MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7154937439 · doi:10.32493/jtsi.v8i2.54082

Assessing Tourist Interest Based on Gender Perceptions in Kayutangan Heritage through Sentiment Analysis of Google Point of Interest (POI)

2025· article· W7154937439 on OpenAlexaff
Syahira Aulia Shalsabilla, Titik Poerwati, Annisaa Hamidah Imaduddina, Firman Afrianto

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Teknologi Sistem Informasi dan Aplikasi · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismSentiment analysisPoint (geometry)PerceptionHeritage tourismBig dataPoint of interest

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluates tourist interest at the Kayutangan Heritage area in Malang City based on gender perceptions through sentiment analysis of reviews on Google Point of Interest (POI). The research employs a big data approach by collecting reviews from Google Maps using web scraping techniques and processing them with the TextBlob algorithm to classify sentiments into positive, neutral, and negative categories. A total of 2,198 reviews were analyzed from six food and beverage (F&B) points across six spatial clusters of the Kayutangan Heritage area. The data were divided into two datasets—overall and gender-labeled—to identify sentiment tendencies among male and female tourists. The results indicate that female tourists tend to prefer Café Lafayette (Cluster 1.A), which offers women-friendly facilities such as separate restrooms and prayer rooms, with a positive sentiment of 67.6%. Meanwhile, male tourists are more interested in Kedai Sedjiwa (Cluster 2.B), which provides a clean environment, modern architecture, and a comfortable ambiance, generating 77.1% positive sentiment. The findings support Chebli et al.’s (2020) model of gender-based tourist preferences, demonstrating that men and women prioritize different elements of a destination. This study contributes to the development of gender-inclusive tourism strategies and data-driven management for heritage destinations.

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)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Teknologi Sistem Informasi dan AplikasiSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207