A comparison of pre- and post-9/11 traveller profiles: post-crisis marketing implications.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To aid in understanding post-crisis travel, the research presented in this chapter compares US travellers who travelled internationally before the terrorist events of 11 September 2001 (9/11) with those who journeyed abroad following the tragedy. Data for the study were obtained from the 2000 and 2001 'Inflight Survey of Overseas Arrivals to the USA'. The sample comprised 700 randomly selected outbound travellers from the fourth quarter of 2000, and an additional 700 travellers randomly selected from the same period a year later - the 3 months immediately following 9/11. The research noted that while far fewer Americans travelled internationally in the wake of 9/11, those who made the journey in the fourth quarter of 2001 were remarkably similar, psychographically and behaviourally, to those who had done so in the year prior to the attack. These findings provide reassurance to post-crisis tourism marketers that their target market's behaviours and attitudes will not fundamentally change and that those travellers they do attract will be very similar to those they had served in the past.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".