MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098834377

ENVIRONMENT AND BEHAVIOR / September 2001Blake / CONTEXTUAL EFFECTS CONTEXTUAL EFFECTS ON ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOR

2016· article· en· W7098834377 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGarlic and Onion Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction (physics)Collective actionPoliticsResource (disambiguation)Sample (material)PerceptionPublic opinionPopulationEnvironmental impact assessmentWork (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Columbia. His research interests include contextual effects on political attitudes, po-litical geography, and partisan realignment. He is currently involved in research on the impact of unemployment on support for environmental policies and on contextual effects regarding attitudes toward visible minorities. Previous work on environmental attitudes has appeared in the Canadian Journal of Political Science and Canadian Public Policy. ABSTRACT: Using data from a random sample survey of the population of British Columbia, this article addresses an anomaly in the literature on environmental con-cern and environmental action: the limited impact of self-interest, in the sense of behavior based on a personal threat from environmental problems, on the likelihood of environmental action. The issue is examined using a regression model that includes contextual effects and measures of political attitudes and environmental knowledge as determinants of individual action in support of environmental causes and collective action directed at halting or reversing environmental degradation. The analysis dem-onstrates that spatial variation in the nature of environmental problems has a signifi-cant effect on perceptions and behavior. Whereas protest behavior is more likely in areas dominated by resource extraction, willingness to incur economic costs in the interest of environmental protection is lower. This article addresses an anomaly in the literature on environmental con-cern and environmental action: the limited impact of self-interest, in the sense of behavior based on a personal threat from environmental problems, on the likelihood of environmental action. For example, a comparative study

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.578
Threshold uncertainty score0.878

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGarlic and Onion StudiesFrench-language works237,207