1995
DOI: 10.1016/0304-4076(93)01589-e
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Temporal aggregation and the power of tests for a unit root

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
41
0
4

Year Published

1996
1996
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 85 publications
(53 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
8
41
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…For instance, Shiller and Perron (1985), Perron (1991), and Campbell and Perron (1991) find through Monte Carlo simulations that the power of unit root tests is mainly affected by the time span, and much less by sampling frequency. In line with this finding, Pierse and Snell (1995) show theoretically that the asymptotic local power of a unit root test is not dependent on sample frequency. However, Boswijk and Klaassen (2012) demonstrate that this result does not hold for time series that exhibit fat tails and volatility clustering.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 65%
“…For instance, Shiller and Perron (1985), Perron (1991), and Campbell and Perron (1991) find through Monte Carlo simulations that the power of unit root tests is mainly affected by the time span, and much less by sampling frequency. In line with this finding, Pierse and Snell (1995) show theoretically that the asymptotic local power of a unit root test is not dependent on sample frequency. However, Boswijk and Klaassen (2012) demonstrate that this result does not hold for time series that exhibit fat tails and volatility clustering.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 65%
“…For the coal price series ADF tests conducted on the corresponding yearly series over the period suggests that a stochastic trend is an appropriate specification. The works of Shiller and Perron (1985) and Pierse and Snell (1995) indicate, in fact, that, in general, the power of unit-root tests depends more on the sample size than on the sample frequency. Then, a conclusion about the order of integration should preferably be drawn by low frequency data covering a longer time span.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, a time series which is stationary (non stationary) at the disaggregated level remains so at the aggregated level. This property has been directly or indirectly derived among others by TELSER (1967), AMEMIYA and WU (1972), TIAO (1972), BREWER (1973), TIAO and WEI (1976), WEI (1981), HARVEY (1981), AHSANULLAH and WEI (1984), WEISS (1984), STRAM and WEI (1986), CHRISTIANO and EICHENBAUM (1987), ROSSANA andSEATER (1995) andPIERSE andSNELL (1995). Most of these studies resorted to analytical tools, accompanied by Monte Carlo experiments and empirical evidence to draw and back up their conclusions.…”
Section: Aggregation Over Timementioning
confidence: 99%
“…That said, a look at the literature reveals that while the first three questions have been systematically examined, this is not the case for the last question. Following the pioneering work of SHILLER and PERRON (1985) as well as PERRON (1987PERRON ( , 1989) in unit root context, HAKKIO and RUSH (1991), MAMINGI (1992MAMINGI ( , 2005b), HOOKER (1993), LAHIRI and MAMINGI (1995), PIERSE and SNELL (1995), OTERO and SMITH (2000) and HAUG (2002) examined the impact of the data span on the power of tests for cointegration. However, with the exception of MAMINGI (1992MAMINGI ( , 2005b no study has examined explicitly the issue in the context of the three scenarios of aggregation over time.…”
Section: Alteration Of Power Of Testsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation