2000
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1808001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Testing for Structural Change of a Time Trend Regression in Panel Data

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
28
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
2
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[21][22][23][24][25][26][27]. Our simulations results (not reported here) show that their approximation gives very liberal bounds unless m is considerably large.…”
Section: Approximate Thresholdsmentioning
confidence: 62%
“…[21][22][23][24][25][26][27]. Our simulations results (not reported here) show that their approximation gives very liberal bounds unless m is considerably large.…”
Section: Approximate Thresholdsmentioning
confidence: 62%
“…The entries under the column heading income (emission) are the computed IPS t-statistic values for the cointegration unit root test when income (emission) was taken as the dependent variable. Here also in each case the cointegration test 11 was done twice -viz., once assuming presence of a deterministic time trend in the residuals of the cointegrating regression equation and again without making such an assumption. In Table 3 country group-specific values of these four test statistics are presented.…”
Section: Data Description and Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Han and Park (1989) [12] develop a multivariate CUSUM test in order to test for a structural break in panel data, and they apply the test to U.S. manufacturing goods trade data. Kao (2000) [13] proposes two classes of test statistics for detecting a break at an unknown date in panel data models with the time trend. The first is a fluctuation test, while the second is based on the mean and exponential Wald statistics of Andrews and Ploberger (1994) [3] and the maximum Wald statistic of Andrews (1993) [2].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%