MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039419393 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v5n7p126

Financial Literacy, Personal Financial Attitude, and Forms of Personal Debt among Residents of the UAE

2013· article· en· W2039419393 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohamed E. Ibrahim, Fatima R. Alqaydi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancial literacyDebtSample (material)Descriptive statisticsService (business)Financial servicesBusinessCredit cardFinancePsychologyMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examined financial literacy among a sample of individuals residing in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and its relation to different forms of personal debt. These forms of personal debt include bank loans, borrowing from friends and/or family members, and borrowing through credit cards. We used a questionnaire distributed to a convenient sample of 412 individuals working for service organizations and residing across the UAE. Usable responses were about 45% of the sample and were subjected to descriptive statistics, reliability analysis, and t-tests. The results indicate that the average level of financial literacy in UAE (0.433) is statistically significantly below the average level reported in the literature (about 0.50). However, there were no significant differences between the mean score of males and females. The results also indicate that individuals with strong financial attitude tend to borrow less from credit cards. UAE nationals are more likely to borrow from banks than using credit cards or borrowing from friends/or family members.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations94
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisFrench-language works237,207