MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3113529346

Small Business Lending and Economic Well-Being in U.S. Counties During the Great Recession.

2020· article· en· W3113529346 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carson Mencken, Kimberly Mencken

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of rural and community development · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaLoanSmall businessRecessionPovertyBusinessCensusBusiness cycleSocioeconomic statusFinanceDemographic economicsEconomicsEconomic growthGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous research shows that small business lending declined significantly during the Great Recession. In this paper, we examine the effects of small business lending on measures of socioeconomic development in U.S. counties during this time period. Citing literature which shows that small business owners in nonmetropolitan counties depend on traditional bank loans more than their metropolitan counterparts, we propose that the effects of small business lending will be more important in nonmetropolitan counties. We utilize data from Community Reinvestment Act Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council and U.S. Census. We use two measures of small business lending: the average per loan small business lending from 2005-2010 and change in small business lending amount in the county between 2005 and 2010. We find that the per loan average amount of small business lending between 2005-2010 increased the 2010 median family income and 2010 county poverty rate in nonmetropolitan counties. The effects in metropolitan counties show no benefits of small business lending. Change in the amount of business loan had no consistent effects. Implications for existing and future research are discussed. Keywords: rural development; small business lending

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of rural and community developmentSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207