How Consumers Pay: Adoption and Use of Payments
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using data from a nationally representative survey of U.S. consumers, we estimate Heckman two-stage regressions on the adoption and use of seven different payment instruments. We find that the characteristics of payment instruments are important in determining consumer payment behavior, even when controlling for demographic and financial attributes: difficulty to setup and keep records are especially important in explaining adoption of payments, while ease of use, cost and security are important in explaining which methods consumers use for transactions. For the first time, the number of payment methods adopted by consumers conditional on having access to a bank account is estimated, as the unbanked consumers’ payment choices are much more limited than those of consumers with bank accounts. Because cost is found to significantly affect payment use, a potential increase in the cost of credit or debit cards following recent regulatory changes affecting those payment methods may lead to a reduction in U.S. consumers’ reliance on payment cards for transactions.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it