2006
DOI: 10.1111/j.1368-423x.2006.00182.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Joint hypothesis specification for unit root tests with a structural break

Abstract: Summary  Several tests based on a t‐ratio have been proposed in the literature to decide the order of integration of a time series allowing for a structural break. However, another approach based on testing a joint hypothesis of unit root and the irrelevance of some nuisance parameters is also feasible. This paper proposes new unit root tests consistent with the presence of a structural break applying this second perspective. Our approach deals both with the case where the break is not allowed under the null h… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 29 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We will follow this route, running first the standard Engle–Granger tests (which are more parsimonious and, hence, more suitable for our data set than Johansen's system tests) for all banks. In the case of RYD, the presence of a clear break in the constant suggested the use of a test that allows for varying parameters—namely, the Carrion‐i‐Silvestre and Sansó (2006) generalization of the KPSS test of cointegration with breaks 14 . For all banks, we included only non‐stationary variables, so that income diversity (ID) was never included in the model and operating cost–income ratio (CI) was included only for RJH.…”
Section: Model Estimates and Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We will follow this route, running first the standard Engle–Granger tests (which are more parsimonious and, hence, more suitable for our data set than Johansen's system tests) for all banks. In the case of RYD, the presence of a clear break in the constant suggested the use of a test that allows for varying parameters—namely, the Carrion‐i‐Silvestre and Sansó (2006) generalization of the KPSS test of cointegration with breaks 14 . For all banks, we included only non‐stationary variables, so that income diversity (ID) was never included in the model and operating cost–income ratio (CI) was included only for RJH.…”
Section: Model Estimates and Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%