Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40961048›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Differentiated brand building of traditional mountain scenic spots in Jiangxi Province: Insights from tourists' perception images and sentiment characteristics.

Yaguang Hu, Lei Yang, Dongbo Xu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yaguang HuJiangxi Modern Service Industry Development Research Institute, Jiangxi Flight University, Nanchang, China.
Lei YangSchool of History, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Dongbo XuCenter of National Security and National Defense Education, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2548-5262

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding the perceptions and sentiment responses of tourists to traditional mountain scenic spots is crucial. This understanding is a cornerstone for improving brand image, optimizing space quality, and fostering sentiment connections between tourists and natural landscapes. Our study aims to address the homogenization issue in mountain scenic spots' brand building. Using online comments and travel blogs as primary data, a mixed-methods approach integrating grounded theory, correspondence analysis, TF-IDF, sentiment analysis, and IPA analysis was employed. The result revealed several significant findings: (1) The tourist perception image represents a multidimensional dynamic system that includes resources, service, sightseeing, and time-space images. Different mountain scenic spots have contrasting characteristics regarding tourism perception images, with the sightseeing image proving a pivotal role in shaping these differences. (2) Among all mountain scenic spots, positive sentiment generally outweighs negative or neutral sentiments, while there are differences in sentiment preferences among perception images. (3) Interactions between tourists' perception images and their sentiment are fundamental to the establishment of the brand of a scenic site. This research constructs a theoretical model for the generation path of tourism brand image, deepens the understanding of cognitive-affective interactions, improves the perception image system, and provides methodological support for big data-based tourism research. Hence, this study offers insights for the differentiated brand building and sustainable development of traditional mountain scenic spots.

Indexed as

PerceptionTourismAdultChinaFemaleHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID40961048
PMCPMC12443250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.