MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2724215471 · doi:10.3390/jrfm12010019

Determinants and Impacts of Financial Literacy in Cambodia and Viet Nam

2019· article· en· W2724215471 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Peter Morgan, Trinh Quang Long

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOrganisation de Coopération et de Développement ÉconomiquesAsian Development Bank
KeywordsFinancial literacyViet namEndogeneityFinancial inclusionLiteracyDemographic economicsFinancial sector developmentEconomicsEconomic growthBusinessFinanceDeveloping countryFinancial servicesEconomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our paper extends the literature on the determinants and impacts of financial literacy by conducting the OECD/INFE survey in two relatively low-income Asian economies—Cambodia and Viet Nam—and analyzing the determinants of financial literacy and the effects of financial literacy on savings and financial inclusion. Generally, our study corroborates the findings of studies of other countries, but uncovers some differences as well. The main determinants of financial literacy are found to be educational level, income, age, and occupational status. Both financial literacy and general education levels are found to be positively and significantly related to savings behavior and financial inclusion, and these results generally hold even when correcting for possible endogeneity of financial literacy.

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)0.002
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations123
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisFrench-language works237,207