MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039820043 · doi:10.1016/j.rfe.2014.07.002

Causal nexus between economic growth, banking sector development, stock market development, and other macroeconomic variables: The case of ASEAN countries

2014· article· en· W2039820043 on OpenAlexaff
Rudra P. Pradhan, Mak B. Arvin, John H. Hall, Sahar Bahmani

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Financial Economics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsStock marketNexus (standard)Granger causalityStock (firearms)MacroeconomicsMonetary economicsCapital marketFinanceEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper examines the relationship between banking sector development, stock market development, economic growth, and four other macroeconomic variables in ASEAN countries for the period 1961–2012. Using principal component analysis for the construction of the development indices and a panel vector auto‐regressive model for testing the Granger causalities, this study finds the presence of both unidirectional and bidirectional causality links between these variables. The study contributes to understanding the importance of the interrelationship between the variables and combines the different strands of the literature. It also contributes to the literature by focusing on a group of countries that have not been studied before. One particular policy recommendation is to make the banking sector more accessible for those country's inhabitants that do not have bank accounts. Another policy recommendation is to nurture stock market development, which will facilitate the increased raising of capital for investment purposes to enhance economic growth.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations185
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Financial EconomicsSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207