Backpackers—What is the Peak Experience?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This section is denoted to research reports, notes, conference resumes and other significant research events. Two copies of write-ups, not exceeding 3,000 words, may be mailed to the Section Editor, Associate Professor David A. Fennell, Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada L2S 3A1; e-mail. dfennell@arnie.pec.bracku.ca. In all cases, one copy of the report should be mailed to the Chief Editor, TRR. This paper reports findings from interviews with 69 respondents representing about 15 percent of the backpackers staying in the Waikato, New Zealand, during the survey period. The research method included both quantitative and qualitative methods and analysed what backpackers perceived as their most memorable experiences. The findings suggest these include themes of difference, uniqueness, bonding with special others, a sense of achievement and the ‘adrenalin high’. While about 70 percent of such experiences related to commercial adventure products, other activities, often in a natural setting, were important. The data were analysed using thematic analysis and perceptual mapping.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".