Communicating Returnable Packaging Through Product Labelling
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
This research seeks to find effective ways to communicate returnable packaging campaigns to consumers through product labelling. This is an important line of inquiry as more and more countries are rolling out regulations that penalize companies for their wasteful practices. Knowing how to encourage people to engage with returnable packaging campaigns will be of great interest to future marketers and sustainability practitioners. This research uses experimental approach with the use of online questionnaires showcasing different label messages. Results show that the conventional method of tapping into the altruistic side of human nature with guilt-inducing messages is ineffective for the population at large. Embracing the self-enhancing, gain-seeking, pain-eliminating side of human nature results in a bigger pro-environmental behaviour change. Making the process of “doing the right thing” easier resulted in the higher willingness to return an empty milk bottle among participants when compared to financial rewards, social modelling, and justification.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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