Financial Education and the Saving Behavior of African American and Hispanic Households,” Report for the
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hispanic and African-American minorities are, and will continue to be, major factors in the U.S. economy. According to the latest U.S. Census Bureau estimates, Hispanics are already the largest minority group in the country. By the year 2050, they are projected to make up nearly one quarter of the U.S. population, a two-fold increase from their current size. African-Americans will remain the second largest minority group and are projected to increase to approximately 15 % of the U.S. population in the coming years. Because of their substantial and growing presence, their saving and investment behavior is cause for national concern. For example, these households are not only less likely to hold high-return assets, such as stocks and business equity, but they do not even hold basic assets, such as checking accounts. While several initiatives have been taken by the government and employers to reduce discrimination and foster savings and financial security, it is not clear how effective these programs are in reaching this segment of the population. Though studies of the effects of financial education on saving and investment
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".