This article was downloaded by: [RMIT University]
On: 22 July 2013, At: 09:03
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,
UK
International Journal of
Hospitality & Tourism
Administration
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjht20
An Application of the Social
Psychological Model of Tourism
Motivation
a
Kara Wolfe PhD & Cathy H. C. Hsu PhD
b
a
Department of Apparel, Design, Facility and
Hospitality Management, North Dakota State
University.
b
School of Hotel and Tourism Management, The
Hong Kong Polytechnic University
Published online: 05 Oct 2008.
To cite this article: Kara Wolfe PhD & Cathy H. C. Hsu PhD (2004) An Application
of the Social Psychological Model of Tourism Motivation, International Journal of
Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 5:1, 29-47, DOI: 10.1300/J149v05n01_02
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J149v05n01_02
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the
information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.
However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,
or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views
expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the
Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,
and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the
Content.
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,
sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is
expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
An Application of the Social Psychological
Model of Tourism Motivation
Kara Wolfe
Cathy H. C. Hsu
ABSTRACT. The purpose of this study was to empirically test IsoAhola’s (1982) Social Psychological Model of Tourism Motivation
(SPMTM). The model is more commonly known as the seeking-escaping theory. Data were collected through a mail survey with 286 respondents and a 31.1% response rate. Factor analysis of the motivation items
resulted in a six factor solution. The factors fit into the seeking and escaping dimensions of the SPMTM, thus confirming the model. Motivational factors were compared between Non-Caucasians and Caucasians.
Significant differences between the two groups provided support for the
subcultural hypothesis, which attributes differences in leisure preferences to differences in norms and values based on racial and ethnic
groups. [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service:
1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: <docdelivery@haworthpress.com> Website: <http://
www.HaworthPress.com> © 2004 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]
KEYWORDS. Tourism motivation, seeking, escaping, subcultural hypothesis
Kara Wolfe, PhD, is Assistant Professor, Department of Apparel, Design, Facility
and Hospitality Management, North Dakota State University.
Cathy H. C. Hsu, PhD, is Associate Head and Graduate Programs Director, School
of Hotel and Tourism Management, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
Address correspondence to: Kara Wolfe, Department of Apparel, Design, Facility
and Hospitality Management, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58103-5057
(E-mail: Kara.Wolfe@ndsu.nodak.edu).
International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, Vol. 5(1) 2004
http://www.haworthpress.com/web/IJHTA
© 2004 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.
Digital Object Identifier: 10.1300/J149v05n01_02
29
30
International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
INTRODUCTION
Tourism motivation is an integral part of tourist behavior, and it has
been linked to destination selection (Jang & Cai, 2002). Mansfeld (1992)
believed tourism motivation was the mechanism that initiated the travel
decision-making process. Other researchers have indicated that studying
tourism motivation may be the key to attracting more visitors, satisfying
the needs of current visitors, and understanding what influences travelers’ decisions (Cha, McCleary, & Uysal, 1995; Goeldner, Ritchie, &
McIntosh, 2000). Crandall (1980) suggested that motivation assessment
could be utilized to predict demand and as a basis for adapting or developing products or programs to meet tourists’ needs. However, Ritchie
(1996) stated that while there were some general theories about tourism
motivation, they could be explored more extensively.
TOURISM MOTIVATION
Motivational research attempts to discover explanations for consumer behaviors (Thomas, 1998). This type of research assumes that
unconscious and conscious motives affect human behaviors. Marketers
try to affect consumer behavior by promoting products and services that
can satisfy consumers’ needs or motives.
Motivation is defined as “to provide with a motive” or urge to drive
forward; a motive “is something (as a need or desire) that causes a person to act” (Woolf, 1974, p. 458). Tourism literature similarly identifies
motivation as something that occurs when there is a need. The underlying principle is that people are trying to reach a state of equilibrium
among physical, psychological, and social aspects within one’s self
(Crompton, 1979). A need arises when there is a disruption in the equilibrium, causing a motivation or reason to restore equilibrium, resulting
in satisfaction. However, it is very difficult to ascertain motivations because they are affected by numerous factors. It is also difficult to capture the essence of why people travel, partially because it is difficult for
travelers to convey their true feelings or the real purpose of their trip.
Social Psychological Model of Tourism Motivation
Studies that investigated tourism motivation usually included a discussion and utilization of the push and pull theory. Push factors are considered to be internal forces that explain why people travel (Dann, 1977;
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
Kara Wolfe and Cathy H. C. Hsu
31
Crompton, 1979). Pull motives are viewed as external forces that draw
people to a particular location. Iso-Ahola (1982) developed a seeking-escaping tourism motivation theory that has some similarities to the
push and pull thesis. He believed a motive is an internal force that affects a person’s behavior, comparable to the push factor.
Iso-Ahola also believed these internal factors can be linked to potential
satisfaction. Therefore, individuals participate in leisure activities to derive satisfaction by seeking or escaping something. The awareness of the
potential satisfaction of traveling leads individuals to develop goals or
reasons for travel (i.e., to seek or escape). These motivational forces influence travelers’ decisions. However, travelers do not necessarily have a list
of “45 leisure needs in their minds” (Iso-Ahola, 1980, p. 241), from which
they submit to, and then decide to travel. Therefore, Iso-Ahola suggested
people think about intrinsic rewards in more general terms. Intrinsic rewards can be grouped into two categories: seeking, in which one might
discover feelings of mastery or competence; and escaping, in which one
might avoid something or leave the daily routine (Iso-Ahola, 1982).
