expand icon
book Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach 6th Edition by Jeffrey M Wooldridge cover

Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach 6th Edition by Jeffrey M Wooldridge

Edition 6ISBN: 130527010X
book Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach 6th Edition by Jeffrey M Wooldridge cover

Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach 6th Edition by Jeffrey M Wooldridge

Edition 6ISBN: 130527010X
Exercise 7

Suppose that the linear model, written in matrix notation,

 Suppose that the linear model, written in matrix notation,   satisfies Assumptions E.1, E.2, and E.3. Partition the model as   where X <sub>1</sub> is <i>n</i> × (<i>k</i><sub>1</sub> 1 1) and X <sub>2</sub> is <i>n</i> × <i>k</i><sub>2</sub>. <blockquote> (i) Consider the following proposal for estimating <i>?</i><sub>2</sub>. First, regress y on X <sub>1</sub> and obtain the residuals, say, ÿ . Then, regress ÿ on X <sub>2</sub> to get   . Show that    is generally biased and show what the bias is. [You should find    in terms of <i>?</i><sub>2</sub>, X <sub>2</sub>, and the residual-making matrix M <sub>1</sub>.] (ii) As a special case, write   where X <i><sub>k</sub></i> is an <i>n</i> × 1 vector on the variable <i>x</i><i><sub>tk</sub></i>. Show that   where SSR<i><sub>k</sub></i> is the sum of squared residuals from regressing <i>x</i><i><sub>tk</sub></i> on 1, <i>x</i><i><sub>t</sub></i><sub>1</sub>, <i>x</i><i><sub>t</sub></i><sub>2</sub>, …, <i>x</i><i><sub>t, k</sub></i><sub>–</sub><sub>1</sub>. How come the factor multiplying <i>?</i><i><sub>k</sub></i> is never greater than one? (iii) Suppose you know <i> ? </i> <sub>1</sub>. Show that the regression y – X <sub>1</sub> <i> ? </i> <sub>1</sub> on X <sub>2</sub> produces an unbiased estimator of <i> ? </i> <sub>2</sub> (conditional on X ). </blockquote>

satisfies Assumptions E.1, E.2, and E.3. Partition the model as

 Suppose that the linear model, written in matrix notation,   satisfies Assumptions E.1, E.2, and E.3. Partition the model as   where X <sub>1</sub> is <i>n</i> × (<i>k</i><sub>1</sub> 1 1) and X <sub>2</sub> is <i>n</i> × <i>k</i><sub>2</sub>. <blockquote> (i) Consider the following proposal for estimating <i>?</i><sub>2</sub>. First, regress y on X <sub>1</sub> and obtain the residuals, say, ÿ . Then, regress ÿ on X <sub>2</sub> to get   . Show that    is generally biased and show what the bias is. [You should find    in terms of <i>?</i><sub>2</sub>, X <sub>2</sub>, and the residual-making matrix M <sub>1</sub>.] (ii) As a special case, write   where X <i><sub>k</sub></i> is an <i>n</i> × 1 vector on the variable <i>x</i><i><sub>tk</sub></i>. Show that   where SSR<i><sub>k</sub></i> is the sum of squared residuals from regressing <i>x</i><i><sub>tk</sub></i> on 1, <i>x</i><i><sub>t</sub></i><sub>1</sub>, <i>x</i><i><sub>t</sub></i><sub>2</sub>, …, <i>x</i><i><sub>t, k</sub></i><sub>–</sub><sub>1</sub>. How come the factor multiplying <i>?</i><i><sub>k</sub></i> is never greater than one? (iii) Suppose you know <i> ? </i> <sub>1</sub>. Show that the regression y – X <sub>1</sub> <i> ? </i> <sub>1</sub> on X <sub>2</sub> produces an unbiased estimator of <i> ? </i> <sub>2</sub> (conditional on X ). </blockquote>

where X1 is n × (k1 1 1) and X2 is n × k2.

