MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388417215 · doi:10.3390/su152115637

Unearthing the Construction Industry’s Awareness of and Reactions to the Global Sand Crisis

2023· article· en· W4388417215 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yunxin Peng, Adel A. Zadeh, Sheila M. Puffer

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurpriseDenialCuriosityPublic relationsCrisis managementCrisis communicationResource (disambiguation)PsychologyBusinessMarketingPolitical scienceSocial psychologyManagementEconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The United Nations has declared a global sand crisis. The construction industry, as a major user of sand, needs to significantly reduce the use of this finite natural resource. The purpose of this study is to measure the level of awareness of the sand crisis among construction industry professionals, to assess their reactions upon learning of the crisis, and to determine sources of information for those who are aware of the crisis. The Cognitive-Affective-Conative model was applied as the theoretical framework. The study is based on a survey and in-depth interviews with 75 construction industry professionals in the United States and Canada. Analyses included level of awareness by professional role and by reaction, as well as level of awareness by role and by type of information. Results showed that knowledge of the sand crisis was generally low. A content analysis of interview transcripts categorized five reactions to the crisis. These results suggest that generally across all roles, those with more familiarity with the sand crisis had reactions of proactive and feel bad while those with less familiarity expressed curiosity and surprise. Denial was expressed by a few. Recommendations include: First, greater efforts are required to inform construction industry professionals of the need to reduce the use of sand. Second, it is important to determine reactions upon learning of the crisis in order to generate interest and galvanize action. Third, determining the source of knowledge can help assess effective ways of broadly disseminating information to the construction industry.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207