MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4316468359 · doi:10.3390/jrfm16010052

Strengthening Formal Credit Access and Performance through Financial Literacy and Credit Terms in Micro, Small and Medium Businesses

2023· article· en· W4316468359 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maria Widyastuti, Deograsias Yoseph Yustinianus Ferdinand, Yustinus Budi Hermanto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancial literacyBusinessAffect (linguistics)Stratified samplingSample (material)LiteracySmall and medium-sized enterprisesTest (biology)FinanceEconomicsEconomic growthPsychologyStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to test financial literacy and credit conditions in determining formal credit access to determine the performance of MSMEs. This research includes the type of associative research that is accompanied by hypothesis testing. This research was conducted on MSMEs of as many as 324 creative industry players in four cities in East Java (Mojokerto, Pasuruan, Gresik, and Sidoarjo) with a sample size of 100 actors who had accessed formal credit using the stratified random sampling method for data collection. The results of Smart PLS analysis show that financial literacy and credit terms directly and significantly affect access to formal credit and MSME performance; formal credit access directly and significantly affects MSME performance. Likewise, financial literacy and credit terms indirectly affect the performance of MSMEs. These results mean that financial literacy and credit terms have a strategic role in explaining why access to formal credit is growing and is attracting MSMEs to strengthen capital to improve performance.

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)0.005
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations39
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicFinancial Literacy and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207