| Literature DB >> 36003117 |
Chih-Hung Pai1, Sai Xu1, Jianren Jin2, Yunfeng Shang1.
Abstract
The era of smart tourism has arrived. In the context of big data information, based on the thinking of the entire tourism activity, it is worth thinking about the role of tourism information in tourism activities. This paper proposes a method for evaluating the psychological expectations of tourist destinations by applying the quality function configuration. According to the needs of tourists, the relevant product characteristics of the tourist destination are selected, an evaluation quality house is established, and various relationships within the quality house are weighed, and established a mathematical model for the evaluation of tourists' psychological expectations in tourist destinations. Bringing the methods of machine learning (ML) and data mining (DM) into the research of tourists' psychological expectation value evaluation, ML is one of the main methods to solve the problem of DM. ML is the process of using the system itself to improve itself, therefore, ML is widely used in data mining. The research combines psychology and tourism research, through empirical research, to establish a structural equation model. It analyzes the influence of tourism information on tourists' behavioral decisions, increases the media's variable expectations of tourism, and uses tourist satisfaction and behavior as dependent variables. The results showed that the effect of tourism information on tourists is significantly greater than the expected effect (p = 0.510, P is significant at 0.001 level) than the effect of tourist satisfaction (p = 0.290, P is significant at 0.05 level). Therefore, in order to create good expectations for tourists, the general image of a tourist destination must match the actual local conditions. Using the support vector machine algorithm with the introduction of optimization mechanism to train the feature set of the user data, and then predict the links in Sina Weibo, and obtain higher prediction accuracy and prediction speed. The psychological expectation evaluation model of tourists in tourist destinations can effectively calculate the perceived value of psychological expectation evaluation of tourists in tourist destinations, and help tourists choose reasonable and satisfactory travel plans.Entities:
Keywords: cultural tourism tourists; data mining; machine learning; psychological expectation; value evaluation
Year: 2022 PMID: 36003117 PMCID: PMC9393551 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.943071
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
FIGURE 1Flow chart of three-stage localization based on SVM and k-nearest neighbor method.
FIGURE 2Example of a multi-classification problem.
The results of the combined simulation of the data to be located.
| Merge time interval | No | 1 s | 2 s | 3 s | 4 s | 5 s |
| Positioning accuracy | 82.36% | 82.95% | 83.5% | 83.97% | 84.18% | 84.27% |
| Positioning time | 39.40 s | 19.64 s | 9.82 s | 6.57 s | 4.92 s | 3.95 s |
| Merge time interval | 6 s | 7 s | 8 s | 9 s | 10 s | |
| Positioning accuracy | 84.32% | 84.27% | 84.17% | 83.88% | 83.25% | |
| Positioning time | 3.28 s | 2.81 s | 2.46 s | 2.19 s | 1.99 s |
FIGURE 3The relationship between the time interval of data merging to be positioned and the positioning accuracy.
The simulation results of the size of the positioning region based on the k-nearest neighbor method.
| Location area side length | 100 m | 200 m | 300 m | 400 m | 500 m |
| Positioning accuracy | 80.92% | 83.36% | 84.32% | 84.97% | 85.20% |
| Positioning time | 0.93 | 1.82 | 3.28 | 4.92 | 6.40 |
| Location result | 12.215 | 5.625 | 9.652 | 11.325 | 15.621 |
FIGURE 4The relationship between the K value of the KNN algorithm and the positioning speed and accuracy.
FIGURE 5Bayesian classification diagram.
FIGURE 6Bayesian probabilistic model classification learning internal model.
FIGURE 7Travel destination product feature configuration.
Partial correlation analysis of sentiment synthesis bias.
| Control variable | Information | Expected mean | Satisfaction mean | ||
| None | Information | Correlation | 1.000 | 0.437 | 0.484 |
| Expected mean | Correlation | 0.437 | 1.000 | 0.702 | |
| Satisfaction mean | Correlation | 0.484 | 0.702 | 1.000 | |
| Comprehensive attitude | Correlation | 0.281 | 0.566 | 0.553 | |
| Synthetic bias of information emotions | Comprehensive bias | Correlation | 0.011 | 0.248 | 0.193 |
| Information | Correlation | 1.000 | 0.449 | 0.491 | |
| Expected mean | Correlation | 0.449 | 1.000 | 0.688 | |
| Satisfaction mean | Correlation | 0.491 | 0.688 | 1.000 | |
| Comprehensive attitude | Correlation | 0.285 | 0.543 | 0.534 | |
The quality of psychological expectation assessment of tourists in the class destination.
| Tourism destination product characteristics | |||||||||
| TC1 | 1 | 0.33 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| TC2 | 0.33 | 1 | 0 | 0.33 | 0 | 0.33 | 0 | 0 | |
| TC3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.33 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.11 | |
| TC4 | 0 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| TC5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.11 | 0 | 0 | |
| TC6 | 0 | 0.33 | 0 | 0 | 0.11 | 1 | 0 | 0.33 | |
| TC7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.11 | |
| TC8 | 0 | 0 | 0.11 | 0 | 0 | 0.33 | 0.11 | 1 | |
|
| |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |||||||||
| TR1 | 0.15 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| TR2 | 0.13 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.33 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| TR3 | 0.25 | 0 | 0 | 0.33 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.33 |
| TR4 | 0.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.33 | 0 | 0.11 |
| TR5 | 0.13 | 0 | 0.33 | 0 | 0 | 0.33 | 1 | 0 | 0.11 |
| TR6 | 0.25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.11 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.11 |
| TR7 | 0.07 | 0 | 0 | 0.11 | 0.33 | 0 | 0.11 | 0 | 0 |
| X1 | 0.45 | 0.80 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.87 | 0.30 | |
| X2 | 0.90 | 1 | 0.40 | 0.30 | 0.40 | 0.25 | 0.80 | 0.42 | |
| X3 | 0.80 | 0.85 | 0.75 | 0.80 | 0.50 | 0.85 | 0.30 | 0 | |
| X4 | 0 | 0.50 | 0.60 | 0.60 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.34 | |
| X5 | 1 | 0.80 | 1 | 1 | 0.20 | 0.90 | 0 | 1 | |
FIGURE 8Tourist demand value of tourist attractions.