On the Proper Computation of the Hausman Test Statistic in Standard Linear Panel Data Models: Some Clarifications and New Results

IF 1.1 Q3 ECONOMICS
Julie Le Gallo, Marc-Alexandre Sénégas
{"title":"On the Proper Computation of the Hausman Test Statistic in Standard Linear Panel Data Models: Some Clarifications and New Results","authors":"Julie Le Gallo, Marc-Alexandre Sénégas","doi":"10.3390/econometrics11040025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We provide new analytical results for the implementation of the Hausman specification test statistic in a standard panel data model, comparing the version based on the estimators computed from the untransformed random effects model specification under Feasible Generalized Least Squares and the one computed from the quasi-demeaned model estimated by Ordinary Least Squares. We show that the quasi-demeaned model cannot provide a reliable magnitude when implementing the Hausman test in a finite sample setting, although it is the most common approach used to produce the test statistic in econometric software. The difference between the Hausman statistics computed under the two methods can be substantial and even lead to opposite conclusions for the test of orthogonality between the regressors and the individual-specific effects. Furthermore, this difference remains important even with large cross-sectional dimensions as it mainly depends on the within-between structure of the regressors and on the presence of a significant correlation between the individual effects and the covariates in the data. We propose to supplement the test outcomes that are provided in the main econometric software packages with some metrics to address the issue at hand.","PeriodicalId":11499,"journal":{"name":"Econometrics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Econometrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/econometrics11040025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We provide new analytical results for the implementation of the Hausman specification test statistic in a standard panel data model, comparing the version based on the estimators computed from the untransformed random effects model specification under Feasible Generalized Least Squares and the one computed from the quasi-demeaned model estimated by Ordinary Least Squares. We show that the quasi-demeaned model cannot provide a reliable magnitude when implementing the Hausman test in a finite sample setting, although it is the most common approach used to produce the test statistic in econometric software. The difference between the Hausman statistics computed under the two methods can be substantial and even lead to opposite conclusions for the test of orthogonality between the regressors and the individual-specific effects. Furthermore, this difference remains important even with large cross-sectional dimensions as it mainly depends on the within-between structure of the regressors and on the presence of a significant correlation between the individual effects and the covariates in the data. We propose to supplement the test outcomes that are provided in the main econometric software packages with some metrics to address the issue at hand.
标准线性面板数据模型中豪斯曼检验统计量的正确计算:一些澄清和新结果
我们提供了在标准面板数据模型中实现Hausman规格检验统计量的新的分析结果,比较了基于可行广义最小二乘法下未变换随机效应模型规格估计量的版本和基于普通最小二乘法估计的准退化模型估计量的版本。我们表明,在有限样本设置中实施豪斯曼检验时,准退化模型不能提供可靠的大小,尽管它是计量经济学软件中用于产生检验统计量的最常用方法。两种方法计算的Hausman统计量之间的差异可能是巨大的,甚至导致相反的结论,用于检验回归量和个体特异性效应之间的正交性。此外,即使具有较大的横截面尺寸,这种差异仍然很重要,因为它主要取决于回归量的内部结构以及个体效应与数据中协变量之间存在显著相关性。我们建议用一些度量标准来补充主要计量经济学软件包中提供的测试结果,以解决手头的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Econometrics
Econometrics Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics and Econometrics
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
20.00%
发文量
30
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信