NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH
NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH

Comparing Predictive Accuracy

Francis X. Diebold, Robert S. Mariano

NBER Technical Working Paper No. 169
Issued in November 1994
NBER Program(s):   EFG

Using research designs patterned after randomized experiments, many recent economic studies examine outcome measures for treatment groups and comparison groups that are not randomly assigned. By using variation in explanatory variables generated by changes in state laws, government draft mechanisms, or other means, these studies obtain variation that is readily examined and is plausibly exogenous. This paper describes the advantages of these studies and suggests how they can be improved. It also provides aids in judging the validity of inferences they draw. Design complications such as multiple treatment and comparison groups and multiple pre- or post-intervention observations are advocated.

download in pdf format
   (867 K)

email paper

This paper is available as PDF (867 K) or via email.

Machine-readable bibliographic record - MARC, RIS, BibTeX

Document Object Identifier (DOI): 10.3386/t0169

Published: Journal of Business and Economic Statistics (1995), vol. 13, pp. 253-265.

Users who downloaded this paper also downloaded these:
Diebold, Gunther, and Tay t0215 Evaluating Density Forecasts
Mincer and Zarnowitz The Evaluation of Economic Forecasts
Diebold and Lopez t0192 Forecast Evaluation and Combination
Diebold w18391 Comparing Predictive Accuracy, Twenty Years Later: A Personal Perspective on the Use and Abuse of Diebold-Mariano Tests
West and Clark t0326 Approximately Normal Tests for Equal Predictive Accuracy in Nested Models
 
Publications
Activities
Meetings
NBER Videos
Data
People
About

Support
National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Ave., Cambridge, MA 02138; 617-868-3900; email: info@nber.org

Contact Us