Exploring sustainability cross‐culturally: Employees' beliefs on green behaviors
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study explores antecedent beliefs associated with green workplace behaviors within various cultures. Semi‐directed interviews were conducted with non‐academic employees of Canadian and Colombian universities in order to identify their beliefs towards two studied behaviors, such as using alternative transportation on the way to the university and making eco‐suggestions at work. Two researchers, applying the fundamentals of the theory of planned behavior, analyzed the interviews and identified pertinent behavioral, normative and control beliefs. Results of the study indicate that cultural and contextual specificities have a non‐negligible effect on intentions to engage in pro‐environmental workplace behaviors. Certain factors that impeded or facilitated the intention to engage in the studied behaviors were present only in transcripts from one country. Moreover, participants from Canada mentioned various beliefs significantly, more frequently, in comparison with Colombian respondents. Findings of this research indicate the necessity to differentiate practical recommendations depending on the behavior and the cultural context.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it