Gå til indholdScholarGate
BibliotekMit bibliotekSkrivebordReview StudioAssistent
Log ind
Crowding Norm Curve Analysis/Bevis
Metodebevisregistrering

Crowding Norm Curve Analysis

Crowding norm curve analysis is a field-survey pipeline for measuring how crowded recreationists feel and for translating their evaluations of density into management standards. Its measurement backbone is the standard single-item 9-point crowding question introduced in Shelby and Heberlein's 1986 book Carrying Capacity in Recreation Settings, on which visitors rate how crowded a setting felt from 'not at all crowded' (1-2) to 'extremely crowded' (8-9). Perceived crowding is a normative evaluation, not a raw density: it is the negative judgment people make about the number of people or encounters they experienced. Vaske and Shelby's 2008 synthesis of thirty years and more than 180 studies showed that this single item behaves consistently, that respondents scoring 3 or higher are conventionally classified as feeling crowded, and that several ways of summarizing the scale correlate above .90. Paired with acceptability evaluations of different densities, the method yields social norm curves that locate the use level at which conditions become unacceptable — a basis for capacity standards.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Kilderegistrering

Citater kopieret ordret fra metodens kilderegistrering. Ingen påstandsniveauverifikation er udledt heraf.

Crowding Norm Curve Analysis (Perceived Crowding and Density-Acceptability Norms)
Taksonomisk metoderegistrering · process-pipeline / sport-leisure-studies
  • Shelby, B., & Heberlein, T. A. (1986). Carrying Capacity in Recreation Settings. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University Press. · ISBN 9780870714269
  • Vaske, J. J., & Shelby, L. B. (2008). Crowding as a Descriptive Indicator and an Evaluative Standard: Results from 30 Years of Research. Leisure Sciences, 30(2), 111-126. · DOI 10.1080/01490400701881341
Åbn fuld metode

Kuraterede påstande

Påstande gemt i bevis-loggen, hver med sin egen vurdering.

Ingen kuraterede påstande endnu

Denne visning opfinder ikke en påstandsvurdering, når loggen ingen har.

Relaterede metoder

Genereret fra metodegrafen og vist som maskinelt foreslåede relationer — ingen bevispåstand er udledt.

Taxonomic bucketEncounter Norm Analysismachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyRecreation Conflict and Coping Assessmentmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyRecreation Specialization Continuummachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyRecreation Substitutability Analysismachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Bevisstatus

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Kilder

2 registrerede citater, kopieret fra metodens kilderegistrering.

Handlinger

Åbn metodeside
ScholarGate

Et indholdsfokuseret opslagsbibliotek over forskningsmetoder — hvad hver metode er, hvordan den fungerer, og hvor den kommer fra.

Åbne data (CC-BY)

Opdag

  • Bibliotek
  • Søg i metoder…
  • Gennemse efter fagområde
  • Fagområder
  • Rejse
  • Sammenlign
  • Hvilken metode?

Reference

  • Fagområder
  • Atlas
  • Ordliste
  • Metodologi
  • Filosofi

Arbejdsområde

  • Mit bibliotek
  • Skrivebord
  • Chat

Virksomhed

  • Om
  • Priser
  • Kontakt
  • Foreslå en metode

Posterne er sammenstillet fra publicerede kilder til reference. Det er dit eget ansvar at kontrollere, at oplysningerne er korrekte og egnede til din anvendelse.

© 2026 ScholarGate · Et opslagsbibliotek over forskningsmetoder
  • Privatliv
  • Cookies
  • Vilkår
  • Slet konto