THROTTLE DECISIONS AN EXAMPLE OF FURTHERING AVALANCHE AWARENESS IN THE MOUNTAIN SNOWMOBILE COMMUNITY THROUGH USE OF SOCIAL COMPARISON
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The social comparison theory is based on the premise that comparison of one’s self to similar others through social comparisons is a psychological process that influences people’s judgments, experiences and behavior (Festinger, 1954). The unique culture of the mountain snowmobile community required project outcomes that would resonate with the user group to maximize culture change opportunities through Festinger’s (1954) theory. Throttle Decisions was one outcome from this three-year project and is a snowmobile based avalanche awareness film series comprised of eight chapters, an outreach module, and a youth module. Over the past several years, the mountain snowmobile community in Canada has demonstrated a positive shift toward greater avalanche awareness and has demonstrated a strong desire to be involved in avalanche incident prevention initiatives. This is likely attributable to a number of factors, but includes the creation of relevant and applicable prevention programs that include the snowmobile community in their development. Individuals and organizations developing prevention programs for this audience must possess a thorough understanding of this user group’s culture and encourage and facilitate their involvement whenever possible.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".