Description
The consumer is currently feeling the consequences of the global economic crisis, leading to
decreased spending by tourists. An important economizing strategy appears to be that vacationers do
not give up their holiday but are likely to travel closer to home, a phenomenon called ‘‘staycation’’, but
this is just one of a variety of options vacationers can use. If they make economies within a holiday, where
do they get their ideas about economizing from? The purpose of this paper is to study information
searching from the perspective of economizing on vacations.
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research
Economizing on vacations: the role of information searching
Fred Bronner Robert de Hoog
Article information:
To cite this document:
Fred Bronner Robert de Hoog, (2013),"Economizing on vacations: the role of information searching", International J ournal of Culture,
Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 7 Iss 1 pp. 28 - 41
Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506181311301336
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 22:20 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 25 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 761 times since 2013*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
J unjie Hong, (2011),"Testing geographic and economic distance of agglomeration economies", J ournal of Chinese Economic and Foreign
Trade Studies, Vol. 4 Iss 1 pp. 55-59http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17544401111106815
Charles G. Smith, Stephen M. Hills, Gail Arch, (2003),"Political economy and the transition from planned to market economies", European
Business Review, Vol. 15 Iss 2 pp. 116-122http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09555340310464740
Richard Berner, (2004),"A global economic outlook: Interview with Richard Berner, Managing Director, Chief US Economist, Morgan
Stanley", Strategic Direction, Vol. 20 Iss 3 pp. 15-16http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02580540410524172
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:115632 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about
how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/
authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than
290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional
customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and
also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Economizing on vacations: the role of
information searching
Fred Bronner and Robert de Hoog
Abstract
Purpose – The consumer is currently feeling the consequences of the global economic crisis, leading to
decreased spending by tourists. An important economizing strategy appears to be that vacationers do
not give up their holiday but are likely to travel closer to home, a phenomenon called ‘‘staycation’’, but
this is just one of a variety of options vacationers can use. If they make economies within a holiday, where
do they get their ideas about economizing from? The purpose of this paper is to study information
searching from the perspective of economizing on vacations.
Design/methodology/approach – The work reported on is a survey of Dutch vacationers who stated
that they economized on their 2009 holiday.
Findings – The research shows that different sources have strong and weak points in relation to the
different subdecisions that constitute a vacation. Information sources are used in concert for
subdecisions; the strongest joint use involves marketer-generated sites and e-WOM, and brochures and
travel guides. In the family context, a tendency is found to use more information sources the more
economizing decisions are discussed.
Practical implications – For tour operators, it seems to make sense to make it easier to compare
vacation alternatives that differ on subdecisions such as booking moment and period, and to offer a
range of options from expensive to inexpensive. Also, making options more ?exible in terms of
downgrading on vacation features could assist vacationers who want to economize.
Consumer-generated sources could focus more on providing information and comparison
opportunities for subdecisions.
Originality/value – Information searching is a widely studied area in vacation decision making. Two
extensive literature reviews give an overview of factors in?uencing this search process. In this literature,
a contribution on information searching to obtain economizing ideas in dif?cult times is absent. In this
article, with the aid of ?ve research questions, the role of information searching in relation to economizing
on vacations is investigated.
Keywords The Netherlands, Holidays, Tourists, Consumer behaviour, Decision making,
Information searching, Vacation decision making, Economic crisis, Economizing behaviour,
Information sources
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction: pre-vacation information searching in general
For most product decisions, the consumer considers information searching to be desirable
and even necessary for choosing a ‘‘good’’ product. In the pre-decision phase, consumers
search for information mainly to reduce uncertainty and risk (Kim et al., 2007). They want to
take a decision which they are satis?ed with and do not regret afterwards. Information
searching increases the likelihood of arriving at such a ‘‘good’’ decision. In line with general
consumer behavior, tourists also consider information acquisition necessary for selecting a
destination, accommodation, a means of transport and speci?c on-vacation activities
(Gursoy and McCleary, 2004). Fodness and Murray (1997, p. 505) summarize the primary
motive for undertaking information searching as follows: ‘‘In short, tourists seek to enhance
PAGE 28
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013, pp. 28-41, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1750-6182 DOI 10.1108/17506181311301336
Fred Bronner and
Robert de Hoog are based
at the Faculty of Social and
Behavioral Sciences,
University of Amsterdam,
Amsterdam, The
Netherlands.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
the quality of their trip by decreasing the level of associated uncertainty through information
searching’’.
Research into tourist information-search processes has developed into one of the most
widely studied areas in tourism (Fodness and Murray, 1997). This not only because the need
to obtain more insight into consumer behavior from an academic perspective, but also to
support the tourism industry in developing effective marketing communications strategies
(Hyde, 2006, 2008). As Pan and Fesenmaier (2006, p. 809) state, ‘‘Tourism is an
information-intensive industry whose organizations rely on the communication with tourists
through various channels to market their products and build customer relationships’’. So the
conclusion is that tourists’ information-searching behavior is important for tourism scholars
as well as for practitioners (Fodness and Murray, 1997).
Hyde (2006) provides an overview of some of the most cited studies in the ?eld of tourism
information-searching. He concludes that researchers addressed six research issues over
the past three decades:
1. sources used;
2. factors in?uencing the choice of sources;
3. amount of pre-vacation information searching;
4. factors in?uencing this amount;
5. timing of information-searching in the process of planning a vacation; and
6. relation between the amount of information-searching and degree of planning of the
vacation.
Grøn?aten (2009) also presents a literature review, but is more focused on the factors
in?uencing travelers’ information-search strategies.
A wide range of variables have been found to in?uence the choice of search strategies. At a
more abstract level, these variables are categorized as personal variables (age, gender),
situational variables (family composition, trip phase) and tourism product variables (travel
style, mode of travel, activity preferences). The articles by Hyde (2006) and Grøn?aten
(2009) together present a very complete picture of vacation information-search studies
between 1975 and 2009. Correcting for overlap, 70 studies are quoted and described
altogether. Summarizing, in these 70 studies the focus is on information search to reduce
uncertainty, but one speci?c topic is lacking: the role of information searching as a means of
obtaining ideas for economizing on a vacation. The research described in this article takes
this new, but highly topical, look at the role of information searching.
2. Information searching in times of a recession
The lack of attention to the relation between economizing decisions and information
searching is not very surprising because for a long period many people lived in times of
prosperity. The current global economic crisis, which started in 2007 in the USA and has
spread to the Eurozone since September 2008, signi?cantly changed this situation. The
consumer was hit hard in 2009/2010 by unemployment, loss of income, insecurity of savings,
and depreciation of shares. Tourism expenditures as part of discretionary consumer
spending experienced greater falls than other consumer spending (Sheldon and Dwyer,
2010). The moment of recovery is still unclear. As Smeral (2010, p. 37) states: ’’The recovery
process might take longer in tourism than in production and trade because there is no
stock-building process going on in tourism’’.
Many vacationers do not opt for a strategy of giving up their holiday and are likely to travel
closer to home, a phenomenon called ‘‘staycation’’ by Papatheodorou et al.(2010). In The
Netherlands too (Continuous Vacation Panel, 2010), data indicate that Dutch vacationers do
not use a ‘‘giving up’’ strategy, but seem to opt for a ‘‘staycation’’ strategy. In 2009, the
market share of more far-off destinations like Spain, Greece and Turkey declined
substantially and the market share of countries closer to home, like Germany and Belgium,
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 29
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
increased in terms of spending outlays. In addition, many other ways of economizing on a
holiday can be adopted by vacationers. These are related to speci?c features of a holiday,
like the nature of the accommodation, activities on the spot and other subdecisions.
