Experiences, perspectives, and meanings of family vacations for children
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Previous research on family vacations has emphasized tourism and marketing but largely ignored lived experiences. As part of a larger project exploring the meanings of family vacations to all family members, this study focuses on children's perspectives through analysis of in‐depth interviews of 24 school‐age children from 15 different families. Throughout the many different types of vacations, activities were central and created a context from which three main themes emerged. The first was a focus on having fun as an important vacation outcome. The second, newness and familiarity, conveyed the importance of adventure, new experiences, and other possibilities within a secure and stable social environment. The third theme was the centrality of social connections to reaffirm and strengthen relationships with family and friends. Children's experiences did not neatly fit into previously established family leisure models, thereby reinforcing the importance of considering all family members’ perspectives in future research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it