The Post-Intervention Persistence of Energy Conservation Behaviors: An Evaluation of the ‘Start Green’ Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For more than four decades, behavioral intervention programs informed by psychology have been employed to increase pro-environmental behaviors. However, there has been little evidence for the post-intervention durability of target behaviors. The few studies that have conducted such evaluations have found that improvements often return to baseline levels post-intervention. This study evaluated the durability of home energy conservation behaviors before, during, and after a community based multi-technique intervention program, and examined the relationship between behavioral durability and the perceived importance, convenience and family norms of each behavior, as well as generalized pro-conservation decision making. The results show increased frequency in target behaviors that remain elevated seven months post-intervention. While the reported generalization of pro-conservation decision-making consistently increased during the study, perceived importance, convenience, and family norms of target conservation behaviors were largely unaffected. In addition, the few significant alterations in these perceptions were found to be due to increases during the post-intervention period only, indicating that they are not necessary pre-requisites for durable behavior change. These results show that a well designed community based intervention can have direct impacts on target behaviors that persist beyond its termination.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".