(i) Consider the following proposal for estimating ?2. First, regress y on X1 and obtain the residuals, say, ÿ. Then, regress ÿ on X2 to get  Suppose that the linear model, written in matrix notation,   satisfies Assumptions E.1, E.2, and E.3. Partition the model as   where X <sub>1</sub> is <i>n</i> × (<i>k</i><sub>1</sub> 1 1) and X <sub>2</sub> is <i>n</i> × <i>k</i><sub>2</sub>. <blockquote> (i) Consider the following proposal for estimating <i>?</i><sub>2</sub>. First, regress y on X <sub>1</sub> and obtain the residuals, say, ÿ . Then, regress ÿ on X <sub>2</sub> to get   . Show that    is generally biased and show what the bias is. [You should find    in terms of <i>?</i><sub>2</sub>, X <sub>2</sub>, and the residual-making matrix M <sub>1</sub>.] (ii) As a special case, write   where X <i><sub>k</sub></i> is an <i>n</i> × 1 vector on the variable <i>x</i><i><sub>tk</sub></i>. Show that   where SSR<i><sub>k</sub></i> is the sum of squared residuals from regressing <i>x</i><i><sub>tk</sub></i> on 1, <i>x</i><i><sub>t</sub></i><sub>1</sub>, <i>x</i><i><sub>t</sub></i><sub>2</sub>, …, <i>x</i><i><sub>t, k</sub></i><sub>–</sub><sub>1</sub>. How come the factor multiplying <i>?</i><i><sub>k</sub></i> is never greater than one? (iii) Suppose you know <i> ? </i> <sub>1</sub>. Show that the regression y – X <sub>1</sub> <i> ? </i> <sub>1</sub> on X <sub>2</sub> produces an unbiased estimator of <i> ? </i> <sub>2</sub> (conditional on X ). </blockquote>   . Show that  Suppose that the linear model, written in matrix notation,   satisfies Assumptions E.1, E.2, and E.3. Partition the model as   where X <sub>1</sub> is <i>n</i> × (<i>k</i><sub>1</sub> 1 1) and X <sub>2</sub> is <i>n</i> × <i>k</i><sub>2</sub>. <blockquote> (i) Consider the following proposal for estimating <i>?</i><sub>2</sub>. First, regress y on X <sub>1</sub> and obtain the residuals, say, ÿ . Then, regress ÿ on X <sub>2</sub> to get   . Show that    is generally biased and show what the bias is. [You should find    in terms of <i>?</i><sub>2</sub>, X <sub>2</sub>, and the residual-making matrix M <sub>1</sub>.] (ii) As a special case, write   where X <i><sub>k</sub></i> is an <i>n</i> × 1 vector on the variable <i>x</i><i><sub>tk</sub></i>. Show that   where SSR<i><sub>k</sub></i> is the sum of squared residuals from regressing <i>x</i><i><sub>tk</sub></i> on 1, <i>x</i><i><sub>t</sub></i><sub>1</sub>, <i>x</i><i><sub>t</sub></i><sub>2</sub>, …, <i>x</i><i><sub>t, k</sub></i><sub>–</sub><sub>1</sub>. How come the factor multiplying <i>?</i><i><sub>k</sub></i> is never greater than one? (iii) Suppose you know <i> ? </i> <sub>1</sub>. Show that the regression y – X <sub>1</sub> <i> ? </i> <sub>1</sub> on X <sub>2</sub> produces an unbiased estimator of <i> ? </i> <sub>2</sub> (conditional on X ). </blockquote>    is generally biased and show what the bias is. [You should find  Suppose that the linear model, written in matrix notation,   satisfies Assumptions E.1, E.2, and E.3. Partition the model as   where X <sub>1</sub> is <i>n</i> × (<i>k</i><sub>1</sub> 1 1) and X <sub>2</sub> is <i>n</i> × <i>k</i><sub>2</sub>. <blockquote> (i) Consider the following proposal for estimating <i>?</i><sub>2</sub>. First, regress y on X <sub>1</sub> and obtain the residuals, say, ÿ . Then, regress ÿ on X <sub>2</sub> to get   . Show that    is generally biased and show what the bias is. [You should find    in terms of <i>?</i><sub>2</sub>, X <sub>2</sub>, and the residual-making matrix M <sub>1</sub>.] (ii) As a special case, write   where X <i><sub>k</sub></i> is an <i>n</i> × 1 vector on the variable <i>x</i><i><sub>tk</sub></i>. Show that   where SSR<i><sub>k</sub></i> is the sum of squared residuals from regressing <i>x</i><i><sub>tk</sub></i> on 1, <i>x</i><i><sub>t</sub></i><sub>1</sub>, <i>x</i><i><sub>t</sub></i><sub>2</sub>, …, <i>x</i><i><sub>t, k</sub></i><sub>–</sub><sub>1</sub>. How come the factor multiplying <i>?</i><i><sub>k</sub></i> is never greater than one? (iii) Suppose you know <i> ? </i> <sub>1</sub>. Show that the regression y – X <sub>1</sub> <i> ? </i> <sub>1</sub> on X <sub>2</sub> produces an unbiased estimator of <i> ? </i> <sub>2</sub> (conditional on X ). </blockquote>    in terms of ?2, X2, and the residual-making matrix M1.]

