MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123742531 · doi:10.15353/rea.v11i3.1686

Fear of Crime and Saving Behavior

2019· article· en· W3123742531 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tristán Canare, Jamil Paolo Francisco, Edgardo Manuel Miguel Jopson

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Economic Analysis · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFear of crimeOrdered probitAffect (linguistics)ProbitProbit modelLogitConsumption (sociology)PsychologyCriminal behaviorProperty crimeSocial psychologyOrdered logitCriminologyViolent crimeEconomicsEconometricsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fear of crime, on top of crime victimization itself, is an important social concern because the literature suggests that it can affect behavior and decision-making. Some studies argue that negative emotions can induce present consumption; thus, one behavior that crime can potentially influence is saving. Applying Logit model and the Heckman Probit model to a household survey dataset of 1,200 respondents, this paper tested for the relationship between fear of crime and saving behavior. We found evidence that fear of crimes involving physical violence has a negative relationship with the likelihood of saving but has a positive relationship with the likelihood of saving through formal channels. Fear of crimes against property, on the other hand, shows no such relationship. Moreover, overall fear of crime in the immediate community has no relationship with saving, but fear of crime in the larger region where the individual lives has.

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)0.005
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.348 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Economic AnalysisSame topicCrime Patterns and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207