MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4246937542 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14655324

Influencing sustainable travel using Instagram

2021· preprint· en· W4246937542 on OpenAlexaff
Brianne James

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismExploitOvercrowdingSustainable tourismDestinationsScarcityTourist destinationsNarrativeSustainable developmentSocial mediaBusinessAdvertisingSociologyMarketingGeographyPolitical scienceComputer scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sustainable tourism is defined as a development of tourism that does not exploit natural and constructed environment and instead preserves the culture, inheritance, and artistic values of the local community (Dávid, 2011). Global mass tourism, a form of tourism that involves tens of thousands of travellers going to the same destination during the same time of year, has contributed to an increase in waste, carbon, water scarcity, cost of living, overcrowding, and misconstrued cultural identities (Juvan, Ring, Leisch, & Dolnicar, 2016; Eraqi, 2014; Smith, 2018). The use of social media has changed the way people discover, research, discuss, and book travel destinations. As a tool that hosts travel discussions and affords travel experiences to be documented, viewed, and narrated, the content posted to Instagram plays an instrumental role in shaping pre-travel narrative. Using studies on sustainable tourism, social media, and persuasive design, this Major Research Project analyzes how Instagram can promote sustainable tourism by integrating new features to its platform.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Marketing and Social Media→French-language works237,207→