MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067978803 · doi:10.1080/14616680309715

Photography and travel brochures: The circle of representation

2003· article· en· W2067978803 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Olivia Jenkins

Bibliographic record

VenueTourism Geographies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaLakehead University
KeywordsDestinationsTourismPhotographyRepresentation (politics)AdvertisingVisual artsRelevance (law)SociologyGeographyArtPolitical scienceBusinessArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The power of the visual image to inspire travel to distant places is well exploited by the myth-makers in tourism marketing and is important for understanding tourist behaviour. This paper explores the relevance of the 'circle of representation' concept to understanding one particular group of tourists: backpackers. First it reviews previous research on visual images and tourist photography, then it presents findings of research investigating the visual images of Australia promoted to and perceived by backpacker travellers. Specifically, the paper investigates evidence for the 'hermeneutic circle' whereby tourists (backpackers) reproduce the iconic images of destinations in their personal photographs. Brochure photographs projected to backpacker tourists and their own photography choices during travel are found to be part of a cultural 'circle of representation' or perhaps a 'spiral of representation' through which the iconic images of Australia are perpetuated.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations478
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTourism GeographiesSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207