MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123621738 · doi:10.25071/1916-0925.40187

Time Preference and Religious Affiliation in Canada: A Quantitative Analysis

2020· article· en· W3123621738 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Christian Robitaille

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Jewish Studies / Études juives canadiennes · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProxy (statistics)Demographic economicsInvestment (military)EconomicsPopulationPreferenceTime preferencePermanent income hypothesisWelfare economicsSociologyDemographyPolitical scienceMicroeconomicsMonetary economicsMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the author studies the association between religious affiliation and investment income as a proxy for individual rates of time preference, defined as the propensity to sacrifice present satisfaction in the anticipation of increasing future satisfaction. Data from the 2001 Census of the Canadian population is used to look at how religious affiliation is associated with the proportion of income coming from investments (a proxy for past rates of time preference) for individuals of working age (15-64). Two models (OLS and logistic) are used in order to compare by religious affiliation the magnitude of the proportion of income attributable to investments and the propensity to invest. Although there are a few exceptions in terms of cross-regional heterogeneity, individuals of Jewish affiliation tend to receive more investment income (as a proportion of their income) than Protestants, who tend to receive more than Catholics. As for the propensity to obtain any investment income, the results are more nuanced although a similar pattern can be observed. The contribution of this paper is to quantitatively assess the association of religious affiliation with time preference through the use of an investment income variable, an endeavour which has not been undertaken so far and which complements the literature on the economic outcomes of religion and the sociological determinants of time preference.Dans cet article, l’auteur étudie l’association entre l’affiliation religieuse et les revenus d’investissement comme une approximation des taux individuels de préférence temporelle, définie comme la propension à sacrifier la satisfaction présente dans l’attente d’une satisfaction future croissante. Des données du recensement de la population canadienne de 2001 sont examinées pour mesurer comment l’appartenance religieuse est associée à la proportion de revenus provenant d’investissements (une approximation des taux passés de préférence temporelle) pour les personnes en âge de travailler (15-64 ans). Deux modèles (MCO et logistique) sont utilisés afin de comparer par appartenance religieuse l’ampleur de la proportion de revenu attribuable aux investissements et la propension à investir. Bien qu’il y ait quelques exceptions en termes d’hétérogénéité interrégionale, les individus d’affiliation juive ont tendance à recevoir plus de revenus d’investissement (en proportion de leurs revenus) que les Protestants, qui ont tendance à recevoir plus que les Catholiques. En ce qui concerne la propension à obtenir des revenus d’investissement, les résultats sont plus nuancés, bien qu’un schéma similaire puisse être observé. La contribution de ce document est d’évaluer quantitativement l’association entre l’appartenance religieuse et la préférence temporelle en utilisant une variable de revenu d’investissement, un effort qui n’a pas été entrepris jusqu’à présent et qui complète la littérature sur les résultats économiques de la religion et les déterminants sociologiques de la préférence temporelle.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.013
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Jewish Studies / Études juives canadiennesSame topicGender, Labor, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207