Citizens' attitudes towards economic insecurity and government after the 2007 financial tsunami: A Hong Kong and Taiwan comparison
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wang KY‐T, Wong C‐k, Tang K‐L. Citizens' attitudes towards economic insecurity and government after the 2007 financial tsunami: A Hong Kong and Taiwan comparison The purpose of this study was to investigate people's attitudes to economic insecurity and government in Hong Kong and Taiwan after the financial tsunami of 2007. Random sampling telephone surveys were conducted in July 2009. These are the main conclusions: First, the most vulnerable groups hurt by the financial crisis were low‐income families and people who had lost their job or were afraid of losing it. This implies that the old policy issue of social stratification and the emerging policy issue of employment insecurity coexisted during the financial crisis. Second, personal experiences of economic insecurity had an influence on people's perceptions of the severity of the economic crisis at the societal level. Third, citizens had ambivalent feelings about public interventions during the crisis. Fourth, there were both convergence and divergence between Hong Kong and Taiwan with regard to attitudes to particular issues. The policy implications of these findings are discussed in the final section of this article.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".