MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417447540 · doi:10.1111/csp2.70221

Knowledge, perceptions, and barriers influence public actions to help bees in Toronto, Canada

2025· article· en· W4417447540 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Science and Practice · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect and Pesticide Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEnthusiasmPerceptionAction (physics)Citizen scienceConservation psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Despite the enthusiasm surrounding bees, the public's current knowledge is sourced from the non‐native honey bee whose life history differs from many endemic North American species. Ascertaining the public's understandings and perceptions of bees is essential to implementing publicly supported conservation initiatives that may benefit bee conservation as well as social and ecological aspects of communities, especially in large cities which are epicenters of increasing urbanization. The knowledge and perception of bees as well as current actions and barriers to their conservation among Torontonians was assessed using an online survey. Participants held correct assumptions about basic bee biology pertaining to environmental importance and decline in cities but lacked awareness regarding species richness. Nonetheless, public support for bees was universally high. Individuals were mostly involved with low‐effort actions such as avoiding pesticide use and intense management but also reported planting wildflowers as well. Most participants indicated at least one barrier to action, with lack of knowledge, time, and money being most frequently reported. These barriers, including knowledge score and demographic characteristics such as lower age and lack of degree, influenced how many actions participants engaged in. Researchers should continue to create inclusive opportunities for public engagement while incorporating inter‐disciplinary approaches to mitigate current barriers.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.440
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.312 · 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