Factors Influencing Muslim Investors to Invest in Sharia Stocks during the Covid-19 Pandemic
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There had been a notable increase in the number of capital market investors in 2020 and 2021 as compared to previous years. In 2020, the number of investors increased by 56.21% from that of the previous year in 2019, and in 2021 it increased to 92.99% as compared to the number in 2020. Such considerable increase was surprising despite the outbreak of Covid pandemic throughout those years, which had an impact on the downturn of community's economy, as seen from an increase in the amount of unemployment by 7.07%, and a poverty rate of 9.8%. Likewise, Indonesia experienced negative economic growth in the quarter II and III of 2020. This study aims to find the factors that influence investors in making investment decisions amidst pandemic conditions that took place in 2020 and 2021 with the variables of Financial Literacy, Influencer’s Influence, Social Media Influence, social environment, and religiosity. It was obvious that these 5 factors had an influence on investment decisions, with the Financial Literacy factor as the factor that had the greatest influence and significance with a regression coefficient of 0.721.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it