MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2287622021 · doi:10.1080/14766825.2015.1125910

Performing identity and culture in Indigenous tourism – a study of Indigenous communities in Québec, Canada

2015· article· en· W2287622021 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Susanna Heldt Cassel, Teresa Miranda Maureira

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Tourism and Cultural Change · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSvenska Sällskapet för Antropologi och Geografi
KeywordsIndigenousTourismEthnic groupIdentity (music)Cultural identityIndigenous cultureCultural tourismSociologyTourism geographyGender studiesEthnologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceAnthropologyEcologyAestheticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this paper is to analyze the ways in which Indigenous tourism affects representations of identity and culture, and how tourism practices are described, negotiated and related to development in Indigenous communities. This aim is met through a study, including interviews and observations in Québec, Canada, where Indigenous tourism has received increased attention and economic importance in recent years. Tourism is put forward as positive for economic as well as social and cultural development, through alternative income opportunities and the revalorization of traditions and cultural practices. Individuals from four different ethnic nations were involved in the study: Innu (formerly known as Montagnais), Cree (Eeyou), Wôbanaki (Abénakis) and Hurons (Wendat). From the interviews conducted for this study, we find that Indigenous tourism influences the ways in which individuals see themselves, and how they perceive their identity and culture. Through the production of Indigenous tourism products, the notion of authenticity is challenged, and performed in ways that benefit contemporary life within the communities. But these performances may also reproduce or challenge traditional Indigenous identities, and fuel tensions and conflicts between different groups within the communities.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Tourism and Cultural ChangeSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207