Abstract
AbstractPrice rigidity plays a central role in macroeconomic models but remains controversial. Those espousing it look to Bayesian estimated models in support, while those assuming price flexibility largely impose it on their models. So controversy continues unresolved by testing on the data. In a Monte Carlo experiment we ask how different estimation methods could help to resolve this controversy. We find Bayesian estimation creates a large potential estimation bias compared with standard estimation techniques. Indirect estimation where the bias is found to be low appears to do best, and offers the best way forward for settling the price rigidity controversy.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Economics and Econometrics
Reference17 articles.
1. Adjemian S, Bastani H, Juillard M, Karamé F, Maih J, Mihoubi F, Mutschler W, Perendia G, Pfeifer J, Ratto M, Villemot S (2011) Dynare: Reference Manual, Version 4. Dynare Working Papers, 1, CEPREMAP
2. Chari VV, Kehoe PJ, McGrattan ER (2009) New keynesian models: not yet useful for policy analysis. Am Econ J Macroecon 1(1):242–66
3. Christiano LJ, Eichenbaum M, Evans CL (2005) Nominal rigidities and the dynamic effects of a shock to monetary policy. J Polit Econ 113:1–45
4. Evans GW, Honkapohja S (2005) Interview with Thomas. J Sargent Macroecon Dyn 9(4):561–583
5. Friedman M (1953) ’The methodology of positive economics’, in Essays in positive Economics, University of Chicago Press
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献