Iso-Ahola (1982) suggested that both seeking and escaping elements
are evident and under certain conditions, one may be stronger than the
other. These two types of motivational forces are also affected by personal and interpersonal dimensions. Thus, Iso-Ahola (1982) developed
the Social Psychological Model of Tourism Motivation (SPMTM). The
model included four motivational categories: Seeking Personal Rewards (SPR), Seeking Interpersonal Rewards (SIR), Escaping Personal
Environments (EPE), and Escaping Interpersonal Environments (EIE).
The model was based on a social psychological perspective in that peoples’ perceptions of traveling are very subjective because travel experiences are biased by peoples’ psychological awareness; thus, different
individuals may perceive the same trip differently (Iso-Ahola, 1983).
Dunn Ross and Iso-Ahola (1991) used a 20-item instrument to survey
members of bus tour groups in Washington, DC. Factor analysis revealed six dimensions, including general knowledge, social interaction,
escape, impulsive decision, specific knowledge, and shopping for souvenirs. The predominant travel motivations were seeking personal and
interpersonal rewards as well as escape. Results supported their hypothesis that the seeking dimension was important for sightseeing tourists
who were primarily motivated by acquiring knowledge and the social
interaction aspects of travel. The study provided some empirical evidence to support the contention that both motivational forces, seeking
and escaping, are present in tourist behaviors. However, the factors did
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
32
International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration
not necessarily validate the SPMTM. It appeared some categories, such
as EIE, were not represented, which may have violated the SPMTM.
Partridge (1997) used the SPMTM to gain a better understanding of
nature-based tourists’ behaviors. A survey of bird watchers included
statements to reflect each of the four categories (i.e., SPR, SIR, EPE,
and EIE). The results showed those nature-based tourists were primarily motivated by seeking dimensions (i.e., education, testing abilities,
meeting people with similar interests). Her study aided in the understanding of how certain activities could satisfy travelers’ needs.
Norman and Carlson (1999) conducted a study to test if tourists could
be segmented into seeking and escaping categories based on Iso-Ahola’s
(1984) dimensions, and to determine if the resulting segments were useful. Respondents were asked to rate their general reasons for pleasure
travel. Results indicated that 39% of the respondents could be categorized as escapers (EPE/EIE) and 27% as seekers (SPR/SIR). The remainder of the respondents fell into the categories of EPE/SIR (21%)
and EIE/SPR (13%). A stepwise multiple discriminant analysis derived
eight motivation statements as significant variables in differentiating
travelers into the four groups. Results showed that the seeking and escaping dimensions can be used to segment travelers. However, more research was needed to substantiate the seeking and escaping motives
(Norman & Carlson, 1999).
Other Motivational Theories
The following is a discussion of other motivation theories viewed in
the context of how they might relate to the SPMTM. This review of
other researchers’ works was not meant to be an exhaustive list of motivational research, but rather provided insight into how some theories or
studies could correspond to the SPMTM. The evaluation of the following studies was subjective and the readers may categorize them differently; nonetheless, it provided a framework for how tourism motivational
literature can be assimilated.
Crompton (1979) derived seven socio-psychological internal motives
that drove pleasure travel behaviors. In relation to the SPMTM, these motives could be categorized as (1) escaping from the routine, regression,
and relaxation, which could be thought of as Escape Personal Environments (EPE); (2) self-discovery, prestige, novelty, and education, which
were related to Seeking Personal Rewards (SPR); and (3) improving
family relationships and facilitating social interaction that could be associated with Seeking Interpersonal Rewards (SIR). Crompton and
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
Kara Wolfe and Cathy H. C. Hsu
33
McKay (1997) used Crompton’s (1979) work as the basis for their empirical study of the motivations of festival attendees. The results suggested festival attendee motivations included seeking personal and
interpersonal rewards, as well as escaping personal environments.
Beard and Ragheb (1983) developed the four-factor Leisure Motivation Scale (LMS), which was designed to assess psychological and sociological reasons for participating in leisure activities. A list of 48
motivational statements was administered and factor analyzed. The resulting factors were intellectual (which could represent SPR), social
(SIR), competency-mastery (SPR), and stimulus avoidance (EPE/EIE).
Ryan and Glendon (1998) used a shortened version of the LMS in their
study of British travelers. Items associated with stimulus-avoidance or
“escape” (e.g., relax mentally, avoid hustle and bustle of everyday life,
and relax physically) were rated as the most important, followed by
“seeking” items (e.g., discover new places and increase knowledge).
Lang and O’Leary (1997) developed a typology of Australian nature
travelers. A factor analysis of the data resulted in the following seven motivation/benefit dimensions: new experience (SPR), escape (EPE/EIE)
and entertained (SPR), show and tell (SPR), family oriented (SIR), cultural group interest (SPR/SIR), physical challenge and nature (SPR/EIE),
and relax (EPE). These motivational studies provided a basis for identifying and understanding tourists’ behavior. However, the various lists
of motivational factors also confirmed the difficulty of measuring motivation, because it is an internal process affected by many other variables
and subject to many interpretations. This review of previous studies was
an attempt to integrate and interpret various theories and findings from
one viewpoint in an effort to better comprehend tourism motivation.
