
ABSTRACT It is well known that multiplier estimates within an interindustry context may be biased when the input coefficients are stochastic. Several conditions have been derived under which the estimates were shown to be biased, all with the same sign. In contrast to these analytical results, however, simulations using a stochastic transactions table unexpectedly reported the unbiasedness of multiplier estimates. This note argues that the sample sizes were too small. It is shown that for increased sample sizes the multiplier estimates are all positively and significantly biased, in line with the analytical results, but the biases are very small.
SIMPLE ECONOMETRIC-MODEL, OVERESTIMATION, UNDERESTIMATION, STOCHASTIC-ANALYSIS, LEONTIEF INVERSE, INPUT-OUTPUT MODELS
SIMPLE ECONOMETRIC-MODEL, OVERESTIMATION, UNDERESTIMATION, STOCHASTIC-ANALYSIS, LEONTIEF INVERSE, INPUT-OUTPUT MODELS
| 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). | 19 | |
| 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 |
