MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004896907 · doi:10.4018/ijcrmm.2020040101

An Evaluation of Toronto's Destination Image Through Tourist Generated Content on Twitter

2020· article· en· W3004896907 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hillary Clarke, Ahmed Hassanien

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Customer Relationship Marketing and Management · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDestination imageTourismPerceptionUser-generated contentSocial mediaAdvertisingInterpretation (philosophy)Content analysisMeaning (existential)CognitionComponent (thermodynamics)PsychologyNetnographySociologyMarketingBusinessDestinationsComputer scienceGeographyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims at evaluating the cognitive, affective, and conative components of destination image from the perception of tourists on social media. The netnography technique is used for data analysis and interpretation. Through a textual content analysis approach, an interpretation of meaning of content produced from tweets by tourists is conducted. The findings show that destination attractions were the most commented on component of the cognitive component. Throughout the travelling process, tourists assessed the affective destination image. It was found that tourists' evaluation was of favourable emotions towards Toronto as a destination. The conative component was assessed before, during, and after visiting Toronto. Tourists provided insight into their behaviour online through personal updates and information sharing. The research outcomes provide scholars and practitioners with greater insight into the dimensions of destination image formed by user-generated content from tourists and their usefulness for information exchange in various settings.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.742
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Customer Relationship Marketing and ManagementSame topicDigital Marketing and Social MediaFrench-language works237,207