1
$\begingroup$

Consider a consumption model with bivariate data points $(Y_i,X_i)$, $i=1,...,n$, with $Y_i$ consumption and $X_i$ income. The univariate model is $$Y_i=\beta X_i+u_i,$$ where $E(u_i|X_i)=0, \textrm{var}(u_i|X_i)=\sigma^2$ and $\textrm{cov}(u_i,u_j|X_i)=0$.

The estimates of $\beta$ are given as follows: $$\hat{\beta_1}=\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{n}Y_i}{\sum_{i=1}^{n}X_i}$$ and $$\hat{\beta_2}=\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{n}X_iY_i}{\sum_{i=1}^{n}X_i^2}.$$ a.) Show that $\hat{\beta_1}$ and $\hat{\beta_2}$ are unbiased. Also, which estimator is 'better'.

I am not sure how to prove that both are unbiased. I think we begin by taking the expected values and then reduce it to the form of $E(\hat{\beta_1})=\beta$ and $E(\hat{\beta_2})=\beta$, but I am not sure how to do this mathematically.

To consider which is better, since both are unbiased, I would look at which has the smallest variance, but to avoid calculating this, would it be sufficient to talk about the Gauss-Markov conditions and state which one satisfies these conditions? Because the one that satisfies these conditions will have the smallest variance possible. How would I show which $\hat{\beta}$ does not satisfy the Gauss-Markov conditions? I believe that it is $\hat{\beta_1}$ but I am unsure of how to show this.

b.) If the residuals of the model are linearly related to the income so that $\textrm{var}(u_i|X_i)=\sigma^2X_i$, how could one verify if this is the case? Ie.: suggest a test.

I think you would write the OLS, take residuals and square them, then run the regression. If we assume linearity then we could use the Breusch-Pagan test with the following model: $$\hat{u_i^2}=\sigma^2+\sum_{j=1}^{k}\delta_jX_{ij}+\epsilon_i,$$ where $\sum_{j=1}^{k}\delta_jX_{ij}+\epsilon_i=0$ by the homoskedasticity assumption.

So this would give us: $H_0: \delta_1=\delta_2=...=\delta_k=0$ and $H_1: \textrm{at least one } \delta \neq 0$.

Then I think you would run an F-test since this is a joint hypothesis. We would then reject the null hypothesis if we cannot accept that all $\delta$'s equal $0$. And we would conclude that there exists heteroskedasticity in at least one of the $X$'s.

Is this correct? And how would be compute the F-statistic?

c.) If heteroskedasticity does exist, then will the estimators still be unbiased? And which estimator is now considered 'better'?

I would say that the estimators are still unbiased as the presence of heteroskedasticity affects the standard errors, not the means. So the condition for unbiasedness still holds ($E(u_i|X_i)=0$). I think the better estimate is now $\hat{\beta_1}$ because it is an optimum WLS (weighted least squares) estimator as it minimises $\textrm{var}(u_i|X_i)=\sigma^2X_i$, however I am unsure of how to prove this formally.

d.) If consumption also depends on interest $R_i$ so that the consumer may need to borrow in order to fund certain forms of expenditure), this would give the following model: $$Y_i=\beta X_i+\gamma R_i+u_i,$$ where $E(u_i|X_i, R_i)=0, \textrm{var}(u_i|X_i, R_i)=\sigma^2X_i$ and $\textrm{cov}(u_i,u_j|X_i, R_i)=0$.

What happens to the unbiasedness of the the $\hat{\beta_1}$ and $\hat{\beta_2}$ estimators? What conditions will make them unbiased?

Here, I think that again $\hat{\beta_1}$ and $\hat{\beta_2}$ are still unbiased as the $E(u_i|X_i, R_i)=0$. However, I am not sure because of the introduction of the $R_i$ term. Also, to make them unbiased would it be correct to say that the only condition that would make them unbiased is when $E(u_i|X_i)\neq0$? Or are there other conditions which can cause unbiasedness?

Any help with any of these questions will be really appreciated. Thank you!

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

Both in case of unbiasedness and variance-connected issues (like efficiency or heteroskedasticity), first of all, I would recommend plugging your equation on $Y$ into formulas for $\beta_{1} / \beta_{2}$. Thus (for $Y_{i} = \beta X_{i} + u_{i}$) we get:

$$ \beta_{1}= \beta + \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{n}u_{i}}{\sum_{i=1}^{n}X_{i}} \\ \beta_{2}= \beta + \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{n}X_{i}u_{i}}{\sum_{i=1}^{n}X_{i}^{2}} \\ $$

Since $E(u_{i}|X_{i}) = 0$, you can see clearly (Tipp: $E(u_{i})=E(E(u_{i}|X_{i})$), why both estimators are unbiased and why there is a problem if we put $Y_{i} = \beta X_{i} + \gamma R_{i} + u_{i}$ inside $\beta_{1} / \beta_{2}$ (instead of $Y_{i} = \beta X_{i} + u_{i}$).

Moreover, calculating OLS estimator ($\beta_{OLS}=(X^{'}X)^{-1}X^{'}y$) for given model, we obtain $\beta_{2} = \beta_{OLS}$. Gauss-Markov Theorem gives you that $\beta_{2}$ has lower variance (both estimators are linear in $Y$ and $\beta_{2}$ is BLUE). Alternatively, you could calculate variance of both estimators directly from definition: $$ Var(\beta_{2})=Var(\beta + \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{n}X_{i}u_{i}}{\sum_{i=1}^{n}X_{i}^{2}})=... $$ remembering that $Var(u_{i}) = E(Var(u_{i}|X_{i})) + Var(E(u_{i}|X_{i}))$. This approach might be particularly useful in c) since you can no longer use Gauss-Markov Theorem (we have heteroskedasticity!). I hope you can manage to do this; to find out which variance is lower you can use Cauchy-Schwarz inequality (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cauchy%E2%80%93Schwarz_inequality).

Last but not least, heteroskedasticity has nothing with biasedness or unbiasedness of your estimators (the only thing you should provide is $E(u_{i}|X_{i})=0$). Back to b), your approach to use Breusch - Pagan test seems correct for me.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ upvote is appreciated :) $\endgroup$ – user2280549 Jan 7 '16 at 14:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.