Communication Factors Contributing to Mindfulness: A Study of Melaka World Heritage Site Visitors
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
We investigate the effects of three communication factors (i.e. variety, interactivity, and personal connection) as used in three different types of media (i.e. exhibits, guided tours, and printed materials) on the state of mindfulness of visitors at the Malacca World Heritage Site. Mindfulness refers to a state of mind in which a person actively processes available information. For a relatively new heritage site, such as Malacca, improving a visitors’ state of mindfulness is important because mindful visitors have been shown to have superior understanding and learning, thus benefiting the heritage site’s management authorities by cultivating responsible and sustainable tourism behaviours. The survey method was employed to measure the state of mindfulness of 200 respondents visiting the Malacca World Heritage Site. The survey results indicate that each communication media has one key communication factor that significantly induces a state of mindfulness in the visitor. For exhibits, variety was found to be the key communication factor while for guided tours and printed material, the key communication factor was interactivity. In response to these findings, we outline a number of specific directions for heritage site management and authorities to identify the most effective communication factors in commonly used communication media.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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