If vacationers economize within a holiday, the interesting question is: from where do they get
their ideas about economizing and from which information sources? Do differences exist for
different subdecisions that constitute a holiday: are vacationers using other sources to
obtain ideas for a subdecision like ?nding a cheaper hotel, for example, than for a
subdecision like opting for a cheaper activity on the spot (bus trip instead of boat trip)?
Answers to these general questions are relevant for tourism research and tourism practice.
For the former they provide insight into a phenomenon that has not been investigated
recently; for the latter they can help suppliers of vacation services to target their messages in
a way that anticipates on the need to economize on holidays.
Theories about economizing on travel expenditures are rare. Some studies date from the
income dip at the end of the 1970s. These studies concentrate only on how economic
recession affects tourism volume and tourism markets (Frechtling, 1982), and not on
individual decision-making. Also, these ‘‘old’’ studies pay no attention to the use of
information sources in the context of an economic recession. Consequently, research into
crisis related economizing behavior and vacation decision-making is more or less
pioneering work. In terms of the six research issues identi?ed by Hyde (2006), the focus of
the research is on which sources are used, factors in?uencing the choice of sources and
factors in?uencing the amount and variety of used sources, all of them in the context of
deciding about economizing on vacations. In the next section, ?ve more speci?c research
questions are formulated.
3. Research questions
Simply asking whether a vacationer economized on a holiday does not make much sense if
one does not also ask about which aspect of a holiday was economized on. A holiday trip is
considered as a bundle of attributes about which separate decisions must be made, which
are seen as subdecisions (Litvin et al., 2004). Thus, the individual must make an expenditure
allocation decision with regard to each attribute in a given bundle. A vacationer can
economize on attributes x and y and decide to spend the usual amount on attribute or
subdecision z.
The literature provides some input for the most relevant subdecisions that offer saving
opportunities. In the ?rst place, tourists can travel closer to home and switch to closer
destinations. Papatheodorou et al. (2010) call this phenomenon ‘‘staycation’’. Other
attributes are shorter length of stay and trading down (lower-cost carriers, lower-standard
hotels, business class to economy; see Sheldon and Dwyer, 2010). Another option is to save
by choosing another moment of booking (Smeral, 2010). Also, tourists can reduce expenses
on recreational activities on the spot. Rosenbaum and Spears (2006) make a distinction
between three types of these expenses:
1. sightseeing (boat tour, bus tour);
2. entertainment (dancing, nightclub, cinema, cultural landmarks, concerts); and
3. shopping.
One can economize on different combinations of these three types of ‘‘on the spot’’
expenses.
Based on this literature, a set of subdecisions on which information searching for
economizing purposes could occur was included in the questionnaire.
Focusing on the use of information sources for obtaining ideas about economizing on these
subdecisions informs ?ve research questions.
RQ1. Which information sources do consumers use for obtaining ideas about how to
economize on a subdecision?
PAGE 30
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Bronner and de Hoog (2010) divide information sources into marketer-generated sources,
consumer-generated sources and neutral sources. Within this categorization, a distinction
can be made between printed material, face-to-face contacts and websites.
Marketer-generated sources are then, for example, websites of a tour operator or airline
company, brochures, and personal contact with a representative of a travel agency.
Consumer-generated sources are review sites on which vacationers post their experiences
and comments (e-WOM, or electronic word-of-mouth), information from friends and
colleagues (WOM, or word-of-mouth). Travel guides are an example of neutral sources. The
literature shows that vacationers use a variety of information sources (Fodness and Murray,
1999) in pre-vacation decision-making. Does this variety also occur when searching for
information for economizing decisions?
RQ2. Do information sources have strong and weak positions in different
subdecisions?
Not only is the frequency of use of an information source important, but the relative position,
or strength or weakness, amidst other information sources matters too. Conceptually this
can be seen as the ‘‘market share’’ of a source for providing information about economizing
opportunities. One question is whether a difference exists in market share, and if this is
related to more general features of a subdecision.
In line with Nelson (1974), product (sub)decisions are classi?able as possessing either
search or experience qualities. Search qualities are those that the consumer can determine
by inspection prior to purchase, and experience qualities are those that can not be easily
determined prior to purchase (Nelson, 1974, p. 730). In holiday choice, some subdecisions
are more experience-determined, like quality of service in restaurants and hotels, and some
subdecisions are more search-determined, like location of an accommodation (Bronner and
de Hoog, 2010). Are certain information sources used more for obtaining ideas for
economizing on experience-determined subdecisions and others for more search-like
subdecisions? In general, what information sources give economizing ideas concerning
what kind of subdecisions?
RQ3. Does differences occur in the variety of information sources used for each
subdecision?
Fodness and Murray (1999) focus not on the speci?c information sources used, but on the
number of information sources, which also indicates the variety in using them. In this period,
the Internet was not as in?uential as ten years later, so their results are dif?cult to compare
with more recent ones, which is nevertheless interesting to do. In their study, from a list of 11
sources identi?ed from the tourism literature, travelers indicated which information sources
they used to plan their pleasure trips. The average number of sources used was 3.09, with a
substantial amount of variation between segments. Vacationers using personal experience
as an information source use fewer sources (on average 1.89 sources), while those who rely
on print use more sources (on average 4.35 sources). So Fodness and Murray found
variation in the number of information sources used, which makes looking for differences in
the number of information sources used for obtaining economizing ideas interesting.
RQ4. Which combinations of information sources are used across subdecisions?
RQ3 aims at separate subdecisions. When looking across subdecisions, a question is if
vacationers use one and the same information source for each subdecision, if they use one
at all, or if they change the information source if the subdecision is different. More
speci?cally, the question is: if one uses e-WOM, for example, does one also use WOM? This
co-occurrence of information sources across subdecisions sheds light on strongly or weakly
linked usage patterns.
RQ5. Does the amount of discussion in a family about economizing on a subdecision
associate with the number of information sources used?
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 31
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Family democracy increased during the last 20 years, and led to a growth of joint
decision-making in families. In a Dutch study, data about the family decision-making
process are available and they allow a comparison over time and over domains. In nearly all
domains, the number of joint decision processes increased between 1985 and 2002
(Bronner, 2006). Compared with other domains, vacation decision-making is a very
collective process between husband and wife and between parents and children. Mottiar
and Quinn (2004, p. 157) also compared vacation choice with other products in terms of
decision-making within households. They conclude: ‘‘this research has gone further by
showing that this vacation decision is more pronounced as a joint decision than even
consumption of equally large and important items such as cars and electronic and ?nancial
products’’. Bronner and de Hoog (2008, p. 977) conclude too that holiday choice has
evolved over the last 30 years into being very much a joint decision: ‘‘in which family
members discuss, seek out information to use in the discussion, employ
disagreement-resolution strategies and come ?nally to a joint choice’’.
Concerning information sources used during this joint decision-making process, Bronner
and de Hoog (2011) found that a wide variety of information sources play a role in this
process. However, this is based on the ‘‘regular’’ pre-vacation information search process,
but how do things stand in relation to discussing economizing ideas in the family?
Summarizing this section: information searching is a widely studied area in vacation
decision-making. Two extensive literature reviews give an overviewof factors in?uencing this
search process. In this literature, a contribution on information searching to obtain
economizing ideas in dif?cult times is absent. In this article, with the aid of ?ve research
questions, the role of information searching in relation to economizing on vacations is
investigated.
4. Research design and data collection
The sample in this research is a sub-sample fromthe sample of the Dutch ‘‘Continu Vakantie
Onderzoek’’ (CVO – Continuous Vacation Panel; see also Bargeman and van der Poel,
2006; Bronner and de Hoog, 2008). This panel, which is refreshed annually, consists of
respondents who report on their vacation behavior four times a year. The CVO data are
weighted for socio-demographics, resulting in a sample that can be considered as
representative of the Dutch population for variables crucial to the vacation decision. All
tour-operators in The Netherlands make use of these data, and the study is considered to be
the standard for obtaining insight into holiday plans and decisions. The ?eldwork is carried
out by TNS NIPO, one of the leading Dutch market research agencies. For data collection,
computer-assisted self-interviewing (CASI) is used. Respondents can answer the questions
at home at a time that is convenient to them and can take the time they require to answer the
questions. This customer-friendly approach increases response and data quality (Bronner
and Kuijlen, 2007).
Within this CVO panel, all participants who took a main summer holiday in The Netherlands
or abroad (n ¼ 3; 195) are asked, just after their holiday, the following ?lter question:
When you look back at your recent summer holiday, did you, when compared with the last few
years, spent a lesser amount of money, a greater amount of money, or the same amount of
money?
Those who answered ‘‘a lesser amount of money’’ are selected for further questions. These
include ten subdecisions of a holiday, which are candidates for economizing and play a role
in vacation decision-making. The choice of these subdecisions is based on earlier research
carried out in The Netherlands (Bronner and de Hoog, 2008, 2011). These respondents are
asked whether they economized on this subdecision or not. The subdecisions include
shorter length of stay; changing the destination (other country); choosing a cheaper tour
operator; choosing a self-arranged vacation instead of using a tour operator; changing the
period (earlier or later); selecting an earlier or later booking moment; using another means of
transport; carrying out fewer or other activities on the spot (with examples taken from
Rosenbaum and Spears, 2006); choosing another type of accommodation; and choosing a
PAGE 32
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
cheaper alternative within the same type of accommodation. For each of the subdecisions,
economizers are ?ltered and asked the following question about gathering information:
You economized by spending less money on . . . [subdecision x ]; for this decision, did you use
the information sources listed below: yes/no.
These information sources are:
B information on websites of airline companies, tour operators and other suppliers of
holiday accommodation;
B information on review websites where other vacationers evaluate, give opinions and
advice (e.g. Tripadvisor);
B tips and advice of friends, relatives and acquaintances;
B brochures of travel organizations;
B advertising in newspapers, television and radio; and
B travel guides.
All vacationers with a partner and who economized on a subdecision were asked whether
discussion took place with partners and/or children about this speci?c economizing
decision. A ?ve-point rating scale was employed, ranging from ‘‘A lot of deliberation’’ to ‘‘No
deliberation at all’’.
5. Results
The ?rst relevant data appear in Table I, which shows the composition of the sample, in
particular the number of vacationers who economized on their main summer holiday in 2009
in The Netherlands.
From Table I, about 23 percent of all vacationers in the sample economized on their main
summer holiday. Of these, 58 economized, but on other subdecisions than the ten
prede?ned ones listed above.
5.1 RQ1. Information sources used
The ?rst research question addresses the overall use of information sources by vacationers
when deciding about economizing on a subdecision. Table II shows the percentage of
vacationers who use an information source for deciding about a subdecision.
Marketer-generated sources (websites, brochures and advertising) are used most
frequently (on average 40 percent), with their websites clearly in the lead. This is
probably related to the fact that, in any case, these sources contain the most information
about such options as other and cheaper accommodation, booking moment and whether or
not tour operators are cheaper. Consumer-generated sources are second, with, somewhat
surprisingly, WOM being used more frequently than e-WOM. A possible explanation for this
is that e-WOM sources will mainly report about their vacations in the past, a moment when
writing about economizing options was not a topic that was the main interest of other
vacationers, although costs played a role in holiday decisions all along. In this respect, WOM
has the bene?t of being more adaptive to changing questions that emerge when economic
conditions suddenly alter. Third-party sources are not used as often as the other sources;
Table I Composition of the sample
Number of
respondents
Percentage of
respondents
Overall sample 3,195 100
Economizers 734 23
Those who economized on at least one of ten
pre-de?ned subdecisions 676 21
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 33
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
obviously they are even less ?exible than marketer-generated sources and
consumer-generated sources. In addition, they will not be very helpful for deciding on
economizing options like ‘‘shorter length of stay’’, ‘‘changing the period’’, ‘‘selecting a later or
earlier booking moment’’ and ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour operator’’, which limit their usefulness.
5.2 RQ2. Strengths and weaknesses of information sources
The second research question focuses on the relative position of each information source:
do information sources stand out more or less clearly, or, do they have strong and weak
positions, for different subdecisions?
In order to obtain insight into the relative position or ‘‘market share’’ of the different
information sources used when economizing on a subdecision, a strength-weakness
analysis of information sources is performed. This analysis uses a method frequently
employed in brand strength and weakness analysis as developed by Marchant (1979). This
analysis entails the following steps:
1. Sumup the rowpercentages and the column percentages in Table II (see last rowand last
column in Table II).
2. Overall, information source and a subdecision are linked 843 times.
3. Marketer-generated websites get 226=843 ¼ 26:8 percent of the links; this can be
interpreted as the overall ‘‘market share’’ of marketer-generated websites.
4. Concerning the subdecision ‘‘Length of stay’’, marketer-generated websites get 22=84 ¼
26:2 percent of the links, which can be interpreted as the ‘‘market share’’ for that
particular subdecision.
5. Next, the percentage 26.2 percent (see step 4) is compared with the percentage 26.8
percent (see step 3Þ ¼ 20:6, which is interpreted as the difference between the overall
market share and the market share for this speci?c subdecision. Negative outcomes are
seen as a weakness and positive outcomes as a strength of the information source. In this
example the difference is small, so no clear strength or weakness of marketer-generated
websites for the subdecision ‘‘Length of stay’’ is found.
The results of this analysis are shown in Table III.
Table II Information sources used when economizing on a subdecision
Information sources
Vacation subdecisions
Marketer-generated
websites e-WOM WOM Brochures Advertising
Travel
guides
Sum of row
percentages
b
Shorter length of stay 22
a
15 18 10 7 12 84
Changing the destination (other
country) 22 20 20 11 6 15 94
Type of accommodation 22 17 24 9 6 13 91
Cheaper alternative within the
same type of accommodation 25 22 23 12 6 13 101
Using another means of transport 15 12 12 6 4 7 56
Choosing a self-arranged vacation
instead of using a tour operator 18 12 17 7 6 8 68
Choosing a cheaper tour operator 31 22 16 14 9 14 106
Changing the period (earlier or
later) 28 15 15 13 7 13 91
Earlier or later booking moment 34 17 17 11 10 12 101
Fewer kinds of activities on the spot 9 8 14 6 6 8 51
Sum of column percentages 226 160 176 99 67 115 843
(26.8) (19) (20.9) (11.7) (8.0) (13.6) (100)
Note: Figures in parentheses are percentages.
a
Reading example: 22 of the economizers on ‘‘length of stay’’ use marketer-generated
websites to get ideas about economizing opportunities.
b
The meaning of the speci?c row and column percentages will be explained
when Table III is presented
PAGE 34
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
In Table III, a ‘‘ þ ’’ sign indicates a relatively strong position of an information source, while a
‘‘ 2 ’’ sign indicates a relatively weak position. When comparing the columns in Table III with
reference to these signs, some striking differences are found.
Marketer-generated websites have a strong position when decisions are taken about ‘‘earlier
or later booking’’, ‘‘changing the period’’ and ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour operator’’. They
have weaker positions as regards ‘‘changing the destination’’, ‘‘choosing another type of
accommodation’ ’ and ‘ ‘choosing a cheaper alternative within the same type of
accommodation’’.
