
Abstract In this paper, we study the effect that different serial correlation adjustment methods can have on panel cointegration testing. As an example, we consider the very popular tests developed by Pedroni [Pedroni, P. (1999). Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regressors. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 61, 653670., Pedroni, P. (2004). Panel cointegration: asymptotic and finite sample properties of pooled time series tests with an application to the PPP hypothesis. Econometric Theory 20, 597–625.]. Results based on both simulated and real data suggest that different adjustment methods can lead to significant variations in test outcome, and thus also in the conclusions.
Panel Data; Cointegration Testing; Parametric and Semiparametric Methods, jel: jel:C32, jel: jel:C33, jel: jel:C14, jel: jel:C15
Panel Data; Cointegration Testing; Parametric and Semiparametric Methods, jel: jel:C32, jel: jel:C33, jel: jel:C14, jel: jel:C15
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 12 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
