Correspondence of Beach User Perception, Lifesaving Strategies and Rip Currents at Brackley Beach and Cavendish Beach Prince Edward Island
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Rip currents are an emerging public health hazard, with the potential to have serious socioeconomic impacts on coastal communities globally. Rip currents, colloquially known as rips, are common along the north shore of Prince Edward Island, and are associated with a transverse bar and rip morphology that tends to develop as the bars migrate landward following winter storms. The rip morphology tends to develop at the height of the economically important tourist season. Several drownings have occurred within and adjacent to Prince Edward Island National Park (PEINP) in recent years, and they have been attributed to rip currents at or near the primary access points to the beach. Whether someone drowns or is in need of rescue depends on a complex interplay between the physical presence of the rip, the management of the specific beach and the perceptions of the beach user. This study is the first to examine the relationship amongst the presence and location of rips, beach user intentions and behaviour, and the lifeguard-defined hazard level. Beach user surveys were administered over a four-week period at the popular tourist beaches of Cavendish Beach and Brackley Beach within PEINP, with an objective to analyze the spatial and temporal variation of beach users with respect to their understanding of the rip hazard, warnings posted by the lifeguards and quasi-permanent rips at the sites. Results suggests that the intention of a beach user to be safe at the beach may not accurately reflect their actions. Many beach users surveyed in this study did not pay attention to beach warnings and appear to be influenced by other factors that confirmed their assumption that the beach was safe. Those who did not observe the sign tended to sit further away from the access point compared to those who saw the signs. Tourists were also found to be at higher risk of needing rescue or drowning caused by rip currents due to their lack of rip knowledge and their inability to recall the location and colour of warning flags and rip signage. Further research into the correspondence of beach user perception, lifesaving strategies and rip currents can help reduce the number of drownings related to rip currents and other surf hazards through the effective deployment of lifesaving strategies and increase public confidence in rip hazard predictions.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».