MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184255817 · doi:10.1080/08927936.2021.1938409

Giving to Animal Charities: A Nine-Country Study

2021· article· en· W3184255817 on OpenAlex
Joanne Sneddon, Julie Lee

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthrozoös · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal welfareValue (mathematics)Logistic regressionWelfareChinaAnimal-assisted therapyHUBzeroDemographic economicsSocioeconomicsDemographyPet therapyPolitical scienceBiologySociologyEconomicsLawMedicineEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Growing public concern for the welfare of animals is reflected in an increase in the number of animal charities around the world. However, little is known about the individuals who donate to these organizations. In this study, we examine relations between individual differences in personal values and sociodemographic characteristics and the decision to donate to animal charities. We do this in samples from nine different countries: the USA, Canada, Australia, the Netherlands, Italy, Poland, Malaysia, Singapore, and China. We show that the personal value expressing concern for the welfare of animals is empirically distinct from other refined values and that this value is positively associated with giving to animal charities in each country. These results extend recent attempts to identify and validate the animals value as a distinct value beyond western samples. Using logistic regression analysis, we also show, in all nine country samples, that the animals value is the most consistent predictor of donating to animal charities when compared with sociodemographic characteristics examined in previous studies. The results of this study can be used by organizations in the animal protection sector to inform their donor segmentation and targeting strategies both within and across borders.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score0.662

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.352 · 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