A Study of Tourism Motivation, Perceived Value and Destination Loyalty for Macao Cultural and Heritage Tourists
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
<p>To enhance the understanding of tourists behavior and to provide some suggestions for a sustainable development of cultural and heritage tourism in Macao, data of this study were collected from Macao cultural and heritage tourists who are visiting famous attractions in the historic center of Macao, to observe the tourism motivation, perceived value, and destination loyalty of cultural and heritage tourists in Macao. In this study, the results of factor analysis of cultural and heritage tourism motivation show that tourists’ perceived value, which contains three dimensions: scenic value, knowledge value, and social value. These dimensions can be considered as the primary indicators of perceived value which positively influence tourists’ destination loyalty. It is worth noting that the direct effect value of cultural and heritage tourism motivation to destination loyalty through perceived value is greater than tourism motivation’s direct effect on destination loyalty. Therefore, some suggestions have been put forward for the sustainable development of cultural and heritage tourism in Macao. Firstly, attractiveness cultural heritage in Macao should be designed and highlighted according to tourists’ tourism motivation. Secondly, the unique value proposition should be proposed from different dimensions of tourists’ perceived value, allowing tourists to experience the differences of Macao from other destinations. Finally, great importance should also be attached to the management of tourists’ perceived value other than just continuously increasing the attractiveness of cultural heritage itself based on tourists’ tourism motivation, which has an indirect influence on destination loyalty to make publicity for the destination voluntarily of tourists.</p>
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 | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| 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