Competitive analysis of cross cultural information search behavior

*Corresponding author.E-mail addresses: [email protected] (D. Gursoy), [email protected]

(J.S. Chen).

Tourism Management 21 (2000) 583}590

Competitive analysis of cross cultural information search behavior

Dogan Gursoy!,*, Joseph S. Chen"

!Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 362 Wallace Hall, Blacksburg,VA 24061-0429, USA

"Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 351 Wallace Hall, Blacksburg,VA 24061-0429, USA

Received 9 May 1999; accepted 31 May 1999

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate German, French, and British travelers' information search behavior. This study used thedata collected from a series of in-#ight surveys on German, British, and French travelers to the US between January and December1997. To visualize tourists' information research behavior, a correspondence analysis was employed. The results from correspondenceanalysis revealed two-dimensional solutions: the "rst was labeled as business/leisure dimension, and the second was identi"edas dependent/independent information search behavior. In addition, four distinct market segments based on the informationsearch behavior emerged from the analysis. In conclusion, future study in respect to cross-cultural choice behaviors was ad-vocated. ( 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Cross-cultural behaviors; Information search; Correspondence analysis

1. Introduction

Understanding travelers' information-search behavioris critical for strategy development and service delivery.Indeed, the emergence of a large number and variety oftravel destinations has increased the importance of un-derstanding the travelers' information-search behavior.As a result, it is not surprising that conceptual andempirical study on tourist information-search behaviorwas one of the more important in marketing research.However, in the tourism literature, there is a little studythat has speci"cally focused on cross-cultural informa-tion search behavior.

To date, one of the major gaps in tourist information-search behavior literature is the lack of a cross-culturalperspective. While it is true that the literature containssome information-search studies conducted on the sam-ples outside of the United States (Uysal, McDonald,& Reid, 1990) the scope of these studies has been toolimited to permit placement of the knowledge regardingtourist information-search behavior into a cross-culturalcontext.

The purpose of this study, therefore, is to expand theconcept of tourist information-search behavior by identi-fying and simultaneously analyzing external informationsources used by German, French, and British travelerswho traveled to the United States in 1997. In this study,each market (country) was segmented based on the travelpurposes embodying business, convention, visiting familyand friends, and leisure vacation. It is believed that analy-sis based on these segments will provide a better under-standing of cross-cultural tourist information-searchbehavior.

2. Tourist information search

Like any other consumer product, information ac-quisition is necessary for selecting a destination and foron-site decisions such as selecting accommodation, trans-portation, and tours (Filiatrault & Ritchie, 1980; Fodness& Murray, 1997, 1998; Jenkins, 1978; Perdue, 1985;Snepenger, Meged, Snelling, & Worral, 1990). However,the types and purposes of travel may in#uence the levelsand types of information needed and therefore, mayimpact on the levels and types of information searchemployed. Routine trips may require little or no ex-ternal information search, whereas overseas vacations

0261-5177/00/$ - see front matter ( 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.PII: S 0 2 6 1 - 5 1 7 7 ( 0 0 ) 0 0 0 0 5 - 4

may require considerable external information search(Snepenger & Snepenger, 1993).

Information search can be de"ned as `the motivatedactivation of knowledge stored in memory or acquisitionof information from the environmenta (Engel, Blackwell,& Miniard, 1990, p. 494). As the de"nition suggests,information search can be either internal or external;internal search is based on the retrieval of knowledgefrom memory; on the other hand, external search consistsof collecting information from the marketplace (Engelet al., 1990).

When the internal search provides su$cient informa-tion regarding a trip decision, then external search isobviously unnecessary (Beatty & Smith, 1986). Whethertravelers rely solely on internal information search willheavily depend on the adequacy or quality of their exist-ing knowledge. For example, travelers may not need tocollect any additional information from external sourcesfor a routine trip to family or friends, or for repeatvisitation of a certain destination because they mayutilize only past experiences (Etzel & Wahlers, 1985;Snepenger & Snepenger, 1993). However, even experi-enced travelers may need to undertake external search.Travelers may search for external information even be-fore a routine trip to visit family or friends because ofa change in route or some side trips (Perdue, 1985).

