MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235505172 · doi:10.20431/2455-0043.0701003

Exploring Consumer Motivation at Small-Scale Ski Resorts

2021· article· en· W4235505172 on OpenAlexaff
Amanda Jacek, Jimmy Smith, Lindsey Elliott, Karen F. Rickel, Patti Millar

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Research in Tourism and Hospitality · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScale (ratio)BusinessMarketingAdvertisingPsychologyGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sport tourism is a dynamic and rapidly growing industry that has skyrocketed to over $45 billion.Scholars suggest that tourism should be studied from a psychological perspective to determine what motivates sport tourists to travel to specific destinations and what motivates them to return.Research on sport tourist motivation is plentiful, examining the behavior and intentions of both active and passive sport tourists.Tourists that visit a ski resort fall into both active and passive categories and possess a range of motivations. Most of the research that has been done on ski tourist motivation has focused on large-scale ski resorts.The current research fills a gap in the existing literature by studying the motivation of ski tourists at a smallscale ski resort.Through a case study model, this research set out to understand the motivational factors and conditions of small-scale ski resorts.The results of this study will equip resort managers to provide an improved resort experience and develop targeted marketing strategies.This will also benefit ski tourists and build guest loyalty.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.248
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Research in Tourism and HospitalitySame topicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness ManagementFrench-language works237,207