Skip to main content

Topology, Dependency Tests and Estimation Bias in Network Autoregressive Models

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Progress in Spatial Analysis

Part of the book series: Advances in Spatial Science ((ADVSPATIAL))

Abstract

Regression analyses based on spatial datasets often display spatial autocorrelation in the substantive part of the model, or residual pattern in the disturbances. A researcher conducting investigations of a spatial dataset must be able to identify whether this is the case, and if so, what model specification is more appropriate for the data and problem at hand. If autocorrelation is embedded in the dependent variable, the following spatial autoregressive (SAR) model with a spatial lag can be used:

$\begin{array}{rcl} & & \mathbf{y} = \rho \mathbf{Wy} + \mathbf{X}\beta + \varepsilon , \\ & & \varepsilon \sim N(0,{\sigma }^{2}). \end{array}$
(1)

On the other hand, when there is residual pattern in the error component of the traditional regression model, the spatial error model (SEM) can be used:

$\begin{array}{rcl} & & \mathbf{y} = \mathbf{X}\beta + \mathbf{u}, \\ & & \mathbf{u} = \rho \mathbf{Wu} + \varepsilon , \\ & & \varepsilon \sim N(0,{\sigma }^{2}).\end{array}$
(2)

In the above equations, W is the spatial weight matrix representing the structure of the spatial relationships between observations, ρ is the spatial dependence parameter, u is a vector of autocorrelated disturbances, and all other terms are the elements commonly found in ordinary linear regression analysis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The visualizations in Sect. 4 indicate that the LR test for SAR-exponential is extremely strong, even for quite small values of dependence. This would explain the extremely high coefficients on the dependence parameters, and perhaps the extremely significant but extremely small coefficients for clustering.

  2. 2.

    We are grateful to the anonymous reviewer who brought this interpretation to our attention.

References

  • Anselin L (1986) Some further notes on spatial models and regional science. J Reg Sci 26:799–802

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anselin L (1988a) Lagrange multiplier test diagnostics for spatial dependence and spatial heterogeneity. Geogr Anal 20:1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anselin L (1988b) Spatial econometrics: methods and models. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Anselin L (2003) Spatial externalities, spatial multipliers, and spatial econometrics. Int Reg Sci Rev 26:153–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anselin L, Florax RJGM (1995) Small sample properties of tests for spatial dependence in regression models: some further results. In: Anselin L, Florax RJGM (eds) New directions in spatial econometrics. Springer, Berlin, pp 21–74

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Anselin L, Rey S (1991) Properties of tests for spatial dependence in linear-regression models. Geogr Anal 23:112–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barabasi AL, Albert R (1999) Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science 286:509–512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartels CPA, Hordijk L (1977) Power of generalized moran contiguity coefficient in testing for spatial autocorrelation among regression disturbances. Reg Sci Urban Econ 7:83–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cliff A, Ord JK (1975) The choice of a test for spatial autocorrelation. In: Davis J, McCullagh M (eds) Display and analysis of spatial data. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Cliff AD, Ord JK (1973) Spatial autocorrelation. Pion, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Cliff, A. D. and Ord, J. K. (1981) Spatial Processes: models and applications. Pion, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Cordy C, Griffith D (1993) Efficiency of least squares estimators in the presence of spatial autocorrelation. Commun Stat B 22:1161–1179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dow MM, Burton ML, White DR (1982) Network auto-correlation – a simulation study of a foundational problem in regression and survey-research. Soc Networks 4:169–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farber S, Páez A, Volz E (2009) Topology and dependency tests in spatial and network autoregressive models. Geogr Anal 41:158–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florax RJGM, de Graaff T (2004) The performance of diagnostic tests for spatial dependence in linear regression models: a meta-analysis of simulation studies. In: Anselin L, Florax RJGM, Rey S (eds) Advances in spatial econometrics: methodology, tools and applications. Springer, Berlin, pp 29–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Florax RJGM, Rey S (1995) The impact of misspecified spatial structure in linear regression models. In: Anselin L, Florax RJGM (eds) New directions in spatial econometrics, Springer, Berlin, pp 111–135

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Haggett P, Chorly RJ (1970) Network analysis in geography. St. Martin’s Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Haining R (1977) Model specification in stationary random fields. Geogr Anal 9:107–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haining R (1978) The moving average model for spatial interaction. Trans Inst Brit Geogr 3:202–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kansky KJ (1963) Structure of transportation networks: relationships between network geometry and regional characteristics. Technical paper, University of Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelejian HH, Robinson DP (1998) A suggested test for spatial autocorrelation and/or heteroskedasticity and corresponding Monte Carlo results. Reg Sci Urban Econ 28:389–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leenders RTAJ (2002) Modeling social influence through network autocorrelation: constructing the weight matrix. Soc Networks 24:21–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LeSage JP (2009) Spatial econometrics toolbox. http://www.spatial-econometrics.com. 29 Sept. 2009

  • Mizruchi MS, Neuman EJ (2008) The effect of density on the level of bias in the network autocorrelation model. Soc Networks 30:190–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman MEJ (2003) The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Rev 45:167–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Páez A, Scott DM (2007) Social influence on travel behavior: a simulation example of the decision to telecommute. Environ Plann 39:647–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Páez A, Scott DM, Volz E (2008) Weight matrices for social influence: an investigation of measurement errors and model identification and estimation quality issues. Soc Network 30:309–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith TE (2009) Estimation bias in spatial models with strongly connected weight matrices. Geogr Anal 41:307–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stetzer F (1982) Specifying weights in spatial forecasting models – the results of some experiments. Environ Plann 14:571–584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volz E (2004) Random networks with tunable degree distribution and clustering. Phys Rev E 70:5056115–5056121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watts DJ, Strogatz SH (1998) Collective dynamics of “small-world” networks. Nature 393:440–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steven Farber .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Farber, S., Páez, A., Volz, E. (2010). Topology, Dependency Tests and Estimation Bias in Network Autoregressive Models. In: Páez, A., Gallo, J., Buliung, R., Dall'erba, S. (eds) Progress in Spatial Analysis. Advances in Spatial Science. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03326-1_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics