MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055649345 · doi:10.2166/wh.2011.139

Influences on the water testing behaviors of private well owners

2011· article· en· W2055649345 on OpenAlex
Krystian Imgrund, Reid Kreutzwiser, Rob de Loë

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water and Health · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStewardship (theology)Quality (philosophy)BusinessWater qualityPsychologyEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental sciencePolitical scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many private wells in the United States and Canada already are contaminated, or are at risk of contamination. Regular testing for pathogenic bacteria is one of the most concrete measures well owners can use to determine whether or not their drinking water quality is safe. This study explored the factors and causal relationships that influence well owner water quality testing behavior. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were used to evaluate the stewardship behavior of 22 well owners in Ontario, Canada. Causal networks were created for each interviewee. These were then aggregated to determine key factors and causal relationships. The research revealed that motivations for regular testing include peace of mind and reassurance. Barriers include complacency, inconvenience, and lack of a perceived problem. Knowledge and better information by themselves were found to provide a weak basis for changing behavior. Implications of this research for promoting water testing behavior are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.242
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.018 · 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