MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413234285 · doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102140

Pursuing prefigurative collective action on climate change

2025· review· en· W4413234285 on OpenAlexaff
Shayda Azamian, Livia Dittmer

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Psychology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollective actionAction (physics)PsychologyClimate changeChemistryPolitical scienceLawPoliticsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reviews recent empirical and theoretical work on prefigurative climate action, emphasizing psychological dimensions and implications of constructive methods that contrast with a politics of opposition to the status quo. We synthesize recent descriptions of prefigurative actions on climate change, highlighting four common characteristics or principles identified from recent literature. Emphasizing the importance of means-ends coherence, we discuss prefigurative climate actions from a systems perspective across social ecological levels of analysis. Finally, we consider the potency and potential for scaling prefigurative climate actions and their effects, including the long-term path of transformation envisioned by these modes of action and possible limitations. The aim of this review is to inform further contributions from psychology to the knowledge base on prefiguration, climate action, and social transformation.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.677
GPT teacher head0.678
Teacher spread0.002 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in PsychologySame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207