Mental models for assessing coastal social-ecological systems following disasters
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Furman et al. (2021) mapped the coastal system and assessed various stakeholder groups' perceptions of the main components of the system.
“For example, Vasslides and Jensen (2016) conducted a study that mapped the estuarine system with the main focus on ecological function, while Furman et al. (2021) mapped the coastal system and assessed various stakeholder groups' perceptions of the main components of the system.”
From Towards integrated management of sandy anthropogenic shores: Developing tools for the exploration of human-natural interactions (2025) · cites this paper as Furman et al. (2021)
The approach of Furman et al. (2021) has not been formatted to assess the interaction between the multifunctional behaviour of the system by presenting concepts as indicators.
“Although there are similarities between the components of the system in the CCM being developed by Furman et al. (2021), their approach has not been formatted to assess the interaction between the multifunctional behaviour of the system by presenting concepts as indicators.”
From Towards integrated management of sandy anthropogenic shores: Developing tools for the exploration of human-natural interactions (2025) · cites this paper as Furman et al. (2021)
Cited by
Sorted by citations
- Authors
- Furman, K. L., Aminpour, P., Gray, S. A., & Scyphers, S. B.
- Affiliations
- Northeastern University (US)
- Michigan State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Furman, Kelsi L.
- Venue
- Marine Policy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2021-03
- Volume
- 125
- Pages
- 104334
- ISSN
- 0308-597X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3118448492
- Cited by
- 25
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3
- FWCI
- 1.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Marine Policy (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Northeastern University (12–05-17)
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Cognitive Science and Mapping
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Coastal and Marine Management
- Keywords
- social-ecological systems, Hurricane Irma, coastal resilience, disaster recovery, mental models, fuzzy cognitive mapping, stakeholder perspectives, coastal restoration, tourism impacts, coral reefs, mangroves, coastline, Key West
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
