The Factors That Influence Travel Decision Making Tourism Essay

The Factors That Influence Travel Decision Making Tourism apprisevassThis chapter consists of three parts. First is introduction, next is literature reviews that review the critical points of earlier researches including substantive finding as well as theoretical and methodological contributions to this similar topic. Lastly, a conclusion to this chapter.enquiry in the sweep of blend in motives is important in understanding and foreshadowing the factors that influence locomote decision-making (Cha, S., McCleary, K.W. and Uysal, M., 1995). pauperism is theoretically viewed as a state of need, a condition that serves as a driving force to dis typify divers(prenominal) kinds of carriage toward certain types of activities, developing preferences, arriving at just about expected satisfactory outcome. (Backman, K.F. Backman, S.J., Uysal, M. and Sunshine, K.M.,1995) In particular, an understanding of pauperization wait on marketers efforts to achieve and satisfy individuals div erse desires and needs, key elework forcets that influence the process of affecters decision-making (Crompton,J.L. and McKay S.L.,1997). Studies of motivation thus provide to predict travelers personal needs, expectations, achievements, or benefits sought (genus Formica,S. and Uysal, M.,1998).A brief review of travel motivation research (Table 1) produce in three major touristry journals Annals of Tourism Research, Tourism Management, and Journal of Travel Research revealed that existing studies swallow covered a wide range of the spectrum, there are included the sociology of travel motivation as a stimulator of actual behavior (Dann 1977 Mansfeld 1992) travel motivation of assorted niche markets (Clift and Forrest 1999 Dunn Ross and Iso-Ahola 1991 Hsu, Cai, and Wong 2007 Maoz 2007 Qu and pick apart 1999 Rittichainuwat 2008) the ripening or experiential test of travel motivation measurements (Crompton 1979 Dann 1981 Fodness 1994 Ryan and Glendon 1998) protestences in mot ivation among tourists with varied nationality and heathen backgrounds (Kim and Prideaux 2005 Maoz 2007), number of visits (Lau and McKercher 2004), ends and origins (Kozak 2002), sociodemographic characteristic (Jang and Wu 2006 Fleischer and Pizam 2002), or environmental attitude (Luo and Deng 2008).AuthorsStudyDann 1977A sociological study of travel motivation, with a focus on the push dimension of motivation.Crompton 1979The motivation for joy vacation. Seven motivation factors were place through interviews.Dann 1981Based on a literature review on travel motivation, seven approaches of motivation study were identified. The utilization of different terminologies was in like manner discussedDunn Ross and Iso-Ahola 1991Motivation of sightseeing tourists in relation to their contentmentMansfeld 1992The eccentric of motivation in travel behavior and its mazy naturePaul 1992Travel motivation of Canadian ecotouristsParrinello 1993Relationship betwixt anticipation and motivatio n in postindustrial societies in the scope of Western atomic number 63Fodness 1994A measurement scale was developed for leisure travel with 20 items.Lieux, weaver and McCleary 1994Benefit variance of senior tourists from the United StatesGnoth 1997Development of theoretical influence on motivation and expectation formationFormica and Uysal 1998Benefit air division of visitors to a cultural-historical event in ItalyRyan and Glendon 1998The Leisure Motivation Scale was applied to tourism with British holidaymakers. An abbreviated version of holiday motivation scale with 14 items was developed.Waller and Lea 1998Relationship amid authenticity seeking and enjoyment. The knowledge dimension of motivation was found to mediate this family.Clift and Forrest 1999The motivation of gay men in relation to the type of destinations they preferred in the circumstance of the United terra firmaQu and Ping 1999Motivation of cruise selection in the circumstance of Hong KongGoossens 2000The ro le of emotional component of travel motivation in stimulating actual travel behaviorFleischer and Pizam 2002Relationship between motivation and Israeli senior travelers income and healthKozak 2002Differences of motivation among tourists visiting different destinations and tourist from different countries visiting same destination with respondents from the United Kingdom and GermanySirakaya, Uysal, and Yoshioka 2003Benefits segmentation of Japanese tourists to TurkeyLau and McKercherDifferences of travel motivation between first-time and repeat visitors to Hong KongKim and Prideaux 2005A cross-cultural synopsis on travel motivation to South Korea among five national tourist groupsPearce and Lee 2005Further development of the Travel Career Ladder by introducing Travel Career Pattern (TCP). The relationship