A typology of residents’ travel safety perceptions and geopolitical border hesitancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Global crises prime travel safety perceptions and foster hesitancy to cross intra- and inter-country borders, significantly shifting travel flows. Tourism's post-crisis recovery is typically driven by domestic travel while international travel returns lag, leading many tourism destination managers to monitor resident travel safety perceptions and willingness to welcome domestic and international visitors. This study uses latent class analysis to model heterogeneity in travel safety perceptions among residents during the most recent global crisis and to profile the characteristics of people with different travel safety perceptions to understand the influence of geopolitical borders. Parameter estimates support a five-cluster typology of Unfettered Travel , Nationwide Travel , Cautioned Travel , Averse To All Travel , and Localized Travel . All clusters feel safest traveling in their community and least safe traveling internationally, similarly for welcoming visitors. Notably, crossing a border, even within one's province and country where boundaries are invisible, causes feelings of safety to decline. The results reveal the significant impact on travel sentiments of geography and borders between communities and provinces where traffic may flow without formal customs requirements. The effect of intra-country borders provides new insight into domestic travel flows.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".