MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735579239 · doi:10.1080/15980634.2017.1351083

Segmenting wine tourists in Niagara, Ontario using motivation and involvement

2017· article· en· W2735579239 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hwansuk Chris Choi, Shuyue Huang, Joan Flaherty, Anahita Khazaei

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Tourism Sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicWine Industry and Tourism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWineWineryPsychographicMarket segmentationMarketingPurchasingVisitor patternBusinessTourismAdvertisingRecreationGeographyComputer sciencePolitical scienceFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wine tourism is a growing industry in select rural regions within Canada, particularly in the Niagara region of Southern Ontario. This study aims to sharpen that development by providing a detailed profile of the psychographic traits of wine tourists visiting the Niagara region. Specifically, our study examines the motivations, wine purchasing involvement and wine purchasing behaviour of the region’s winery tourists to identify distinct market segments. The study results indicate that the wine visitor market in Ontario can be segmented into three distinct groups: Wine Enthusiast, Wine Interested person and the Wine Novice. This study also shows that the multi-criterion segmentation approach is a viable way to determine distinctive wine market segments, and to provide a solid, evidenced-based foundation for effective marketing strategies and sales practices.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Tourism SciencesSame topicWine Industry and TourismFrench-language works237,207