MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898890380 · doi:10.20897/ejosdr/3933

Opening the Black Box of Psychological Processes in the Science of Sustainable Development: A New Frontier

2018· article· en· W2898890380 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

VenueEuropean Journal of Sustainable Development Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSustainability in Higher Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ontario Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilitySustainable developmentFrontierEngineering ethicsPerspective (graphical)Environmental psychologySustainability scienceSociologyEnvironmental ethicsPsychologyPolitical scienceSocial sustainabilityEngineeringSocial psychologyEcologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The psychology of sustainability and sustainable development represents a new research area in the field of Sustainability Science. It introduces a psychological perspective and enhances the trans-disciplinary framework that forms the foundation of Sustainability Science. Firmly establishing the psychology of sustainability and sustainable development as a research area means recognizing and integrating the value of psychology and the psychological approach in the construction of processes linked to sustainable development. Enriching sustainable development through opening the black box of psychological processes in support of sustainable development is a new and exciting frontier, that will likely lead to major developments and concrete advances for making development more sustainable in the 21st century and beyond.

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)0.063
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.231
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0630.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.326 · 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