MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W432090998

Consumer confidence and aggregate consumption expenditures in the United States

2011· article· en· W432090998 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bahram Adrangi, Joseph Macri

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Economics and Finance · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConsumer confidence indexConsumption (sociology)EconomicsConsumer spendingPopularityDurable goodCointegrationConsumer behaviourPersonal consumption expenditures price indexEconometric modelMicroeconomicsEconometricsAdvertisingBusinessMacroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the relationship between consumer confidence and consumption expenditures in the US for the period 1970:1-2007:4. Consumer confidence surveys are widely reported in the business and economics media and play an important role in the direction of business decisions and equity market movements. Despite the widely cited importance and popularity of consumer confidence indices, empirical studies attempting to establish a causal relationship between consumer confidence indices and consumption expenditures are mixed. This paper employs disaggregated consumer expenditures on services, nondurable and durable goods. The consumption functions for the three categories were obtained from the well-established Fair (2009) Macro-econometric model of the US economy. The results of our regression estimation and cointegration analysis, for both the short and long-run, suggests that consumer confidence is a determining factor for expenditures on consumer durable goods only. This finding supports the work of Blanchard (1993) and Hall (1993).

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)0.002
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 score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.135 · 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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Economics and FinanceSame topicMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactFrench-language works237,207