Cultural Influences on Motivation
One last aspect considered in this study of tourism motivation pertained to the sociological feature. Moutinho (2000) contended many social influences impact travelers’ decisions, including motivation. He
also indicated motivation is affected by an individual’s cultural background, as well as opinions from friends and family members. Iso-Ahola
(1983) agreed that people are influenced by the social environments in
which they function. Therefore, the SPMTM includes personal and interpersonal dimensions.
As the U.S. population becomes more diverse, concerns arise about
low visitation rates by various racial and ethnic groups to some tourist
destinations. Floyd (1999) proposed one reason that could account for
34
International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
differences in visitation rates is the subcultural hypothesis, which bases
differences on cultural preferences. If tourism motivation is influenced
by culture, destination managers may need to develop different activities and promotional strategies to attract more diverse visitors.
PURPOSE
Ritchie (1996) declared tourism motivation as an area of research
that has progressed in recent years, yet he noted that a shortcoming in
this area of research was the lack of empirical or statistical validation of
motivational theories. Previous studies have investigated tourism motivation based on the push and pull theory, Leisure Motivation Scale, and
other theoretical structures. However, Pearce (1982, as cited in Mansfeld,
1992) suggested the biggest gap in the study of tourism motivation was
the failure to build on previous research.
The purpose of this study was to integrate past studies to develop an
instrument that would evaluate the applicability of the SPMTM and the
subcultural hypothesis. Specific objectives of the study included: (1) to
empirically test the SPMTM and (2) compare tourism motivations between Non-Caucasians and Caucasians to empirically verify the
subcultural hypothesis.
Other studies have used factor analysis to validate the push-pull theory; therefore, this study utilized a similar methodology to test the
SPMTM. Also, the following methodology was different from previous
studies of the seeking and escaping model (Norman & Carlson, 1999),
consequently, the results could further support the theory or pose contradictions to earlier findings. No empirical studies were found that examined the applicability of the subcultural hypothesis to tourism
motivation, thus simple comparisons between the groups were made.
METHODOLOGY
Churchill’s (1979) scale development steps were used to guide the process. The steps included to specify the domain, generate items, collect
data, purify the measure, collect data, assess reliability and validity, and
develop norms. The first step, specify the construct domains, was carried
out by reviewing past studies. It was evident from previous literature that
motivation was defined as inner attitudes that guide peoples’ behaviors.
The motivation construct domains were further specified by using
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
Kara Wolfe and Cathy H. C. Hsu
35
Iso-Ahola’s (1982) SPMTM. Next, a list of items was generated to measure the four domains identified in the SPMTM. Items from previous
studies that appeared to measure the four dimensions were reviewed and
adapted. Past research studies that were reviewed included those based on
the push and pull theory (Crompton & McKay, 1997), Leisure Motivation Scale (Beard & Ragheb, 1983; Ryan & Glendon, 1998), and a variety
of other studies measuring tourism motivation. Figure 1 represents a categorization of generic items used in previous studies. The 26 motivational
items used in this study are listed.
From the list of items generated, a questionnaire was developed. The
questionnaire included 26 statements on travel motivation, followed by demographic questions. Respondents were asked to rate each travel motivation statement based on their agreement as to why they traveled for leisure
in general, with a 7-point scale (7 being strongly agree and 1 being strongly
disagree). The questionnaire was submitted to tourism behavior experts
(hospitality, tourism, marketing, and recreation faculty members) and destination managers for review and input. Revisions were made based on
their recommendations. The questionnaire was pilot tested with 48 volunteers from different social, economic, and racial backgrounds.
An exploratory factor analysis was conducted with the pilot test data.
Eight factors emerged with eigenvalues of greater than 1.0. Factor loadings and item-total correlations were used to evaluate whether to keep
or delete an item. All items’ factor loadings exceeded .40 and the overall
coefficient alpha for the 26 items was .82. Thus, all items were retained.
A mail survey was administered to a sample of 1,000 households in
Kansas. A mailing list was purchased from a company that specialized
in targeting ethnic populations to increase the racial diversity of the
study sample. Another list was created from telephone books to target a
random sample of Kansas residents; each list included 500 names. Kansas is predominantly a rural state; however, due to the population distribution, about half of the sampled residents lived in an urban area with a
population of over 300,000. Residents were sent a cover letter that described the project and introduced the researchers, a copy of the questionnaire, and a business reply envelope. Approximately two weeks
after the initial mailing, non-respondents were sent a follow-up letter,
another copy of the questionnaire, and a business reply envelope.
Data were entered into SPSS 10.0 for analysis. Descriptive statistics,
such as frequencies, means, and standard deviations, were calculated. A
factor analysis of the motivation items was conducted and reliability coefficients were calculated. Motivations were compared between Caucasians and Non-Caucasians using non-parametric tests.
36
International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration
FIGURE 1. Motivational Items in Previous Research Categorized into Iso- Ahola’s
SPMTM
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
Seeking
Personal
Interpersonal
1. Be places friends have not been – B,L/O
2. Tell friends about the trip – B, D/T, F
3. Skill testing/development – B/R, D/T, N/C,
W/D/R
4. Be entertained – B, L/O, P
5. See/experience new things/places – B/P/B,
B/R, D/T, F, L/O, L/P, N/C, P
6. Like to be pampered – P
7. Have fun – B, M/H
8. Gain general knowledge – B, D/T, D/I, L/O
[Learn about culture/history – C/M, F, D/I, L/O]
[Educational experiences – B/R, M/H, N/C]
9. Enjoy sightseeing/scenery – B/P/B, D/T, D/I,
W/D/R
10. Seek stimulation/thrills/excitement – B, B/R,
C/M, D/T, L/O
11. Exercise/be physically active – B/R, D/T, M/H,
W/D/R
12. Try different foods – P
18. Be with/meet people with similar interests – B,
D/T, L/O, N/C, P
19. Meet new people – B/P/B, B/R, C/M, D/T, P,
N/C, W/D/R
20. Be with friends – B/P/B, C/M, D/A, L/L, L/O, P,
W/D/R [Gain feeling of belonging – D/T] [Be
with others – B/R, D/I, M/H]
21. Be with family – B/P/B, D/T, L/L, L/O, W/D/R
22. Provide education for children [Teach
others – D/T, M/H, W/D/R]
Escaping
Personal
Interpersonal
13. Escape personal problems/pressure – D/T,
D/I, N/C, P, W/D/R
14. Be away from work/daily routine – B, D/I,
L/O, L/P, P
15. Change from daily routine – B/R, C/M, L/O,
L/P, M/H, N/C, W/D/R
16. Be away from family – N/C, P
17. Relax/rest – B, B/P/B, B/R, D/T, F, L/P,
M/H, N/C, P, W/D/R
23. Be close to nature – D/T [Enjoy out – doors
– B/P/B, L/O, M/H] [Learn about/experiencing
nature – B/P/B, L/L, W/D/R] [Get away from
city life/pollution/traffic – B/P/B, N/C]
24. Get away from crowds – B, B/R, D/T, L/P, N/C
[Escape social pressure – W/D/R] 25. Be free
to act the way I feel – B
26. Self-reflection/spend time alone – B, B/P/B,
B/R, D/T, M/H, N/C, W/D/R
Legend:
B=
B/P/B =
L/O =
L/P =
M/H =
N/C =
P=
W/D/R =
B/R =
C/M =
D/T =
D/I =
F=
Baloglu (1996)
Ballayante, Packer, and Beckmann
(1998)
Beard and Ragheb (1983)
Crompton and McKay (1997)
Driver and Toucher (1970)
Dunn Ross and Iso-Ahola (1991)
Fodness (1994)
Lang and O'Leary (1997)
Loker and Perdue (1992)
Morgan and Hodgkinson (1999)
Norman and Carlson (1999)
Partridge (1997)
Wellman, Dawson, and
Roggenbuck (1982)
Note: [Items in brackets were not used in the scale rather, they showed similar statements used by various
researchers.]
RESULTS
Of the 1,000 questionnaires mailed, 79 were undeliverable, 305 were
returned, and 286 were usable. The overall effective response rate was
31.1%. A majority (79.7%) of the respondents had traveled within the
past year, averaging 2.5 trips over that time period. Demographic char-
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
Kara Wolfe and Cathy H. C. Hsu
37
acteristics of respondents are shown in Table 1. Over half of the respondents aged 45 or older (65.4%) and had annual household incomes of
$45,000 or more (56.3%). The majority of respondents (72.8%) reported having had some college education or more. The percentage of
females (59.1%) and African Americans (11.9%) was slightly higher
than that of the state’s population (50.6% and 5.7%, respectively), according to the U.S. Census Bureau (2003). The proportion of older age
brackets, upper income categories, and higher education levels were
also greater than those reported in the state’s population, which could
influence the findings.
Factor Analysis
Motivation items were factor analyzed with the principal component
method and varimax rotation. Not all respondents answered the complete list of 26 items. Missing data were dealt with, as recommended by
Johnson (1998), by using listwise analysis, which included only the
cases that had completed all items. As a result, only 251 cases were
available for analysis, which imposed a limitation because factor analysis should include 10 responses for each item (Nunneally, 1967). However, the number of responses analyzed was not far from the desired
number of 260.
A factor analysis with four factors specified was attempted and only
47.1% of the variance was explained by the four-factor solution. Most
importantly, the items that loaded together were not meaningful groupings. It was evident that a simple four-factor solution, one factor for each
category of the SPMTM, was not appropriate. Therefore, an exploratory
factor analysis was used. The initial solution emerged eight factors that
had an eigenvalue of greater than 1.0. Items with a less than .40 loading
on any one factor and items with .40 or higher loading on multiple factors were removed one at a time. One factor was found as a trivial factor
with only one item; therefore, it was removed from the analysis. After
removing each item, another factor analysis was run to fine tune the results. The final 6-factor solution retained 21 items, explained 60.95% of
the variance, and had an overall reliability of .84 (Table 2).
