MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975819771 · doi:10.1080/01490400802017464

A More Tenable Marketing for Leisure Services and Studies

2008· article· en· W1975819771 on OpenAlex
Andrew T. Kaczynski

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLeisure Sciences · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarketingSkepticismMarketing researchMandateServices marketingPerspective (graphical)Public relationsRelationship marketingPublic Sector MarketingContext (archaeology)Return on marketing investmentSocial marketingConfusionSociologyMarketing managementBusinessMarketing sciencePsychologyPolitical scienceService (business)EpistemologyLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The integration of marketing principles and practices into leisure services and studies over the past 25 years has been met with significant confusion and skepticism. Recent theoretical re-conceptualizations of public leisure services marketing suggest that a new marketing philosophy is needed to guide marketing efforts in this context. This paper argues that social marketing, previously largely ignored in the leisure literature, offers a perspective more consistent with the mandate of public leisure services. An explicit goal of the essay is to clarify confusion surrounding marketing and to describe a more tenable philosophy so that a wider range of subdisciplines in leisure services and studies might take advantage of some or all of the beneficial aspects of marketing.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.770

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it