MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283372508 · doi:10.1177/13567667221109269

Holiday photographic trends: Geographic origin and the male/female divide

2022· article· en· W4283372508 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anja Pabel, Leonie Cassidy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Of Vacation Marketing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismSocial mediaAdvertisingPreferenceGeographyMarketingBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to examine the influence of geographic origin and gender on photo-taking and photo-sharing behaviours. An online survey was circulated in four geographical areas: Australia, Canada, India, and Malaysia. The survey questions asked respondents’ preferred types of photographic device, photo-content, photo-taking motivation, and photo-sharing behaviours while on holiday. Data were analysed using crosstabulation with Chi-square, controlling for gender, and reporting strength of association with Cramer's V. Results show geographic origin and gender are significant indicators of tourists’ photo-taking and photo-sharing behaviour. The number one preference for male/female respondents from India and Malaysia is taking photos of family, which are shared on social media. While nearly a third of male respondents from Australia and Canada do not share holiday photos on social media. Knowledge of this type may assist tourism marketers and destination marketing organisations (DMOs) to personalise their tourism offerings according to geographic region and gender.

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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Of Vacation MarketingSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207