between previous experience and motivation was explored by TCP.Yoon and Uysal 2005Causal relationship between push- take in motivations, satisfaction, and destination loyalty. po ke factors were found to negatively influence satisfaction.Jang and Wu 2006Influences of sociodemographic factors, economic status, health status, and positive and negative effects on travel motivation among Taiwanese seniorsChang, wall, and Chu 2006Benefits segmentation using the novelty seeking scale in the context of Taiwanese tourists to aboriginal attractionsNicolau and Mas 2006Influences of travel distance and price on destination selection, with travel motivation as a moderator in the context of SpainPoria, Reichel, and Biran 2006Relationship between perception of heritage as it is related to the tourists own heritage and motivation explored beforehand the tripSnerpenger et al. 2006Tourists and recreationist were comparing using Iso-Aholas motivation theory. The relationship between motivation and previous vacations was investigated.Swanson and Horridge 2006Causal relationship between souvenir shopping and cardinal motivational factors in the context of Southwestern United StatesBeh and Bruyere 2007Benefits segmentation in the context of KenyaHsu, Cai, and Wong 2007A theoretical model of senior travel motivation in the context of ChinaMaoz 2007Travel motivation of Israeli backpackers, investigated in relation to national and cultural characteristicsLuo and Deng 2008Relationship between environmental attitude and nature-based tourism motivationRittichainuwat 2008Travel motivation to a tourism destination, using the disaster-hit shore resort in Phuket as an example. Comparison was make between domestic and inbound tourists, and between tourists of different ages and genders.Park and Yoon 2009Benefit segmentation of rural tourism in the context of South KoreaTable1. Brief abstract of Studies on Travel Motivation(Adopted from Cathy H.C. Hsu, Liping A. Cai and Mimi Li, 2009)Many researchers from different fields such(prenominal) as from sociology, anthropology, and psychology have investigated travel motivation since many years ago (Cohen, 1972 Dann, 19 77 Crompton, 1979 Gnoth, 1997). Maslows hierarchical theory of motivation was one of the approximately applied in tourism literature (1970) and it was model as a pyramid whose base consists of the physiological needs, followed by higher levels of psychological needs and the need for self-actualization. Numerous tourism scholars have attempted to diversify the model empirically, with the notable success by Pearce (1982), who projected a tourism motivation model that mirrors the model of Maslow, but free of prepotency assumption.Fulfilling PrestigePush Seeking RelaxationFactors Sightseeing VarietyGaining KnowledgeEvents and ActivitiesPull AdventureFactors History and CultureEasy Access and AffordableA review of past researches on tourist motivation indicates that the analysis of motivations based on the devil dimensions of push and pull factors have been in general accepted (Yuan McDonald, 1990 Uysal Hagan, 1993). The concept behind push and pull dimension is that people trave l because they are pushed by their own inner forces and pulled by the outer forces of destination attributes. Most of the push factors that are origin-related are nonphysical or intrinsic desires of the individual travelers. Pull factors, vice versa, are those that emerge because of the attractiveness of that particular destination, as the travelers perceive it. They include tangible resources and travelers perception and expectation such as benefit expectation, novelty and marketed witness of the destination. A research model is then developing based on this theory at below diagram (adapted from Baloglu Uysal, 1996).Travel MotivationCrompton (1979) first sought to draw seven socio-psychological, or push motives such as escape, self-exploratory, relaxation, prestige, regression, kinship-enhancement, and social action) and two cultural, or pull motives that are novelty and education. The conceptual framework that he developed would giving impact the selection of a destination, a nd this approach implies that the destination bay window have some degree of influence on vacation behavior in meeting an aroused need.As Cromptons sign empirical effort, many studies have attempted to recognize push and pull motivational factors in different settings such as nationalities, destinations and events (Jang and Wu, 2006). Example incorporated Yuan and McDonalds (1990) study on motivations for overseas travel from four countries Japan, France, West Germany and UK. While Uysal and Jurowski (1993) studied, the nature and extent of the reciprocal relationship between push and pull factors of motivations for pleasure travel with using data from the Canadian