MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Explaining Festival Impacts on a Hosting Community Through Motivations to Attend

2016· article· en· W2340333088 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kyle Maurice Woosnam, Jingxian Jiang, Christine M. Van Winkle, Hyun Kim, Naho Maruyama

Bibliographic record

VenueEvent Management · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtant taxonSociocultural evolutionScale (ratio)Music festivalPsychologyExploratory factor analysisTourismSocial impactAdvertisingSociologyGeographyBusinessDemographyDevelopmental psychologyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extant literature on social–cultural impacts of festivals traditionally takes into consideration perspectives of the host community while neglecting those of visitors, who often times comprise a high percent of total number of attendees at such expositions. Additionally, motivations of these visitors to attend festivals have rarely been considered in explaining perceived impacts among festival attendees. This study examined the underlying structures of motivations to attend the annual Morden Corn and Apple Festival, Manitoba, Canada among area residents and visitors as well as their perceived sociocultural impacts of the festival on community through a newly developed festival-attending motivation scale and modified Festival Social Impact Attitude Scale (FSIAS). Exploratory factor analysis and multiple regression results suggested that at least one motivation factor (i.e., social interaction and/or knowledge gain) significantly predicted three of the four modified FSIAS factors.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.374
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations26
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvent ManagementSame topicSport and Mega-Event ImpactsFrench-language works237,207