu & McAleer, Michael, 2014. "The maximum number of parameters for the Hausman test when the estimators are from different sets of equations," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 123(3), pages 291-294.
    7. Bontemps, Christophe & Mizon, Grayham E., 2001. "Congruence and encompassing," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 0107, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    8. Aït-Sahalia, Yacine & Xiu, Dacheng, 2019. "A Hausman test for the presence of market microstructure noise in high frequency data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(1), pages 176-205.
    9. Kiviet, Jan F. & Pleus, Milan, 2017. "The performance of tests on endogeneity of subsets of explanatory variables scanned by simulation," Econometrics and Statistics, Elsevier, vol. 2(C), pages 1-21.
    10. Firmin Doko Tchatoka, 2015. "On bootstrap validity for specification tests with weak instruments," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 18(1), pages 137-146, February.
    11. Huy Quang Doan, 2019. "Trade, Institutional Quality and Income: Empirical Evidence for Sub-Saharan Africa," Economies, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-23, May.
    12. O'Brien, Raymond & Patacchini, Eleonora, 2003. "Testing the exogeneity assumption in panel data models with "non classical" disturbances," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 0302, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    13. Angela Luci-Greulich & Olivier Thévenon, 2013. "The Impact of Family Policies on Fertility Trends in Developed Countries," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 29(4), pages 387-416, November.
    14. Andrea Bassanini & Stefano Scarpetta, 2003. "The Driving Forces of Economic Growth: Panel Data Evidence for the OECD Countries," OECD Economic Studies, OECD Publishing, vol. 2001(2), pages 9-56.
    15. Maranzano, Paolo & Cerdeira Bento, Joao Paulo & Manera, Matteo, 2021. "The Role of Education and Income Inequality on Environmental Quality. A Panel Data Analysis of the EKC Hypothesis on OECD," FEEM Working Papers 310225, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    16. Geweke, J. & Joel Horowitz & Pesaran, M.H., 2006. "Econometrics: A Bird’s Eye View," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0655, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    17. Migliardo, Carlo, 2012. "Heterogeneity in price setting behavior, spatial disparities and sectoral diversity: Evidence from a panel of Italian firms," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 1106-1118.
    18. Armenia Androniceanu & Irina Georgescu, 2023. "The Impact of CO 2 Emissions and Energy Consumption on Economic Growth: A Panel Data Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-17, January.
    19. Philippe Aghion & Matias Braun & Johannes Fedderke, 2008. "Competition and productivity growth in South Africa," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 16(4), pages 741-768, October.
    20. Kwaku Addai & Berna Serener & Dervis Kirikkaleli, 2022. "Asymmetricity in the Effect of Economic and Environmental Factors on Social Sustainability: Empirical Evidence from Eastern European Economies using Dynamic Analysis with CCEMG & D-H Causality Approac," International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, vol. 12(3), pages 75-93.

    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:jns:jbstat:v:228:y:2008:i:4:p:394-405. 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.