MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313438024 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v15n2p1

Internet Use and Risky Financial Market Participation: Evidence from China

2022· article· en· W4313438024 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xinxin Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMicrofinance and Financial Inclusion
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsEndogeneityThe InternetChinaBusinessFinancial marketPromotion (chess)FinanceDemographic economicsEconomicsPublic economicsMarketingFinancial systemPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The information and communication technology promotion policies have been implemented and enforced in both developed and developing countries. China has the most Internet users worldwide. Although it is assumed that the Internet use may affect the risky financial market participation, the empirical evidence on the issue is scarce. Using a national longitudinal data, this study investigates the impact of Internet use on individuals’ participation in risky financial markets in China after considering the endogeneity issues. Three key findings emerged. First, Internet use has a significantly positive effect on participation in risky financial markets. Second, the positive effect of Internet use is greater for the group aged 30–49 years, the middle and the highly educated group, urban hukou residents, and women as compared to their counterparts. Third, the positive effect of Internet use on risky financial participation may be through three channels—increase in income, information obtaining, and reduction of transaction costs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.372
Threshold uncertainty score0.777

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicMicrofinance and Financial InclusionFrench-language works237,207