MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768840708 · doi:10.24043/isj.43

Tourism economies and islands’ resilience to the global financial crisis

2017· article· en· W2768840708 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Katarzyna Podhorodecka

Bibliographic record

VenueIsland Studies Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIsland Studies and Pacific Affairs
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancial crisisResilience (materials science)TourismBusinessEconomyFinancial systemEconomic geographyEconomicsGeographyMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article is a comparative study of islands' reactions to the global financial crisis.The main aim is to identify conditions which influence how the effects of the crisis in the tourism sector differed between selected island territories.Seventeen island territories which rely on tourism were selected for analysis.Each reacted differently to the global financial crisis, especially with regard to changes in tourist movement, employment in tourism, and expenditure by foreign tourists.The factors analysed are: length of time as an independent state or dependent territory, degree of dependence on tourism, the diversity of the mix of foreign markets from which tourists arrive, level of dominance of the main foreign market, level of dependence on European and North-and South American markets, duration of flights from the main market, level of economic development, quality of life of the island area's residents, tourist expenditure, and changes in government expenditure on tourism.The statistical analysis was conducted using both the Spearman and the Kendall rank correlation coefficients.

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)0.002
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations27
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIsland Studies JournalSame topicIsland Studies and Pacific AffairsFrench-language works237,207