Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-f46jp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-22T02:00:14.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Estimating Dynamic Models Using Kalman Filtering

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2017

Nathaniel Beck
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Kalman filter is useful to estimate dynamic models via maximum likelihood. To do this the model must be set up in state space form. This article shows how various models of interest can be set up in that form. Models considered are Auto Regressive-Moving Average (ARMA) models with measurement error and dynamic factor models.

The filter is used to estimate models of presidential approval. A test of rational expectations in approval shows the hypothesis not to hold. The filter is also used to deal with missing approval data and to study whether interpolation of missing data is an adequate technique. Finally, a dynamic factor analysis of government entrepreneurial activity is performed.

Appendices go through the mathematical details of the filter and show how to implement it in the computer language GAUSS.

Type
Research Article
Information
Political Analysis , Volume 1 , 1989 , pp. 121 - 156
Copyright
Copyright © by the University of Michigan 1990 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beck, N. 1983. “Time-Varying Parameter Regression Models.” American Journal of Political Science 27: 557–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, N. 1985. “Estimating Dynamic Models Is Not Merely a Matter of Technique.” Political Methodology 11: 71–90.Google Scholar
Beck, N. 1988. “Temporal Aggregation.” Presented at the 1988 Meeting of the Political Methodology Society, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Beck, N. n.d. “The Economy and Presidential Popularity: An Attempt at a Rational Model and Improved Econometric Estimates.” In Economics and Elections in the United States and Western Europe, ed. Lafay, J., Lewis-Beck, M. and Norpoth, H. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
Brown, R., Durbin, J., and Evans, J. 1975. “Techniques for Testing the Constancy of a Regression Relationship Over Time.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, ser. B, 37: 149–92.Google Scholar
Chrystal, K. and Peel, D. 1986. “What Can Economists Learn from Political Science and Vice Versa?” American Economic Review 76(2): 62–65.Google Scholar
Engle, R., and Watson, M. 1980. “A Time Domain Approach to Dynamic Factor and MIMIC Models.” Cahiers du Seminaires d'Econometrie 22.Google Scholar
Engle, R., and Watson, M. 1981. “A One Factor Multivariate Time Series Model of Metropolitan Wage Rates.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 76: 774–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, J., and Duvall, R. 1984. “International Economic Relationships and the Entrepreneurial State.” Economic Development and Cultural Change 32: 373–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallant, A. 1987. Nonlinear Statistical Models. New York: John Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granger, C., and Morris, M. 1976. “Time Series Modelling and Interpretation.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, ser. A, 139: 246–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, A. 1981a. Time Series Models. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Harvey, A. 1981b. The Econometric Analysis of Time Series. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Harvey, A. 1984. “Dynamic Models, the Prediction Error Decomposition and State Space.” In Econometrics and Quantitative Economics, ed. Hendry, D. and Wallis, K. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Harvey, A., and McKenzie, C. 1984. “Missing Observations in Dynamic Econometric Models: A Partial Synthesis.” In Time Series Analysis of Irregular Observations, ed. Parzen, E. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Harvey, A., and Philips, G. 1979. “Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Regression Models with Autoregressive-Moving Average Disturbances.” Biometrika 66: 49–58.Google Scholar
Hibbs, D. 1974. “Problems of Statistical Estimation and Causal Inference in Time-series Regression Models. In Sociological Methodology 1973-1974, ed. Costner, H. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Joreskog, K. 1973. “A General Method for Estimating a Linear Structure Equation System.” In Structural Equation Models in the Social Sciences, ed. Goldberger, A. and Duncan, O. New York: Seminar Press.Google Scholar
Judge, G., Griffiths, W., Hill, W., R., Lutkepohl, H., and Lee, T.-C. 1985. The Theory and Practice of Econometrics. 2d ed. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Kalman, R. 1960. “A New Approach to Linear Filtering and Prediction Problems.” Journal of Basic Engineering 82: 34–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, G. 1989. Unifying Political Methodology: The Likelihood Theory of Statistical Inference. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kirchgassner, G. 1985. “Rationality, Causality and the Relationship between Economic Conditions and the Popularity of Parties.” European Economic Review 28: 243–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKuen, M., Erikson, R., and Stimson, J. 1988. “Macro Party Identification: A Preliminary Analysis.” Presented to the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Meinhold, R., and Singpurwalla, N. 1983. “Understanding the Kalman Filter.” America Statistician 37: 123–27.Google Scholar
Watson, M., and Engle, R. 1983. “Alternative Algorithms for Estimating Dynamic Factor Analysis, MIMIC, and Varying Coefficient Regression Models.” Journal of Econometrics 23: 385–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar