Paper detail

The Incidental Parameters Problem in Testing for Remaining Cross-section Correlation

In this paper we consider the properties of the Pesaran (2004, 2015a) CD test for cross-section correlation when applied to residuals obtained from panel data models with many estimated parameters. We show that the presence of period-specific parameters leads the CD test statistic to diverge as length of the time dimension of the sample grows. This result holds even if cross-section dependence is correctly accounted for and hence constitutes an example of the Incidental Parameters Problem. The relevance of this problem is investigated both for the classical Time Fixed Effects estimator as well as the Common Correlated Effects estimator of Pesaran (2006). We suggest a weighted CD test statistic which re-establishes standard normal inference under the null hypothesis. Given the widespread use of the CD test statistic to test for remaining cross-section correlation, our results have far reaching implications for empirical researchers.

preprint2021arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.