IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/apeclt/v7y2000i10p641-644.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Additional results on the power of unit root and cointegration tests under threshold processes

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Pippenger
  • Gregory Goering

Abstract

Recently researchers have begun to develop methods to detect stationarity or cointegration when the underlying error correction process follows a threshold model. In the context of one type of threshold model, Pippenger and Goering found that the power of unit root or cointegration tests decay substantially under many economically relevant parameterization. However, in a recent article Balke and Fomby conclude that linear tests work 'reasonably well when threshold cointegration is present' and based on these findings propose a modelling methodology under threshold cointegration. This study examines the threshold processes they analysed under a wide range of parameterizations and finds that linear unit root and cointegration tests display relatively low power even under large sample sizes. Hence, contrary to Balke and Fomby linear cointegration tests appear to be an inappropriate test under threshold cointegration.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Pippenger & Gregory Goering, 2000. "Additional results on the power of unit root and cointegration tests under threshold processes," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(10), pages 641-644.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:apeclt:v:7:y:2000:i:10:p:641-644
    DOI: 10.1080/135048500415932
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.informaworld.com/openurl?genre=article&doi=10.1080/135048500415932&magic=repec&7C&7C8674ECAB8BB840C6AD35DC6213A474B5
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/135048500415932?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. Gregory Goering & Michael Pippenger, 1994. "A note regarding ARCH and threshold processes: results from a Monte Carlo study," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(11), pages 210-213.
    2. Baldwin, Richard, 1990. "Re-Interpreting the Failure of Foreign Exchange Market Efficiency Tests: Small Transaction Costs, Big Hysteresis Bands," CEPR Discussion Papers 407, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Pippenger, Michael K & Goering, Gregory E, 1993. "A Note on the Empirical Power of Unit Root Tests under Threshold Processes," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 55(4), pages 473-481, November.
    4. Michael, Panos & Nobay, A Robert & Peel, David A, 1997. "Transactions Costs and Nonlinear Adjustment in Real Exchange Rates: An Empirical Investigation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(4), pages 862-879, August.
    5. Norrbin, Stefan C. & Reffett, Kevin L., 1997. "The Disaggregated Money Demand in the Long Run," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 495-507, July.
    6. Johansen, Soren, 1991. "Estimation and Hypothesis Testing of Cointegration Vectors in Gaussian Vector Autoregressive Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(6), pages 1551-1580, November.
    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. Gonzalo, Jesùs & Pitarakis, Jean-Yves, 2005. "Threshold effects In multivariate error correction models," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 0501, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    2. Chen, Show-Lin & Wu, Jyh-Lin, 2005. "Long-run money demand revisited: evidence from a non-linear approach," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 19-37, February.
    3. Efthymios Pavlidis & Ivan Paya & David Peel, 2010. "Further empirical evidence on the consumption-real exchange rate anomaly," Working Papers 447022, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    4. Chen, Show-Lin & Wu, Jyh-Lin, 2000. "A Re-Examination of Purchasing Power Parity in Japan and Taiwan," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 271-284, April.
    5. Cheung, Yin-Wong & Lai, Kon S. & Bergman, Michael, 2004. "Dissecting the PPP puzzle: the unconventional roles of nominal exchange rate and price adjustments," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 135-150, October.
    6. Kleopatra Nikolaou, 2007. "The behaviour of the real exchange rate: Evidence from regression quantiles," Money Macro and Finance (MMF) Research Group Conference 2006 46, Money Macro and Finance Research Group.
    7. Daiki Maki, 2008. "The Performance of Variance Ratio Unit Root Tests Under Nonlinear Stationary TAR and STAR Processes: Evidence from Monte Carlo Simulations and Applications," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 31(1), pages 77-94, February.
    8. Andy Snell & George Kapetanios & Yongcheol Shin, 2004. "Testing for nonlinear cointegration between stock prices and dividends," Money Macro and Finance (MMF) Research Group Conference 2003 90, Money Macro and Finance Research Group.
    9. Mototsugu Shintani, 2006. "A nonparametric measure of convergence towards purchasing power parity," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(5), pages 589-604.
    10. Obstfeld, Maurice & Taylor, Alan M., 1997. "Nonlinear Aspects of Goods-Market Arbitrage and Adjustment: Heckscher's Commodity Points Revisited," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 441-479, December.
    11. Pippenger, John, 2004. "The Modern Theory of the LOP and PPP: Some Implications," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt60z886n7, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
    12. George Kapetanios & Yongcheol Shin, 2006. "Unit root tests in three-regime SETAR models," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 9(2), pages 252-278, July.
    13. Mainardi, Stefano, 2001. "Limited arbitrage in international wheat markets: threshold and smooth transition cointegration," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 45(3), pages 1-26.
    14. I Paya & D Peel, 2005. "A new analysis of the determinants of the real dollar-sterling exchange rate: 1871-1994," Working Papers 565953, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    15. Gilles Dufrénot & Valérie Mignon, 2002. "La cointégration non linéaire : une note méthodologique," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 155(4), pages 117-137.
    16. Ivan Paya & David A. Peel, 2004. "Nonlinear Purchasing Power Parity under the Gold Standard," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 71(2), pages 302-313, October.
    17. Li, Dandan & Ghoshray, Atanu & Morley, Bruce, 2013. "An empirical study of nonlinear adjustment in the UIP model using a smooth transition regression model," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 109-120.
    18. Ivan Paya & David Peel, 2007. "On the relationship between nominal exchange rates and domestic and foreign prices," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 105-117.
    19. Paul De Grauwe & Marianna Grimaldi, 2005. "The Exchange Rate and its Fundamentals in a Complex World," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 549-575, August.
    20. repec:lan:wpaper:2608 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Frederic Bec & Melika Ben Salem & Marine Carrasco, 2004. "Tests for Unit-Root versus Threshold Specification With an Application to the Purchasing Power Parity Relationship," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 22, pages 382-395, October.

    More about this item

    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:taf:apeclt:v:7:y:2000:i:10:p:641-644. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEL20 .

    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.