ES · EN
Soft Exclusion Coding Protocol · Monte Carlo Research Lab
Documentation, databases and replication resources associated with the development, empirical application and review of the Soft Exclusion Coding Protocol.
Protocol navigation:
Overview ·
Theory ·
Taxonomy ·
Coding method ·
Empirical validation ·
Reliability and validity ·
Research materials
Current release and review design
The current SECP release contains final empirical results reviewed and ratified by the researcher responsible for the corpus. Coding and review follow a single-coder design. The controls applied comprise explicit coding rules, review of ambiguous cases and alternative explanations, and traceability between evidence and decisions. Intercoder agreement has not been estimated for this release.
In this release, the documented validation is limited to application of the protocol to the corpus, review of decisions and the operational checks described. It does not imply that all reliability and validity properties of the instrument have been assessed. The final status of the results is not equivalent to an independent assessment of intercoder agreement.
The methodological procedures and their limits are described in Reliability, Validity and Ethics. Decisions and results for the current release are presented in SECP Empirical Validation & Final Results.
Protocol resources
| Resource | Status | Function |
|---|---|---|
| Scientific protocol | Completed and applied to the current corpus | Defines the theoretical and methodological architecture of SECP. Its application and review are documented within the scope of the single-coder design. |
| Coding taxonomy | Completed, applied and internally reviewed | Defines the twelve operational categories SE1–SE12 and the rules used to distinguish them within the corpus. |
| Coding variables | Completed and operationally applied | Defines presence, restrictive intensity, explicitness, spatial coverage, temporal persistence, behavioural effect, user specificity and evidence confidence. |
| Decision tree | Completed and internally reviewed | Structures classification and interpretation decisions. |
| Database architecture | Completed | Organises mechanism occurrences, spatial units, evidence and coding variables. |
| Empirical application and review dataset | Final, reviewed and ratified | Contains the observations and decisions used in the empirical application and review of the protocol. Its final status applies to the published corpus release. |
| Observation framework | Completed | Structures the systematic recording of spatial observations and evidence sources. |
| Coder handbook and decision rules | Completed | Establishes definitions, rules, interpretative anchors, negative cases and decision criteria. |
| Reliability and validity framework | Framework completed; applicable single-coder controls implemented | Distinguishes the controls applied to the current corpus from procedures intended for multi-coder applications. Internal review does not constitute an estimate of intercoder agreement. |
| Monte Carlo empirical dataset | Completed | Provides the empirical basis for the application of SECP in Monte Carlo. |
| Replication materials | Completed for the current release | Brings together the documentation needed to understand, review and reproduce the coding and analytical logic. Its availability does not mean that an independent replication has already been conducted. |
Connected instruments
Visibility–Accessibility Matrix
The Visibility–Accessibility Matrix (VAM) analyses the structural conditions of visibility and accessibility present in luxury tourism spaces.
VAM and SECP are related but methodologically distinct instruments. VAM characterises visibility and accessibility conditions, whereas SECP identifies specific mechanisms that may condition approach, circulation, staying, participation or spatial legitimacy.
The same evidence may be relevant to both instruments, but classification must follow their respective variables and decision rules.
Choreographed Access Trajectory Map
The Choreographed Access Trajectory Map represents the spatial sequence through which users approach, recognise an access point, enter, circulate, stop and participate within a particular territorial configuration.
SECP occurrences may be located at different stages:
- approach;
- threshold recognition;
- entry;
- circulation;
- permanence;
- participation;
- withdrawal or exit.
Soft Exclusion Index
The Soft Exclusion Index (SEI) is an analytical extension intended to explore the aggregation of selected SECP variables at the spatial-unit level.
Its development must preserve the traceability of the underlying mechanisms and prevent an aggregate score from replacing examination of the original occurrences, categories and empirical contexts.
SEI integration constitutes a separate line of development. Its ongoing development does not make the final SECP corpus results provisional or extend the scope of the checks already conducted.
