MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220841216 · doi:10.1177/09726527221082005

Calling the Shots: Determinants of Financial Decision-making and Behavior in Domestic Migrant Households in India

2022· article· en· W4220841216 on OpenAlexaff
Vinith Kurian, Shashank Sreedharan, Fabrizio Valenti

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Emerging Market Finance · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsGolder Associates (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemittanceFinancial literacyFinancial inclusionSample (material)Demographic economicsHousehold incomeBusinessEconomicsFinanceEconomic growthFinancial servicesGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores financial decision-making and behavior in migrant households. Literature on migration and financial inclusion usually focuses on either migrant workers and their financial needs or remittance flows and their effects on development, leaving the subject of household decision-making significantly underresearched. Using primary data from two sample surveys, one with migrant workers and one with their household members, we employ descriptive analysis to study the financial decision-making processes and outcomes. Our sample is mostly composed of male Indian domestic migrants from Bihar, Jharkhand, and eastern Uttar Pradesh. Our analysis considers the following migrant typology dimensions: duration of migration cycle, skills, and destination. Key household characteristics explored in our study include household size, the number of financial contributors in the household, the presence of an older male and children below the age of 18, and overall household income. Our results show that household members compete for influence over financial decisions and power balances change significantly whether the migrant is at home or at destination. These dynamics play an important role in determining household financial preferences. This suggests that financial products and interventions targeting specific financial behavior (for instance, financial literacy programs) need to take these factors into account since different households and different migrant types make these choices differently. JEL Codes: D14, O15, O16

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.686

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Emerging Market FinanceSame topicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisFrench-language works237,207