Skip to main content
Log in

Correcting for Omitted-Variable and Measurement-Error Bias in Autoregressive Model Estimation with Panel Data

  • Published:
Computational Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The parameter estimates based on an econometric equation are biased and can also be inconsistent when relevant regressors are omitted from the equation or when included regressors are measured with error. This problem gets complicated when the `true' functional form of the equation is unknown. Here, we demonstrate how auxiliary variables, called concomitants, can be used to remove omitted-variable and measurement-error biases from the coefficients of an equation with the unknown `true' functional form. The method is specifically designed for panel data. Numerical algorithms for enacting this procedure are presented and an illustration is given using a practical example of forecasting small-area employment from nonlinear autoregressive models.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Basmann, Robert L. (1988). Causality tests and observationally equivalent representations of econometric models. J. Econometrics, 39, 69–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, Laurence D. (1990). An ancillarity paradox which appears in multiple linear regression (with discussion). Ann. Stat., 18, 471–538.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, I-Lok, Swamy, P.A.V.B., Hallahan, Charles and Tavlas, George S. (2000). A computational approach to finding causal economic laws. Computat. Econom., 16, 105–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, I-Lok, Hallahan, Charles and Swamy, P.A.V.B. (1992). Efficient computation of stochastic coefficient models. In H.M. Amman, D.A. Belsley and L.F. Pau (eds.), Computational Economics and Econometrics, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, pp. 43–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Finetti, Bruno (1974). The Theory of Probability, Vol. 1. Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, Milton and Schwartz, Anna J. (1991). Alternative approaches to analyzing economic data. Amer. Econom. Rev., 81, 39–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, William H. (2000). Econometric Analysis, 4th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kourouklis, S. and Paige, C.C. (1981). A constrained least squares approach to the general Gauss-Markov linear model. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc., 78, 620–625.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann, Erich L. and Casella, George (1998). Theory of Point Estimation, 2nd edn. Springer, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, Alan L., Zarnowitz, Victor, Tsay, Ruey S. and Tiao, George C. (1998). Forecasting the U.S. unemployment rate. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc., 93, 478–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Narasimham, Gorti V.L., Swamy P.A.V.B. and Reed, R.C. (1988). Productivity analysis of U.S. manufacturing using a stochastic-coefficients production function. J. Busin. Econom. Stat., 6, 339–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oakes, D. (1985). Self-calibrating priors do not exist. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc., 80, 339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peddada, S.D. (1985). A short note on Pitman's measure of nearness. Amer. Statistician, 39, 298–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, John W. and Schlaifer, Robert (1984). On the nature and discovery of structure. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc., 79, 9–21, 29-33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, C.R. (1973). Linear Statistical Inference and its Applications, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schervish, M.J. (1985). Discussion of ‘Calibration-based empirical probability’ by A.P. Dawid. Ann. Statist., 13, 1274–1282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swamy, P.A.V.B. and Mehta, Jatinder S. (1975). Bayesian and non-Bayesian analysis of switching regressions and of random coefficient regression models. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc., 70, 593–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swamy, P.A.V.B. and Schinasi, Garry J. (1989). Should fixed coefficients be re-estimated every period for extrapolation? J. Forecasting, 8, 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swamy, P.A.V.B., Mehta, Jatinder S. and Singamsetti, Rao N. (1996). Circumstances in which different criteria of estimation can be applied to estimate policy effects. J. Statist. Planning Inference, 50, 121–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swamy, P.A.V.B. and Tavlas, George S. (2001). Random coefficient models. In B.H. Baltagi (ed.), Companion to Theoretical Econometrics. Blackwell Publishers Ltd, Malden, Massachusetts, pp. 410–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yokum, J. Thomas, Wildt, Albert R. and Swamy, P.A.V.B. (1998). Forecasting disjoint data structures using approximate constant and stochastic coefficient models. J. Appl. Statist. Sci., 8, 29–49.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Swamy, P.A.B., Chang, IL., Mehta, J.S. et al. Correcting for Omitted-Variable and Measurement-Error Bias in Autoregressive Model Estimation with Panel Data. Computational Economics 22, 225–253 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026189916020

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026189916020

Navigation