Values, Personality, and Sustainability Behaviour: An Integrative Analysis
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In two studies we examine how values and personality traits relate to corporate sustainability actions and vote choice. Results from a student sample (N=411) and then a nationally representative Canadian sample (N=639) confirm that values and personality factors independently and incrementally predict six sustainability action types. We replicate previous findings pertaining to values and sustainability actions and find that, accounting for demographic characteristics and values, the personality dimension of Honesty-Humility is the strongest negative predictor of harmful actions. We also find some evidence that the individual differences impacting work-related behaviours have cross-contextual effects on vote choice in a national election. Our analyses highlight that values and personality traits are markers for sustainability behaviour, and that it is important to account for both beneficial and harmful activities to fully understand their distinctive roles. By simultaneously assessing values and personality we also contribute to more general efforts within psychology to develop an integrative view of the person.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it