Disrupting the Complacency: Disaster Experience and Emergent Environmentalism
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
As climate change intensifies, scholars are beginning to ask whether firsthand experience with disaster will cause complacent people to develop greater environmental concern and engage in more proenvironmental behaviors. Will the disruption caused by experiencing a local environmental disaster be enough to motivate residents to change their values and behaviors? The aim of this study is to answer that question by analyzing qualitative interview data collected from 40 residents of Calgary, Alberta, who survived the devastating and costly 2013 southern Alberta flood. Despite normally high levels of climate change denial and complacency, findings indicate that the flood prompted residents to concern themselves more with climate change and the climate crisis and to begin adopting many household-level proenvironmental behaviors. The findings also point to important gender differences in both environmental concern and proenvironmental behaviors. Thus, the article establishes a social-psychological process of attitudinal and behavioral change, allowing us to better understand how jarring environmental events disrupt complacency.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it