MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327605306 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.180205

Analyzing Urban Communities Level of Environmental Awareness for a Future Sustainable Use of Plastic Packaging

2023· article· en· W4327605306 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nur Muthi'ah Rezkiyanti Ridwan, Evi Frimawaty, Herdis Herdiansyah

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Design and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDirektorat Riset and Pengembangan, Universitas IndonesiaUniversitas Indonesia
KeywordsPlastic packagingBusinessEnvironmental planningSustainable developmentEnvironmental scienceEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the last decades, problems have occur due to the increased plastic used as packaging for various products.Plastic may be considered profitable for the company for their products because it is easy to use and has a low price which economically benefical for the company.However, problems may arise due to its nature of being hard to break, the material making it difficult to decompose, causing piles of plastic waste.Therefore, this research aims to determine the level of environmental awareness in individuals.We aim from the humanperspective since human are the subject of plastic users in daily life, as we access the level of knowledge, attitude, and behavior towards plastic use.We used a quantitative research method and distributed questionnaires to 268 respondents.Distributed frequency analysis was done using SPSS, and we categorized the total scores of each variable into two groups.Then, we composite the three variables to determine the level of environmental awareness.Results show that based on respondent's knowledge, attitude, and behavior towards plastic use, the majority of respondents, about 55.6% have good environmental awareness, whereas the other 44.4% have poor environmental awareness.This result indicates that the respondents already have formed their awareness, which may be beneficial in forming their pro-environmental behavior in future daily life, therefor aiming for future sustainable behavior of plastic use, especially plastic for packaging.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicSustainable Design and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207