Altruistic, Egoistic, and Normative Effects on Curbside Recycling
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How altruistic, normative, and egoistic factors affect households’ participation in curbside recycling is shown to depend on how participation is measured. If expressed as whether a household participated, the importance of two normative factors (the expectations of household members and of friends and neighbors), an altruistic factor (that recycling helps protect the environment), and an egoistic factor (that recycling is inconvenient) appears similar. However, the altruistic factor has the greatest impact and the egoistic factor the least because of strong beliefs in curbside recycling’s environmental benefit and weak beliefs in its inconvenience. However, when measured by the proportion of different kinds of material a household recycles, the dominant influences are the expectations of other household members and inconvenience. The significance of egoistic concerns, namely, inconvenience and cost, is confirmed by negative attitudes toward user fees for garbage collection and toward drop-off depots as alternatives to curbside pickup.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it