MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401869654 · doi:10.33423/jabe.v26i4.7180

Unemployment, Financial Literacy, and Retirement: Evidence From National Data Before and During COVID-19 Pandemic

2024· article· en· W4401869654 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ying Chen, Weihong Ning, Taufiq Hasan Quadria

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Business and Economics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancial literacyPandemicUnemploymentCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)EconomicsDemographic economicsBusinessEconomic growthFinanceMedicineVirologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unemployment rates changed dramatically and peaked at 14.7% in April 2020 in the United States. The labor market force might affect households’ retirement differently before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. By utilizing 2018 and 2021 datasets, the study mainly contributes to the following insights related to retirement decisions. First, the current study finds a positive correlation between state-level unemployment rates and retirement. Second, this study finds that both objective and subjective financial literacy, financial confidence, age, and households without a child or a financially dependent child are positively associated with retirement in both pre-pandemic and during the pandemic. Financial market participation, financial risk, and income drop are negatively associated with retirement in pre-pandemic and during the pandemic. We find different significant results regarding the annual income, savings, and the number of children in a household before and during the pandemic. The findings extend the literature on unemployment and retirement. Financial professionals and the government will apply the empirical findings to the practice.

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 score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.957

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 communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Business and EconomicsSame topicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisFrench-language works237,207