The first factor, called “Escape personal worries,” included items
“forget about personal worries,” “forget about work,” “escape family
problems,” and “have a change in daily routine.” This factor was related to the Escape Personal Environments dimension of the SPMTM
and explained the largest variance (24.57%). The results fit in accordance with Iso-Ahola’s (1982) theory that traveling is primarily a
38
International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration
TABLE 1. Demographics of Respondents
Demographic Characteristic
n
%
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
Gender
Male
111
38.8
Female
169
6
59.1
2.1
35-44
8
35
50
2.8
12.2
17.5
45-54
73
25.5
55-64
65 or over
No response
44
15.4
70
6
24.5
2.1
223
34
14
2
2
3
8
78.0
11.9
4.9
0.7
0.7
1.0
2.8
Less than $15,000
15,000-29,999
30,000-44,999
45,000-59,999
$60,000 or more
No response
17
36
50
62
99
22
5.9
12.6
17.5
21.7
34.6
7.7
No formal education
Grade school
High school
Some/2 yr college
4 yr degree
More than 4 yr degree
No response
1
5
68
90
56
62
4
0.3
1.7
23.8
31.5
19.6
21.7
1.4
No Response
Age
18-24
25-34
Race
Caucasian
African-American
Native American
Asian/Pacific Islander
Hispanic/Latino
Other
No Response
Income
Education
mode of escape for people. In a state of disequilibrium, people either
try to find more or less stimulation to satisfy their needs and return balance, or equilibrium, to their lives. In today’s society, people can be
over stimulated by work and personal worries, thus they often try to
escape to satisfy their needs. The factor “Escape personal worries”
Kara Wolfe and Cathy H. C. Hsu
39
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
TABLE 2. Factor Analysis of Motivation Items
a
Factor/Items
Mean (SD)
Escape personal worries
Forget about personal worries/troubles
Forget about work
Escape family problems
Have change in daily routine
4.43 (1.29)
Seek competition/recognition
Test and develop athletic skills
Be somewhere friends haven't been
Tell friends about the trip
Be physically active
3.25 (1.32)
Seek entertainment/fun
Be entertained
Be pampered
See/experience something new
Try new foods
Have fun
5.27 (1.05)
Seek interpersonal relations
Meet/be with people of similar interests
Meet new people
Be with friends
4.44 (1.37)
Escape crowds
Be close to nature
Get away from crowds
Enjoy sightseeing/scenery
5.48 (1.07)
Seek family time
Spend time with family
Provide education for children
5.27 (1.45)
Loading
.81
.73
.63
.53
.76
.73
.64
.57
.70
.70
.68
.59
.53
.77
.76
.70
.81
.66
.63
Overall
.81
.65
Variance
(alpha)
24.57
(.70)
9.91
(.75)
8.64
(.73)
6.76
(.71)
5.98
(.62)
5.10
(.54)
.84
a
Seven-point scale: 7 = strongly agree and 1 = strongly disagree.
also seemed congruent with other studies. Baloglu and McCleary
(1999) found getting away from demands and escaping from the routine loaded on the same factor they called relax/escape, which accounted for 24% of the variance explained in their study. Jang and Cai
(2002) found three items (i.e., getting away from the demands of
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
40
International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration
home, getting a change from a busy job, and escaping the ordinary)
loaded on one factor they named escape, which accounted for 11% of
the variance explained.
The second and third factors, named “Seek competition/recognition” and “Seek entertainment/fun,” both fit into the Seeking Personal
Rewards category of the SPMTM. The “Seek competition/recognition” factor included items such as “be somewhere my friends haven’t
been” and “tell friends about the trip.” Other studies also found these
items to be correlated (e.g., Baloglu & McCleary, 1999). Some people
perceive traveling as a proof of affluence or even their ability to adapt to
new environments; others may travel because they see it as a way of increasing their social status or improving their self-esteem (Iso-Ahola,
1983). As Iso-Ahola (1982) indicated, a primary motivational force was
to seek intrinsic rewards, such as that of mastery or competence, which
was related to “Seek competition/recognition.”
The fourth factor, “Seek interpersonal relations,” and the last factor,
“Seek family time,” can both be categorized as Seeking Interpersonal
Rewards. The “Seek interpersonal relations” factor was similar to the
known social group factor in Crompton and McKay’s (1997) study,
which found that people attended festivals to be with friends and be with
others who enjoyed the same things. The fifth factor, “Escape crowds,”
corresponded to the Escaping Interpersonal Environments dimension of
the model. This factor included the item “Be close to nature,” which was
similar to Stankey’s (1972, as cited in Iso-Ahola, 1983) finding that an
important feature of the wilderness was that it provided solitude.
The reliabilities of factors in this study ranged from .54 to .75, with
“Seek family time” being the lowest. Respondents without children or
without children living at home may have had a difficult time assessing
the statement on providing educational experience for children. This assumption was supported by the observation that a few respondents
wrote “grandchildren” or “we used to” next to the statement, indicating
they liked to travel to provide educational experiences for their grandchildren or they used to travel to provide educational experiences for
children, when the children were living at home.
In the context of face validity, the researchers evaluated whether the
scale behaved as expected. It was anticipated that rest/relax would have
loaded on the “Escape personal worries” factor. It was unclear why it
did not. Further testing is needed to determine if the item fits into the
context of the SPMTM. The items “seek thrills/excitement” and “gain
general knowledge” were expected to load on one of the two factors regarding Seek Personal Rewards; however, they did not. The items were
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
Kara Wolfe and Cathy H. C. Hsu
41
often retained in factor analyses of previous studies (Baloglu &
McCleary, 1999; Dunn Ross & Iso-Ahola, 1991; Jang & Cai, 2002).
The most likely reason the statements did not associate with other items
in this study was that not enough other items in the instrument measured
the excitement and knowledge aspects of personal rewards.
“Be free to express the way I feel” was expected to identify with Escaping Interpersonal Environments; however, it did not load on any factor. Depending on respondents’ interpretation, the item may be seen as a
means of escaping personal or interpersonal oppressions or possibly
Seeking Personal Rewards (e.g., fulfillment); the ambiguity that the
item purveyed could be the reason it did not load on a factor. To enhance
clarity, the item could be reworded as “Be free to express my true feelings.” Baloglu (1996) used the statement “Be free to act the way I feel”;
however, in the preliminary stages of this study, destination managers
who reviewed the questionnaire indicated that visitors were not necessarily allowed to act the way they felt at particular destinations, because
there were restrictions that guided people’s behavior, such as laws and
societal norms. Additional items could be added to the scale, such as
“Let my hair down” (Crompton & McKay, 1997), “Pursue personal interests or hobbies,” and “Be creative” (Driver & Toucher, 1970; Norman & Carlson, 1999), to see if they correlate with the item “Be free to
express my true feelings” and help clarify which quadrant of the
SPMTM the statements represent. Other areas that warrant further investigation are the family dimension and the statement about spending
time alone. By adding measurement items to “Seek family time,” the reliability of the dimension may increase. By simplifying the item “Spend
time alone for self-reflection” to “Spend time alone,” the item might fit
the construct of “Escape crowds” better.
Comparison Between Non-Caucasians and Caucasians
The preponderance of Caucasian respondents made for complications
in using MANOVAs to analyze the motivation by race. The responses
were collapsed into two categories by race, namely Non-Caucasians and
Caucasians. The Mann-Whitney U test, a non-parametric test, may be used
to evaluate if there are differences between two populations (McCall,
1986). The Mann-Whitney U test does not compare the means of two
populations; instead it compares the populations’ scores in central tendency and distribution. Even though not all Non-Caucasians are alike,
this exploratory study was an attempt to show that members of a minor-
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
42
International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration
ity population may differ from those of a majority population in regards
to tourism motivations based on the subcultural hypothesis. The
subcultural hypothesis suggested that differences in leisure behavior
can be attributed to norms and values of a racial or ethnic groups (Floyd,
1999). When the rankings were compared between Non-Caucasians
and Caucasians, there were significant differences on three of the six
motivational factors (see Table 3). Of the factors that showed a significant difference between the two groups (i.e., “Seek entertainment/fun,”
“Seek interpersonal relations,” and “Seek family time”), Non-Caucasians agreed more with them all. The Non-Caucasians also agreed more
with some items that did not load on any factor (i.e., “Rest/relax,”
“Express the way I feel,” and “Spend time alone for self-reflection”).
These findings may indicate Non-Caucasians traveled for different reasons from Caucasians, supporting the subcultural hypothesis. It also
could indicate that Non-Caucasians had stronger travel motives or they
were more likely to verbalize their motives.
TABLE 3. Differences in Motivation Between Non-Caucasians and Caucasians
Mean rank
Non-Caucasian
Mean rank
Caucasian
U
z Test
p
(2-tailed)
Escape personal
worries
141.49
122.89
3,738.5
⫺1.518
0.129
Seek competition/
recognition
146.13
124.42
3,711.5
⫺1.746
0.081
Seek entertainment/
fun
161.60
122.45
3,199.0
⫺3.158
0.002
Seek interpersonal
relations
174.76
120.84
2,760.5
⫺4.365
0.000
Escape crowds
111.58
132.60
3,919.5
⫺1.719
0.086
Seek family time
149.57
124.63
3,844.5
⫺2.063
0.039
Rest/relax
158.64
131.79
4,683.0
⫺2.452
0.014
Be free to express the
way I feel
173.34
119.84
2,735.0
⫺4.421
0.000
Seek thrills/excitement
143.68
127.20
4,128.0
⫺1.345
0.179
Gain general knowledge
150.01
131.20
4,464.5
⫺1.548
0.122
Spend time alone for
self-reflection
148.94
124.26
3,764.5
⫺2.038
0.042
Motivation
Factors
Items
Kara Wolfe and Cathy H. C. Hsu
43
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
CONCLUSIONS
Many motivational studies have found results congruent with the
push-pull theory. Results of this study empirically confirmed Iso-Ahola’s
(1982) SPMTM, which theorizes motivation can be grouped into broad
intrinsic reward categories. The Seeking Personal Rewards category
was represented by two factors, “Seek competition/recognition” and
“Seek entertainment/fun.” Seeking Interpersonal Rewards was also denoted by two factors, “Seek interpersonal relations” and “Seek family
time.” Escape Personal Environments and Escape Interpersonal Environments were each represented by one factor, “Escape personal worries” and “Escape crowds,” respectively. Empirical evidence also
lended support to the subcultural hypothesis, as some motivational factors were more important to Non-Caucasians than to Caucasians.
