Article

Consistent specification test for ordered discrete choice models

Universidad de Granada
Working papers = Documentos de trabajo: Serie AD, Nº. 17, 2006 08/2006;
Source: OAI

ABSTRACT Specification Tests, Ordered Discrete Choice Models; Statistical Simulation.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
67 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Market researchers often conduct surveys asking respondents to estimate their future demand for new products. However, projected demand may exhibit systematic bias. For example, the more respondents like a product, the more they may exaggerate their demand. We found evidence of such exaggeration in a recent survey of demand for a potential new video product. In this paper, we develop a computationally tractable procedure that corrects for a general form of systematic bias in demand projections. This general form is characterized by a monotonictransformation of projected demand, and covers exaggeration bias as a special case.
    Journal of Econometrics 01/1997; · 1.71 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Journal of Economic Literature 02/1992; 30(1):102-46. · 9.24 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We develop a new test of a parametric model of a conditional mean function against a nonparametric alternative. The test adapts to the unknown smoothness of the alternative model and is uniformly consistent against alternatives whose distance from the parametric model converges to zero at the fastest possible rate. This rate is slower than n[superscript -1/2]. Some existing tests have nontrivial power against restricted classes of alternatives whose distance from the parametric model decreases at the rate n[superscript -1/2]. There are, however, sequences of alternatives against which these tests are inconsistent and ours is consistent. As a consequence, there are alternative models for which the finite-sample power of our test greatly exceeds that of existing tests. This conclusion is illustrated by the results of some Monte Carlo experiments.
    Econometrica 02/2001; 69(3):599-631. · 3.82 Impact Factor

Full-text (3 Sources)

View
5 Downloads
Available from
Jun 11, 2014