MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409771244 · doi:10.1155/atr/9606650

Addressing Perceived Insecurity in Public Transportation: A PLS‐SEM Approach

2025· article· en· W4409771244 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carolina Busco, Felipe González, Sara Arancibia Carvajal, Tiare Vera, Milko Yuretic, Claudio Fuentes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain Resilience and Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico
KeywordsPublic transportTransport engineeringPsychologyEnvironmental healthBusinessForensic engineeringEnvironmental planningComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The sense of insecurity and fear of crime associated with public transportation are disadvantages that can deter individuals from using public transportation. We propose a methodology based on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS‐SEM) to examine perceptions of insecurity among public transportation users in the Gran Valparaíso area and how these perceptions have influenced the corporate image of the services. To do so, we conducted a survey to assess perceptions of insecurity in situations involving harassment, crime, threatening social environments, crowded and isolated environments, and corporate image. Additionally, we considered gender and previous experiences of victimization in public transportation as moderating factors to identify significant differences among these groups. The main factor influencing the corporate image of buses and the metro is insecurity based on harassment. In terms of gender, women have a heightened perception of insecurity in crowded settings, influencing their feelings of insecurity based on harassment. Meanwhile, men’s apprehension mainly relates to crime and is due to isolated environments.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicSupply Chain Resilience and Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207