The 3 references with contexts in paper Christopher F. Baum, John Barkoulas (2001) “Dynamics of Intra-EMS Interest Rate Linkages” / RePEc:boc:bocoec:492

7
Fama, Eugene. (1984) “Forward and spot exchange rates.” Journal of Monetary Economics, 14, 319-328.
Total in-text references: 1
  1. In-text reference with the coordinate start=7679
    Prefix
    Given the empirical evidence that the spot returns series t+1s−ts is a martingale-difference process (see, inter alia, Meese and Singleton (1982) and Baillie and Bollerslev (1989)), nonstationary exchange rate returns are unlikely. Therefore, nonstationary interest rate differentials should reflect nonstationary foreign exchange risk premia. In contrast to this prediction, studies by
    Exact
    Fama (1984),
    Suffix
    Hansen and Hodrick (1980), Hodrick and Srivastava (1984), Korajczyk (1985), and Wolff (1987), among others, find evidence consistent with stationary time-varying currency risk premia.6 More recently, Shively (2000) provides emphatic evidence supportive of time-varying risk premia evolving as stationary processes in the post-Bretton Woods era.

11
Hassapis, Christis, Nikitas Pittis, and Kyprianos Prodromidis. (1999) “Unit roots and Granger causality in the EMS interest rates: The German dominance hypothesis revisited.” Journal of International Money and Finance, 18, 47-73.
Total in-text references: 2
  1. In-text reference with the coordinate start=2183
    Prefix
    A direct implication of the GDH is that the interest rates of other EMS member countries are cointegrated with the German interest rate, with the German interest rate playing the leading role. However, Karfakis and Moschos (1990), Katsimbris and Miller (1993),
    Exact
    Hassapis et al. (1999), and
    Suffix
    Caporale et al. (1996), among others, report evidence that short-term interest rates in EMS countries are not cointegrated with the German interest rate.1 The absence of a common trend in the bivariate systems of EMS and German interest rates refutes the monetary-policy objectives of the EMS, and suggests the absence of convergence of European monetary policies.

  2. In-text reference with the coordinate start=3591
    Prefix
    Katsimbris and Miller (1993) estimate trivariate error-correction models including the U.S. interest rate in the system and, based on Granger causality tests, report negative evidence for the GDH, finding that EMS interest rates respond to each other as well as to the U.S. interest rate.
    Exact
    Hassapis et al. (1999)
    Suffix
    apply the Johansen cointegration methodology to systems of EMS interest rates extended to include the U.S. interest rate. They find that EMS interest rates are cointegrated with the U.S. interest rate but not with the German interest rate.2 They identify short-run intra-EMS linkages but, in most cases, they report that German interest rates are caused by, rather than cause, the interest rates of t

22
Krugman, Paul. (1991) “Target zones and exchange rate dynamics.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106, 311-325.
Total in-text references: 1
  1. In-text reference with the coordinate start=13916
    Prefix
    In a targetzone regime, the interest rate differential can be written as it−t i*= Ett+1c−tc()+tEt+1x−tx(),(6) where tc is the central parity and tx is the proportionate deviation from the central parity. tx, informally referred to as the exchange rate within the band, is theoretically mean-reverting
    Exact
    (Krugman 1991) and
    Suffix
    it empirically exhibits strong autocorrelation (Rose and Svensson 1995). Should the exchange rate within the band exhibit long memory, the interest rate spread may inherit such stochastic behavior. Fractionally differenced intra-EMS interest rate spreads could also possibly reflect the presence of strongly dependent risk premia of the EMS currencies relative to the Deutsche mark. 3.2 Estimation o