MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948951363 · doi:10.3386/w26128

Tax-Sheltered Retirement Accounts: Can Financial Education Improve Decisions?

2019· preprint· en· W2948951363 on OpenAlexaff
M. Martin Boyer, Philippe D'Astous, Pierre‐Carl Michaud

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Bureau of Economic Research · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessFinanceEconomicsActuarial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We conduct a stated-choice experiment to analyze the decision to contribute to front-or backloaded tax-sheltered savings accounts.Our experimental design includes a randomized financial education treatment that provides information on these accounts.We assess whether respondents learn about the tax implications of these accounts and make contribution choices that increase after-tax income when exposed to the intervention.We find that our intervention improves both the understanding of the tax implications of the savings accounts (an increase of 6 to 15 percent) and contribution decisions.We find effects on after-tax lifetime-income for respondents by up to $1,900 per scenario presented.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.250
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.182
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.257 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Bureau of Economic ResearchSame topicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisFrench-language works237,207