MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040178787 · doi:10.5267/j.ac.2020.6.022

Demographic characteristics, personality characteristics, and the level of student’s financial literacy

2020· article· en· W3040178787 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gatot Nazir Ahmad, Sholatia Dalimunthe, Siti Thahirah, Hania Aminah

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrit, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancial literacyResidencePersonalityPsychologyLogistic regressionPopulationSample (material)LiteracyFinanceDemographic economicsDemographySocial psychologyEconomicsPedagogySociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to analyze the demographic and personality characteristics toward the level of student's financial literacy. We use gender, age, parental income, pocket money, and place of residence as the proxies of demographic characteristics. In addition, financial attitude, and financial behavior are considered as proxies of personality characteristics. The population of this research is the students of business/management department of Universitas Negeri Jakarta. We use 194 students as the sample which represents twenty percent of population. The result of this study shows that the level of financial literacy of the students is in middle category. We use logistic regression as the statistical tool and also found that several proxies like age, pocket money, and financial behavior had positive effects toward the level of student's financial literacy. However, other proxies like residence and financial attitude had a negative sign on financial literacy. While gender and parental income had no significant effect on financial literacy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.320
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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccountingSame topicGrit, Self-Efficacy, and MotivationFrench-language works237,207