Monetary policy, external instruments, and heteroskedasticity
货币政策、外部工具变量与异方差AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要明确研究结构向量自回归中的货币政策冲击识别、工具检验与产出价格响应,直接对应宏观冲击分析。
货币政策、外部工具变量与异方差AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
We develop a structural vector autoregressive framework that combines external instruments and heteroskedasticity for identification of monetary policy shocks. We show that exploiting both types of information sharpens structural inference, allows testing the relevance and exogeneity condition for instruments separately using likelihood ratio tests, and facilitates the economic interpretation of the structural shock of interest. We test alternative instruments and find that narrative and model‐based measures are valid, while high‐frequency data instruments show signs of invalidity. Finally, we document that monetary shocks identified with both a valid instrument and heteroskedasticity have larger effects on production and prices than monetary shocks identified via an instrument only.