MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3124699413

Sentiment Volatility and Bank Lending Behavior

2016· preprint· en· W3124699413 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mustafa Çağlayan, Bing Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolatility (finance)Panel dataEconomicsImperfectConstruct (python library)Monetary economicsBusinessFinanceEconometricsComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a panel of commercial, co-operative and savings banks from G7 countries, we investigate whether change in sentiment and its volatility affect banks' lending behavior. Sentiment indicators, which gauge the state of the economy from the perspective of the economic agents, are widely considered as a critical component by academics, policy makers and media in the transmission of shocks into the economic activity. We also know that leading indicators usually change before the economic activities change as a whole and provide useful information on the state of the economy. Surprisingly, earlier studies have not examined the impact of the level and volatility of economic agents sentiment on banks' lending behavior. As each type of agent acts on a specific set of (imperfect) information that emanate from the state of the economy, rational inattention, or their own asymmetric goals and strategies, it is important find out whether bank managers respond to changes and variability in sentiment. To carry out our investigation, we construct a large panel of commercial, co-operative, and savings banks collected from the Bankscope database for the G7 countries including Canada, Germany, France, the UK, Italy, Japan, and the US. This database provides detailed bank-level information yet the sample size is constrained due to the fact that we seek to examine the role of Core Tier 1 capital on banks' lending. The final dataset that we employ in our analysis is comprised of more than 9, 000 banks and retains bank, country and time dimensions. The analysis covers the period between 1999-2014. The investigation implements GMM and fixed effects models to test various hypotheses. We show that the changes in economic agents' sentiment and its volatility affect bank lending negatively, while the impact sizes differ across indicators. We also find that the impact of volatility effects on banks' loan growth varies at excessive levels. We highlight the role of several bank-specific characteristics in transmission of uncertainty effects on the growth of bank loans, as uncertainty affects extenuate or mitigate through them.

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics→Same topicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies→French-language works237,207→