A Comment on "Estimating Dynamic Discrete Choice Models with Hyperbolic Discounting" by Hanming Fang and Yang Wang

Jaap H. Abbring and {\O}ystein Daljord

Papers from arXiv.org

Abstract: The recent literature often cites Fang and Wang (2015) for analyzing the identification of time preferences in dynamic discrete choice under exclusion restrictions (e.g. Yao et al., 2012; Lee, 2013; Ching et al., 2013; Norets and Tang, 2014; Dub\'e et al., 2014; Gordon and Sun, 2015; Bajari et al., 2016; Chan, 2017; Gayle et al., 2018). Fang and Wang's Proposition 2 claims generic identification of a dynamic discrete choice model with hyperbolic discounting. This claim uses a definition of "generic" that does not preclude the possibility that a generically identified model is nowhere identified. To illustrate this point, we provide two simple examples of models that are generically identified in Fang and Wang's sense, but that are, respectively, everywhere and nowhere identified. We conclude that Proposition 2 is void: It has no implications for identification of the dynamic discrete choice model. We show that its proof is incorrect and incomplete and suggest alternative approaches to identification.

Date: 2019-05, Revised 2019-07
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-dcm
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Published in International Economic Review 61(2), 565-571 (May 2020)

Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1905.07048 Latest version (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:arx:papers:1905.07048

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().