Risk and Time Preferences Among the Urban Poor in Saudi Arabia
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
ABSTRACT This paper investigates behavioral attitudes toward risk and time among the urban poor in Saudi Arabia by conducting an incentivized lab‐in‐the‐field experiment and exploring the correlations between these attitudes and demographic and socioeconomic characteristics that are relevant in the Saudi context. Specifically, the focus of this research is on cultural and religious indicators related to Bedouin heritage and the strength of religious beliefs as well as a set of different proxies for poverty, including income, assets, social welfare payments, and social capital. Accordingly, we define a discounted utility model, where we apply prospect theory and quasihyperbolic discounting. We then jointly estimate participants' risk and time preferences via a maximum likelihood approach. Our results suggest that, on average, poor urban Saudis exhibit high levels of risk aversion and patience; these findings are similar to those reported in other studies that have investigated Muslim respondents in rural settings. We also reveal that stronger religious beliefs are associated with higher levels of risk‐taking and a stronger preference for the present, whereas Bedouin heritage and asset‐related poverty in terms of home ownership and savings are related to higher levels of risk aversion and impatience.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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