MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2590234719 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v9n3p168

Educational Gender Gap, Economic Growth and Income Distribution: An Empirical Study of the Interrelationship in Cameroon

2017· article· en· W2590234719 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dobdinga Cletus Fonchamnyo, Nubonyin Hilda Fokong

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpenness to experienceTheil indexEconomicsInequalityDistribution (mathematics)Economic inequalityIndex (typography)Income distributionGender gapEstimationDemographic economicsRegression analysisIncome inequality metricsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed at investigating the interrelationship existing between educational gender gap, economic growth and income distribution in Cameroon using time series data from 1970 to 2014 obtained from the World Bank Development indicators and University of Texas inequality project. For estimation, the three stage least square regression technique was employed to estimate the parameters of the system of equations. The econometrics results showed that, educational gender gap had a positive and significant effect on economic growth, while increase in income inequality deters growth in Cameroon. The results also revealed that the theil index of income inequality negatively and significantly affect the educational gender gap, while the proportion of female teachers in the labour force and trade openness had a positive influence on the educational gender gap. Based on the findings, it is recommended that policymakers should focus on socio-economic policies apt to reduce educational gender gap and income inequality and at promoting economic growth.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicEconomic Growth and ProductivityFrench-language works237,207