MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2558850584 · doi:10.1080/1533015x.2016.1241166

Developing interventions to change recycling behaviors: A case study of applying behavioral science

2016· article· en· W2558850584 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Environmental Education & Communication · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity College London
KeywordsPsychological interventionContext (archaeology)Intervention (counseling)PsychologyBehavior changeApplied psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and the Behavior Change Wheel (BCW) are frameworks that can be used to develop recycling interventions. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the utility of these frameworks for developing recycling interventions. 20 semistructured interviews with university building users were analyzed using the TDF and BCW. Environmental context and resources, beliefs about consequences, knowledge, and intention were identified as the key theoretical domains influencing recycling behaviors. The BCW was used to develop recommendations for intervention. This research is the first case study to demonstrate how the TDF and the BCW can be used to develop recycling interventions.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.608
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.303 · 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