Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ubes20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] Date: 12 January 2016, At: 23:53
Journal of Business & Economic Statistics
ISSN: 0735-0015 (Print) 1537-2707 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ubes20
Correction
To cite this article: (2005) Correction, Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 23:3, 363-363, DOI: 10.1198/073500105000000045
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1198/073500105000000045
Published online: 01 Jan 2012.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 28
Correction
Bun, M. J. G., and Carree, M. A.(2005), “Bias-Corrected Estimation in Dynamic Panel Data Models,”Journal of Busi-ness & Economic Statistics, 23, 200–210.
Due to misinterpretation the simulation and empirical results for the additive bias corrected estimator (labeledac) do not do full justice to this method. In this erratum we correct these re-sults. In the original study we used three simulation designs, of which the simulation results have been reported in Tables 2, 3, and 4 respectively. Here we repeat the corrected tables (for theacestimator only).
The corrected results show that the ac estimator performs well in the first two designs (Tables 2 and 3), contrary to
what was reported earlier. In general, bias is neglible or small, whereas only for γ andT small is there a moderate size dis-tortion. Based on an MSE criterion, this estimator can com-pete with bcandgmmestimators. Regarding the third design (Table 4), especially for γ, bias in gmm carries over to bias in ac, demonstrating the dependence of additive bias correc-tion on preliminary consistent estimators. Previously this re-mark was erroneously made in the discussion of Table 2. Also, bias in estimating γ increases with increasing γ, contrary to what was reported earlier. Finally, the correct empirical results of the acestimator for the unemployment growth model (Ta-ble 5) are γˆac=.624 and βˆac= −.056 (with standard errors .038 and .012), which are close to thebcandgmmestimates.
Corrected Results, ac Estimator for Table 2
(N, T) (300, 2) (200, 3) (150, 4) (100, 6) (60, 10) (40, 15)
Corrected Results, ac Estimator for Table 3
(N, T) (300, 2) (200, 3) (150, 4) (100, 6) (60, 10) (40, 15)
Corrected Results, ac Estimator for Table 4
Design nr. I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X
© 2005 American Statistical Association Journal of Business & Economic Statistics July 2005, Vol. 23, No. 3, Correction DOI 10.1198/073500105000000045
363
