MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2893190628 · doi:10.6000/1929-7092.2018.07.26

Investigation of Household Debt through Multilevel Multivariate Analysis: Case of a Developing Country

2018· article· en· W2893190628 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wajiha Haq, Noor Azina Ismail, Nurulhuda Mohd Satar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reviews on Global Economics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultivariate statisticsMultivariate analysisDebtMultilevel modelEconomicsHousehold debtBusinessEconometricsStatisticsFinanceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study focuses on investigating the relationships between different socioeconomic and demographic characteristics and households’ debt decision and demand. We used six survey rounds of data from Pakistan household integrated expenditure survey (HIES) 2001 to 2014. HIES is a nationally representative data collected by Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. Multilevel models were used to investigate the relationship in which the data on households was nested in primary sampling units (PSUs) and PSUs were nested in provinces. The decision of taking household debt varies 22% at PSU level and 18% at provincial level due to unobserved variables. We found that households having higher financial assets, higher income and larger household sizes tend to have a higher percentage of debt. The amount of debt also increases with education and age. In the case of demand for debt, the variation is 12% at the provincial level. Literature studying household debt decision in Pakistan often ignore the geographical differences (region/province specific studies). Considering socioeconomic characteristics habituating the usage of credit is of countless importance in guiding policy design and interventions that aim to improve financial inclusion.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.164

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reviews on Global EconomicsSame topicHousing Market and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207