MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396223527 · doi:10.5539/ijms.v16n1p89

KL as an Islamic City Tourism Destination: The Influence of Place Involvement and Experience Quality on Place Attachment

2024· article· en· W4396223527 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nur Wafaa Abdullah Shaimi, Ahmad Azmi M. Ariffin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Marketing Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious Tourism and Spaces
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismMarketingBusinessPlace attachmentQuality (philosophy)IslamDestination marketingAdvertisingDestinationsPsychologyGeographySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Muslim market presently dominates as the most lucrative and fastest-growing market segment, simultaneously holding one of the largest markets in the world. Therefore, it is necessary to have a comprehensive understanding of Muslim tourists, especially those outside the Asia-Pacific region, such as the Middle East, who have significant purchasing power. This discussion argues that the strategies that focus on creating a strong emotional connection with the country are imperative to ensure that Malaysia, particularly Kuala Lumpur, will always remain the most popular Muslim destination. This article defines the sense of place concept (place attachment) and explains the factors that influenced it. Comprehending the sense of place key elements can help measure visitor engagement with a place accurately. Based on the literature on “place involvement” in consumer behaviour and “place attachment” from environmental psychology, this article provides a conceptual framework for understanding tourist attachment relationships with places.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.379 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Marketing StudiesSame topicReligious Tourism and SpacesFrench-language works237,207