MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3217504822 · doi:10.1111/caje.12538

Short‐term impact of COVID‐19 on consumption spending and its underlying mechanisms: Evidence from Singapore

2021· article· en· W3217504822 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Seonghoon Kim, Kanghyock Koh, Xuan Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Education, IndiaMinistry of Education - Singapore
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Term (time)Consumption (sociology)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakEconomicsVirologyMedicinePhysicsSociologyInternal medicineOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine the short-term impact of COVID-19 on consumption spending and its underlying mechanisms using individual-level monthly panel data from Singapore. Although Singapore's case fatality rate was one of the lowest in the world in the early stage of the pandemic (0.05%), we find that the COVID-19 pandemic reduced household consumption spending by almost one quarter at its peak, with a larger response from households with above-median wealth. We show that the reduction in consumption spending is associated with the nationwide lockdown policy, heightened economic uncertainty and reduced income. In addition, we find a substantial increase in monthly savings among households without income losses, suggesting a substantial rebound in consumption spending after the lifting of the lockdown. The results from June 2020 confirm this conjecture, as we find that consumption spending rebounded by about 10 percentage points in that month.

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 score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.426
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.140 · 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

Citations32
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économiqueSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207