MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159008776 · doi:10.13140/rg.2.2.31015.88488

Guided Cultural Evolution and Sustainable Development: Proof of Concept and Exploratory Results

2021· dissertation· en· W3159008776 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Norman Kearney

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsProof of conceptSustainable developmentEnvironmental ethicsPsychologyEpistemologySociologyPolitical scienceComputer sciencePhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation innovatively uses Cross-Impact Balances (CIB) to study how societal cultures evolve, and how societies might steer the evolution of their cultures towards sustainability. Societal cultures have been conceptualized as interdependent sets of worldviews, institutions, and technologies (WITs), which co-evolve and interact with their environment (Beddoe et al. 2009). CIB is a judgment-based, computational method for identifying internally consistent scenarios (self-reinforcing system states) and pathways (sequences of contradictory system states between pairs of self-reinforcing system states) (Weimer-Jehle 2006). CIB uses categorical variables to represent state-specific effects, allowing it to represent system change as an evolutionary process of recombination (e.g., of types of worldviews, institutions, and technologies).
\n
\nMy dissertation develops a new analytical approach for studying socio-cultural evolution; elaborates the WITs framework of socio-cultural evolution; and presents a dynamic model of socio-cultural evolution, along with validation and a set of exploratory results. Validation shows that the model performs well in reproducing the recent evolutionary histories of a sample of contemporary societies. The exploratory results provide preliminary answers to the following research questions: which combinations of worldviews, institutions, and technologies (societal cultures, or WITs) are self-reinforcing, and under what environmental selective pressures; which self-reinforcing societal cultures appear to be most compatible with sustainable development, and why; and how might an unsustainable, self-reinforcing societal culture be transformed into a sustainable, self-reinforcing societal culture?
\n
\nMy exploratory results suggest that societies have been converging towards a small number of highly contrasting cultural types, and that this polarization may be expected to continue. My exploratory results also suggest that achieving sustainable development may require a transformation in the international system from competition to cooperation. Achieving such a transformation might require societies to foster an inclusive social identity, in order to overcome potential sources of conflict that can stem from sharp cultural differences.
\n
\nMy dissertation breaks new ground in the study of guided cultural evolution and sustainability transformations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207