When the internal information search proves inad-equate, the travelers may decide to collect additionalinformation from external sources. Travelers tend to usefour broad, external information sources when planningtheir trips. These are (1) family and friends, (2) destinationspeci"c literature, (3) media, and (4) travel consultants(Snepenger & Snepenger, 1993). Travelers may utilize anyof these external information sources for pre-purchaseinformation search or ongoing information search.Pre-purchase information search can be de"ned as theexternal information search that is driven by an upcom-ing purchase decision whereas ongoing informationsearch can be de"ned as acquisition of external informa-tion regardless of sporadic purchase needs (Bloch, Sher-rell & Ridgway, 1986). Bloch et al. (1986) suggested thatpre-purchase search is in#uenced by involvement in thepurchase, while ongoing search is in#uenced by involve-ment with the product.

The degree of pre-purchase external informationsearch is directly related to the type of product con-sumers intent to purchase. Consumers tend to engage inmore search when purchasing higher priced, more visible,and more complex products which intrinsically creategreater perceived risk (Beatty & Smith, 1986) such asoverseas travels. Woodside and Ronkainen (1980) foundthat only about 20 per cent of travelers to South Carolineutilize travel agents, motor clubs and tour operators tohelp plan their trips. They also noted that overseas, "rsttime travelers to a destination were prone to using travelagents and tour operators more frequently (Woodside

& Ronkainen, 1980). Snepenger et al. (1990) studied theinformation search strategies of "rst time visitors toAlaska. Their study indicated that a large segment of "rsttime visitors (destination namKve travelers) to Alaska utiliz-ed travel agents as the main source of external informa-tion. Fesenmaier and Vogt's study (as cited in Snepenger& Snepenger, 1993) on the use of information at statewelcome centers suggested that a majority of travelersstopping at the welcome centers did not utilize any ex-ternal information sources prior to their trip. However,they reported that most of these travelers collect informa-tion during the trip. These "ndings implied that thesetravelers employed internal information search beforethey made their travel decision.

Fodness and Murray (1998) examined how travelersmake systematic use of information available to them forvacation planning. They found that leisure travelers com-bine available information sources rationally. Travelersdo not depend on one type of information source. Eventhough travelers use a combination of available informa-tion sources, they distinguish information sources onspatial, temporal, and operational dimensions. Travelersuse a limited set of information strategies and each ofthese strategies exhibits unique combinations of the spa-tial, temporal, and operational dimensions (Fodness& Murray, 1998).

Indeed, most research works on the information-search behavior of travelers have focused on UStravelers, only a few cross-national information searchbehaviors can be found in the current tourism literature(Snepenger & Snepenger, 1993). Uysal et al. (1990)studied the information search behavior of German,French, British and Japanese travelers who travel to theUnited States. They found that travelers from di!erentcountries were more inclined to utilize di!erent types ofinformation with varying frequency. British travelerstended to use travel agents as the main source of externalinformation source followed by family and friends, bro-chures and pamphlets, and magazine and newspaperarticles. `Family and friendsa is found to be the mostimportant external information source for Germantravelers followed by travel agents, brochures andpamphlets, and books and library materials. Like Ger-man travelers, `family and friendsa is found to be themost important external information source for Frenchtravelers, followed by travel agents, brochures andpamphlets, airlines, and articles in magazines and news-papers. Japanese travelers are more likely to use booksand other library materials "rst, then brochures andpamphlets, family and friends, and travel agents.

3. Research design

The data used in this study were based on the results ofthe in-#ight survey and a comprehensive study of

584 D. Gursoy, J.S. Chen / Tourism Management 21 (2000) 583}590

Table 1Sampled international travelers to the US by the purposes of travel

Purpose of travel Germantravelers

Britishtravelers

Frenchtravelers

Business 1054 981 550Convention 341 244 211Leisure & VFR 3185 2331 1173Leisure (Vacation) 2579 1882 921Total! 4026 3041 1651

!Sum of categories is higher than the total number of respondents dueto multiple responses

German, British and French travelers to the US betweenJanuary and December 1997. The survey was conductedon an ongoing basis by the International Trade Adminis-tration (ITA) and Tourism Industries (TI).

