MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281389069 · doi:10.1177/13548166221104390

Psychological factors of Canadian and Mexican tourists and the US tourism sector

2022· article· en· W4281389069 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Khandokar Istiak

Bibliographic record

VenueTourism Economics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismSpillover effectVector autoregressionTerrorismNatural disasterFinancial crisisBusinessEconomicsDemographic economicsDevelopment economicsEconomyGeographyMonetary economicsMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the impact of psychological factors of Canadian and Mexican tourists on the US tourism sector. Using the data of 1996–2019, the study uses vector autoregression models and the spillover analysis to perform the investigation. The paper discovers that high insecurity of tourists significantly reduces tourist arrivals, passenger fare receipts, and expenditure of tourists in the US. Also, tourist inflows are highly influenced by insecurity during terrorist attacks, natural disasters, and the financial crisis of the US. It is found that high sentiment of Canadian and Mexican tourists increases their outbound travel to the US, but the impact of sentiment is relatively stronger for the Canadian tourists. Results show that the tourist inflows from Canada and Mexico are influenced by low sentiment during recessionary periods of Canada and Mexico, respectively. The paper finds no robust evidence of mood and nationalism-based retaliation of tourists for traveling to the US.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTourism EconomicsSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207