MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399126059 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.190514

Perceptions of Environmental Awareness and Pro-Environmental Behaviour of People in the Riverfront City, Pekanbaru City, Riau, Indonesia

2024· article· en· W4399126059 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Evawani Elysa Lubis, Yusni Ikhwa Siregar, Nofrizal Nofrizal, Noor Efni, Fajriani Ananda

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal Management and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionSocioeconomicsEnvironmental planningGeographyPsychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aims to analyze the perception of environmental awareness of the people of Kampung Baru, Kampung Bandar, Kampung Dalam, and Pesisir sub-districts, which is influenced by individual characteristics such as education and income.Then the perception of environmental awareness will influence the pro-environmental behavior of the people in these four sub-districts towards where they live.The area of these four sub-districts is the riverside city area of Pekanbaru City, which is starting to be organized into a tourist attraction known as Tepian Sungai Siak.The method used in this research was quantitative, distributing questionnaires to 120 respondents.The data was processed using SEM-PLS.From the results of research data processing, it is known that the respondents' characteristics, namely education and income, do not influence the respondents' environmental awareness perceptions.However, the respondents' perception of environmental awareness is classified as moderate or agrees with various management issues related to environmental concerns where they live, such as waste management, sanitation, clean water, energy, and concern for the surrounding environment.Furthermore, this environmentally conscious perception significantly influences the pro-environmental behavior of settlers on the banks of the Siak River.The results of this research can be used in designing government programs to create pro-environmental residential based on the pro-environmental behavior of settlers.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.243
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 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicCoastal Management and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207