Soft Exclusion Index integration
Integration between SECP and the Soft Exclusion Index remains a distinct methodological extension. Its purpose is to determine the conditions under which selected protocol variables can be aggregated without losing information about mechanisms, context and differences between spatial units.
| Protocol variable | Potential index function |
|---|---|
| Restrictive intensity | Potential core component of restrictive intensity. |
| Spatial coverage | Possible adjustment according to the spatial extent of the mechanism. |
| Temporal persistence | Possible adjustment according to temporal persistence. |
| Mechanism diversity | Possible component of mechanism diversity or density. |
| Mechanism configuration | Possible modifier associated with reinforced configurations. |
| Behavioural effect | Possible outcome variable or variable for convergent assessment. |
| Evidence confidence | Evidence-quality indicator; it does not represent the substantive intensity of exclusion. |
| Direct exclusion | Contextual indicator kept separate from the intensity of soft exclusion. |
Variables that must not automatically increase the index
- Luxury aesthetic intensity.
- Commercial price level.
- Number of security cameras.
- Security presence without filtering effects.
- Evidence confidence.
- Coder certainty.
- Mechanism count without intensity or context.
- Behavioural effect when behaviour was not systematically observed.
- Direct exclusion incidents combined without differentiation.
Index construction must preserve these distinctions to prevent features associated with luxury or the visibility of control from automatically becoming measures of soft spatial exclusion.
Scientific status
| Component | Status | Scientific position |
|---|---|---|
| Operational definition | Completed and applied to the current corpus | Applied to the empirical corpus and consolidated within the protocol. Its assessment is limited to the documented scope of this application. |
| Twelve-category taxonomy | Completed, applied and internally reviewed | SE1–SE12 constitute the operational taxonomy used in the empirical application. Their category-boundary rules were examined during internal review. |
| Coding variables and scales | Completed and operationally applied | Variables M1–M8 form the final architecture for characterising occurrences in this release. |
| Decision tree | Completed and internally reviewed | Applied to inclusion, exclusion, classification and case-review decisions. |
| Empirical fieldwork | Completed | The Monte Carlo corpus provides the observational basis of the study. |
| Empirical application and operational review | Completed for the current release | The final results and review procedure are documented in SECP Empirical Validation & Final Results. This status does not imply that all reliability and validity properties of the instrument have been assessed. |
| Reliability assessment | Internal consistency review completed; intercoder agreement not estimated | Decisions were reviewed by the researcher responsible for the corpus using explicit rules, evidence traceability and examination of ambiguous cases and alternative explanations. No intercoder agreement coefficients are reported. |
| Construct validation | Operational assessment documented within the current corpus | The assessment documents the application of category definitions and decision rules to the corpus. It should not be interpreted as comprehensive validation of the construct. |
| Convergent and discriminant validation | Separate empirical assessment not reported in the current release | Conceptual distinctions and category-boundary rules are documented. These do not, by themselves, constitute empirical estimates of convergent or discriminant validity. |
| Negative-case analysis | Completed within the internal review | Used to assess alternative explanations and prevent the automatic classification of non-exclusionary features. |
| Soft Exclusion Index integration | Under development | Analytical extension distinct from the final SECP corpus results. |
| External transferability | Future research extension | Application beyond Monte Carlo requires specific studies in other territorial contexts. |
The ongoing development of the Soft Exclusion Index and assessment of external transferability constitute subsequent extensions. The Monte Carlo corpus results remain final for the published release. This final status does not, by itself, demonstrate external transferability or replace additional reliability and validity assessments.
Completed empirical application and review
The empirical application and review of SECP followed a structured sequence connecting methodological design, field observation, coding, internal review and analysis.
- The final observation and recording system was established.
- The definitions and rules of the coding manual were consolidated.
- The empirical corpus and spatial units of analysis were delimited.
- Observations were conducted at selected locations in Monte Carlo.
- Ordinary spatial conditions and contextual variations were documented where relevant.
