MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281481760 · doi:10.4324/9780429299377-15

The sustainability of low-income homeownership: The incidence of unexpected costs and needed repairs among low-income homebuyers

2022· book-chapter· en· W4281481760 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shannon Van Zandt, William M. Rohe

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLow incomeQuarter (Canadian coin)DebtBusinessHousehold debtDemographic economicsSustainabilityLabour economicsEconomicsFinanceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Until the recent housing market crisis, the United States was producing first-time, low-income homeowners at an unprecedented rate. In a longitudinal study of low-income renters participating in a multi-site homeownership education program, we examine the ability of low-income homebuyers to pay housing-related costs after home purchase, including maintenance or repairs costs. After less than two years of ownership, we find the sustainability of low-income homeownership in jeopardy for sizeable portion of homebuyers. About half of the more than 350 new homeowners surveyed face unexpected costs, and about a third confront home repairs they cannot afford. More than half carry greater nonhousing debt, and about a quarter were 30 days late or more in debt repayment. The findings raise concerns about the long-term sustainability of low-income homeownership and emphasize the importance of requiring effective prepurchase services and effective and ongoing postpurchase counseling.

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)0.000
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations27
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHousing Market and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207