A Grounded Theory Perspective on Eco-Sustainable Change in Families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we look to better understand what it takes to live sustainably as a family. Building on a previous study into the process of adopting eco-sustainable actions in families, the present study goes a step further by examining the case of a family already living a sustainable lifestyle. In this instrumental single case study, qualitative in nature, we first conduct a thematic analysis of interviews with family members to appreciate the experience of sustainable living as communicated by participants of the case family. A secondary competence analysis is then undertaken to find out if certain competences demonstrated during the process of change (context of our previous research project) are still part of prolonged habitual sustainable family living (context of the present research project). A holistic examination of all findings suggests that competences such as collaboration, perseverance, self-efficacy, problem-solving, decision-making, self-regulation, and organizational skills not only play a role during the processes involved in adopting new eco-sustainable actions, but also are prevalent in families already living sustainably. Moreover, members of the single case family echoed previous findings regarding the importance of family values and harmonious family dynamics in maintaining a sustainable lifestyle. Finally, through grounded theory, the present article proposes a series of concluding hypotheses on a conceptual model of eco-sustainable change in the context of family, focusing on the interplay between three emergent constructs: collective competences, shared biospheric values, and collaborative family dynamics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.026 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".