Discovering the hotel selection factors of vegetarians: the case of Turkey
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the hotel selection preferences of vegetarians in Turkey. Design/methodology/approach The questionnaire used in this study had four main sections: animal and environmentally friendly hotel attributes; hotel features and facilities; hotel food and beverage services; and demographic and travel information of respondents. Data were collected by way of face-to-face questionnaires from 328 self-identified vegetarians who visited the first vegan/vegetarian event – “Didim VegFest” – in Turkey on 29-30 April 2017. Findings Eco-animal friendly hotels, customer requests and animal friendly and environmental ethics (main Factor 1); comfort and value, facilities and security, the natural environment and the staff and their services (main Factor 2); standards and sanitation, sensibility, atmosphere and knowledge (main Factor 3) were identified as the main hotel selection factors of vegetarians in Turkey. Originality/value This study is the first of its kind in the tourism literature.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it