MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3119017534 · doi:10.1111/csp2.336

Measuring behavioral social learning in a conservation context: Chilean fishing communities

2021· article· en· W3119017534 on OpenAlexafffund
Jordan Tam, Timothy M. Waring, Stefan Gelcich, Kai M. A. Chan, Terre Satterfield

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Science and Practice · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersU.S. Department of AgricultureAgencia Nacional de Investigación y DesarrolloWalton Family FoundationSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNational Institute of Food and AgricultureNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSocial learningSocial capitalPsychologyExperiential learningCollaborative learningContext (archaeology)Consistency (knowledge bases)Social psychologyCognitive psychologyComputer scienceSociologyArtificial intelligenceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the sustainability and conservation sciences, “social learning” is defined as a group process which depends on trust and social capital and tends to boost conservation outcomes. We term this “collaborative social learning.” Meanwhile, the behavioral sciences define social learning as the individual use of socially acquired information and seek to explain how individuals employ social learning as part of adaptive behavior. We term this “behavioral social learning.” However, the influence of behavioral social learning on ecological outcomes is poorly understood. We conducted a study of behavioral social learning among fishers in seven communities in Chile's Region V to probe its connections with ecological outcomes and collaborative social learning. We develop and employ a novel behavioral measure of individual social learning in a simple fishing game in which fishers may pay a portion of their game earnings to observe and learn from other fishers in the game. We explore the internal and external validity of the instrument. The self‐consistency of game play, learning, and participant reflections reveals strong internal validity of the learning game. Additionally, game behavior is correlated with factors such as migration history, and the perceived availability of peers from whom to learn, suggesting the method also holds external validity. We then test whether factors associated with collaborative social learning, such as social capital, are related to social learning behavior as measured by the experiment. Interestingly, many correlates of ‘collaborative social learning’ are not strongly correlated with ‘behavioral social learning’ in our sample. We argue that this disconnect can help improve our understanding of the emergence of community‐based conservation and positive ecological outcomes as well as ‘collaborative social learning’ itself. Finally, we provide guidance on how behavioral measures of social learning could benefit community‐based natural resource management and conservation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.248
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConservation Science and PracticeSame topicExperimental Behavioral Economics StudiesFrench-language works237,207