Pride and promotion: Exploring relationships between national identification, destination advocacy, tourism ethnocentrism and destination image
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social media sites are an increasingly popular forum for loyal and engaged destination advocates to promote a place and encourage visitation. Motivation to advocate is related to one's identity, belonging and involvement with a place, factors of particular relevance to residents. Borrowing from the field of social psychology, this study examines the role of national identification as a determinant of residents’ destination advocacy behaviour. Adapted to a tourism context, it measures relationships between identity and advocacy for the first time. Canadian residents (n = 465) were surveyed online through Destination Canada's Facebook page, revealing that the stronger one's national identification, the more likely one is to advocate for their nation. The relationship positively impacts destination image and tourism ethnocentrism, newly identified relationships that contribute to destination marketing theory and practice. Further, it is not destination image that influences an ethnocentric sense of duty to travel within one's boundary; it is national identification.
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.
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 | 0.020 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it