MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332677382 · doi:10.1177/0020715212473314

Consumer markets and national income inequality: A study of 18 advanced capitalist countries

2012· article· en· W2332677382 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christopher Kollmeyer

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Comparative Sociology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIncome, Poverty, and Inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLeverhulme Trust
KeywordsEndogeneityEconomicsEconomic inequalityInequalityIncome inequality metricsMeasures of national income and outputIncome distributionDemographic economicsMacroeconomicsEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sociologists have paid scant attention to the possibility that the structure of the macro-economy is an important determinant of income inequality. Although prior research finds negative links between the size of the public sector and income inequality, no study to date considers whether the size of consumer markets has distributional consequences as well. To investigate this possibility, the present study measures the size of national consumer markets with the System of National Accounts used by governments to calculate gross domestic product (GDP). Based on data from 18 advanced capitalist countries over nearly a 40-year period, two-way random effects regression models reveal a strong and positive link between the size of consumer markets and income inequality. This finding is robust to the inclusion of numerous control variables, and to the consideration of endogeneity within the causal relationship. The proposed theoretical explanation centers on ideas developed by Polanyi, and suggests that economic activity in consumer markets creates higher levels of individual differentiation, and hence higher levels of income inequality, than economic activity in other sectors of the economy. The study concludes by highlighting ways future research can advance our theoretical and empirical understanding of this topic.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Comparative SociologySame topicIncome, Poverty, and InequalityFrench-language works237,207