MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947233133 · doi:10.1080/23311886.2019.1625101

An ecological model of climate marketing: A conceptual framework for understanding climate science related attitude and behavior change

2019· article· en· W2947233133 on OpenAlexafffund
Jaigris Hodson

Bibliographic record

VenueCogent Social Sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change Communication and Perception
Canadian institutionsRoyal Roads University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaFederation for the Humanities and Social Sciences
KeywordsClimate changeGovernment (linguistics)Conceptual modelSocial ecological modelAction (physics)Environmental resource managementSocial marketingMarketingConceptual frameworkBusinessEcologyPolitical scienceSociologyEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change is a problem that will require cooperation across different levels of government, society, community and individual action. For this reason, communicating about climate change represents a distinct challenge for marketers. This review paper proposes an ecological solution to this challenge. Using the ecological model to guide climate communication efforts could increase marketing effectiveness. This paper proposes a series of questions that marketers can use to create messages, and it shows how the ecological model incorporates the best practices from the climate communication and public health literature on behavior and attitude change.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.671
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCogent Social SciencesSame topicClimate Change Communication and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207