Robust Evaluation of Fixed-Event Forecast Rationality
Michael Clements and
Nick Taylor ()
Journal of Forecasting, 2001, vol. 20, issue 4, 285-95
In this paper we introduce a new testing procedure for evaluating the rationality of fixed-event forecasts based on a pseudo-maximum likelihood estimator. The procedure is designed to be robust to departures in the normality assumption. A model is introduced to show that such departures are likely when forecasters experience a credibility loss when they make large changes to their forecasts. The test is illustrated using monthly fixed-event forecasts produced by four UK institutions. Use of the robust test leads to the conclusion that certain forecasts are rational while use of the Gaussian-based test implies that certain forecasts are irrational. The difference in the results is due to the nature of the underlying data. Copyright © 2001 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (9) Track citations by RSS feed
There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:jof:jforec:v:20:y:2001:i:4:p:285-95
Access Statistics for this article
Journal of Forecasting is currently edited by Derek W. Bunn
More articles in Journal of Forecasting from John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing ().