English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Two experiments were conducted to assess litter control at a riverside location. Experiment 1 examined the effects of a security camera (presence/absence), past littering (presence/absence), and environmental features (tussock/plain ground/flowerbed). Two scenes containing combinations of these factors were presented. Participants chose the scene in which they felt it was to easier to litter. Participants also reported their emotional response to the presence/absence of a security camera and environmental features in scenes with litter. The results revealed that the presence of a security camera, no past littering, flowerbeds, and plain ground inhibited littering. Littering in the presence of a security camera facilitated discomfort, anger, and shame, and littering in flowerbeds caused discomfort, anger, shame, and sadness. Using a similar method, Experiment 2 addressed the particular effects of a security camera combined with other factors: past littering, environmental features, and signboards (no sign/sign with eyes/security camera images). The results demonstrated the effectiveness of a security camera, no past littering, flowerbeds, plain ground, signboards presenting eyes, and images from a security camera in preventing littering.

The effects of security camera, past littering, environment, and signboards on littering prevention