MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2554776524 · doi:10.1089/eco.2016.0024

A Theory of Engagement for Fostering Collective Action in Youth Leading Environmental Change

2016· article· en· W2554776524 on OpenAlexafffund
Gina Hickman, Manuel Riemer

Bibliographic record

VenueEcopsychology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAction (physics)SustainabilityContext (archaeology)Public engagementYouth engagementPsychologyYouth studiesSociologyPublic relationsSocial psychologyPolitical scienceDevelopmental psychologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Youth and young adults play an important role in creating a much-needed major cultural shift toward sustainability and environmental justice. Such social change is significantly advanced when youth engage in collective environmental actions that go beyond greening their own personal practice. Although significant progress has been made in recent years in our understanding of how to engage youth in environmental action, what is currently lacking is a clear theory of engagement that unifies this knowledge in one comprehensive and easily accessible framework that is applicable in different cultural contexts. In this article, the authors describe a theory of engagement that was developed, applied, and tested in six countries in the context of the Youth Leading Environmental Change (YLEC) project. The authors describe the development process of the theory of engagement before discussing its core components, which include several facilitating factors of engagement and four active ingredients. A rationa...

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.017
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations28
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcopsychologySame topicEnvironmental Education and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207