Search alternatives:
significant decrease » significant increase (Expand Search), significantly increased (Expand Search)
gap decrease » a decrease (Expand Search), gain decreased (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search)
significant decrease » significant increase (Expand Search), significantly increased (Expand Search)
gap decrease » a decrease (Expand Search), gain decreased (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search)
-
101
-
102
Effect of the smoking factor on lung function parameters (FVC, FEV1, PEF, FEF 25_75).
Published 2025Subjects: -
103
-
104
Tourism determinants’ marginal effects.
Published 2025“…In comparison, a similar rise in neighboring countries’ prices leads to a 0.4 percent decrease in inbound tourists. Most economic freedom variables, including the Business Freedom Index, Investment Freedom Index, Labor Freedom Index, Trade Freedom Index, and Government Integrity Index, demonstrate statistically significant positive effects. …”
-
105
Descriptive statistics from 2005 to 2018.
Published 2025“…In comparison, a similar rise in neighboring countries’ prices leads to a 0.4 percent decrease in inbound tourists. Most economic freedom variables, including the Business Freedom Index, Investment Freedom Index, Labor Freedom Index, Trade Freedom Index, and Government Integrity Index, demonstrate statistically significant positive effects. …”
-
106
Models 7 to 12: estimation results.
Published 2025“…In comparison, a similar rise in neighboring countries’ prices leads to a 0.4 percent decrease in inbound tourists. Most economic freedom variables, including the Business Freedom Index, Investment Freedom Index, Labor Freedom Index, Trade Freedom Index, and Government Integrity Index, demonstrate statistically significant positive effects. …”
-
107
Models 1 to 6: estimation results.
Published 2025“…In comparison, a similar rise in neighboring countries’ prices leads to a 0.4 percent decrease in inbound tourists. Most economic freedom variables, including the Business Freedom Index, Investment Freedom Index, Labor Freedom Index, Trade Freedom Index, and Government Integrity Index, demonstrate statistically significant positive effects. …”
-
108
Hausman test results.
Published 2025“…In comparison, a similar rise in neighboring countries’ prices leads to a 0.4 percent decrease in inbound tourists. Most economic freedom variables, including the Business Freedom Index, Investment Freedom Index, Labor Freedom Index, Trade Freedom Index, and Government Integrity Index, demonstrate statistically significant positive effects. …”
-
109
Variable’s construction.
Published 2025“…In comparison, a similar rise in neighboring countries’ prices leads to a 0.4 percent decrease in inbound tourists. Most economic freedom variables, including the Business Freedom Index, Investment Freedom Index, Labor Freedom Index, Trade Freedom Index, and Government Integrity Index, demonstrate statistically significant positive effects. …”
-
110
Moran’s I across countries.
Published 2025“…In comparison, a similar rise in neighboring countries’ prices leads to a 0.4 percent decrease in inbound tourists. Most economic freedom variables, including the Business Freedom Index, Investment Freedom Index, Labor Freedom Index, Trade Freedom Index, and Government Integrity Index, demonstrate statistically significant positive effects. …”
-
111
Raw dataset.
Published 2025“…In comparison, a similar rise in neighboring countries’ prices leads to a 0.4 percent decrease in inbound tourists. Most economic freedom variables, including the Business Freedom Index, Investment Freedom Index, Labor Freedom Index, Trade Freedom Index, and Government Integrity Index, demonstrate statistically significant positive effects. …”
-
112
Table 2 -
Published 2024“…<div><p>Background</p><p>Evidence indicates that criminal behaviour in youth is linked with a range of negative physical, mental, and social health consequences. Despite a global decrease over the last 30 years, youth crime remains prevalent. …”
-
113
Preference for the EIA – conjoint results.
Published 2025“…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
114
Marginal means – Pooled across scenarios.
Published 2025“…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
115
Sample attribute table.
Published 2025“…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
116
Subgroup analysis – Political affiliation.
Published 2025“…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
117
Sample scenario description.
Published 2025“…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
118
AMCEs – Pooled across scenarios.
Published 2025“…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
119
Methodological flowchart.
Published 2025“…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
-
120
Preference for the EIA vs. ETA across scenarios.
Published 2025“…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”