MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789907796 · doi:10.5539/jms.v8n1p127

Predictors of Pro-Environmental Behavior: A Comparison of University Students in the United States and China

2018· article· en· W2789907796 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Uchechi Onokala, Adeleke Oladapo Banwo, Florence O. Okeowo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Sustainability · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSituational ethicsChinaTheory of planned behaviorPsychologyIndividualismSocial psychologyAction (physics)Sustainable developmentSocial environmentConstruct (python library)Norm (philosophy)Political scienceControl (management)SociologyComputer scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding and managing University student’s environmental and sustainable behavior is critical to reducing global environmental problems and influencing pro-environmental behaviors. Survey data obtained from University students in different cities in the United States (n = 75) and Chinese Students in Jiangsu Province, China (n = 109) were investigated and analyzed to identify major predictors of pro-environmental behaviors using the Comprehensive Action Determination Model. The results confirmed multiple factors such as Social norms, Intention to Act, Information Need and Situational factors significantly influence and shape the nature of pro-environmental behavior in the US and sets of Social norms, Intention to act, Environmental awareness, Information need and Situational factor in China. These findings are in consonance with the tenets of theory of planned behavior, norm activation theory; though the loading and effects differ in their local environment. University students in US showed higher level of pro-environmental behavior despite their individualistic society compared to Chinese students in China. The findings confirms the complexity of human behavior through the robustness of the comprehensive action determination model by showing that using unitary construct to predict environmental behavior is context specific and using different combinations of predictor variables exert significant influences in different local environments.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations17
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and SustainabilitySame topicEnvironmental Education and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207