MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148216054 · doi:10.1177/0047287505276592

Defining Authenticity and Its Determinants: Toward an Authenticity Flow Model

2005· article· en· W2148216054 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Travel Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusMarketingBusinessAdvertisingTourismRepresentation (politics)Empirical examinationSociologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to broaden the understanding of authenticity through an empirical examination of Scottish goods sold to tourists at retail outlets and festivals. The focus was on vendors selling Scottish merchandise in the United States and Canada. A majority of the vendors describe authenticity as a representation of Scottish traditions, and their definitions do not vary with their socioeconomic characteristics but with the percentage of income obtained from festivals. The study further traces the authenticity flow in the marketing system on a continuum of 1 to 4, with 1 being the originator and 4 being the receiver. The results indicate that authenticity is supply driven and that producers are its determinants who obtain verifications from the trade fair, historians, and ancestral heritage. Vendors act as liaisons between the producers and the consumers, and, contrary to expectations, tourists are the receivers of authenticity.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.294 · 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