Table 1 suggests that all regressor variables of the regression, ecept for LFDI and LG are significant at the 0. This means that for all coefficients, ecept LFDI and LG, w can reject the applicable null hypothesis that i =0 to accept alternative hypotheses that are consistent with economic theory. Bsed on the theory of the national income function in economics, w expect the signs to be as follows: 2>0, 3>0, 4>0, 5>0, 6>0, ad 7 0. W develop model 2 by removing LFDI or the logarithm of investment from the regression.
Te non-significance of LFDI indicates that LFDI is not significantly affecting LGDP or the logarithm of gross domestic product. I indicates that it is LDI or domestic investments that is significantly affecting LGDP not LFDI. Again, w used Eviews to determine the empirical implementation of model 2 below. Smilarly, w obtained Table 2 above as the empirical implementation of model 2. Bsed on the figures of Table 2, mdel 2 appears to be the better econometric model. Athough the F and R2 of model 1 good as model 2, mdel 2 has a lower standard error of regression and can be described as more accurate than model 1.
A in model 1, mdel 2 allows us to reject the null hypothesis that the coefficients are simultaneously equal to zero based on the F-statistics. I also allows us to reject the null hypothesis that R2 is equal to zero and accept that alternative hypothesis that R2 is greater than zero. Frther, ecept for LG, te coefficients have signs consistent with the economic theory on income.
for LG and the constant, te.. .
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples