Impacts of Religious and Pilgrimage Tourism in Rural Areas: The Case of Iran
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
Rural tourism has speedily developed and become an engine for economic development and plays a great role towards socio-economic changes in rural areas. However, its impact is controversial and not always obvious. To examine these issues, this research presents an empirical analysis of pilgrimage and religious tourism and the impacts of these types of travel in rural areas in Iran. The paper provides examples of these impacts and transformations in the three rural centers as Tourism Model Villages (TMVs). A qualitative method and survey questionnaire was distributed to 300 households in the study area and the data analyzed by use of One-sample T-test, Kruskal-Wallis and tukey test in SPSS software. In this regards the social, physical and economic impacts on the transformation of rural households are discussed. The results revealed that pilgrims and religious tourists are strongly influenced in rural areas, but the social aspect of pilgrimage and religious tourism had the largest impacts on rural households. And also the results indicated that the villages related to “Religious tourism”, have registered statistically significant higher impacts of those villages related to “Pilgrimage tourism”.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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