Heteroskedasticity Test White

For econometric discussions not necessarily related to EViews.

Moderators: EViews Gareth, EViews Moderator

Suresh
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:45 pm

Heteroskedasticity Test White

Postby Suresh » Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:55 pm

The Heteroskedasticity Test White with and without including cross terms give contradictory results. By including the cross terms the following results lead to rejection of null hypothesis.
Heteroskedasticity Test: White

F-statistic 2.894027 Prob. F(5,3729) 0.0130
Obs*R-squared 14.43739 Prob. Chi-Square(5) 0.0131
Scaled explained SS 1508.234 Prob. Chi-Square(5) 0.0000

On the other hand if I am not including cross terms, the results accepts the null hypotheis
Heteroskedasticity Test: White

F-statistic 2.224166 Prob. F(2,3732) 0.1083
Obs*R-squared 4.446607 Prob. Chi-Square(2) 0.1083
Scaled explained SS 464.5247 Prob. Chi-Square(2) 0.0000

Which one should I use? If I am using include cross terms and assume that heteroskedasticity is present, how shall I proceed with my multiple regression model.
Expecting clarifications. Thank you

startz
Non-normality and collinearity are NOT problems!
Posts: 3775
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:25 pm

Re: Heteroskedasticity Test White

Postby startz » Mon Nov 14, 2016 8:25 pm

Include the cross-terms and use robust standard errors.

Suresh
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:45 pm

Re: Heteroskedasticity Test White

Postby Suresh » Mon Feb 20, 2017 10:22 pm

Thank You Startz

Suresh
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:45 pm

Re: Heteroskedasticity Test White

Postby Suresh » Mon Feb 20, 2017 10:34 pm

Can any one please help me in this dilemma. I have 13 variables. Eleven of them are used as dependent variables and two are common independent variables, which use independently to run 11 regression equations. However when i consider group unit root of this 13 cross sections with 41924 observation I get the following output.
Group unit root test: Summary
Series: ER_BODAL, ER_COSMO, ER_DALMBHART, ER_EXCELCO,
ER_GRAUER, ER_JINDASTEEL, ER_NCL, ER_ORI_CARB,
ER_POLYPLEX, ER_RASHTRIYA, ER_STGOBAIN,
ER_BASMAT, ER_SENSEX
Date: 02/21/17 Time: 09:34
Sample: 4/03/2001 3/31/2016
Exogenous variables: Individual effects
Automatic selection of maximum lags
Automatic lag length selection based on SIC: 0 to 1
Newey-West automatic bandwidth selection and Bartlett kernel

Cross-
Method Statistic Prob.** sections Obs
Null: Unit root (assumes common unit root process)
Levin, Lin & Chu t* 63.8800 1.0000 13 41924

Null: Unit root (assumes individual unit root process)
Im, Pesaran and Shin W-stat -121.281 0.0000 13 41924
ADF - Fisher Chi-square 1674.34 0.0000 13 41924
PP - Fisher Chi-square 592.280 0.0000 13 41925

** Probabilities for Fisher tests are computed using an asymptotic Chi-square
distribution. All other tests assume asymptotic normality.
Since null hypothesis of unit root cannot be rejected since p value of Levin, Lin & Chu t* statistics is >0.05, and the series are stationary using individual unit process assumption, the following doubts arise
1. Can i ignore the presence of unit root under assumption of common unit root since I am not using panel data and use regression individually.
2. If I ignore that will it in any way affect my regression results

Looking forward for getting help from anyone here
Regards
Suresh


Return to “Econometric Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 60 guests