The survey was conducted on selected international#ights from various major airlines. British, French andGerman travelers to the United States were surveyed byself-administered questionnaires that were distributed tothose #ights departing from US airports to destinationsin Great Britain, Germany and France. Surveys wereconducted monthly, during the seven days beginningwith the third Monday of the month. The speci"c #ightswere selected randomly, and participating airlines re-ceived advanced listings of the #ights to be surveyed.Airline personnel distributed the questionnaire afterboarding, and collected the completed questionnaireprior to debarkation.

Total sample size was 8842: 4085 German travelers,3080 British travelers, and 1677 French travelers(Table 1). Based on information from cabin crews, theaverage passenger response rate was 49 per cent (UnitedStates Department of Commerce: International TradeAdministration, 1998).

3.1. Survey variables

3.1.1. Country of residenceRespondents' country of residence was determined by

asking them to state their city, state, ZIP (postal) codeand country of residence. Based on their responses, re-spondents were categorized as German, British orFrench travelers.

3.1.2. Purpose of the tripTwo items were used to measure the purpose of the

trip. First, respondents were asked to state the mainpurpose of their trip by selecting one of the purposes ofthe trip options from the list provided. Afterwards, theywere asked to state whether their trip had any otherpurposes by selecting all that apply from the list pro-vided. The provided list for both questions included thefollowing nine options; (1) business/professional, (2) con-

vention/conference/trade shows, (3) leisure/recreation/holidays/sightseeing, (4) visit friends/relatives, (5) govern-ment a!airs/military, (6) study/teaching, (7) religion/pilgrimages, (8) health treatment, and (9) other, specify.

In this study, travelers from each country were cat-egorized based on the four main purposes of their travel:business travelers, convention travelers, leisure & VFRtravelers, and leisure (vacation) travelers (Table 1). AsTable 1 shows, majority of the travelers from each coun-try visited the United States for the purpose of leisure& VFR followed by vacation, business, and convention.

3.1.3. Information sources usedRespondents were asked to indicate how they obtained

the information used to plan their trip. Respondentsprovided a list of 12 information sources and asked toselect all sources that they used to plan their trip. Theseinformation sources were (1) airlines directly, (2) in-#ightinformation systems, (3) national government touristo$ce, (4) state/city travel o$ce, (5) friends or relatives, (6)travel agency, (7) travel guides, (8) tour company, (9)corporate travel department, (10) newspapers/magazines,(11) TV/radio, and (12) personal computer.

3.1.4. Data analysisThe list of external information sources used by each

category of respondents from each country, as well as thepercentage of respondents that used each source is identi-"ed by cross tabulating the external information sourcesby the category of respondents. After identifying the ex-ternal information sources used by international travelersto the United States, a canonical correspondence analysiswas utilized in order to simultaneously analyze the respon-dents external information search behavior and to identifysigni"cant di!erences among respondents.

Correspondence analysis technique was selected as theresult of the categorical nature of the data and its advant-ages of utilizing multivariate category. Correspondenceanalysis is an interdependence technique that uses thesingular value decomposition to analyze contingencytables from multinominal data (Thompson, 1995). Themain interest of the method lies in the characterization ofthe structure of the row and/or column variables. Itsmost direct application involves portraying the corre-spondence of categories of variables, particularly thosemeasured in nominal measurement scales. The bene"t ofcorrespondence analysis is in its unique abilities for rep-resenting rows and columns in a joint space (Hair,Anderson, Tatham & Black, 1998).

Correspondence analysis has several features that en-able researchers to have a better understanding of therelationships among variables. The most important fea-ture of correspondence analysis is its multivariate naturewhich enables multivariate treatment of multiple cat-egorical data simultaneously. The multivariate nature ofcorrespondence analysis can reveal relationships that

D. Gursoy, J.S. Chen / Tourism Management 21 (2000) 583}590 585

Table 2Determining the appropriate dimensionality

Dimension Singularvalue

Inertia Proportionexplained

Cumulativeproportion

1 0.41635 0.17335 0.651 0.6512 0.28530 0.08139 0.306 0.9573 0.07168 0.00514 0.019 0.9764 0.05948 0.00354 0.013 0.9895 0.03784 0.00143 0.005 0.9946 0.02872 0.00082 0.003 0.9977 0.01907 0.00036 0.001 0.9998 0.01517 0.00023 0.001 19 0.01048 0.00011 0 1

10 0.00204 0 0 111 0.00045 0 0 1

Total 0.26638 1 1

would not be detected in a series of pairwise comparisonsof variables. Correspondence analysis also helps to showhow variables are related, not just the relationship exists.The joint graphical display obtained from correspond-ence analysis can help in detecting structural relation-ships among the variable categories (Ho!man & Franke,1986).`A distinct advantage of correspondence analysis over

other methods yielding joint graphical displays is that itproduces two dual displays whose row and column geo-metries have similar interpretations, facilitating analysisand detection of relationships. In other multivariateapproaches to graphical data representation, this dualityis not presenta (Ho!man & Franke, 1986, p. 215).

Correspondence analysis is basically a special case oftraditional principal component analysis, except for themeasurement of distance. Given the nominal scale of thedata, correspondence analysis constructs a space struc-tured by chi-square distance and proceeds to identifya reduced-space representation of the data based on theidenti"ed principal components (axes). The success ofthis type of data analysis stems from the fact that, inde-pendent of any probabilistic model, the chi-squared dis-tance is the only metric data that is in agreement with thedistributional equivalence concept, a universal principlebased on the symmetry relations that exist with nominaldata (Benzecri, 1979).

4. Results

The results from a correspondence analysis exhibitedthe singular values and the proportion explained by eachestimated dimension (Table 2). In a correspondence anal-ysis, the maximum number of dimensions that can beestimated is one less than the smaller number of rows orcolumns (in this case, 12!1"11). As a result, 11-dimen-sional solutions were calculated, respectively (Table 2).

However, a dimension will only be accepted if it hassingular values (eigenvalues) greater than 0.20 (Hair et al.,1998). In this study, only two dimensions out of 11dimensions produced by correspondence analysis hada singular value greater than 0.20 and these two dimen-sions collectively explained 95.7 per cent of the variance,(Table 2). The "rst dimension explained 65.1 per cent ofthe variance and a second dimension explained 30.6 percent of the variance. A two-dimensional solution wasselected for the analysis.

Table 3 shows the dimensions and their correspond-ence to external information sources. Two external in-formation sources have low "t values and less than 50 percent of variance in those external information sources isexplained by both dimensions. These external informa-tion sources are in-#ight information (14.5 per cent) andnational government tourist o$ces (33.7 per cent), conse-quently, these external information sources are notincluded in the analysis.

The principal coordinates of external informationsources (Table 3) and the traveler category by country(Table 4) pro"le points from the correspondence analysisin two-dimensional solution are plotted in Fig. 1. Theplots are merged into one joint display through a canoni-cal normalization procedure. Fig. 1 exhibits the jointdisplay of traveler categories and external informationsources de"ned by the "rst two principal axes. Twoprincipal axes account for 95.7 per cent of the inertia inthe data. Contribution to inertia of each external in-formation sources indicate that the "rst dimension wasde"ned by airlines, corporate travel departments, friendsand relatives, newspapers and magazines, travel guides,and TV and radio (Table 3). The "rst principal axisseparates corporate travel departments from airlines,friends and relatives, newspapers and magazines, travelguides, and TV and radio (Fig. 1). Therefore, the "rstdimension was labeled as `leisure/businessa dimension.

The second dimension (second principal axis in Fig. 1)was de"ned primarily by personal computers, state/citytourism o$ces, tour companies and travel agencies. Thesecond principal axis separates personal computers andstate/city tourism o$ces from tour companies and travelagencies. Therefore, the second dimension was identi"edas `dependent/independenta dimension.

The explained variance by dimension indicated thatthe "rst principal axis explained almost all the variancein airlines, corporate travel departments, friendsand relatives, newspapers and magazines, travel guides,and TV and radio, the lowest explained variance being0.804 (Table 2). However, the second principal axis ac-counted for almost all variances in personal computerexternal information search (0.864) while it explaineda lower amount of variance in state/city tourism o$ces(0.582), tour companies (0.408) and travel agencies(0.546). Tour companies had the worst "t in the seconddimension.


