MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2503864174 · doi:10.14288/1.0303137

Exploring the environmental worldviews and Leave No Trace awareness of rock climbers in Squamish

2016· article· en· W2503864174 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jason H. Byrd

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWinter Sports Injuries and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTRACE (psycholinguistics)GeologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The general theme of rock climbing is common, at its core it’s a physically active problem solving exercise with the goal of reaching the top of a three dimensional problem. Participants in this activity however, are not homogenous (Ryan et al., 2001; Hydler, 1999); the activity of climbing supports various subgroups that differ in style, training practices, required equipment, and, potentially environmental attitudes. Once seen as a fringe outdoor activity with limited opportunities, climbing is now ubiquitous in urban areas, leading to increased participation rates, which results in increased use of natural recreation resources and potential increased environmental impact where climbing takes place. This research project examines the variation of environmental worldviews and Leave No Trace awareness among rock climbers in Squamish, British Columbia. A sample of rock climbers (n = 466) at ten climbing locations in Squamish, and one climbing gym in Vancouver, British Columbia provided the respondents for this research project. First the climbers’ environmental worldviews and Leave No Trace Awareness are examined through three research questions: (RQ1) Do environmental worldviews and Leave No Trace awareness vary among climbing styles? (RQ2) Does recreation specialization predict environmental worldviews and Leave No Trace awareness among climbers? And, (RQ3) Does Leave No Trace awareness vary among climbers according to where they were introduced to the activity (i.e., outdoors or indoor climbing gym)? Further, the climbers’ support for recreation management in climbing areas is examined through: (RQ4) Is support for climbing management consistent across specialization levels and among climbing styles? The climbers’ social networks are examined with a final research question: (RQ5) Does network range influence the environmental worldviews of climbers? Recreation specialization was found to be the most significant predictor of a climber’s pro-environmental orientation, which is consistent with previous research. Whereas the climbers Leave No Trace ethics seem to be more a product of the historical use and management of local recreational resources. Additionally, the range of ties among climbing and outdoor professionals, environmental organizations, and the general climbing community were correlated with the development of biocentric worldviews among the respondents.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.169 · 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.

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicWinter Sports Injuries and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207