MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161329740 · doi:10.1080/13691060500453726

Women-Owned businesses and access to bank credit: Evidence from three surveys since 1987

2006· article· en· W2161329740 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Monica Zimmerman Treichel, Jonathan Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueVenture Capital · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmall businessEntrepreneurshipLoanBusinessManagementPublic relationsPolitical scienceMarketingEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Women-owned businesses are often thought to face difficulties in applying for and securing bank loans (Schwartz, 1979 Schwartz, E. B. 1979. Entrepreneurship: a new female frontier. Journal of Contemporary Business, 4: 47–76. [Google Scholar]; Riding and Swift, 1990 Riding, A. and Swift, C. 1990. Women business owners and terms of credit: some empirical findings of the Canadian experience. Journal of Business Venturing, 5(5): 327–340. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]; Buttner and Rosen, 1992 Buttner, E. H. and Rosen, B. 1992. Rejection in the loan application process: male and female entrepreneurs' perceptions and subsequent intentions. Journal of Small Business Management, 30(1): 58–65. [Google Scholar]; Fabowale et al., 1995 Fabowale, L., Orser, B. and Riding, A. 1995. Gender, structural factors, and credit terms between Canadian small businesses and financial institutions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 19(4): 41–65. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar]; Haines et al., 1999 Haines, G. H. Jr, Orser, B. J. and Riding, A. L. 1999. Myths and realities: an empirical study of banks and the gender of small business clients. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 16(4): 291–307. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]; Coleman, 2000 Coleman, S. 2000. Access to capital and terms of credit: a comparison of men- and women-owned small businesses. Journal of Small Business Management, 38(3): 37–52. [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). While there may always be individual instances of difficulties with credit availability that might receive the attention of the media, the more important issue—especially given the increasing contribution of women-owned business to growth in the US economy, is whether women-owned businesses face any systemic, non-economic discrimination in applying for credit. We test three questions related to the success of women-owned businesses in accessing commercial bank financing. First, are women-owned businesses less likely to apply for bank loans than businesses owned by men? Second are women-owned businesses more likely to be turned down in their most recent loan application? And finally, if approved on their most recent loan application, are they more likely to receive a smaller loan? We found gender to be related to the application for bank loans as well as the size of the loans but not to the frequency of turndowns. These findings may be due to an omitted variable that could capture women's concerns about maintaining control over their business.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations152
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVenture CapitalSame topicCorporate Finance and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207