Consumer-generated websites have a less marked pro?le, which to some extent is the
inverse image of marketer-generated websites. The strongest positions are for ‘‘changing
the destination’’, ‘‘choosing another type of accommodation’’ and ‘‘choosing a cheaper
alternative within the same type of accommodation’’, and the weakest are for ‘‘earlier or later
booking’’, ‘‘changing the period’’ and ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour operator’’.
Word-of-mouth has the strongest position for ‘‘fewer kinds of activities on the spot’’,
‘‘choosing a self-arranged vacation instead of using a tour operator’’ and ‘‘another type of
accommodation’’. The weakest positions are for ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour operator’’,
‘‘changing the period’’ (earlier or later) and ‘‘earlier or later booking moment’’.
As regards the other information sources, the pro?les are less clear-cut. Somewhat
surprising is the relatively strong position of Advertising information sources for ‘‘fewer kinds
of activities on the spot’’.
A possible explanation for these patterns may be the notion of search-determined and
experience-determined subdecisions. Tentatively, but also based partly on the ?ndings by
Bronner and de Hoog (2010), the subdecisions in Table III are arranged along a continuum
ranging from subdecisions with a high ‘‘search’’ character to subdecisions with a high
‘‘experience’’ character. At the ‘‘search’’ end of this continuum are subdecisions like ‘‘earlier
or later booking’’, ‘‘changing the period’’, ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour operator’’, while at the
‘‘experience’’ end of the continuum are subdecisions like ‘‘fewer kinds of activities on the
spot’’, ‘‘another type of accommodation’’ and ‘‘cheaper alternative within the same type of
accommodation’’. The other subdecisions are somewhere in between. Accepting this,
tentative classi?cation marketer-generated sources have a stronger position for
search-determined subdecisions, while for experience-determined subdecisions, e-WOM
and WOM have a stronger position. This ?nding is in line with that of Bronner and de Hoog
(2010), and also of Bei et al. (2004). In this context, the strong position of advertising
information sources for ‘‘fewer kinds of activities on the spot’’ can be explained.
Economizing on this subdecision can be postponed until the actual vacation. On the spot,
vacationers can consult the advertising of suppliers of these activities, which are frequently
available at the holiday location.
Table III Analysis of strengths and weaknesses of information sources
Information sources
Vacation subdecisions
Marketer-generated
websites eWOM) WOM) Brochures Advertising
Travel
guides
Shorter length of stay 20.6 21.1 þ0.5 þ0.2 þ0.3 þ0.7
Changing the destination (other country) 23.4 þ2.3 þ0.4 0 21.6 þ2.3
Another type of accommodation 22.6 20.3 þ5.5 21.8 21.4 þ0.7
Cheaper alternative within the same type of
accommodation 22.0 þ2.8 þ1.9 þ0.2 22.1 20.7
Using another means of transport 0 þ2.4 þ0.5 21.4 20.9 21.1
Choosing a self-arranged vacation instead of
using a tour operator 20.3 21.3 þ4.1 21.4 þ0.8 21.8
Choosing a cheaper tour operator þ2.5 þ1.8 25.8 þ1.5 þ0.5 20.4
Changing the period (earlier or later) þ4.0 22.5 24.4 þ2.6 20.3 þ0.7
Earlier or later booking moment þ6.9 22.2 24.1 20.8 þ1.9 21.7
Fewer kinds of activities on the spot 29.1 23.3 þ6.6 þ0.1 þ3.8 þ2.1
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 35
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
5.3 RQ3. Variety of information sources used
The previous analysis focuses on the weak and strong points of information sources for the
different subdecisions. This does not answer the third research question: does the variety of
information sources used for economizing on each subdecision differ? In order to answer
this question, the average number of information sources used by vacationers when
deciding about economizing about a subdecision is computed. Table IV shows the results.
The highest averages are found for the subdecisions ‘‘changing the destination’’ and
‘‘shorter length of stay’’, which are also the subdecisions on which most vacationers
economize. The lowest averages are for ‘‘fewer kinds of activities on the spot’’, ‘‘choosing a
self-arranged vacation instead of using a tour operator’’ and ‘‘using another means of
transport’’. These are also subdecisions on which fewer vacationers economize, except for
‘‘fewer kinds of activities on the spot’’.
Apparently subdecisions which set the overall ?avor of the holiday, like length of stay and
destination, call for a larger variety in information sources used than subdecisions which
mainly concern the details of the holiday, like a cheaper alternative, earlier or later booking
and fewer activities on the spot. Overall, the averages in Table IV are fairly low: less than
‘‘half’’ an information source is used, which is much lower than the averages reported by
Fodness and Murray (1999). However, the scope of the decision in this study is narrower
than in the study of Fodness and Murray, i.e. economizing decisions only, as opposed to
decisions concerning the entire vacation. Also, a vacationer could economize on a
subdecision without using an information source (averages in Table IV are calculated
including these ‘‘zero’’ uses).
5.4 RQ4. Combinations of information sources
Another research question is whether the combination of information sources occurs across
subdecisions or not. For this analysis, six new variables are created. As an example, the
overall use of marketer-generated websites by a vacationer is computed by entering in the
numerator the number of times marketer-generated websites are used across the ten
subdecisions, and in the denominator, the number of subdecisions that are economized on.
The maximum score is 1, the minimum score is 0. A value of 1 indicates that every occasion
of economizing on a subdecision involves the use of an information source; this is at least a
marketer-generated one. A value of 0 indicates that an information source is never used for
any subdecision. In the same way, the scores are computed for the other information
sources. By correlating these scores, one obtains insight into whether different information
sources are combined across subdecisions.
Though all correlations are signi?cant in Table V, indicating a tendency to use several
information sources across subdecisions, the strengths of the correlations are different. The
Table IV Average number of information sources used for obtaining economizing ideas for
each subdecision
Subdecision
Average number of
information sources used
Changing the destination (other country) 0.45
Shorter length of stay 0.44
Another type of accommodation 0.38
Cheaper alternative within the same type of accommodation 0.33
Earlier or later booking moment 0.32
Changing the period (earlier or later) 0.30
Choosing a cheaper tour operator 0.25
Fewer kinds of activities on the spot 0.23
Choosing a self-arranged vacation instead of using a tour operator 0.23
Using another means of transport 0.18
Notes: A difference of proportions test shows that differences of 0.04 or more are signi?cant at
p , 0:05; n ¼ 734, economizers
PAGE 36
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
strongest correlations are found between marketer-generated sites and e-WOM (0.54), and
brochures and guides (0.54), which mean that those are used together most of the time. The
?rst correlation shows a kind of ‘‘internet effect’’, as marketer-generated sites and e-WOM
both depend on access to the internet. This is made even clearer by the relatively low
correlation between e-WOM and WOM (0.27). They both contain consumer-generated
information, but this seems to be less of a determining factor than accessibility by a
computer. The strong correlation between brochures and guides appears to point to a
segment of vacationers who mainly use printed sources when deciding on economies
relating to vacations. Finally, the low correlation of WOM with all other information sources
indicates that users of WOM mainly use this as the most important information source, and
can be seen as a ‘‘face-to-face’’ segment.
5.5 RQ5. Information sources and family discussions
The last research question focuses on the relation between the amount of discussion in a
family about economizing on a subdecision and the number of information sources used.
First, vacationers who were not part of a family (82 vacationers) were excluded from the
analysis. Table VI shows the results of correlating the number of information sources used for
a subdecision with the amount of discussion about this subdecision.