(ii) As a special case, write

 Suppose that the linear model, written in matrix notation,   satisfies Assumptions E.1, E.2, and E.3. Partition the model as   where X <sub>1</sub> is <i>n</i> × (<i>k</i><sub>1</sub> 1 1) and X <sub>2</sub> is <i>n</i> × <i>k</i><sub>2</sub>. <blockquote> (i) Consider the following proposal for estimating <i>?</i><sub>2</sub>. First, regress y on X <sub>1</sub> and obtain the residuals, say, ÿ . Then, regress ÿ on X <sub>2</sub> to get   . Show that    is generally biased and show what the bias is. [You should find    in terms of <i>?</i><sub>2</sub>, X <sub>2</sub>, and the residual-making matrix M <sub>1</sub>.] (ii) As a special case, write   where X <i><sub>k</sub></i> is an <i>n</i> × 1 vector on the variable <i>x</i><i><sub>tk</sub></i>. Show that   where SSR<i><sub>k</sub></i> is the sum of squared residuals from regressing <i>x</i><i><sub>tk</sub></i> on 1, <i>x</i><i><sub>t</sub></i><sub>1</sub>, <i>x</i><i><sub>t</sub></i><sub>2</sub>, …, <i>x</i><i><sub>t, k</sub></i><sub>–</sub><sub>1</sub>. How come the factor multiplying <i>?</i><i><sub>k</sub></i> is never greater than one? (iii) Suppose you know <i> ? </i> <sub>1</sub>. Show that the regression y – X <sub>1</sub> <i> ? </i> <sub>1</sub> on X <sub>2</sub> produces an unbiased estimator of <i> ? </i> <sub>2</sub> (conditional on X ). </blockquote>

where Xk is an n × 1 vector on the variable xtk. Show that

 Suppose that the linear model, written in matrix notation,   satisfies Assumptions E.1, E.2, and E.3. Partition the model as   where X <sub>1</sub> is <i>n</i> × (<i>k</i><sub>1</sub> 1 1) and X <sub>2</sub> is <i>n</i> × <i>k</i><sub>2</sub>. <blockquote> (i) Consider the following proposal for estimating <i>?</i><sub>2</sub>. First, regress y on X <sub>1</sub> and obtain the residuals, say, ÿ . Then, regress ÿ on X <sub>2</sub> to get   . Show that    is generally biased and show what the bias is. [You should find    in terms of <i>?</i><sub>2</sub>, X <sub>2</sub>, and the residual-making matrix M <sub>1</sub>.] (ii) As a special case, write   where X <i><sub>k</sub></i> is an <i>n</i> × 1 vector on the variable <i>x</i><i><sub>tk</sub></i>. Show that   where SSR<i><sub>k</sub></i> is the sum of squared residuals from regressing <i>x</i><i><sub>tk</sub></i> on 1, <i>x</i><i><sub>t</sub></i><sub>1</sub>, <i>x</i><i><sub>t</sub></i><sub>2</sub>, …, <i>x</i><i><sub>t, k</sub></i><sub>–</sub><sub>1</sub>. How come the factor multiplying <i>?</i><i><sub>k</sub></i> is never greater than one? (iii) Suppose you know <i> ? </i> <sub>1</sub>. Show that the regression y – X <sub>1</sub> <i> ? </i> <sub>1</sub> on X <sub>2</sub> produces an unbiased estimator of <i> ? </i> <sub>2</sub> (conditional on X ). </blockquote>

where SSRk is the sum of squared residuals from regressing xtk on 1, xt1, xt2, …, xt, k1. How come the factor multiplying ?k is never greater than one?

(iii) Suppose you know ?1. Show that the regression yX1?1 on X2 produces an unbiased estimator of ?2 (conditional on X).

Step-by-step solution
Verified
like image
like image

Step 1 of 4

Consider the linear model as,

    <div class=answer> Consider the linear model as,   That is partitioned as,   Here,

That is partitioned as,

    <div class=answer> Consider the linear model as,   That is partitioned as,   Here,

Here,

    <div class=answer> Consider the linear model as,   That is partitioned as,   Here,


Step 2 of 4


Step 3 of 4


Step 4 of 4

close menu
Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach 6th Edition by Jeffrey M Wooldridge
cross icon