MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139483709 · doi:10.1177/0047287512475220

The Ethics of Excellence in Tourism Research

2013· article· en· W2139483709 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Travel Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicHospitality and Tourism Education
Canadian institutionsLaurentian UniversityBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcellenceUtilitarianismTourismField (mathematics)AuditSociologyEpistemologyPublic relationsWork (physics)Political scienceManagementEconomicsLawPhilosophyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the challenges that have emerged in tourism as a result of the new audit culture, and the effects this system is having on the creation of knowledge. A premium is now being placed on quantifying just about every type of output in our efforts to rank one agent or entity against another: people, programs, journals, disciplines, and so on. This analysis departs from other works on the topic through the use of philosophy, and in particular, the work of the Canadian philosopher John Ralston Saul. Saul’s thoughts on corporatism, instrumental reason, utilitarianism, and knowledge are fundamental to the situation we find ourselves in at present. I argue, as Saul does, for a return to content over structure and form. Although working within these systems may be beneficial to some scholars and their programs and universities, the practice is not helping to build a cohesive and well-organized field.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.548
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.201
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.229 · 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