Table 3Dimensions and their correspondence to external information sources

External information sources Coordinates Contribution to inertia Explained by dimension Total

I II I II I II

Airlines !0.390 0.090 0.037 0.003 0.819 0.030 0.849Corporate travel departments !1.171 !0.645 0.395 0.192 0.804 0.183 0.998Personal computer 0.092 !0.544 0.001 0.039 0.036 0.864 0.900Friends and relatives 0.666 0.309 0.107 0.034 0.824 0.122 0.946In-#ight information 0.231 0.162 0.001 0.000 0.118 0.027 0.145Nat. Gov. T 0.347 !0.027 0.003 0.000 0.335 0.001 0.337Newspapers and magazines 0.812 0.365 0.063 0.018 0.832 0.115 0.947State/city travel o$ces 0.999 !1.431 0.178 0.534 0.414 0.582 0.995Tour company 0.356 0.449 0.012 0.027 0.373 0.408 0.781Travel agency !0.240 0.331 0.053 0.146 0.419 0.546 0.965Travel guides 0.782 0.067 0.119 0.001 0.888 0.004 0.892TV/radio 1.023 0.337 0.031 0.005 0.852 0.063 0.916

Table 4Dimensions and their correspondence to travel categories

ObjectsCoordinates

Contributionto inertia

Explainedby dimension

Total

I II I II I II

German travelers to the United StatesBusiness !0.518 !0.816 0.051 0.184 0.360 0.612 0.972Convention !0.216 !0.759 0.009 0.157 0.092 0.775 0.866VFR 0.920 !0.434 0.223 0.072 0.865 0.132 0.997Leisure 0.972 !0.411 0.266 0.069 0.884 0.108 0.992

British travelers to the United StatesBusines !0.798 !0.026 0.107 0.000 0.930 0.001 0.931Convention !0.483 0.232 0.042 0.014 0.763 0.121 0.884VFR 0.286 0.693 0.016 0.141 0.187 0.753 0.940Leisure 0.336 0.692 0.023 0.144 0.241 0.700 0.941

French travelers to the United StatesBusiness !899 !0.167 0.137 0.007 0.948 0.022 0.970Convention !0.888 !0.023 0.125 0.000 0.983 0.000 0.983VFR !0.012 0.591 000 0.099 0.001 0.840 0.841Leisure 0.065 0.614 0.001 0.111 0.015 0.874 0.889

The joint display (Fig. 1) revealed, by their proximity,those travelers having similar external informationsearch pro"les. Similarly, individuals close together inthe display share similar patterns of external informationsearch and thus constituted likely market segments basedon external information search behavior. Individualswho share the same point in the display have identicalpro"les. As for the type of travelers, German businessand convention travelers' points were very close to eachother. German leisure & VFR and leisure (vacation)travelers almost shared the same points. French businessand convention travelers', and British business and con-vention travelers' points were very close to each other.French and British leisure & VFR, and leisure travelers

almost shared the same point. In sum, this study identi-"ed four distinct market segments based on respondents'information search patterns. These are German businessand convention travelers, German Leisure & VFR andleisure (vacation) travelers, British and French businessand convention travelers, and British and French leisure& VFR and leisure (vacation) traveler market segments.Each of these market segments had the similar externalinformation search patterns.

In reference to information sources, German travelersused personal computers, and city/state travel depart-ments for external information search relatively moreoften than British and French travelers did. British andFrench business and convention travelers used airlinesand travel agencies as an external information sourcerelatively more frequently than other travelers did.British and French leisure & VFR and leisure (vacation)travelers were more likely to use tour companies, news-papers and magazines relatively more than others. Inaddition, it seemed that French and British leisure& VFR and leisure (vacation) travelers tended to listen totheir friends and relatives for external information searchpurpose.

5. Conclusion

The analysis of external information search behaviorof German, British, and French travelers manifested thatthere were two dimensions of information search behav-ior. The "rst one was business/leisure dimension andthe second one was dependent/independent informationsearch behavior. The analysis also exhibited that therewere four distinct market segments based on the informa-tion search behavior.

