MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Visitors’ Perception of Maritime Museums: Preference Analysis

2022· article· en· W4304207178 on OpenAlex
Ivan R. Nikolaev

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueObservatory of Culture · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisitor patternExhibitionTourismPerceptionCultural heritageWork (physics)Quarter (Canadian coin)Exposition (narrative)PreferenceSample (material)GeographyPublic relationsSociologyPolitical sciencePsychologyArchaeologyEngineeringArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article considers the results of a sociological survey devoted to the analysis of preferences and perception of maritime museums by their potential visitors. The topic of maritime heritage and its museification is relevant due to a number of strategic documents devoted to the development of activities aimed at marine resources and affecting the preservation and actualization of maritime heritage. Although there are studies devoted to maritime museums in Russia and abroad, the attitude of visitors to this kind of expositions has not been studied before. This lacuna, along with the need to develop maritime museums, determined the purpose of this work — to analyze the visitor’s perception of the topics presented in the expositions of maritime museums. The study is based on a sociological survey (20 topics were presented in the questionnaire). The sample size was 500 people, including 171 men and 329 women. The average age of the respondents was 32 (±11) years in the range from 12 to 74 years. The majority of the respondents live in the Central and North-Western Federal Districts. Slightly more than a quarter of the respondents work in museums or are associated with cultural and tourism institutions. The article analyzes the estimated results in accordance with the respondents’ age, gender, as well as their involvement in museum activities. The results of the research can be applied within the framework of scientific and exposition activities – in particular, when creating scientific concepts for new expositions and exhibitions dedicated to maritime heritage. In addition, they can be used in preparation of training courses dedicated to the study, preservation and museification of maritime heritage.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.257 · 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