Table VI shows that the more discussion occurs in a family about economizing on a
subdecision, the larger the number of information sources is used. This points to what might
be expected: the need to discuss economizing options with others leads to consulting a
larger number of information sources, as these sources can be used to inform or convince
family members of different economizing options for the same subdecision. The highest
ranking correlations are found for ‘‘earlier or later booking moment’’, ‘‘choosing a cheaper
tour operator’’ and ‘‘changing the destination’’. An explanation for these relatively strong
Table V Correlations between use of different information sources across subdecisions
Marketer sites eWOM WOM Brochures Advertising Guides
Marketer sites
eWOM 0.54
WOM 0.23 0.27
Brochures 0.34 0.34 0.26
Advertising 0.25 0.25 0.19 0.33
Guides 0.31 0.38 0.19 0.54 0.37
Notes: All correlations are signi?cant at the p , 0:05 level; n ¼ 676, only economizers who
economized on at least one of the ten pre-de?ned subdecisions are included
Table VI Correlations between discussion in families about economizing on a subdecision
and total number of information sources used for a subdecision
Vacation subdecision Kendall’s t B p value Sample size
Shorter length of stay 0.15 0.001 347
Changing the destination (other country) 0.22 0.001 309
Another type of accommodation 0.17 0.001 269
Cheaper alternative within the same type of
accommodation 0.20 0.001 220
Using another means of transport 0.21 0.002 176
Choosing a self-arranged vacation instead of
using a tour operator 0.18 0.002 216
Choosing a cheaper tour operator 0.27 0.001 155
Changing the period (earlier or later) 0.16 0.002 216
Earlier or later booking moment 0.29 0.001 198
Fewer kinds of activities on the spot 0.17 0.001 293
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 37
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
correlations may be that they can involve fairly ‘‘factual’’ information – that is, information not
open to many different interpretations. Information of the latter type will exacerbate the
differences in the family by generating new discussions, rather than help in resolving
existing differences of opinion.
6. Summary and implications
6.1 Summary
This paper investigates the role of information searching for vacations in a somewhat unique
context – economizing decisions in times of an economic recession. The results show that if
vacationers use information sources for economizing decisions, marketer-generated
sources are used most frequently, with their websites clearly in the lead.
Consumer-generated sources are second, though with a small margin, with WOM more
frequently used than e-WOM.
In terms of strengths and weaknesses of information sources for supporting economizing
decisions concerning speci?c subdecisions that constitute a vacation, marketer-generated
sources have a strong position when decisions are taken about ‘‘earlier or later booking’’,
‘‘changing the period’’ and ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour operator’’.
They have a weaker position on ‘‘changing the destination’’, ‘‘choosing another type of
accommodation’’ and ‘ ‘choosing a cheaper alternative within the same type of
accommodation’’. Consumer-generated websites do have a less marked pro?le, with a
strong position for ‘‘changing the destination’’, ‘‘choosing another type of accommodation’’
and ‘‘choosing a cheaper alternative within the same type of accommodation’’. The weakest
position is for ‘‘earlier or later booking’’, ‘‘changing the period’’ and ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour
operator’’. WOM has the strongest position for ‘‘fewer kinds of activities on the spot’’,
‘‘choosing a self-arranged vacation instead of using a tour operator’’ and ‘‘another type of
accommodation’’. The weakest positions are for ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour operator’’,
‘‘changing the period’’ and ‘‘earlier or later booking moment’’.
As regards the variety of information sources used, on average a limited number of
information sources was used, but they are most frequently used for the subdecisions
‘‘changing the destination’’ and ‘‘shorter length of stay’’, which are also the subdecisions on
which most vacationers economize.
Across subdecisions, a tendency is found to use several information sources
simultaneously. The strongest combined use is between Marketer-generated sites and
e-WOM, and between brochures and guides. Surprisingly, WOM and e-WOM do not go
together that much.
Finally, the role of discussions in the family concerning information searching for
economizing decisions is investigated. The more discussion in a family about
economizing decisions, the larger the number of information sources used. The highest
scores are for the subdecisions ‘‘earlier or later booking moment’’, ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour
operator’’ and ‘‘changing the destination’’.
Taken together, these results show that information searching plays a role in the
decision-making process concerning economizing on vacations. This information
searching depends largely on factors that are related to the nature of subdecisions
about which an economizing decision has been made, and on the amount of discussion in
a family about these subdecisions. The information sources used clearly have strong and
weak points for different subdecisions, but overall the use of information sources shows
quite some variety.
6.2 Implications
The research can have implications for tourism research as well as tourism practice.
For tourism research, information searching in the context of an economic recession is
largely virgin territory. The results of this study show that information searching for
PAGE 38
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
economizing decisions seems to be largely determined by the nature of the subdecisions on
which a vacationer wants to economize. Marketer-generated sources have a strong position
concerning search-oriented subdecisions, that is, subdecisions for which reliable
information can be found in advance. Consumer-generated sources have a stronger
position for experience-oriented subdecisions, that is, subdecisions whose ‘‘true’’ value can
mainly be experienced on the spot.
The question arises as to whether this pattern is different from what vacationers do with
information sources under ‘‘normal’’ conditions. Although studies that explicitly link the
use of information sources to subdecisions are rare and comparisons with older studies
are dif?cult due to the rise of the internet, a limited comparison can be made. Printed
material seems to be more important in ‘‘normal’’ pre-vacation information searching,
while in this study the internet, WOM and e-WOM are used most frequently (see Hyde,
2006). An explanation for this difference may be that for current economizing decisions,
very recent information is relevant, which requires information sources that are quickly
updated.
The amount of discussion in a family also makes a difference. The more discussion about the
booking moment and choosing a cheaper tour operator, the more the information sources
that are used. This could be related to the factual information needed for these
subdecisions, that is, information not open to too many different interpretations. For less
factual information, a risk is that this will exacerbate the differences of opinion in a family,
rather than resolve them.
The research here relies on data obtained at a single point in time. As holiday decision
making is mostly a process that unfolds over a longer time span, collecting data about
economizing decisions and used information sources at different points in time will shed light
on the dynamics of these decisions. This longitudinal approach will also provide information
about intentions to economize and actual economizing behavior, as well as shifts between
different economizing options in the short and middle term.
For tourismpractice, things relate to the kind of information that should be made available by
information suppliers, and by which suppliers. Tour operators, can assist vacationers when
comparing vacation alternatives that differ on subdecisions like booking moment and
period, and can offer a range of options fromexpensive to inexpensive. Also, making options
more ?exible in terms of downgrading on vacation features can help vacationers who want to
economize.
Consumer-generated sources can focus more on providing information and comparison
opportunities for subdecisions like another destination closer to home, a cheaper type of
accommodation and cheaper accommodation within the same type. Finally, mediator
websites, like Bookings.com, can play a role. They can capitalize on the ?nding that
marketer-generated information and e-WOM are mostly sought together. Placing this
combined information in the context of opportunities for economizing, can make their sites
more attractive for vacationers who want to economize. For example, these sites can
provide a search facility that tries to ?nd cheaper alternatives within certain constraints
proposed by the vacationer, not unlike the current practice of sites for booking cheap ?ight
tickets.
Though the depth of the recession will likely recede in the near future, it seems to be
beyond doubt that vacationers will experience the effects in terms of their personal
incomes. During the coming years, most governments will likely cut back on expenses or
increase taxation to deal with huge de?cits incurred during the crisis. This will leave a mark
in the future on travel expenditures too. As a consequence, this notion will become more
salient for the tourism industry, as well as for academic tourism research. Though the
industry may deplore this development, tailoring information can be part of a ?exible
response to this new reality.
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 39
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
References
Bargeman, B. and van der Poel, H. (2006), ‘‘The role of routines in the vacation decision-making process
of Dutch vacationers’’, Tourism Management, Vol. 27, pp. 707-20.
