The purchasing power parity persistence paradigm

By C. Murray, David H. Papell. 2000

258 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d6f4399fc83461f8b628c7450982c0b44bf432e0

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

Citations in the corpus

State of the Art Unit Root Tests and the PPP Puzzle (2003, methodology): “The half-lives for long-horizon data in Murray and Papell (2002a) are computed from ADF regressions using GS lag selection, using data for six countries from 1900-1996. To remove one of these differences, we have also computed median-unbiased half-lives from Taylor’s (2002) long term data set, based”
Asymptotic confidence intervals for impulse responses of near‐integrated processes (2004, background): “The ‘consensus estimates for the half-life of three to five years’ reported by Rogoff (1996) have C© Royal Economic Society 2004 been challenged recently by Murray and Papell (2002) and Kilian and Zha (2002).”
Confidence Intervals for Half-Life Deviations From Purchasing Power Parity (2005, methodology): “This is not the first article on inference about half-life deviations from PPP. Authors who have recently addressed this issue include Cheung and Lai (2000), Murray and Papell (2002), Lopez, Murray, and Papell (2003), Gospodinov (2002), and Kilian and Zha (2002).”
Non-commercial Research and Educational Use including without Limitation Use in Instruction at Your Institution, Sending It to Specific Colleagues That You Know, and Providing a Copy to Your Institution's Administrator. All Other Uses, Reproduction and Distribution, including without Limitation Comm (2005, unknown): “We mention selective deuteration in conjunction with heteronuclear decoupling, multiple quantum NMR (MQ–NMR) techniques , computer experiments such as molecular dynamics or Monte Carlo type simulations to estimate the degree of orientational order, and the use of 'magic mixtures' in combination…”
Dissecting the PPP Puzzle: The Unconventional Roles of Nominal Exchange Rate and Price Adjustments (2004, unknown): “As recommended by Froot and Rogoff (1995), the most direct way to verify the long-run PPP specification is to perform unit-root tests on the real exchange rate q.”
Exchange Rate Predictability (2013, unknown): “15The half-life measures how many time periods it takes for the e¤ects of a shock to PPP to decrease by 50%. and Zha, 2002, Murray and Papell, 2002, Gospodinov 2004, Lopez, Murray, and Papell, 2005, and Rossi, 2005c)16 and heterogeneity in disaggregate data (Imbs, Mumtaz, Ravn and Rey, 2005).17 (c)…”
Concepts of equilibrium exchange rates (2005, methodology): “For example, Murray and Papell (2002), find that the estimated half-lives associated with deviations in the real exchange rate are within the 3-5 years suggested in Rogoff (1996) for the countries in their sample.”
International Prices and Exchange Rates (2013, unknown): “Also as documented in Murray and Papell (2002) and Rossi (2005) the confidence intervals on the half live estimates are very wide.”
Real exchange rates and Purchasing Power Parity: mean-reversion in economic thought (2006, methodology): “Murray and Papell (2002) using the medianunbiased estimation methods of Andrews (1993) and the approximately median-unbiased methods of Andrews and Chen (1994), suggest that the puzzle may be even more acute.”
Testing for PPP: Should we use panel methods? (2005, background): “Among the large number of papers available in the literature, special attention should be drawn to the work of Papell and his co-authors, Murray and Papell (2002) , Murray and Papell (2003), Papell and Theodoridis (2001), Papell (2002), Papell (2003) and Papell and Prodan (2003), who have investiga”
Persistence in law of one price deviations: Evidence from micro-data (2008, result): “Correcting bias caused by Þnite T in the least-squares persistence estimates of real exchange rates has been conducted in studies by Andrews (1993), Murray and Papell (2002), and Choi, Mark and Sul (2003), among others.5 In contrast, our baseline results are based on the GMM estimator which is…”