Practical Implications
Destination managers can use the results of this study in developing
communication materials that appeal to individuals’ travel motivation
within the seeking and escaping context. Based on factor means, Kansas
residents traveled to escape crowds, be with family, and to have fun/entertainment. The proposition “need to get away?” for instance, could be
used to attract individuals who want to escape personal or interpersonal
environments. Activities can be developed and promoted to attract more
people based on their motivation. The types of activities that might appeal to those trying to escape crowds could include self-guided nature
trails. Leisure travelers seeking activities that focus on the family could
appreciate opportunities for children to learn about nature or Kansas
history, such as those provided by interpreters. Historical re-enactments
that included food tasting could entertain visitors as well as satisfy their
need to try new foods and experience something new.
The differences that were identified between Non-Caucasians and
Caucasians suggested that when targeting Non-Caucasians, it would be
beneficial to promote the seeking aspects of travel, such as family time,
including educational activities for children; opportunities to be around
other people with similar interests; and the types of entertainment and
fun available.
In addition to seeking family time and entertainment, Non-Caucasians
also rated seeking interpersonal relations as more important than Caucasians. Activities that could satisfy this motive might include festivals or
large parties. Attendees should be encouraged to bring friends and fam-
44
International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
ily. This could be achieved by providing discounts to large groups and
families (e.g., children get in free). If admissions are charged, the fee
could be based on carloads instead of on an individual basis.
Research Implications
This study investigated people’s travel motivations and compared
differences in motivation between Non-Caucasians and Caucasians.
Comparisons of motivational factors and items between minority and
majority groups showed significant differences. This was a first step
into investigating if merit exists in researching potential market segments by motivation based on the subcultural hypothesis. Even though
not all Non-Caucasians are alike due to intra-group (i.e., people of the
same race) and inter-group (i.e., individuals of different races) variations (Carr & Williams, 1993; Floyd et al., 1994; Phillip, 1993; Shaull &
Gramman, 1998), this exploratory study was an attempt to show that
members of a minority population may differ from those of a majority
population in regards to tourism motivation.
Results of the study lended support to the argument made by Floyd
(1999) that the values or motives that draw Caucasians to a destination
might be the same values or motives that cause Non-Caucasians not to
visit a destination. This study’s results also were consistent with those
of earlier research that some minority groups valued family time more
than others (Shaull & Gramman, 1998) and that Caucasians were more
likely to visit remote areas than African-Americans (Virden & Walker,
1999). This study also demonstrated the importance of considering aspects of motivation that are sometimes overlooked when focusing on
the majority population. For instance, items or statements that were
dropped from the factor analysis, such as “Be free to express the way I
feel,” were found to be more important to Non-Caucasian groups.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE STUDIES
Only a small sample of Kansas residents was surveyed. However, the
results did present a benchmark for others to conduct more research
based on Iso-Ahola’s (1982) SPMTM. The researchers recognized that
motivation is dialectical and ever-changing; however, this study only
measured motivation at one point in time because a primary objective of
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
Kara Wolfe and Cathy H. C. Hsu
45
the study was to explore whether motivational items can be categorized
according to the seeking and escaping dimensions. A revised instrument based on suggestions discussed earlier could be applied to tourists
in various specific settings to further validate the SPMTM based on the
dynamism of tourism motivation. This type of research could assist in
increasing researchers’ understanding of the applicability of the
SPMTM.
Many iterations need to be conducted before the validity of the
scale can truly be assessed because construct validation is a continual process (Cronbach, 1971, as cited in Peter, 1981). Other survey
methods could be used to measure the same constructs to assess the
convergent validity of the measures (Peter, 1981). For instance, semantic differential scales could be used to measure personal and interpersonal dimensions, and the seeking and escaping dimensions of
travel. Another method for investigating the validity of the SPMTM
could be by showing participants pictures of destinations and asking
them why they would visit the place to see if the seeking and escaping motives emerge. Thus, the validity assessment and norm establishment steps of the scale development process proposed by Churchill
(1979) were not carried out in the current study. Additional research
with new datasets is required to further validate the SPMTM.
REFERENCES
Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Beckmann, E. (1998). Targeted interpretation: Exploring relationships among visitors’ motivation, activities, attitudes, information needs and preferences. The Journal of Tourism Studies 9(2), 14-25.
Baloglu, S. (1996). An empirical investigation of determinants of tourist destination image. Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
Baloglu, S., & McCleary, K.W. (1999). A model of destination image formation.
Annals of Tourism Research 26(4), 868-897.
Beard, J., & Ragheb, M. (1983). Measuring leisure motivation. Journal of Leisure
Research 15(3), 219-228.
Carr, D. S., & Williams, D. R. (1993). Understanding the role of ethnicity in outdoor recreation experiences. Journal of Leisure Research 25(1), 22-38.
Cha, S., McCleary, K., & Uysal, M. (1995). Travel motivation of Japanese overseas
travelers: A factor-cluster segmentation approach. Journal of Travel Research
34(1), 33-39.
Churchill, G. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research 16(1), 64-73.
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
46
International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration
Crandall, R. (1980). Motivation for leisure. Journal of Leisure Research 12(1),
45-54.
Crompton, J. (1979). Motivation for pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research 6(4), 408-424.
Crompton, J. L., & McKay, S. L. (1997). Motives of visitors attending festival
events. Annals of Tourism Research 24(2), 425-439.
