MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053843890 · doi:10.1177/154193120805201111

The Need for Human Factors in the Sustainability Domain

2008· article· en· W2053843890 on OpenAlexaff
Scott A.C. Flemming, Antony Hilliard, Greg A. Jamieson

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeuristicsSustainabilityPsychological interventionAntecedent (behavioral psychology)Intervention (counseling)Consumption (sociology)Risk analysis (engineering)Energy consumptionHuman resourcesResource consumptionComputer scienceOverconsumptionEnvironmental economicsDomain (mathematical analysis)Resource (disambiguation)Sustainable consumptionManagement scienceBusinessPsychologyEconomicsEngineeringSocial psychologyMicroeconomicsProduction (economics)SociologyEcologyManagementSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Curbing the over-harvesting of the earth's resources by the developed and developing world cannot be achieved solely by technological solutions. This paper reviews the literature on how reductions in energy consumption can be achieved through behavioral interventions. The literature shows that feedback, a consequence intervention, has been shown to be more effective than antecedent interventions in correcting erroneous heuristics and biases as well as encouraging both efficiency and curtailment behaviors. However, few feedback studies approach the feedback design problem systematically. Human Factors specialists have an opportunity to contribute their expertise in human-machine systems to help address these deficiencies and aid in shifting our societies toward sustainable resource consumption.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.023
Scholarly communication0.0140.019
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0100.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.003

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations29
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual MeetingSame topicEnvironmental Education and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207