MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7020909478

Monetary Policy Analysis and its Contemporary Challenges

2024· dissertation· en· W7020909478 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonetary policyReal estateSample (material)Event (particle physics)Policy analysisLiberian dollarYield (engineering)Empirical evidenceInterest rate
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis contains three essays on the empirical analysis of monetary policy. While the subjects are diverse, they all share the goal of providing for a thorough, data-driven analysis of critical policy developments related to communications from North American central banks. The first chapter examines the effectiveness of central bank communications as a policy tool. To evaluate this otherwise qualitatively-oriented policy channel, a new dictionary of central banking sentiment is developed using natural language processing. This dictionary aims to capture the relative prevalence of positive (contractionary) versus negative (expansionary) words used in discussions of the monetary policy landscape. It is then applied to a large sample of news articles, where sentiment scores are computed and adopted in two forms of empirical analysis. The first form of analysis utilizes these sentiment scores in a high-frequency event study, which indicate that positive communication surprises lead to increased interest rates across various horizons on the yield curve, along with an appreciation of the Canadian dollar relative to other major currencies. The sentiment measure is also employed in a lower-frequency analysis, where the average score across all articles is computed on a monthly basis. VAR estimates support the findings from the high-frequency event analysis and allow exploration of other outcomes available only at a monthly frequency. The analysis suggests limited direct evidence of links between communication shocks, prices, and real measures of economic activity, except for the real estate market. In the second chapter, we profile an essential case study that emerged during COVID-related monetary stimulus, where central banks sought to dismiss concerns about rising inflation as "transitory." This chapter focuses on the United States and develops a separate tailored dictionary that is used to quantify the degree of belief (or disbelief) in the transitory inflation signal. It analyzes news articles and tracks changes in sentiment-derived signal credibility over time, revealing that overall levels of credibility declined as positive inflation surprises persisted throughout 2021. This measure is then adopted within the framework of a daily VAR model, showing that the signal credibility measure declines significantly to positive inflation surprises and that market-based inflation expectations rise even at extended horizons in response to negative shocks from the credibility measure. The final chapter explores the potential intersection between economic inequality and monetary policy in Canada. In the first exercise, a macro panel exercise reveals a "U-shaped" effect on income sourced from labour, meaning that expansionary policy benefits the bottom and upper ends of the income distribution most significantly in percentage terms. A similar pattern is observed for non-labour income, which tend to favour the wealthiest Canadians, and particularly since the 2008-2009 Financial Crisis. Time series evidence highlights a growing connection between policy surprises and real asset prices, with a more modest impact on unemployment. Altogether, these essays address crucial issues related to monetary policy, emphasizing the importance of evidence-based analysis and objective quantitative research in evaluating the effectiveness and consequences of central bank communications and policies.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.026
Scholarly communication0.0160.024
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0090.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)→Same topicCanadian Policy and Governance→French-language works237,207→