The "rst segment was German business and conven-tion travel segment; this segment demonstrated an


Fig. 1. Two-dimensional correspondence analysis of travel categories by country and the external information sources.

independent and business information search pattern.The second was German leisure & VFR and leisuretravel segment. Both segments browsed internet relative-ly more often than other travelers did and they were alsomore likely to utilize state/city travel o$ces. The distinc-tion between these two segments was that German busi-ness and convention travel market used corporate traveldepartments as an external information source relativelymore whereas German leisure & VFR and leisure (vaca-tion) segment used travel guides as an external informa-tion source relatively more. The third was French andBritish business and convention travel segment; this seg-ment used airlines as an external information sourcerelatively more. The fourth was French and British lei-

sure & VFR and leisure (vacation) travel segment; thissegment utilized tour companies, newspapers and maga-zines, and friends and relatives as an external informationsource relatively more often than other travelers did. AllBritish and French travelers depended on travel agenciesfor external information relatively more than Germantravelers did.

5.1. Marketing implications

What do the "ndings of this study mean? Can wedraw some practical implications for promoting the UStourism resources? Can tourism marketing managers usesuch aggregate information to increase awareness levels


of what US has to o!er and convert potential interna-tional visitor markets into actual demand? What type ofinformation sources should be deployed to reach andinform international visitors at their points of origin?This analysis of external information search behavior ofinternational visitors provides some answers to the abovequestions.

The "ndings of this study revealed that British andFrench travelers information search behavior are alike.Therefore, similar marketing strategies should be de-veloped for these two markets. Tourism marketers whowant to reach all British and French travelers shouldfocus on travel agencies because the "ndings indicatedthat travel agencies are utilized by all British and Frenchtravelers, regardless of the purpose of the trip, relativelymore than German travelers. Establishing good relation-ships with French and British travel agencies andagency's franchisors to further penetrate into the marketand to sway potential travelers into actual demand.

German travelers are likely to utilize internet andcity/state travel o$ces relatively more than British andFrench travelers. Developing web pages that containsextensive amount of information about the destinationand the activities that the destination has to o!er, andsecure on-line booking services may help to increase thenumber of German visitors to a destination. In addition,tourism marketers need to work closely with city/statetravel o$ces to attract more German travelers. Destina-tions should provide a large number of brochures inGerman to city/state travel o$ces in Germany. Thesebrochures should be made speci"c to the destinations.Additional information on attractions near the destina-tion should also be included in information packetsto make the destination more attractive. To ensurethe distribution of these brochures, tourism marketersneed to establish good relationships with city/state travelo$ces in Germany.

Tourism marketers who wants to reach British andFrench leisure & VFR and leisure travelers need to workclosely with British and French tour operators becausethese markets are heavy users of tour operators as anexternal information source. Tourism marketers may es-tablish good business relationships with tour operatorsby developing products that may satisfy the needs of touroperators. In addition, these travelers use newspapersand magazines as an external information source;tourism marketers may need to work with public relationmanagers to ensure good coverage in British and Frenchnewspapers and magazines. Inviting journalists and col-umnists from United Kingdom and France may bea feasible idea for getting good coverage in British andFrench media. The positive word of mouth is also veryimportant for attracting more French and Britishtravelers because British and French travelers heavilyrely on friends and relatives for information. Therefore,a special attention is needed to be given to customer

satisfaction and complain handling. Customer satisfac-tion should be constantly monitored in order to identifythe problem areas and make necessary modi"cations toenhance customer satisfaction. German leisure & VFRand leisure travel segment uses travel guides for informa-tion relatively more than French and British. Therefore,it is necessary to work closely with German travel-guidepublishing companies to amplify the quality of coveragein the travel guides.

French and British business and convention marketsutilize airlines as an external information source relative-ly more than German business and convention travelers.Therefore, marketers targeting this segment need to workwith airlines to increase the number of business andconvention travelers from France and United Kingdom.German business and convention travelers uses corpo-rate travel departments relatively more than French andBritish business and convention travelers. To attractmore German business and convention travelers, tourismmarketers need to establish good relationships with Ger-man corporate travel agencies and the corporate traveldepartments of German companies. For example, o!er-ing incentives to corporate travel agents and corporatetravel departments' employees may be helpful.

