MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Promoting Sustainability: Audience and Curatorial Perspectives on The Human Factor

2008· article· en· W2162047126 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurator The Museum Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsRoyal Saskatchewan Museum
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsExhibitionSustainabilityHumanityPublic relationsSociologyPsychologyPolitical scienceArtVisual artsEcologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Humanity faces a growing list of socio‐economic and environmental problems, which impel us all to foster more sustainable forms of development. This paper examines how museums might encourage the kind of awareness that can lead to sustainability, by assessing responses to The Human Factor, a permanent exhibition at the Royal Saskatchewan Museum, which raises questions about values, beliefs, and actions associated with the industrialized worldview. Responses to the exhibition were assessed through quantitative exit surveys and a novel technique involving heart rate monitors. Additional qualitative insights were gained from responses of participants in a high school Youth Forum on Sustainability that used the exhibition to catalyze discussion. Together, these studies suggest that provocative exhibitions can foster understanding and awareness among teenagers and adults through a combination of cognitive and emotional responses, and that a focus on sustainability can be challenging both for visitors and for museums as cultural institutions.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.246
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.249 · 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