MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002221159 · doi:10.1108/02651331011058581

China and the Olympics: views of insiders and outsiders

2010· article· en· W2002221159 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

VenueInternational Marketing Review · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsNipissing UniversityCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaBeijingContext (archaeology)OriginalityMarketingAdvertisingMultivariate analysis of varianceRelevance (law)Value (mathematics)Event (particle physics)Political sciencePsychologyGeographyBusinessSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the views of residents and foreigners of the Olympics and the host country before and after the mega‐event within the context of marketing theory on country image effects and psychology theories attribution. Design/methodology/approach This is achieved by studying the views of American and Chinese respondents of China and the Olympics before and after the Beijing Olympics. Samples of Chinese and Americans were surveyed before and after the Beijing Summer Olympics concerning their images of the Olympics, China and its people, and China as a vacation destination. Cross‐national and pre‐post comparisons are made and interaction effects are noted using MANOVA. Findings Significant cross‐national and time differences and several interaction effects are found across all three focal objects of image measurements. Large country differences are found. Despite how technically successful the Games might have looked, post‐event assessments are overwhelmingly lower. Additional differences in views and interaction effects are discussed in terms of the intended and unintended impacts of the event on local and foreign respondents. Research limitations/implications Only one location in China and one foreign country are surveyed. Practical implications The paper has important implications for both the effects of mega‐events on country images and the effects of the host country on the event brand image. These issues have relevance for countries seeking to host mega‐events and those who manage these events and make decision about where they will be held. Originality/value This is the first cross‐national study of the Olympics and their effects using before‐and‐after event measures. It also combines analyses of both the event and the place images from the perspectives of both those who live in the country and residents of other countries. Attribution theory is a useful reference theory for mega‐event assessments.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.319 · 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