Student’s engagement in home preparedness: : a qualitative study on preparation, responsibility, risk perception and social networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The concept of home preparedness has once again become increasingly more important in Sweden due to worsening national and international security conditions, and because international crises such as the Covid-19 pandemic has received increased attention. Home preparedness should enable individuals to be self-sufficient för at least a week and should include preparations for a variety of crises as well as för war. However, there is little interest in home preparedness among the population (FOI 2024, p. 31), for a variety of reasons. One important reason seems to be that it is all too easy to ignore it, as we are not exposed to the risk or occurrence of serious crises daily. In this study, I have used a qualitative approach to conduct semi-structured interviews to investigate students’ relationships to home preparedness. I chose to focus on students´ due to a research gap, where students are often included among other adults, and because existing studies suggest that students possibly may be a vulnerable group during crises. The paper uses four different hypotheses that link to four different aspects of home preparedness, that is in turn structured around two research questions. The hypotheses are built on previous research and a theoretical framework. The results show that the students have two clear strengths in a crisis; they possess large social network and a strong willingness to cope with the crisis without help, even if they lack sufficient home preparedness. But at the same time, they also have a clear weakness where they are not sufficiently prepared for a crisis according to the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB’s) recommendations. Most respondents do not believe that a crisis is likely to occur in the near future.
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 | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".