MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Predicting Use of GoodGuide.com Consumer Product Sustainability Information Using VBN Theory and NEP Scale

2015· book-chapter· en· W2500648549 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rebecca Angeles

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in web technologies and engineering book series · 2015
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityScale (ratio)Product (mathematics)MarketingSample (material)Norm (philosophy)AdvertisingEnvironmental economicsBusinessPsychologyGeographyEconomicsMathematicsCartographyPolitical scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The chapter focuses on the use of information provided by an Online Environmental Infomediary (OEI), GoodGuide.com, to advise consumers on the overall and specific sustainability attributes of personal care and household chemical and food products. This chapter seeks to predict the willingness of consumers to be influenced by GoodGuide.com information in their purchases and to influence others as well with this information using the Value-Belief-Norm (VBN) theory and the New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) scale. An experiment was applied to a sample of both undergraduate and graduate students at the Faculty of Business Administration, University of New Brunswick Fredericton, Canada. Data analysis using a series of stepwise multiple regressions was used in this study. Study results indicate the usefulness of both theoretical frameworks in understanding consumer predisposition to use OEI-provided information and the potential of social networking and use of mobile devices and apps in facilitating access and use of green information.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in web technologies and engineering book seriesSame topicEnvironmental Education and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207