Bibliographic record
Abstract
Against the backdrop of sharply lower global equity prices, an important question facing policymakers is the outlook for consumer spending.2 The exact relationship between changes in household wealth and consumer spending is uncertain. Even so, the recent large declines in equity prices are likely to be a depressing influence on consumer spending in the future. Offsetting this effect is the strong recent growth in house prices in a number of countries. Academic research has documented an important influence of housing wealth on consumer behaviour.3 The outlook for consumer spending, therefore, also depends on the future course of house prices. Presumably, a continuation of the global economic slowdown would slow the growth in house prices. Yet, house prices could also come under pressure even in the absence of a further slowdown in economic activity if stock market wealth is an important determinant of the demand for housing. This special feature examines the extent to which house price fluctuations in six advanced economies – the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Ireland, the Netherlands and Australia – can be attributed to fluctuations in national incomes, interest rates and stock prices. To this end, the joint behaviour of house prices, national incomes, real interest rates and stock prices is studied within the context of a simple empirical model. The empirical framework permits one to identify the typical response of house prices to changes in a small set of key determinants and also to examine the extent to which house prices have tended to deviate from the values predicted by them. Interesting results emerge from the analysis. For instance, the empirical results indicate that shocks to national income, stock prices and interest rates influence house prices, and that some of the recent large gains in house prices can be explained in terms of the favourable economic developments captured by these variables.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".