MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3116640808 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v12n1p76

Central Bank Communication and Policy Interest Rate

2020· article· en· W3116640808 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Haryo Kuncoro

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonetary policyInflation targetingInflation (cosmology)EconomicsInterest rateOutput gapBank rateReal interest rateMonetary economicsForward guidanceCentral bankOfficial cash rateGovernorMacroeconomicsCredit channelEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Central bank communications play an important role in the monetary policy. In the inflation-targeting frameworks, central bank communications might guide public to shape inflation expectations and then determine actual inflation rates through which the policy interest rates policy would manage them. This paper studied the impact and central bank monetary policy communications on the policy interest rate. Unlike other studies, this paper uses two stages. First, we estimate the impact of central bank communication on the inflation expectation gap. Second, we use the estimated value of inflation expectation gap to predict the policy interest rate. The study found evidence that economic agents analyse the Governor Board of Central Bank of Indonesia meeting decisions every month to shape their inflation expectation. Therefore, the difference between inflation expectation and actual inflation tends to narrow. The inflation expectation gap affects the policy interest rates in Indonesia. In other words, the policy interest rates can control the inflation rate and anchor expectations as required by the inflation-targeting framework.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.294
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.080 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactFrench-language works237,207