Seasoned travelers are more sustainable: modelling the tourism experience life cycle
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
Mapping a tourist’s travel frequency and behaviour over time (as outlined in the Tourism Experience Life Cycle (TELC)), may be as important as Butler’s Tourism Area Life Cycle (TALC) as there is a ‘need to understand the life cycle for a tourist’ (Dodds, 2020 Dodds, R. (2020). The tourist experience life cycle: A perspective article. Tourism Review, 75(1), 216–220. https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-05-2019-0163[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], p. 219). This paper, using a quantitative approach of 980 Canadians, tests the validity of the TELC model to determine if sustainable travel behaviours increase the more a tourist travels. Two hypothesis are tested in this paper. First, the more trips taken by a traveller, the more sustainable their behaviur will be and second, the more a traveller revisits the same destination, the more sustainable their travel behaviour will be. Findings, supported through ANOVA and hierarchical multi-step regression, show that there is a relationship between the number of trips taken and sustainable behaviour. The greater the number of domestic and/or international trips that a leisure traveller takes, the more likely their behaviour while travelling will be more sustainable. On the other hand, findings also outline that the more frequently a visitor returns to the same destination, the less likely they will practice sustainable travel behaviour.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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