MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095768069 · doi:10.5539/jms.v2n2p1

Environmental Concern Behaviours in Africa: An Exploratory Study

2012· article· en· W2095768069 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Adele Berndt, Lucy Gikonyo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Sustainability · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEnvironmental Sustainability in Business
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPurchasingContext (archaeology)Exploratory researchMarketingSample (material)BusinessConsumer behaviourSociologyGeographySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Environmental concern, including environmental behaviour continues to receive attention in both the public media and academic research. The purpose of the paper is to investigate environmental behaviour (both purchasing and non-purchasing behaviour) in an African context. Use was made of a quantitative study among a convenience sample of selected Africans. Statements reflecting non-purchasing behaviour indicated lower mean scores when compared to purchasing behaviour statements. Statistically significant differences were found to exist between different age groups with respect to both purchasing and non-purchasing behaviour as well as between different nationalities with regard to their purchasing behaviour. The findings have the potential of impacting the strategies of organisations operating on the continent. The major contribution of this paper is that is provides insight in the behavioural aspects as seen in an African context, and consequently provides detail on both purchasing and non-purchasing behaviour and the role of marketing aspects (such as price) in influencing purchase behaviour of Africans.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and SustainabilitySame topicEnvironmental Sustainability in BusinessFrench-language works237,207