MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400213235 · doi:10.1080/13504622.2024.2365395

Perceptions of a sustainable diet among young adults

2024· article· en· W4400213235 on OpenAlexaff
Shannon Ruzgys, Gary J. Pickering

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Education Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental educationPerceptionPsychologyEducation for sustainable developmentSustainabilitySociologyPedagogyEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We sought to gain a more holistic understanding of young adults’ knowledge and perceptions around sustainable diets using a mixed methods online survey of 500 young adults (18–25 yrs.). Variables measured included food choice motivators (6-point importance scale), knowledge (ranking of efficacy of sustainable dietary behaviours), and several open-ended questions (responses assessed using inductive coding). Results show that environmental and health dimensions of sustainability are most salient for young adults. Decreasing food waste and consuming local and seasonal produce were rated as the most important behaviours for promoting a sustainable diet, while reducing consumption of sugary drinks, and reducing dairy consumption were rated as the least important. Cost was cited as the most important barrier to engaging in a sustainable diet. Young adults’ knowledge around sustainable diets is mixed, but sustainability is an important motivator in their dietary choices. Results inform education and communication strategies that seek to mobilise young adults to make sustainable dietary decisions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Education ResearchSame topicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactFrench-language works237,207