Global Financial Crisis of Islamic and Conventional Banking in Middle East – A Case Study in Turkey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The financial tools all over the world become extremely decisive in these days. The main goal of this paper is to measure then to discuss the impact of performance of conventional and Islamic banking in Turkey during the financial crisis. some variables such as profitability, liquidity, operational efficiency and business growth are used as a measuring factor to determine the performance for both financial models. The period of study is taken during the financial crisis in 1997 and during the global financial crisis in 2007. The comparison in this study is made between the performances of Islamic banking and conventional banking in Turkey.Some secondary data had examines in this study which was drown from the annual report from one of Turkey bank since 2002 until 2013. SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) “18.0” has been used to compare between Islamic finance model and other model. The findings of this paper shows that Islamic financial system is performing superior than conventional financial system for the period of this study. Hence, it can be concluded that the system of Islamic banking is able to sustain and compete with the conventional banking system especially during any financial crisis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".