MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402840105 · doi:10.1016/j.jmacro.2024.103641

Is deflation cause for panic? Evidence from the National Banking era

2024· article· en· W4402840105 on OpenAlex
Casey Pender

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 Macroeconomics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsMount Allison University
FundersCarleton University
KeywordsDeflationPanicEconomicsKeynesian economicsMonetary economicsMedicineMonetary policyPsychiatryAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the relationship between deflation, real output, and bank panics in the United States during the National Banking era from 1868 to 1913, a period marked by frequent deflationary episodes and many bank panics. Using a structural vector autoregression with sign restrictions, I distinguish between deflation as part of negative aggregate demand shocks and deflation as part of positive aggregate supply shocks. My findings indicate that negative aggregate demand shocks are associated with an increased likelihood of bank panics, while positive aggregate supply shocks are not. I then bolster these findings with case studies of the major bank panics of 1873, 1893, and 1907, analyzing stock data, bank clearing data, and narrative evidence. Combined, these results suggest that unexpected declines in nominal income, rather than deflation itself, contribute to financial stress, aligning with recent theoretical work.

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)0.002
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 score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.195 · 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