Gå til innholdScholarGate
BibliotekMitt bibliotekPultenReview StudioAssistent
Logg inn
Encounter Norm Analysis/Bevis
Metodebevisregister

Encounter Norm Analysis

Encounter norm analysis is the normative-survey pipeline used to set standards for visitor impacts in parks and protected areas. Building on Vaske, Shelby, Graefe, and Heberlein's 1986 formalization of backcountry encounter norms, it asks recreationists to evaluate the acceptability of a range of conditions — most classically the number of other groups encountered per day, but also people at one time, campsite sharing, or depicted impact levels — and aggregates those evaluations into a social norm curve. The curve locates the minimum acceptable condition where acceptability crosses from positive to negative, supplying a defensible numeric standard. The method also quantifies the structural properties of norms: their intensity (how strongly conditions are evaluated), prevalence (whether respondents hold a norm at all), and crystallization (the degree of agreement), the last now commonly indexed by the Potential for Conflict Index (PCI2). Robert Manning's synthesis in Parks and Carrying Capacity made this normative approach the empirical core of indicators-and-standards frameworks.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Kilderegister

Siteringer kopiert ordrett fra metodens kilderegister. Ingen påstandsnivåverifisering er underforstått fra dem.

Encounter Norm Analysis (Normative Standards and Acceptability Curves)
Taksonomisk metoderegister · process-pipeline / sport-leisure-studies
  • Vaske, J. J., Shelby, B., Graefe, A. R., & Heberlein, T. A. (1986). Backcountry Encounter Norms: Theory, Method and Empirical Evidence. Journal of Leisure Research, 18(3), 137-153. · DOI 10.1080/00222216.1986.11969653
  • Manning, R. E. (2007). Parks and Carrying Capacity: Commons Without Tragedy. Washington, DC: Island Press. · ISBN 9781559631051
Åpne full metode

Kuraterte påstander

Påstander lagret i bevishovedboken, hver med sin egen vurdering.

Ingen kuraterte påstander ennå

Denne visningen finner ikke opp en påstandsvurdering når hovedboken ikke har noen.

Relaterte metoder

Generert fra metodegrafen og vist som maskinforslåtte relasjoner – ingen bevispåstand er underforstått.

Taxonomic bucketCrowding Norm Curve 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 registrerte siteringer, kopiert fra metodens kilderegister.

Handlinger

Åpne metodeside
ScholarGate

Et innholdsfokusert oppslagsbibliotek for forskningsmetoder — hva hver metode er, hvordan den fungerer, og hvor den kommer fra.

Åpne data (CC-BY)

Oppdag

  • Bibliotek
  • Søk i metoder…
  • Bla etter fagfelt
  • Fagfelt
  • Reise
  • Sammenlign
  • Hvilken metode?

Referanse

  • Fagområder
  • Atlas
  • Ordliste
  • Metodikk
  • Filosofi

Arbeidsområde

  • Mitt bibliotek
  • Pulten
  • Chat

Selskap

  • Om
  • Priser
  • Kontakt
  • Foreslå en metode

Oppføringene er sammenstilt fra publiserte kilder til referansebruk. Å kontrollere at informasjonen er korrekt og egnet for ditt eget bruk, er fremdeles ditt eget ansvar.

© 2026 ScholarGate · Et oppslagsbibliotek for forskningsmetoder
  • Personvern
  • Informasjonskapsler
  • Vilkår
  • Slett konto