MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902615886 · doi:10.5539/ass.v14n12p134

Do Political Institutions Affect Housing Prices in Malaysia?

2018· article· en· W2902615886 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Noor Zahirah Mohd Sidek

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsEconomicsDemocracyInstitutionBalance (ability)Corporate governanceGovernment (linguistics)Affect (linguistics)Outcome (game theory)Short runPolitical economyEconomic systemMacroeconomicsPolitical scienceMicroeconomicsFinanceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the relationship between housing price and political institutions. Political institutions is captured by elections, the role of elected government and their ramifications, and economic governance. Furthermore, the outcome of political choice on the economy is capture via economic freedom. Data ranges from 1988 to 2015. The choice of variable and time frame is highly restricted to availability of data. The effect of political institution on housing prices is examined using the ARDL bounds testing to test for both short and long run effects. Results show that elections have important effects on housing prices where prior to elections the effect is positive and negative after elections. Based on the results we recommend a strong and balance democratic regime to ensure a more stable housing prices. Strong political will is expected to curb excessive increase in housing prices in the long run.

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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicHousing Market and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207