Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 242

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Note on the Hiemstra-Jones Test for Granger Non-causality

Open access
Diks, Cees, Panchenko, Valentyn·2005·Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics

Abstract

We address a consistency problem in the commonly used nonparametric test for Granger causality developed by Hiemstra and Jones (1994). We show that the relationship tested is not implied by the null hypothesis of Granger non-causality. Monte Carlo simulations using processes satisfying the null hypothesis show that, for a given nominal size, the actual rejection rate may tend to one as the sample size increases. Our results imply that evidence for nonlinear Granger causality reported in the applied empirical literature should be re-interpreted.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2202/1558-3708.1234

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 242

Metadata

Authors
Diks, C., & Panchenko, V.
Venue
Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics
Published
2005-01-06
Volume
9
Issue
2
ISSN
  • 1081-1826 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-3708
OpenAlex
W2045865139
Cited by
242
References
1
FWCI
11.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Note on the Hiemstra-Jones Test for Granger Non-causality. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2202/1558-3708.1234
The paper
Diks, C., & Panchenko, V. (2005). A Note on the Hiemstra-Jones Test for Granger Non-causality. Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics. https://doi.org/10.2202/1558-3708.1234

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.