Abstract
AbstractWe re‐examine studies of cross‐country growth regressions by Levine and Renelt (American Economic Review, Vol. 82, 1992, pp. 942–963) and Sala‐i‐Martin (American Economic Review, Vol. 87, 1997a, pp. 178–183; Economics Department, Columbia, University, 1997b). In a realistic Monte Carlo experiment, their variants of Edward Leamer's extreme‐bounds analysis are compared with a cross‐sectional version of the general‐to‐specific search methodology associated with the LSE approach to econometrics. Levine and Renelt's method has low size and low power, while Sala‐i‐Martin's method has high size and high power. The general‐to‐specific methodology is shown to have a near nominal size and high power. Sala‐i‐Martin's method and the general‐to‐specific method are then applied to the actual data from Sala‐i‐Martin's original study.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
