MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366984823 · doi:10.1111/joca.12533

Vulnerable consumer experiences of (dis)empowerment with consumer protection regulations

2023· article· en· W4366984823 on OpenAlex
Mohammed El Hazzouri, Rowan El‐Bialy, Ela Veresiu, Kelley Main

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Consumer Affairs · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaYork UniversityDalhousie University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConsumer protectionBusinessLoanEmpowermentGovernment (linguistics)Affect (linguistics)Psychological interventionMarketingAmbivalencePublic policyEconomic growthEconomicsFinanceCommercePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The payday lending industry has been characterized as predatory, which has led to tougher government interventions. However, research on how stricter consumer protection regulations affect actual vulnerable consumers' lived experiences remains seriously underdeveloped. Following in‐depth interviews with financially excluded and therefore vulnerable payday loan consumers, this study finds that increased payday loan industry regulations are perceived by consumers as either empowering, disempowering, or simultaneously (dis)empowering. Accordingly, practical implications are developed to help public policy makers navigate vulnerable consumers' ambivalent relationship with consumer protection regulations.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.757
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.207 · 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