MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151088272 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v4n3p237

The Determinants of Life Insurance Demand in Central and Southeastern Europe

2012· article· en· W2151088272 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jordan Kjosevski

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInsurance and Financial Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDependency ratioLife insuranceEconomicsPer capitaPanel dataActuarial scienceDependency (UML)Unit (ring theory)Demographic economicsEconometricsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main purpose of this study is to identify determinants of the demand of life insurance in 14 countries in Central and South- Eastern Europe (CSEE). We use fixed-effects panel model for the period 1998 - 2010 allowing each cross-sectional unit to have a different intercept term serving as an unobserved random variable that is potentially correlated with the observed regressors. We use two measures as a demand for life insurance: life insurance penetration and life insurance density. The research results show that higher, GDP per capita, inflation, health expenditure, level of education and rule of law are the most robust predictors of the use of life insurance. Real interest rates, ratio of quasi-money, young dependency ratio, old dependency ratio control of corruption and government effectiveness do not appear to be robustly associated with life insurance demand.

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)0.001
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations99
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicInsurance and Financial Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207