MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396975679 · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1377205

On proposing relational environmental metaphors to stimulate engagement and foster well-being in the midst of climate change

2024· article· en· W4396975679 on OpenAlexafffund
Christian R. Bellehumeur, Laure-Marie Carignan

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change Communication and Perception
Canadian institutionsSaint Paul University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAction (physics)FeelingPsychologyConstructiveClimate changeMental healthSocial psychologyEnvironmentalismEnvironmental ethicsSociologyPolitical sciencePoliticsEcologyPsychotherapistComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Messages regarding climate change that are intended to stimulate responsible engagement can impact our mental health in both positive and negative ways, which in turn can increase or limit the potential engagement being sought through those very messages. Increasingly alarmist environmental metaphors are being brought into question due to their possibly detrimental impact on mental health and well-being, and in their place, relational environmental metaphors are proffered to instill hopeful and constructive individual and collective engagement for responsible climate action. This article discusses how both alarmist and relational environmental metaphors interact with eco-emotions. It proposes, in light of concepts arising from Porges' Polyvagal Theory - on the psychophysiology of autonomic states created in contexts of threatening cues and feelings of safety and connection -, that relational environmental metaphors are preferable for stimulating responsible collective engagement and fostering global well-being in the midst of climate change.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.019
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychiatrySame topicClimate Change Communication and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207