English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This note explores the robustness of Hamilton's (Econometrica, 1989) two-regime Markov switching model framework for capturing business-cycle patterns. Applying his exact specification to a revised version of real GNP, I find parameter estimates that are similar to those he reported only when I use the same sample period (1952-1984) and a particular set of starting values for the maximum likelihood procedure. Two other local maxima exist that have higher likelihood values, and neither correspond to the conventional recession-expansion dichotomy. In fact, when the sample period is extended, there is no longer a local maximum near the parameter set reported by Hamilton. Exploring the model and data further, I reject cross-regime restrictions of Hamilton specification, but also find that relaxing these restrictions increases the number of local maxima. However, a parsimonious three-regime model for GNP growth is more robust and plausible, especially when each regime is required to last more than one quarter.

A Check on the Robustness of Hamilton's Markov Switching Model Approach to the Economic Analysis of the Business Cycle