Tourism Attribute and Motivation Survey. An separate study in Australia examined the nature and usefulness of the relationship between these two factors of motivation by utilizing loaferonical correlation analysis (Oh, H., M., Uysal, P. Weaver, 1995).Baloglu and Uysal (1996) claimed that the concept of product bundles is used to refer to the perceived significance of the interaction between push and pull items of motivation. This implies that certain conditions for travel may correspond to certain benefits that are to be valued and obtained at the destination spot. Based on the intrinsic and extrinsic motivations, as discussed above, the individual tourist builds their perceptions, and the perceptions can be differ from the true attributes of the product depending on how the individual receives and process information (Gartner, 1993 Dann, 1996 Baloglu and Brinberg, 1997). A general conclusion can be drawn that the personal motives or called push motives and the view of the characteristics of the tourism destination (pull motives) determine perceptions. These motives interact in dynamic and evolving context (Correia, 2000), and the tourist motivation is seen as a multidimensional concept that indicates tourist decision (McCabe, 2000).As tourism paradigm is related to human beings and human natur e, it is always a complex proposition to study why people travel and what they want to enjoy (Yoon and Uysal, 2005). In most studies, it is principally accepted that push and pull motivations have been primarily utilized in studies of tourist behavior. The discoveries and issues undoubtedly play a use role in attempting to understand a wide different of needs and wants that can drive and influence tourist behavior. Nevertheless, Yoon and Uysal (2005) said that the results and effects of the motivation studies of tourist behavior need to a greater extent than an understanding of their needs and wants.In tourism destination management, it was generally agree that maximizing travel satisfaction is crucial for a successful business. The evaluation of the physical products of destination as well as the psychological interpretation of a destination product are important for human actions (Swan and Comb, 1976 Uysal and Noe, 2003), which could be further equal as a travel satisfaction and destination faithfulness. Both concepts can be examined within the context of a tourism system representing two major components of the market place, namely, demand (tourist) and supply (tourism attractions) which demand refers to motives (push factors) that endure tourists desire while supple relates to destinations characteristics (pull factors) (Jurowski et al., 1996).Push and pull factors have generally been characterized to two separate decisions made at two separate period in time one focusing on whether to go, the other on where to go. For instance, Dann (1981) noted that once the trip has been decided upon, where to go, what to see or what to do (relating to the specific destinations) can be tackled and this make a conclude that, analytically, both logically and temporally, push factors precede pull factor.Although these two factors has been viewed as relating to two distinct decisions, several researchers have distinguished that they should not be viewed as in operation (p) entirely independent of each others. For example, it has suggested that people travel because they are pushed by their own intrinsic forces and at the same time pulled by the extrinsic forces such as the destination and its attributes (Cha, McCleary, and Uysal 1995 Uysal and Jurowskil, 1994). However, Crompton (1979) argued, push factors may be useful not only in explaining the initial arousal, energizing, or push to take a vacation, but may also have directive potential to direct the tourist toward a particular destination (p.412).Several empirical examinations of push and pull factors had been reported in the travel and tourism literature. Of the prior research that examined the students and/or parachute break travel market (Butts, F.B., J. Salazar, K. Sapio, and D. Thomas, 1996 Field, 1999 Hobson and Josiam, 1992,1996 Hsu and Sung, 1996,1997 Sirakaya and McLellan, 1997), there have been no investigations of push forces and only a smattering of attempts to study the pull fa ctors influencing students destination choice decision. In another study, conducted by Hobson and Josiam (1992), students were asked to list their primary reason for choosing a spring break destination and most responses referred to the influence of friends and/or family living near or going to the destination, other reasons referred to destination-related attributes such as the destination having s spring break party reputation, loosen up weather, affordable pricing, quiet environment, good skiing, or good beaches.