MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174545942

Uncertainty About Future Income: Initial Beliefs and Resolution During College

2019· article· en· W3174545942 on OpenAlexaff
Yifan Gong, Ralph Stinebrickner, Todd Stinebrickner

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarningsEconomicsVariety (cybernetics)EconometricsDistribution (mathematics)Survey data collectionSurvey of Professional ForecastersDemographic economicsAccountingStatisticsMathematicsMonetary economics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Uncertainty about future income plays a conceptually important role in college decisions. Unfortunately, characterizing how much earnings uncertainty is present for students at college entrance and how quickly this uncertainty is resolved has proven to be difficult. This paper takes advantage of unique expectations data from the Berea Panel Study to provide new evidence about this issue. We characterize initial uncertainty using survey questions that elicit the entire distribution describing one's beliefs about future earnings at an ideal time - immediately before students began their first year courses. We characterize the amount of uncertainty that is resolved during college by taking advantage of the longitudinal nature of the expectations data. Taking advantage of a variety of additional survey questions, we provide evidence about how the resolution of income uncertainty is influenced by factors such as college GPA and college major, and also examine why much income uncertainty remains unresolved at the end of college.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisFrench-language works237,207