MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123243168 · doi:10.1177/0013916511421196

Personally Relevant Climate Change

2011· article· en· W2123243168 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Behavior · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPlace Attachment and Urban Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaPacific Institute for Climate Solutions
KeywordsClimate changePsychologyCommunity engagementSample (material)Social psychologyPolitical economy of climate changeAction (physics)Environmental resource managementGeographyPolitical sciencePublic relationsEnvironmental scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To help mitigate the negative effects of climate change, citizens’ attitudes and behaviors must be better understood. However, little is known about which factors predict engagement with climate change, and which messaging strategies are most effective. A community sample of 324 residents from three regions in British Columbia read information either about a climate change impact relevant to their local area, a more global one, or, in a control condition, no message. Participants indicated the extent of their climate change engagement, the strength of their attachment to their local area, and demographic information. Three significant unique predictors of climate change engagement emerged: place attachment, receiving the local message, and gender (female). These results provide empirical support for some previously proposed barriers to climate action and suggest guidelines for effective climate change communication.

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)0.000
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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.197 · 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