MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945325324 · doi:10.1002/sd.1955

Between hesitation and decisiveness—Understanding consumers' ego, altruism, and eagerness to pay for renewable energy

2019· article· en· W2945325324 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainable Development · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersMitacs
KeywordsAltruism (biology)Renewable energyEconomicsScarcityEthical egoismValue (mathematics)MicroeconomicsSocial psychologyEnvironmental economicsPositive economicsPsychologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In our study, we examined the role of consumers' egoism and social and biospheric altruism in influencing their willingness to adopt renewable energy. Past research has suggested that the social, biospheric, and egoistic values and beliefs of energy consumers influence their cognitive decision‐making mechanisms. However, studies have not compared and contrasted the effects of different altruistic values on specific environmental behaviors. To address this problem, we drew on the theories of value–belief–norm and paradox to propose that social and biospheric altruistic values have diverse effects on renewable energy adoption. We observed that biospheric altruism is positively associated with the adoption of renewable energy and social altruism is negatively associated with the adoption of renewable energy. Contrary to the propositions of the theory of paradox, we observed that egoistic values measured in terms of financial scarcity reduced the paradoxical nature of social and biospheric altruism. In our study, we used partial least squares structural equation modeling to analyze the data. We analyzed 140 responses from the residential energy consumers of New Brunswick, Canada. Our study underscores the claims of value–belief–norm theory. Further, it adds to the theory of paradox. The findings from this study help guide utilities on how to approach different consumers with specific new sustainable and renewable energy products and services. Moreover, the study throws light on how the policy makers should design energy policy‐related messages to specific consumer segments.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score0.662

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.228 · 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