Bei, L.-T., Chen, E.Y.L. and Widdows, R. (2004), ‘‘Consumers’ online information search behavior and the
phenomenon of search vs. experience products’’, Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Vol. 25 No. 4,
pp. 449-67.
Bronner, A.E. (2006), ‘‘Increasing family democracy and the implications for advertising’’, in Diehl, S.
and Terlutter, R. (Eds), International Advertising and Communication, Deutscher Universita¨ ts-Verlag,
Wiesbaden, pp. 301-18.
Bronner, A.E. and de Hoog, R (2008), ‘ ‘Agreement and disagreement in family vacation
decision-making’’, Tourism Management, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 967-79.
Bronner, F. and de Hoog, R. (2010), ‘‘Consumer-generated versus marketer-generated websites in
consumer decision-making’’, International Journal of Market Research, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 231-48.
Bronner, F. and de Hoog, R. (2011), ‘‘A new perspective on tourist information search: discussion in
couples as the context’’, International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 5 No. 2,
pp. 128-43.
Bronner, A.E. and Kuijlen, T. (2007), ‘‘The live or digital interviewer: a comparison between CASI, CAPI
and CATI with respect to differences in response behaviour’’, International Journal of Market Research,
Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 167-90.
Continuous Vacation Panel (2010), ‘‘NBTC-NIPO Research 2010’’, Continuous Vacation Panel,
Amsterdam.
Fodness, D. and Murray, B. (1997), ‘‘Tourist information search’’, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 24
No. 3, pp. 503-23.
Fodness, D. and Murray, B. (1999), ‘‘A model of tourist information search behavior’’, Journal of Travel
Research, Vol. 37, pp. 220-30.
Frechtling, D.C. (1982), ‘‘Tourism trends and the business cycle: tourism in recession’’, Tourism
Management, Vol. 3, pp. 285-90.
Grøn?aten, O. (2009), ‘‘Predicting travelers’ choice of information sources and information channels’’,
Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 230-44.
Gursoy, D. and McCleary, K.W. (2004), ‘‘An integrative model of tourists’ information search behavior’’,
Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 353-73.
Hyde, K.F. (2006), ‘‘Contemporary information search strategies of destination-na? ¨ve international
vacationers’’, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, Vol. 21 Nos 2/3, pp. 63-76.
Hyde, K.F. (2008), ‘‘Information processing and touring planning theory’’, Annals of Tourism Research,
Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 712-31.
Kim, D-Y., Lehto, X.Y. and Morrison, A.M. (2007), ‘‘Gender differences in online travel information search:
implications for marketing communications on the internet’’, Tourism Management, Vol. 28, pp. 423-33.
Litvin, S.W., Xu, G. and Kang, S.K. (2004), ‘‘Spousal vacation-buying decision making revisited across
time and place’’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 43, pp. 193-8.
Marchant, L.J. (1979), ‘‘Systematic analysis of market behaviour and attitudes: two case studies’’, LMA,
London.
Mottiar, Z. and Quinn, D. (2004), ‘‘Couple dynamics in household tourism decision making: women as
the gatekeepers?’’, Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 149-60.
Nelson, P. (1974), ‘‘Advertising as information’’, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 83 No. 4, pp. 729-54.
Pan, B. and Fesenmaier, D.R. (2006), ‘‘Online information search: vacation planning process’’, Annals of
Tourism Research, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 809-32.
Papatheodorou, A., Rossello, J. and Xiao, H. (2010), ‘‘Global economic crisis and tourism:
consequences and perspectives’’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 39-45.
PAGE 40
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Rosenbaum, M.S. and Spears, D.L. (2006), ‘‘An exploration of spending behaviors among Japanese
tourists’’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 3-13.
Sheldon, P. and Dwyer, L. (2010), ‘‘The global ?nancial crisis and tourism: perspectives of the
academy’’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 3-4.
Smeral, E. (2010), ‘‘Impacts of the world recession and economic crisis on tourism: forecasts and
potential risks’’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 31-8.
About the authors
Fred Bronner is Professor of Media Research and Advertising Research at the Faculty of
Social and Behavioral Sciences, the University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Furthermore, he is an advisor to several Dutch marketing research agencies. His main
interests are advertising and information searching by consumers.
Robert de Hoog is Professor of Information and Knowledge Management at the Faculty of
Behavioral Sciences, the University of Twente, The Netherlands. His main interests are
choice processes and computer-supported knowledge sharing. Robert de Hoog is the
corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected]
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 41
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
doc_552209461.pdf
The consumer is currently feeling the consequences of the global economic crisis, leading to
decreased spending by tourists. An important economizing strategy appears to be that vacationers do
not give up their holiday but are likely to travel closer to home, a phenomenon called ‘‘staycation’’, but
this is just one of a variety of options vacationers can use. If they make economies within a holiday, where
do they get their ideas about economizing from? The purpose of this paper is to study information
searching from the perspective of economizing on vacations.
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research
Economizing on vacations: the role of information searching
Fred Bronner Robert de Hoog
Article information:
To cite this document:
Fred Bronner Robert de Hoog, (2013),"Economizing on vacations: the role of information searching", International J ournal of Culture,
Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 7 Iss 1 pp. 28 - 41
Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506181311301336
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 22:20 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 25 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 761 times since 2013*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
J unjie Hong, (2011),"Testing geographic and economic distance of agglomeration economies", J ournal of Chinese Economic and Foreign
Trade Studies, Vol. 4 Iss 1 pp. 55-59http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17544401111106815
Charles G. Smith, Stephen M. Hills, Gail Arch, (2003),"Political economy and the transition from planned to market economies", European
Business Review, Vol. 15 Iss 2 pp. 116-122http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09555340310464740
Richard Berner, (2004),"A global economic outlook: Interview with Richard Berner, Managing Director, Chief US Economist, Morgan
Stanley", Strategic Direction, Vol. 20 Iss 3 pp. 15-16http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02580540410524172
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:115632 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about
how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/
authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than
290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional
customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and
also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Economizing on vacations: the role of
information searching
Fred Bronner and Robert de Hoog
Abstract
Purpose – The consumer is currently feeling the consequences of the global economic crisis, leading to
decreased spending by tourists. An important economizing strategy appears to be that vacationers do
not give up their holiday but are likely to travel closer to home, a phenomenon called ‘‘staycation’’, but
this is just one of a variety of options vacationers can use. If they make economies within a holiday, where
do they get their ideas about economizing from? The purpose of this paper is to study information
searching from the perspective of economizing on vacations.
Design/methodology/approach – The work reported on is a survey of Dutch vacationers who stated
that they economized on their 2009 holiday.
Findings – The research shows that different sources have strong and weak points in relation to the
different subdecisions that constitute a vacation. Information sources are used in concert for
subdecisions; the strongest joint use involves marketer-generated sites and e-WOM, and brochures and
travel guides. In the family context, a tendency is found to use more information sources the more
economizing decisions are discussed.
Practical implications – For tour operators, it seems to make sense to make it easier to compare
vacation alternatives that differ on subdecisions such as booking moment and period, and to offer a
range of options from expensive to inexpensive. Also, making options more ?exible in terms of
downgrading on vacation features could assist vacationers who want to economize.
Consumer-generated sources could focus more on providing information and comparison
opportunities for subdecisions.
Originality/value – Information searching is a widely studied area in vacation decision making. Two
extensive literature reviews give an overview of factors in?uencing this search process. In this literature,
a contribution on information searching to obtain economizing ideas in dif?cult times is absent. In this
article, with the aid of ?ve research questions, the role of information searching in relation to economizing
on vacations is investigated.
