MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2271971933 · doi:10.25916/sut.26288059

Effective approaches for community engagement and behaviour change

2010· article· en· W2271971933 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Walter Lotz, D R Sweeney

Bibliographic record

VenueSwinburne Research Bank (Swinburne University of Technology) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Community-based behaviour change is widely considered as a key component of progressing sustainability. Increasingly, educational engagement programs are being delivered to build the capacity of community members to adopt more sustainable behaviours. But just how successful is this approach in achieving long term change? To try and answer this question, the National Centre for Sustainability (NCS) at Swinburne University of Technology conducted a longitudinal evaluation of the City of Whitehorse's Sustainable Ambassadors program. For the last two years, this innovative program has trained community members to become 'change agents' within the context of their peer network of friends, neighbours, or workplace. Participation in the program requires each community member to learn about behaviour change theory and practice and then design and deliver community-based behaviour change projects. The evaluation process included a survey of twenty five Sustainable Ambassador participants (56% response rate). Key research findings indicated: (1) 72% of participants self-reported their project as successful in achieving 'change'; (2) Targeting diverse community groups is an effective approach for integrating sustainable behaviour through the community; (3) Individuals who are organised in a group of like-minded people are more likely to remain committed to ongoing sustainability activities; (4) The majority of participants continued sustainability projects after their participation in the program; and (5) Networking opportunities are important in supporting ongoing change after program completion.

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 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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.353
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.092 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSwinburne Research Bank (Swinburne University of Technology)Same topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207