The Role of Place Attachment in Volunteer Monitoring: A Transnational Study of Engaging Volunteers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While many studies have identified motivations for public participation in scientific research, few have sought to understand the role that place attachment may play as a potential driver of initial or sustained participation. This study will apply a mixed-method approach to assess and compare the motivations of new and continuing volunteers in stream-based water monitoring programs in three countries: the United States, Canada, and New Zealand via: 1) surveys of stream-based volunteer monitoring groups, and 2) follow-up interviews with a subset of survey participants. Survey data collected to assess volunteer motivations will incorporate place attachment items as a metric to determine volunteers’ level of attachment with a particular site or stream. Interviews will be used to expand upon survey results. This research aims to determine the extent to which place attachment influences participants’ decision to volunteer, and if the level of such attachment may change over time. Subsequently, advocacy for protection of local natural areas is a potential benefit of volunteer monitoring that may be influenced by volunteers’ attachment to a specific site or place. Volunteer monitoring programs could be strengthened by focusing on the aspects of volunteering that draw participants and keep them engaged as well as identifying if place attachment has an influence on creating support to protect local natural areas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".