Survey data on wellbeing and nature connectedness before and after taking part in nature-based activities in 2020, UK
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Surveys of wellbeing, nature connectedness and pro-nature conservation behaviour scores from adult human participants before and after taking part in nature-based activities, including citizen science, in 2020 are presented. Participants were recruited via a public campaign and were randomly allocated into groups: citizen science, noticing nature (three good things in nature activity), combined citizen science and three good things in nature, and a wait list control. They were invited to take part in activities up to five times in the following eight days. Online surveys of wellbeing and nature connectedness were undertaken at people’s sign up to the project and after the eight days of activities. Demographic characteristics and people’s engagement with the project and responses to the pathways to nature connectedness were recorded after the eight days of activities. The research was carried out to investigate concern about the negative impacts of COVID-19 movement restrictions and social distancing on people's wellbeing and mental health. Research was funded through NERC grant NE/V009656/1 - COVID 19 - Does nature-based citizen science enhance well-being and mitigate negative effects of social isolation?
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.015 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".