MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Volunteers, Place, and Ultramarathons: Addressing The Challenge of Recruitment and Retention

2019· article· en· W2982700572 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tom D. Hinch, Craig Cameron

Bibliographic record

VenueEvent Management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolunteerLocal communityThematic analysisBeautyEvent (particle physics)Word of mouthPublic relationsAdvertisingPsychologySociologyQualitative researchPolitical scienceBusinessEcologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultramarathons are often hosted in peripheral areas featuring challenging natural landscapes. Given limited local volunteer pools in these areas, the recruitment and retention of visiting volunteers is crucial to the sustainability of these events, yet little is known about the importance of the destination or place in terms of the volunteer experience. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to gain insight into the role that place plays in volunteer experiences at an ultramarathon in a peripheral area. A case study methodology was adopted with a focus on volunteers at the Canadian Death Race in Grande Cache (GC), Alberta, Canada. Semistructured interviews with event hosts, local volunteers, and visiting volunteers provided insight into the place dimension of the volunteer experiences. In phase 1, interviews with event/community hosts confirmed that local volunteer retention was challenging due to the growing demands of the event and to local volunteer fatigue. A systematic thematic analysis in phase 2 found that volunteers were connected to the destination through the place-based themes of: 1) beauty, 2) remoteness, 3) event, and 4) community. These findings demonstrated that "place mattered" in the experience of local and visiting volunteers. Therefore, organizers should actively recognize the importance of place when recruiting and retaining volunteers for these types of events in remote communities.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvent ManagementSame topicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness ManagementFrench-language works237,207