The case for trend‐stationarity is stronger than we thought
回应Phillips对DeJong和Whiteman早期研究的批评，指出其模型和先验设定偏向单位根，但即使如此，数据仍更支持趋势平稳性，且该结论具有稳健性。
Abstract In DeJong and Whiteman (1991a), we concluded that 11 of the 14 macroeconomic time‐series originally studied by Nelson and Plosser (1982) supported trend‐stationarity. Phillips (1991) criticizes this inference, claiming that our procedure is biased against integration, and that our results are sensitive to model and prior specification. However, Phillips' alternative models and priors bias his results in favour of integration; despite these biases, Phillips' own findings indicate that the data provide the greatest relative support to trend‐stationarity. This result is similar to our own (1989, 1990, 1991b) findings concerning the sensitivity of our results; the trend‐stationarity inference is remarkably robust.