MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2740002588 · doi:10.14738/assrj.414.3488

People’s Perception of the Socio-Cultural and Environmental Impacts of Tourism in Malaysia: A Community-Reflective Study

2017· article· en· W2740002588 on OpenAlexaff
Abdul Karim

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Social Sciences Research Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocioeconomic Development in Asia
Canadian institutions123 Certification (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismPrideTourism geographyPrestigeGrassrootsEcotourismBeautyPopulationProduct (mathematics)MalayPerceptionMarketingSociologyPolitical scienceBusinessPoliticsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tourism is considered as the largest service-oriented industry of Malaysia, contributing enormously in economic terms to the GDP (gross domestic product) of the country, delivering employment to a sizeable section of the population, and fostering civic pride, social prestige, and international recognition as a desirable tourist destination. The tourism industry parades the beauty of Malaysian culture abroad as well as it enables people from outside to acquaint with a unique Muslim heritage amidst Malay modernity. Notwithstanding its many blessings, the tourism issue has sparked debate recently necessitating a discourse on a ‘rational framework for Malaysian tourism’ upon the premise that the benefits of tourism should not only be calculated in economic metrics, rather its demerits should be factored in as well. Under this circumstance, this paper empirically reflects the Malaysian community’s perception on the socio-cultural and environmental effects of tourism at the grassroots level.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.389 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Social Sciences Research JournalSame topicSocioeconomic Development in AsiaFrench-language works237,207