Cited by 47Climate Change Policy and EconomicsSustainability and Climate Change GovernanceClimate Change Communication and Perception

Integrating institutional approaches and decision science to address climate change: a multi-level collective action research agenda

Open access
York, Abigail M, Drummond Otten, Caitlin, BurnSilver, Shauna, Neuberg, Steven L, Anderies, John M·2021·Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cosust.2021.06.001

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
York, A. M., Drummond Otten, C., BurnSilver, S., Neuberg, S. L., & Anderies, J. M.
Affiliations
Arizona State University (US)
Corresponding author
York, Abigail M
Venue
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-10
Volume
52
Pages
19-26
ISSN
1877-3435 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3175089051
Cited by
47
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 1
FWCI
1.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (NNA-1928235)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Climate Change Policy and Economics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Climate Change Communication and Perception
Keywords
climate change, institutional approach, decision science, trust, norms, worldview, climate change narratives, climate policy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review