0
Article ? AI-assigned paper type based on the abstract. Classification may not be perfect — flag errors using the feedback button. Tier 2 ? Original research — experimental, observational, or case-control study. Direct primary evidence. Environmental Sources Food & Water Human Health Effects Policy & Risk Sign in to save

Uncertainties about waste using an online survey and review approach: Environmentalist perceptions, household waste compositions and views from media and science

Cambridge Prisms Plastics 2024 1 citation ? Citation count from OpenAlex, updated daily. May differ slightly from the publisher's own count. Score: 45 ? 0–100 AI score estimating relevance to the microplastics field. Papers below 30 are filtered from public browse.
Laura Markley, Laura Markley, Laura Markley, Laura Markley, Laura Markley, Laura Markley, Maja Grünzner, Maja Grünzner, Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Laura Markley, Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Maja Grünzner, Maja Grünzner, Maja Grünzner, Maja Grünzner, Maja Grünzner, Maja Grünzner, Laura Markley, Laura Markley, Laura Markley, Laura Markley, Laura Markley, Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Laura Markley, Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Maja Grünzner, Tony R. ‎Walker Laura Markley, Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Tony R. ‎Walker Laura Markley, Tony R. ‎Walker

Summary

An online survey distributed as part of a global social media challenge asked participants to collect and report their non-perishable waste during February 2020, examining individual perceptions and waste compositions pre-COVID-19. Results highlighted significant gaps between individual waste perceptions and actual waste generation, with plastic and single-use items consistently underestimated.

Abstract Waste generation and subsequent plastic pollution pose a major threat to both human and environmental health. Furthering our understanding of waste at individual levels can inform future waste reduction strategies, education and policies. This study explores the components and perceptions among individuals using survey data combined with a mini-review. An online Qualtrics survey was distributed pre-COVID-19 following a global social media challenge, Futuristic February, which directed participants to collect their nonperishable waste during February 2020. Participants were asked about their waste generation, perceptions toward waste and plastic pollution issues, and environmental worldview using the New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) scale (n = 50). We also conducted a mini-review of eight waste and plastic pollution statements from our survey in both popular media and scientific journal articles. Survey results indicated participants had an overall pro-ecological worldview ( M = 4.32, SD = 0.88) and reported cardboard and paper (66%) as the most commonly occurring nonperishable waste category. Across categories, food packaging was the most common waste type. Participants were most uncertain about statements focusing on bioplastic or biodegradable plastic, respectively (44% and 30%), while the statement on microplastic toxicity obtained 100% mild or strong agreement among participants. Uncertainty for reviewed statements varied depending on the topic and group. Popular media and scholarly articles did not always agree, possibly due to differences in communication of uncertainty or terminology definitions. These results can inform future policy and educational campaigns around topics of misinformation.

Sign in to start a discussion.

Share this paper