Keywords The Netherlands, Holidays, Tourists, Consumer behaviour, Decision making,
Information searching, Vacation decision making, Economic crisis, Economizing behaviour,
Information sources
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction: pre-vacation information searching in general
For most product decisions, the consumer considers information searching to be desirable
and even necessary for choosing a ‘‘good’’ product. In the pre-decision phase, consumers
search for information mainly to reduce uncertainty and risk (Kim et al., 2007). They want to
take a decision which they are satis?ed with and do not regret afterwards. Information
searching increases the likelihood of arriving at such a ‘‘good’’ decision. In line with general
consumer behavior, tourists also consider information acquisition necessary for selecting a
destination, accommodation, a means of transport and speci?c on-vacation activities
(Gursoy and McCleary, 2004). Fodness and Murray (1997, p. 505) summarize the primary
motive for undertaking information searching as follows: ‘‘In short, tourists seek to enhance
PAGE 28
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013, pp. 28-41, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1750-6182 DOI 10.1108/17506181311301336
Fred Bronner and
Robert de Hoog are based
at the Faculty of Social and
Behavioral Sciences,
University of Amsterdam,
Amsterdam, The
Netherlands.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
the quality of their trip by decreasing the level of associated uncertainty through information
searching’’.
Research into tourist information-search processes has developed into one of the most
widely studied areas in tourism (Fodness and Murray, 1997). This not only because the need
to obtain more insight into consumer behavior from an academic perspective, but also to
support the tourism industry in developing effective marketing communications strategies
(Hyde, 2006, 2008). As Pan and Fesenmaier (2006, p. 809) state, ‘‘Tourism is an
information-intensive industry whose organizations rely on the communication with tourists
through various channels to market their products and build customer relationships’’. So the
conclusion is that tourists’ information-searching behavior is important for tourism scholars
as well as for practitioners (Fodness and Murray, 1997).
Hyde (2006) provides an overview of some of the most cited studies in the ?eld of tourism
information-searching. He concludes that researchers addressed six research issues over
the past three decades:
1. sources used;
2. factors in?uencing the choice of sources;
3. amount of pre-vacation information searching;
4. factors in?uencing this amount;
5. timing of information-searching in the process of planning a vacation; and
6. relation between the amount of information-searching and degree of planning of the
vacation.
Grøn?aten (2009) also presents a literature review, but is more focused on the factors
in?uencing travelers’ information-search strategies.
A wide range of variables have been found to in?uence the choice of search strategies. At a
more abstract level, these variables are categorized as personal variables (age, gender),
situational variables (family composition, trip phase) and tourism product variables (travel
style, mode of travel, activity preferences). The articles by Hyde (2006) and Grøn?aten
(2009) together present a very complete picture of vacation information-search studies
between 1975 and 2009. Correcting for overlap, 70 studies are quoted and described
altogether. Summarizing, in these 70 studies the focus is on information search to reduce
uncertainty, but one speci?c topic is lacking: the role of information searching as a means of
obtaining ideas for economizing on a vacation. The research described in this article takes
this new, but highly topical, look at the role of information searching.
2. Information searching in times of a recession
The lack of attention to the relation between economizing decisions and information
searching is not very surprising because for a long period many people lived in times of
prosperity. The current global economic crisis, which started in 2007 in the USA and has
spread to the Eurozone since September 2008, signi?cantly changed this situation. The
consumer was hit hard in 2009/2010 by unemployment, loss of income, insecurity of savings,
and depreciation of shares. Tourism expenditures as part of discretionary consumer
spending experienced greater falls than other consumer spending (Sheldon and Dwyer,
2010). The moment of recovery is still unclear. As Smeral (2010, p. 37) states: ’’The recovery
process might take longer in tourism than in production and trade because there is no
stock-building process going on in tourism’’.
Many vacationers do not opt for a strategy of giving up their holiday and are likely to travel
closer to home, a phenomenon called ‘‘staycation’’ by Papatheodorou et al.(2010). In The
Netherlands too (Continuous Vacation Panel, 2010), data indicate that Dutch vacationers do
not use a ‘‘giving up’’ strategy, but seem to opt for a ‘‘staycation’’ strategy. In 2009, the
market share of more far-off destinations like Spain, Greece and Turkey declined
substantially and the market share of countries closer to home, like Germany and Belgium,
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 29
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
increased in terms of spending outlays. In addition, many other ways of economizing on a
holiday can be adopted by vacationers. These are related to speci?c features of a holiday,
like the nature of the accommodation, activities on the spot and other subdecisions.
If vacationers economize within a holiday, the interesting question is: from where do they get
their ideas about economizing and from which information sources? Do differences exist for
different subdecisions that constitute a holiday: are vacationers using other sources to
obtain ideas for a subdecision like ?nding a cheaper hotel, for example, than for a
subdecision like opting for a cheaper activity on the spot (bus trip instead of boat trip)?
Answers to these general questions are relevant for tourism research and tourism practice.
For the former they provide insight into a phenomenon that has not been investigated
recently; for the latter they can help suppliers of vacation services to target their messages in
a way that anticipates on the need to economize on holidays.
Theories about economizing on travel expenditures are rare. Some studies date from the
income dip at the end of the 1970s. These studies concentrate only on how economic
recession affects tourism volume and tourism markets (Frechtling, 1982), and not on
individual decision-making. Also, these ‘‘old’’ studies pay no attention to the use of
information sources in the context of an economic recession. Consequently, research into
crisis related economizing behavior and vacation decision-making is more or less
pioneering work. In terms of the six research issues identi?ed by Hyde (2006), the focus of
the research is on which sources are used, factors in?uencing the choice of sources and
factors in?uencing the amount and variety of used sources, all of them in the context of
deciding about economizing on vacations. In the next section, ?ve more speci?c research
questions are formulated.
3. Research questions
Simply asking whether a vacationer economized on a holiday does not make much sense if
one does not also ask about which aspect of a holiday was economized on. A holiday trip is
considered as a bundle of attributes about which separate decisions must be made, which
are seen as subdecisions (Litvin et al., 2004). Thus, the individual must make an expenditure
allocation decision with regard to each attribute in a given bundle. A vacationer can
economize on attributes x and y and decide to spend the usual amount on attribute or
subdecision z.
The literature provides some input for the most relevant subdecisions that offer saving
opportunities. In the ?rst place, tourists can travel closer to home and switch to closer
destinations. Papatheodorou et al. (2010) call this phenomenon ‘‘staycation’’. Other
attributes are shorter length of stay and trading down (lower-cost carriers, lower-standard
hotels, business class to economy; see Sheldon and Dwyer, 2010). Another option is to save
by choosing another moment of booking (Smeral, 2010). Also, tourists can reduce expenses
on recreational activities on the spot. Rosenbaum and Spears (2006) make a distinction
between three types of these expenses:
1. sightseeing (boat tour, bus tour);
2. entertainment (dancing, nightclub, cinema, cultural landmarks, concerts); and
3. shopping.
One can economize on different combinations of these three types of ‘‘on the spot’’
expenses.
Based on this literature, a set of subdecisions on which information searching for
economizing purposes could occur was included in the questionnaire.
Focusing on the use of information sources for obtaining ideas about economizing on these
subdecisions informs ?ve research questions.
RQ1. Which information sources do consumers use for obtaining ideas about how to
economize on a subdecision?
PAGE 30
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Bronner and de Hoog (2010) divide information sources into marketer-generated sources,
consumer-generated sources and neutral sources. Within this categorization, a distinction
can be made between printed material, face-to-face contacts and websites.
Marketer-generated sources are then, for example, websites of a tour operator or airline
company, brochures, and personal contact with a representative of a travel agency.
