Time-Varying Nexus between Investor Sentiment and Cryptocurrency Market: New Insights from a Wavelet Coherence Framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study attempts to investigate the nexus between investor sentiment and cryptocurrencies prices. Our empirical investigation merges bivariate and multivariate wavelet tools to examine the investor sentiment nexus to inter-cryptocurrencies prices. The study outcomes show that the Sentix Investor Confidence index provides significant information in explaining long-term changes in Bitcoin and Litecoin prices. Moreover, the findings generated from the multiple wavelet coherence illustrate the simultaneous contribution of cryptocurrencies and the Sentix Investor Confidence index in explaining the Bitcoin index movement across frequencies and over horizons, especially during bubble burst periods. The study also suggests a time-dependent relationship of Bitcoin prices with alternative cryptocurrencies and the Sentix Investor Confidence index, mostly pronounced during the Bitcoin bubble. We discuss our results using GSV-based investor sentiment. Our findings remain robust and confirm the strong predictive power of investor sentiment in cryptocurrencies price movements over time and across scales.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".