A Multi-Method Evaluation of the Potential for Using the Electricity Bill to Encourage Energy Savings in Norwegian Households
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
This study explores whether the electricity bill can be used as a medium to deliver information that encourages energy conservation in Norwegian households. Two main categories of information were tested: social comparative feedback and information about the monetary savings that can be made through specific energy-saving measures. The study combines four methods. First, a focus group study gathered advice on the categories and design of information that could influence energy consumption, and addressed general issues on energy consumption. Second, a field experiment monitored actual electricity use in 1000 households over a period of 10 months. In addition, through a survey and a series of in-depth interviews, the experience of the participating households was investigated. The experiment showed no effect on actual consumption. One main barrier was that only half the sample noticed the information. This suggests that the potential for encouraging energy conservation through adding new information to the bill in Norway is limited. The bill is already quite informative and is becoming less relevant as an increasing share of consumers switch to electronic bills and direct debit, which decreases the attention they pay to their bills.
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 | 0.003 | 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) | 0.001 | 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