The Moderating Effect of Religiosity in the Relationship between Money Ethics and Tax Evasion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Past studies on the ethics of tax evasion seems to focus on comparing tax evasion from various demographic, religious or perspective from different countries. Extensive search through the literature revealed that there were no studies on the effect of money ethics toward tax evasion and also the moderating effect of religiosity on this relationship. Hence, the current research is exploratory in nature and is an attempt to expand the empirical base of research findings on the area of tax evasion from a different viewpoint. The objective of the study therefore is to examine the relationship between money ethics and tax evasion as well as investigating the moderating effect of religiosity (intrinsic and extrinsic) on this relationship. The results of the hierarchical regression analyses showed that money ethics was positively related to tax evasion. Additionally, intrinsic religiosity was also found to moderate the relationship between money ethics and tax evasion. However, the result indicated that extrinsic religiosity was not a moderator in this relationship.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".