Dann, G. M. S. (1977). Anomie, ego-enhancement and tourism. Annals of Tourism
Research 4(4), 184-194.
Driver, B., & Toucher, S. (1970). Toward a behavioral interpretation of recreation
engagements with implications for planning. In B. L. Driver (Ed.), Elements of
outdoor recreation planning (pp. 9-31). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan
Press.
Dunn Ross, E. L., & Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1991). Sightseeing tourists’ motivation and
satisfaction. Annals of Tourism Research 18(2), 226-237.
Floyd, M. F. (1999). Race, ethnicity and use of the National Park System. Social
Science Research Review 1(2), 1-24.
Floyd, M. F., Shinew, K. J., McGuire, F. A., & Noe, F. P. (1994). Race, class, and
leisure activity preferences: Marginality and ethnicity revisited. Journal of Leisure Research 26(2), 158-173.
Fodness, D. (1994). Measuring tourist motivation. Annals of Tourism Research,
21(3), 555-581.
Goeldner, C., Ritchie, B., & McIntosh, R. (2000). Tourism: Principles, practices, philosophies (8th ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1980). The social psychology of leisure and recreation. Dubuque, IA:
Wm. C. Brown Company Publishers.
Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1982). Toward a social psychological theory of tourism motivation:
A rejoinder. Annals of Tourism Research 9(2), 256-261.
Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1983). Towards a social psychology of recreational travel. Leisure
Studies 2(1), 45-56.
Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1984). Social psychological foundations of leisure and resultant implications for leisure counseling. In E. T. Dowd (Ed.), Leisure counseling: Concepts and applications (pp. 97-125). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Jang, S. C., & Cai, L. A. (2002). Travel motivation and destination choice: A study of
British outbound market. In A. DeFranco & J. Abbott (Eds.), Proceedings of Seventh Annual Graduate Education and Graduate Students Research Conference in
Hospitality and Tourism: Volume 7 (pp. 289-300). Houston, TX: University of
Houston.
Johnson, D. E. (1998). Applied multivariate methods for data analysis. Pacific Grove,
CA: Duxbury.
Lang, C., & O’Leary, J. T. (1997). Motivation, participation, and preference: A
multi-segmentation approach of the Australian nature travel market. Journal of
Travel & Tourism Marketing 6(3/4), 159-180.
Loker, L. E., & Perdue, R. R. (1992). A benefit-based segmentation of a nonresident
summer travel market. Journal of Travel Research 31(1), 30-35.
Mansfeld, Y. (1992). From motivation to actual travel. Annals of Tourism Research
19(3), 399-419.
Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 09:03 22 July 2013
Kara Wolfe and Cathy H. C. Hsu
47
McCall, R. B. (1986). Fundamental statistics for behavioral sciences (4th ed). New
York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers.
Morgan, J. M., & Hodgkinson, M. (1999). The motivation and social orientation of visitors attending a contemporary zoological park. Environment and Behavior 31(2):
227-239.
Moutinho, L. (2000). Consumer behaviour. In L. Moutinho (Ed.), Strategic management in tourism (pp. 41-78). New York: CABI Publishing.
Norman, W. C., & Carlson, M. N. (1999). An investigation of the seeking-escaping
theory as a segmentation tool in tourism marketing. In R. N. Moisey, N. P.
Nickerson, & K. L. Andereck (Eds.). Travel and Tourism Research Association
30th Annual Conference Proceedings, (pp.10-18). Boise, ID: TTRA.
Nunneally, J. C. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw Hill.
Partridge, C. (1997). An investigation of nature based tourists’ motives for travel. Master’s thesis, University of Manitoba.
Peter, J. P. (1981). Construct validity: A review of basic issues and marketing practices. Journal of Marketing Research 18(2), 133-145.
Phillip, S. F. (1993). Racial differences in the perceived attractiveness of tourism destinations, interests, and cultural resources. Journal of Leisure Research 25(3),
290-304.
Ritchie, J. R. B. (1996). Beacons of light in an expanding universe: An assessment of
the state-of-the-art in tourism marketing/marketing research. Journal of Travel &
Tourism Marketing 5(4), 49-84.
Ryan, C., & Glendon, I. (1998). Application of leisure motivation scale to tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 25(1), 169-184.
Shaull, S. L., & Gramman, J. H. (1998). The effect of cultural assimilation on the importance of family-related and nature-related recreation among Hispanic Americans. Journal of Leisure Research 30(1), 47-63.
Thomas, J. (1998). Motivational research: Explaining why consumers behave the way
they do. Direct Marketing 60(12), 54-56.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2003). Kansas Quick Facts. Retrieved December 22, 2003, from
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/20000.html
Virden, R. J., & Walker, G. J. (1999). Ethnic/racial and gender variations among meanings given to, and preferences for, the natural environment. Leisure Sciences, 21(3),
219-239.
Wellman, J., Dawson, M., & Roggenbuck, J. (1982). Park managers’ perceptions of the
motivation of visitors to two national park service areas. Journal of Leisure Research, 14(1), 1-15.
Woolf, H.B. et al. (Eds.). (1974). The Merriam-Webster Dictionary. New York: Simon
& Schuster, Inc.
RECEIVED: 08/05/03
REVISIONS RECEIVED: 11/17/03
ACCEPTED: 11/23/03