MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410178036 · doi:10.1080/13563467.2025.2497769

Not so different after all? household attitudes toward financialisation in Germany and the United Kingdom

2025· article· en· W4410178036 on OpenAlex
Alexander Reisenbichler, Pascal D. König

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Political Economy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceEconomicsPolitical economySociologyEconomic history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How do households perceive financialisation? While existing scholarship on household financialisation has investigated financialised household behaviour across advanced economies, this article investigates households’ attitudes toward financialisation. Using a custom survey conducted in Germany and the United Kingdom, we created a ‘credit financialisation index’ based on respondents’ attitudes toward credit-financed spending and the strategic use of assets. Our comparison reveals that there are virtually no differences in such attitudes between German and British households, even though British households tend to borrow much more than German households. Our findings suggest that both countries’ differences in borrowing behaviour are likely the product of both countries’ distinct institutional contexts, such as different credit and welfare regimes, rather than culture or attitudes. The study makes both conceptual and empirical contributions to the scholarship on financialisation in advanced economies.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score0.747

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.202 · 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