Promotion of Domestic Tourism by Enhancing the Practice of Alternative Tourism as a Quality Measure to Satisfy and Retain National Tourists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to study the satisfaction of national tourists with the tourism experience in the Sahara. It also seeks to examine the influence this has on the intention to return and spread positive word-of-mouth about this destination, work on its improvement to capitalize on the internal mobilities induced by COVID-19, and build a long-term relationship with them to strengthen regional attachment. Data were collected from 123 national tourists in Algeria using convenience sampling. Two analyses were carried out to process the data: a structural equation modeling approach to test and validate the hypotheses and textual analysis. The results show that among the five factors determining the quality of the Sahara experience, four factors significantly influence the satisfaction of domestic tourists: The scenic environment, the personal environment, entertainment, and reliability. It is deduced that the niche and responsible character of Saharan tourism is the main thing that satisfies tourists and ensures the success of tourism in the Sahara.
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 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 | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".