MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399067717 · doi:10.33921/stpv8063

“Find a Place Where You Can Be a Part of the Change”: A Thematic Analysis of the Conditions that Influence Direct, Collective Pro-Environmental Activism

2024· article· en· W4399067717 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interpersonal Relations Intergroup Relations and Identity · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmentalismReflexivityCollective actionThematic analysisSocial activismPoliticsClimate changePolitical activismPolitical scienceEnvironmental changeAffect (linguistics)Social movementPublic relationsSociologySocial psychologyQualitative researchPsychologySocial scienceLawEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The harmful impacts of climate change are becoming increasingly apparent across many aspects of society, and pro-environmental collective activism may help slow its progression. While previous research underscores several factors that shape participation in pro-environmental collective activism, much of this research is informed by quantitative data. This study used qualitative methods to investigate the conditions that shape participation in collective pro-environmental activism. This study drew on four in-depth interviews with climate activists recently engaged in direct action. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Three themes are presented: (a) Tangible and local instances of environmental and social injustices encourage people to act on existing environmental and political values; (b) Activists are motivated to participate in collective activism by a need to belong; (c) A sense of hopeful group efficacy counteracts negative affect about the climate crisis. These findings demonstrate the interactive nature of the conditions that support proenvironmental activism

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0080.011
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Interpersonal Relations Intergroup Relations and IdentitySame topicEnvironmental Education and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207