What do technology shocks tell us about the New Keynesian paradigm?

Journal of Monetary Economics

Volumn 56, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 560-569

  Dupor, Bill ^a   Han, Jing ^a   Tsai, Yi Chan ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

New Keynesian paradigm; Structural vector autoregression; Technology shocks

Indexed keywords

EID: 65649102207     PISSN: 03043932     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmoneco.2009.03.016     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Altig, D., Christiano, L., Eichenbaum, M., Linde, J., 2004. Firm-specific capital, nominal rigidities and the business cycle, Manuscript, Northwestern University.
2. Boivin J., and Giannoni M. Has monetary policy become more effective?. Review of Economics and Statistics 88 3 (2006) 445-462
3. Canova, F., Lopez-Salido, D., Michelacci, D., 2008. The effects of technology shocks on hours and output: a robustness analysis. Working paper.
4. Christiano L., Eichenbaum M., and Evans C. Nominal rigidities and the dynamic effects of a shock to monetary policy. Journal of Political Economy 113 1 (2005) 1-45
5. Christiano L., Eichenbaum M., and Vigfusson R. Alternative procedures for estimating vector autoregressions identified with long-run restrictions. Journal of the European Economic Association 4 2 (2006) 475-483
6. Christiano, L., Eichenbaum, M., Vigfusson, R., 2007. Assessing structural vector autoregressions. NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2006, The MIT Press.
7. Cogley T., and Nason J. Testing the implications of long run neutrality for monetary business cycle models. Journal of Applied Econometrics 9 (1994) S37-S70
8. Edge, R., Laubach, T., Williams, J., 2003. The responses of wages and prices to technology shocks. Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2003-65, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
9. Erceg C., Guerrieri L., and Gust C. Can long-run restrictions identify technology shocks?. Journal of the European Economic Association 3 (2005) 1237-1278
10. Fernald J. Trend breaks, long run restrictions, and the contractionary effects of technology shocks. Journal of Monetary Economics 54 (2007) 2467-2485
11. Francis N., and Ramey V. Is the technology-driven real business cycle hypothesis dead? Shocks and aggregate fluctuations revisited. Journal of Monetary Economics 52 (2005) 1379-1399
12. Francis, N., Ramey, V., 2008. Measures of per capita hours and their implications for the technology-hours debate. University of California, San Diego.
13. Gali J. Technology, employment, and the business cycle: Do technology shocks explain aggregate fluctuations?. American Economic Review 89 1 (1999) 249-271
14. Gali J., and Gertler M. Inflation dynamics: a structural econometric analysis. Journal of Monetary Economics 44 2 (1999) 195-222
15. Gali J., and Rabanal P. Technology shocks and aggregate fluctuations: How well does the RBC model fit postwar US data?. NBER Macroeconomics Annual 19 (2004) 225-288
16. Mackowiak, B., Wiederholt, M., 2008. Business cycle dynamics under rational inattention. Manuscript.
17. Mankiw N., and Reis R. Sticky information versus sticky prices: a proposal to replace the New Keynesian Phillips curve. Quarterly Journal of Economics 117 4 (2002) 1295-1328
18. Paciello, L., 2007. The response of prices to technology and monetary policy shocks under rational inattention. Manuscript, 2007.
19. Rotemberg J., and Woodford M. An optimization-based econometric model for the evaluation of monetary policy. NBER Macroeconomics Annual 12 (1997) 297-346