We analyze use of a quasi-likelihood ratio statistic for a mixture model to test the null hypothesis of one regime versus the alternative of two regimes in a Markov regime-switching context. This test exploits mixture properties implied by the regime-switching process, but ignores certain implied serial correlation properties. When formulated in the natural way, the setting is nonstandard, involving nuisance parameters on the boundary of the parameter space, nuisance parameters identified only under the alternative, or approximations using derivatives higher than second order. We exploit recent advances by Andrews (2001) and contribute to the literature by extending the scope of mixture models, obtaining asymptotic null distributions different from those in the literature. We further provide critical values for popular models or bounds for tail probabilities that are useful in constructing conservative critical values for regime-switching tests. We compare the size and power of our statistics to other useful tests for regime switching via Monte Carlo methods and find relatively good performance. We apply our methods to reexamine the classic cartel study of Porter (1983) and reaffirm Porter's findings.

This study demonstrates a tractable method for analyzing schooling investment with risky incomes. Constant relative risk aversion is assumed, and borrowing in a rudimentary capital market is allowed. A linear, variance-components model on log (real income) is estimated. Only unexplained variation is treated as a source of risk. Illustrative empirical results indicate that students should take either 4 years of college or none at all, depending on time preference, loan availability, and degree of risk aversion. Estimate risk-adjusted rates of return to college exceed 10 percent for some parameter values. Risk adjustments for college rates are small but positive.

In this paper we utilize White's Reality Check bootstrap methodology (White (1999)) to evaluate simple technical trading rules while quantifying the data‐snooping bias and fully adjusting for its effect in the context of the full universe from which the trading rules were drawn. Hence, for the first time, the paper presents a comprehensive test of performance across all technical trading rules examined. We consider the study of Brock, Lakonishok, and LeBaron (1992), expand their universe of 26 trading rules, apply the rules to 100 years of daily data on the Dow Jones Industrial Average, and determine the effects of data‐snooping.