5.2. Limitations

It is important to consider the limitations of the study.The results of this study described di!erences amongFrench, British and German travelers' informationsearch behavior. However, the evidence advanced heredid not permit an explanation of why those di!erencesexist. Therefore, a thorough examination of why thosedi!erences exist is necessary. In this study, culture isequated with nationality. However, this is a very broadde"nition of culture. Subcultures within a national groupmay exist and they may have di!erent information searchpatterns in planning an overseas trip. Moreover,travelers' culture can also be de"ned as a culture of beinga business traveler, a culture of being a vacation-taker orholiday-maker which in part transcends nationality. Theabove two sets of cultures may constitute distinct sub-segments which researcher and practitioners shouldfurther investigate in the future study.

This study only analyzed 12 external information sour-ces used by German, British and French business, con-vention, leisure & VFR and leisure (vacation) travelers tothe US. Other information sources need to be studied,especially the culture speci"c external information sour-ces. In addition, tourism scholars may consider conduct-ing research on other subjects pertaining to tourists'choice behavior such as decision rules * how interna-tional tourists make a travel decision. The resulting datashould help practitioners deliver more e!ective and ac-tionable marketing strategies.


References

Beatty, S. E., & Smith, S. M. (1986). External search e!ort: An investiga-tion across several product categories. Journal of Consumer Re-search, 14, 83}95.

Benzecri, J. P. (1979). Practical aspects of correspondence analysis. InBulletin de l'ADDAD (6th ed.) (pp. 45}55). Paris: Association pour leDevelopment et la Di!usion de l'Analyse des Donnees Laboratoirede Statistique Tour.

Bloch, P. H., Sherrell, D. L., & Ridgway, N. M. (1986). Consumersearch: An extended framework. Journal of Consumer Research, 13,119}126.

Engel, J., Blackwell, R. D., & Miniard, P. (1990). Consumer behavior (6thed.). Fort Worth, TX: Dryden.

Etzel, M. J., & Wahlers, R. G. (1985). The use of requestedpromotional material by pleasure travelers. Journal of Travel Re-search, 23(4), 2}6.

Filiatrault, P., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (1980). Joint purchasing decisions:A comparison of in#uence structure in family and couple decisionmaking units. Journal of Consumer Research, 7, 131}140.

Fodness, D., & Murray, B. (1997). Tourist information search. Annals ofTourism Research, 24(3), 503}523.

Fodness, D., & Murray, B. (1998). A typology of tourist infor-mation search strategies. Journal of Travel Research, 37,108}119.

Hair Jr., J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998).Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice-Hall.

Ho!man, D. L., & Franke, G. R. (1986). Correspondence analysis:Graphical representation of categorical data in marketing research.Journal of Marketing Research, 23, 213}227.

Jenkins, R. L. (1978). Family vacation decision making. Journal ofTravel Research, 16, 2}7.

Perdue, R. R. (1985). Segmenting state information inquirers by timingof destination decision and previous experience. Journal of TravelResearch, 23, 6}11.

Snepenger, D., & Snepenger, M. (1993). Information search by pleasuretravelers. In M. A. Kahn, M. D. Olsen, & T. Var, Encyclopedia ofhospitality and tourism (pp. 830}835). New York: Van NostrandReinhold.

Snepenger, D., Meged, K., Snelling, M., & Worrall, K. (1990). Informa-tion search strategies by destination-namKve tourists. Journal TravelResearch, 29(1), 13}16.

Thompson, P. A. (1995). Correspondence analysis in statistical packageprograms. The American Statistician, 49, 310}316.

United States Department of Commerce: International Trade Adminis-tration (1998). In-yight survey of international air travelers: Overseastravelers to the United States, January}December 1997. Washington,DC: United States Department of Commerce: International TradeAdministration.

Uysal, M., McDonald, C. D., & Reid, L. J. (1990). Sources of informa-tion used by international visitors to US parks and natural areas.Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 8(1), 51}59.

Woodside, A. G., & Ronkainen, I. A. (1980). Vacation planning seg-ments: Self planning vs. users of motor club and travel agents.Annals of Tourism Research, 7, 385}393.


Competitive analysis of cross cultural information search behavior

Documents

Transcript of Competitive analysis of cross cultural information search behavior