Abstract
The role of model complexity in asymmetric price transmission model selection is not well understood. In order to appreciate the role of model complexity in model selection performance, this study fits alternative asymmetric price transmission models that differ in complexity to simulated data and evaluates the ability of the model selection method to recover the true model. The results of Monte Carlo experimentation suggest that in general BIC, CAIC and DIC were superior to AIC when the true data generating process was the Manning Error Correction model (MECM). However, AIC was more successful when the true model was the Complex Error Correction Model (CECM). The tendency of the complex model (CECM) to over fit the relatively simpler true asymmetric data generating process (MECM) is minimized in larger samples. The research findings demonstrate the role of model complexity in asymmetric price transmission model comparison and selection.
Keywords
- Asymmetry Search this journal for Asymmetry (opens in a new tab)
- Monte Carlo Search this journal for Monte Carlo (opens in a new tab)
- Complexity Search this journal for Complexity (opens in a new tab)
- Information Criteria Search this journal for Information Criteria (opens in a new tab)
- Recovery Rate Search this journal for Recovery Rate (opens in a new tab)
References
- Acquah, H. D. (2010). Comparison of Akaike Information Criterion and Consistent Akaike Information Criterion for Model Selection in Asymmetric Price Transmission Studies. Asian-African Journal of Economics and Econometrics , 9(1), 49-56.
- Akaike, H. (1973). Information Theory and an Extension of the Maximum Likelihood Principle. B. N. Petrov and F. Csaki (eds.) 2nd International Symposium on Information Theory: 267-81. Budapest: Akademiai Kiado.
- Bozdogan, H. (1987). Model Selection and Akaike’s Information Criterion (AIC): The General Theory and Its Analytical Extensions. Psychometrika, 52 (3), 345-370.
- Capps, O. & Sherwell, P. (2007). Alternative Approaches in Detecting Asymmetry in Farm-Retail Prices Transmission of Fluid Milk. Journal of Agribusiness , 23(3), 313-331.
- Cook, S., Holly, S. & Turner, P. (1999). The Power of Tests for Non-Linearity: The Case of Granger–Lee Asymmetry. Economics Letters , 62, 155–159.
- Draper, D. (1995). Assessment and Propagation of Model Uncertainty. Journal of Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) , 57(1) 45-97.
- Fishler, E., Grosmann, M. & Messer, H. (2002). Detection of signals by information theoretic criteria: general asymptotic performance analysis. IEEE Trans. Signal Process , 50(5) 1027–1036.
- Holly, S., Turner P. & Weeks, M. (2003). Asymmetric Adjustment and Bias in Estimation of an Equilibrium Relationship from a Co-integrating Regression. Computational Economics, 21, 195-202
- Houck, J. P. (1977). An Approach to Specifying and Estimating Nonreversible Functions. American Journal of Agricultural Economics , 59, 570 – 572.
- Ichikawa, M. (1988). Empirical Assessments of AIC Procedure for Model Selection in Factor Analysis. Behaviormetrika, 24, 33–40.
- Lin, T. H. & Dayton, C. M. (1997). Model selection Information Criteria for Non-Nested Latent Class Models. Journal of Educatational and Behavioral Statistics , 22(3) 249–264.
- Manera, M. & Frey, G. (2007). Econometric Models of Asymmetric Price Transmission. Journal of Economic Surveys , 67, 349- 415.
- Manning, D. N. (1991). Petrol Prices, Oil Price Rises and Oil Price Falls: Some Evidence for the UK since 1972. Applied Economics , 23, 1535 – 1541.
- Markon, K. E. & Krueger, R. F. (2004). An Empirical Comparison of Information- Theoretic Selection Criteria for Multivariate Behavior Genetic Models. Behavior Genetics , 34(6), 593- 609.
- Myung, J. I. (2000). The Importance of Complexity in Model Selection. Journal of Mathematical Psychology , 44, 190-204.
- Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the Dimension of a Model. Annals of Statistics , 6, 461- 464.
- Von-Cramon-Taubadel, S. & Loy, J. P. (1996). Price Asymmetry in the international Wheat Market: Comment. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 44, 311-317.
Downloads
No downloads have been recorded for this article yet. Figures appear here once readers begin downloading the full text.
How to Cite
Share this article
License
Copyright (c) 2013 Henry de-Graft Acquah, Patrick Ofosuhene (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Author (s) should affirm that the material has not been published previously. It has not been submitted and it is not under consideration by any other journal. At the same time author (s) need to execute a publication permission agreement to assume the responsibility of the submitted content and any omissions and errors therein. After submission of revised paper in the light of suggestions of the reviewers, the editorial team edits and formats manuscripts to bring uniformity and standardization in published material.
This work will be licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) and under condition of the license, users are free to read, copy, remix, transform, redistribute, download, print, search or link to the full texts of articles and even build upon their work as long as they credit the author for the original work. Moreover, as per journal policy author (s) hold and retain copyrights without any restrictions.
Keywords
- Asymmetry Search this journal for Asymmetry (opens in a new tab)
- Monte Carlo Search this journal for Monte Carlo (opens in a new tab)
- Complexity Search this journal for Complexity (opens in a new tab)
- Information Criteria Search this journal for Information Criteria (opens in a new tab)
- Recovery Rate Search this journal for Recovery Rate (opens in a new tab)
Section
Published
Submissions
Have research to publish? Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies welcomes submissions.
Make a Submission