MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999520115 · doi:10.1108/eb058425

Branding mountain destinations: The battle for “placefulness”

2004· article· en· W1999520115 on OpenAlex

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

VenueTourism Review · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDestinationsTourismBattleBusinessMarketingCorporate brandingAdvertisingTourist destinationsGeographyBrand management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the potential influence and consequences of corpora te branding on mountain resort destinations. It examines the extent to which corporations emphasize “placefulness” in the branding of their tourism products and services, as well as the degree to which they intentionally match their brands with values held by other destination stakeholders. “Placefulness” refers to the relative extent to which corporate branding strategies reinforce a destination's “sense of place” The findings suggest that a corporate as opposed to a community approach to branding is emerging in many tourism destinations. This has resulted in some significant redefinition of destination identities to reflect the changing needs of markets and corporations. Probably the most apparent identity shift in mountain communities brought on by corporate influence has involved the repositioning of many areas from being ski resorts to becoming four season destination resorts.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.615
Threshold uncertainty score0.838

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.340 · 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