Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T07:54:31.375Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A REMARK ON BIMODALITY AND WEAK INSTRUMENTATION IN STRUCTURAL EQUATION ESTIMATION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 August 2006

Peter C.B. Phillips
Peter C.B. Phillips
Affiliation:
Cowles Foundation, Yale University University of Auckland and University of York
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In a simple model composed of a structural equation and identity, the finite-sample distribution of the instrumental variable/limited information maximum likelihood (IV/LIML) estimator is always bimodal, and this is most apparent when the concentration parameter is small. Weak instrumentation is the energy that feeds the secondary mode, and the coefficient in the structural identity provides a point of compression in the density that gives rise to it. The IV limit distribution can be normal, bimodal, or inverse normal depending on the behavior of the concentration parameter and the weakness of the instruments. The limit distribution of the ordinary least squares (OLS) estimator is normal in all cases and has a much faster rate of convergence under very weak instrumentation. The IV estimator is therefore more resistant to the attractive effect of the identity than OLS. Some of these limit results differ from conventional weak instrument asymptotics, including convergence to a constant in very weak instrument cases and limit distributions that are inverse normal.My thanks to Richard Smith and two referees for comments on an earlier version. Section 2 of the paper is based on lectures given to students over the 1970s and 1980s at Essex, Birmingham, and Yale. Partial support is acknowledged from a Kelly Fellowship at the University of Auckland School of Business and the NSF under Grant SES 04-142254.

Type
MISCELLANEA: BIMODALITY AND WEAK INSTRUMENTATION
Information
Econometric Theory , Volume 22 , Issue 5 , October 2006 , pp. 947 - 960
Copyright
© 2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Andrews, D.W.K. & J.H. Stock (2005) Inference with Weak Instruments. Cowles Foundation Discussion paper 1530, Yale University.
Bergstrom, A.R. (1962) The exact sampling distributions of least squares and maximum likelihood estimators of the marginal propensity to consume. Econometrica 30, 480–490.Google Scholar
Chao, J.C. & N.R. Swanson (2005) Consistent estimation with a large number of weak instruments. Econometrica 73, 1673–1712.Google Scholar
Forchini, G. (2006) On the bimodality of the exact distribution of the TSLS estimator. Econometric Theory 22, 932–946 (this issue).Google Scholar
Hahn, J. & J. Hausman (2003) Weak instruments: Diagnosis and cures in empirical econometrics. American Economic Review 93, 118–125.Google Scholar
Han, C. & P.C.B. Phillips (2006) GMM with many moment conditions. Econometrica 74, 147–192.Google Scholar
Hillier, G.H. (2006) Yet more on the exact properties of IV estimators. Econometric Theory 22, 913–931 (this issue).Google Scholar
Kiviet, J.F. & J. Niemczyk (2005) The Asymptotic and Finite Sample Distributions of OLS and IV in Simultaneous Equations. UVA Econometrics Discussion paper 2005/01.
Lebedev, N.N. (1972). Special Functions and Their Applications. Dover.
Maddala, G.S. & J. Jeong (1992) On the exact small sample distribution of the instrumental variable estimator. Econometrica 60, 181–183.Google Scholar
Nelson, C.R. & R. Startz (1990) Some further results on the small sample properties of the instrumental variable estimator. Econometrica 58, 967–976.Google Scholar
Phillips, P.C.B. (1980) The exact distribution of instrumental variable estimators in an equation containing n + 1 endogenous variables. Econometrica 48, 861–878.Google Scholar
Phillips, P.C.B. (1983) Exact small sample theory in the simultaneous equations model. In M.D. Intriligator & Z. Griliches (eds.), Handbook of Econometrics, 449–516. North-Holland.
Phillips, P.C.B. (1984) The exact distribution of LIML, part I. International Economic Review 25, 249–261.Google Scholar
Phillips, P.C.B. (1985) The exact distribution of LIML, part II. International Economic Review 26, 21–36.Google Scholar
Phillips, P.C.B. (1986) The distribution of FIML in the leading case. International Economic Review 27, 239–243.Google Scholar
Phillips, P.C.B. (1989) Partially identified econometric models. Econometric Theory 5, 181–240.Google Scholar
Phillips, P.C.B. & V.A. Hajivassiliou (1987) Bimodal t Ratios. Cowles Foundation Discussion paper 842.
Phillips, P.C.B. & M.R. Wickens (1978) Exercises in Econometrics, vol. 2. Ballinger and Philip Allan.
Sargan, J.D. (1970/1988) The Finite Sample Distribution of FIML Estimators. Paper presented at the Second World Congress of the Econometric Society. Reprinted in E. Maasoumi (ed.), Contributions to Econometrics, vol. 2, pp. 57–75 (Cambridge, 1988).
Staiger, D. & J.H. Stock (1997) Instrumental variables regression with weak instruments. Econometrica 65, 557–586.Google Scholar
Stock, J.H., J. Wright, & M. Yogo (2002) A survey of weak instruments and weak identification in generalized method of moments. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 20, 518–529.Google Scholar
Woglom, G. (2001) More results on the exact small sample properties of the instrumental variable estimator. Econometrica 69, 1381–1389.Google Scholar