- Categories SE1–SE12 and variables M1–M8 were applied.
- The responsible researcher reviewed coding decisions and cases involving complex interpretation.
- Alternative explanations and negative cases were assessed.
- Operational consistency was examined through internal review and application of protocol rules, without estimating intercoder agreement.
- Correspondence between definitions, evidence and decisions was reviewed, keeping this operational check separate from specific assessments of convergent, discriminant or criterion validity.
- The final empirical results were consolidated and ratified.
- Traceability between occurrences, spatial units, evidence and interpretative decisions was integrated.
Explore the SECP Empirical Validation & Final Results →
Empirical application and review materials
Documentation for the current release brings together the materials used to apply the protocol, review decisions and maintain their traceability. Consistency and robustness controls refer to the single-coder design.
- Sampling and fieldwork design
- Empirical mechanism-occurrence dataset
- Single-coder consistency review and decision audit trail
- Operational definitions and category-boundary rules
- Case and temporal comparisons where documented
- Negative-case analysis
- Alternative-explanation and evidence-sufficiency checks
- Protocol review and final coding decisions
- Final empirical results
Methodological procedures distinguished from current results
Intercoder agreement assessment and specific assessments of construct, criterion, convergent or discriminant validity require their own designs, procedures and results. They are not presented as completed analyses solely because they are included in the methodological framework.
- Intercoder agreement: not estimated for the current release.
- Construct assessment: the operational checks described are documented without being presented as comprehensive validation.
- Criterion, convergent and discriminant validity: results from specific empirical assessments are not presented on this page.
Separating methodological materials from results preserves study traceability without confusing protocol rules with findings derived from their application.
Open the empirical validation and final results →
Research outputs
Application of the protocol has generated a research architecture comprising the following materials:
- complete coding manual;
- mechanism taxonomy;
- observation framework;
- structured database;
- spatial-setting profiles;
- category-frequency tables;
- mechanism-combination analyses;
- spatial distribution analyses;
- ordinary and event-condition comparisons where applicable;
- single-coder consistency and decision-traceability documentation;
- operational assessment documentation and interpretative limits;
- negative-case register;
- final empirical results and internal-review documentation;
- scientific article materials;
- replication materials for the current release.
External transferability
The application conducted in Monte Carlo documents the operational functioning of SECP within the corpus and context studied. Transfer to other geographies or forms of luxury tourism constitutes a separate line of research.
Future transferability assessment may include:
- cruise ships;
- luxury hotels and resorts;
- marinas;
- luxury shopping environments;
- premium transport terminals;
- other luxury tourism territories beyond Monaco.
External transferability assessment must examine which protocol components remain stable and which require contextual adaptation. The final Monte Carlo corpus results retain their local scope; they do not, by themselves, constitute evidence of transferability to other contexts.
Scientific article supported by the protocol
SECP provides a methodological and empirical basis for developing the scientific publication on soft spatial exclusion in Monte Carlo.
The protocol provides:
- an operational definition;
- a mechanism taxonomy applied and internally reviewed within the corpus;
- a coding procedure;
- a sampling strategy;
- an observation protocol;
- a single-coder consistency-review procedure;
- an empirical application and operational assessment framework;
- ethical safeguards;
- alternative-explanation rules;
- negative-case analysis;
- final empirical results;
- a documented relationship with the Visibility–Accessibility Matrix;
- a basis for subsequent Soft Exclusion Index integration.
Scientific status: the Soft Exclusion Coding Protocol has a complete conceptual and operational architecture, has been applied to empirical evidence from Monte Carlo, and provides final results reviewed and ratified by the researcher responsible for the corpus. The review documents operational consistency and traceability; it does not constitute an estimate of intercoder agreement or an exhaustive assessment of all validity properties. Development of the Soft Exclusion Index and assessment of external transferability remain subsequent research directions.
Explore the SECP Empirical Validation & Final Results →
Return to the protocol overview →
Research Materials · Soft Exclusion Coding Protocol