Consumer-generated sources are review sites on which vacationers post their experiences
and comments (e-WOM, or electronic word-of-mouth), information from friends and
colleagues (WOM, or word-of-mouth). Travel guides are an example of neutral sources. The
literature shows that vacationers use a variety of information sources (Fodness and Murray,
1999) in pre-vacation decision-making. Does this variety also occur when searching for
information for economizing decisions?
RQ2. Do information sources have strong and weak positions in different
subdecisions?
Not only is the frequency of use of an information source important, but the relative position,
or strength or weakness, amidst other information sources matters too. Conceptually this
can be seen as the ‘‘market share’’ of a source for providing information about economizing
opportunities. One question is whether a difference exists in market share, and if this is
related to more general features of a subdecision.
In line with Nelson (1974), product (sub)decisions are classi?able as possessing either
search or experience qualities. Search qualities are those that the consumer can determine
by inspection prior to purchase, and experience qualities are those that can not be easily
determined prior to purchase (Nelson, 1974, p. 730). In holiday choice, some subdecisions
are more experience-determined, like quality of service in restaurants and hotels, and some
subdecisions are more search-determined, like location of an accommodation (Bronner and
de Hoog, 2010). Are certain information sources used more for obtaining ideas for
economizing on experience-determined subdecisions and others for more search-like
subdecisions? In general, what information sources give economizing ideas concerning
what kind of subdecisions?
RQ3. Does differences occur in the variety of information sources used for each
subdecision?
Fodness and Murray (1999) focus not on the speci?c information sources used, but on the
number of information sources, which also indicates the variety in using them. In this period,
the Internet was not as in?uential as ten years later, so their results are dif?cult to compare
with more recent ones, which is nevertheless interesting to do. In their study, from a list of 11
sources identi?ed from the tourism literature, travelers indicated which information sources
they used to plan their pleasure trips. The average number of sources used was 3.09, with a
substantial amount of variation between segments. Vacationers using personal experience
as an information source use fewer sources (on average 1.89 sources), while those who rely
on print use more sources (on average 4.35 sources). So Fodness and Murray found
variation in the number of information sources used, which makes looking for differences in
the number of information sources used for obtaining economizing ideas interesting.
RQ4. Which combinations of information sources are used across subdecisions?
RQ3 aims at separate subdecisions. When looking across subdecisions, a question is if
vacationers use one and the same information source for each subdecision, if they use one
at all, or if they change the information source if the subdecision is different. More
speci?cally, the question is: if one uses e-WOM, for example, does one also use WOM? This
co-occurrence of information sources across subdecisions sheds light on strongly or weakly
linked usage patterns.
RQ5. Does the amount of discussion in a family about economizing on a subdecision
associate with the number of information sources used?
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 31
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Family democracy increased during the last 20 years, and led to a growth of joint
decision-making in families. In a Dutch study, data about the family decision-making
process are available and they allow a comparison over time and over domains. In nearly all
domains, the number of joint decision processes increased between 1985 and 2002
(Bronner, 2006). Compared with other domains, vacation decision-making is a very
collective process between husband and wife and between parents and children. Mottiar
and Quinn (2004, p. 157) also compared vacation choice with other products in terms of
decision-making within households. They conclude: ‘‘this research has gone further by
showing that this vacation decision is more pronounced as a joint decision than even
consumption of equally large and important items such as cars and electronic and ?nancial
products’’. Bronner and de Hoog (2008, p. 977) conclude too that holiday choice has
evolved over the last 30 years into being very much a joint decision: ‘‘in which family
members discuss, seek out information to use in the discussion, employ
disagreement-resolution strategies and come ?nally to a joint choice’’.
Concerning information sources used during this joint decision-making process, Bronner
and de Hoog (2011) found that a wide variety of information sources play a role in this
process. However, this is based on the ‘‘regular’’ pre-vacation information search process,
but how do things stand in relation to discussing economizing ideas in the family?
Summarizing this section: information searching is a widely studied area in vacation
decision-making. Two extensive literature reviews give an overviewof factors in?uencing this
search process. In this literature, a contribution on information searching to obtain
economizing ideas in dif?cult times is absent. In this article, with the aid of ?ve research
questions, the role of information searching in relation to economizing on vacations is
investigated.
4. Research design and data collection
The sample in this research is a sub-sample fromthe sample of the Dutch ‘‘Continu Vakantie
Onderzoek’’ (CVO – Continuous Vacation Panel; see also Bargeman and van der Poel,
2006; Bronner and de Hoog, 2008). This panel, which is refreshed annually, consists of
respondents who report on their vacation behavior four times a year. The CVO data are
weighted for socio-demographics, resulting in a sample that can be considered as
representative of the Dutch population for variables crucial to the vacation decision. All
tour-operators in The Netherlands make use of these data, and the study is considered to be
the standard for obtaining insight into holiday plans and decisions. The ?eldwork is carried
out by TNS NIPO, one of the leading Dutch market research agencies. For data collection,
computer-assisted self-interviewing (CASI) is used. Respondents can answer the questions
at home at a time that is convenient to them and can take the time they require to answer the
questions. This customer-friendly approach increases response and data quality (Bronner
and Kuijlen, 2007).
Within this CVO panel, all participants who took a main summer holiday in The Netherlands
or abroad (n ¼ 3; 195) are asked, just after their holiday, the following ?lter question:
When you look back at your recent summer holiday, did you, when compared with the last few
years, spent a lesser amount of money, a greater amount of money, or the same amount of
money?
Those who answered ‘‘a lesser amount of money’’ are selected for further questions. These
include ten subdecisions of a holiday, which are candidates for economizing and play a role
in vacation decision-making. The choice of these subdecisions is based on earlier research
carried out in The Netherlands (Bronner and de Hoog, 2008, 2011). These respondents are
asked whether they economized on this subdecision or not. The subdecisions include
shorter length of stay; changing the destination (other country); choosing a cheaper tour
operator; choosing a self-arranged vacation instead of using a tour operator; changing the
period (earlier or later); selecting an earlier or later booking moment; using another means of
transport; carrying out fewer or other activities on the spot (with examples taken from
Rosenbaum and Spears, 2006); choosing another type of accommodation; and choosing a
PAGE 32
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
cheaper alternative within the same type of accommodation. For each of the subdecisions,
economizers are ?ltered and asked the following question about gathering information:
You economized by spending less money on . . . [subdecision x ]; for this decision, did you use
the information sources listed below: yes/no.
These information sources are:
B information on websites of airline companies, tour operators and other suppliers of
holiday accommodation;
B information on review websites where other vacationers evaluate, give opinions and
advice (e.g. Tripadvisor);
B tips and advice of friends, relatives and acquaintances;
B brochures of travel organizations;
B advertising in newspapers, television and radio; and
B travel guides.
All vacationers with a partner and who economized on a subdecision were asked whether
discussion took place with partners and/or children about this speci?c economizing
decision. A ?ve-point rating scale was employed, ranging from ‘‘A lot of deliberation’’ to ‘‘No
deliberation at all’’.
5. Results
The ?rst relevant data appear in Table I, which shows the composition of the sample, in
particular the number of vacationers who economized on their main summer holiday in 2009
in The Netherlands.
From Table I, about 23 percent of all vacationers in the sample economized on their main
summer holiday. Of these, 58 economized, but on other subdecisions than the ten
prede?ned ones listed above.
5.1 RQ1. Information sources used
The ?rst research question addresses the overall use of information sources by vacationers
when deciding about economizing on a subdecision. Table II shows the percentage of
vacationers who use an information source for deciding about a subdecision.
Marketer-generated sources (websites, brochures and advertising) are used most
frequently (on average 40 percent), with their websites clearly in the lead. This is
probably related to the fact that, in any case, these sources contain the most information
about such options as other and cheaper accommodation, booking moment and whether or
not tour operators are cheaper. Consumer-generated sources are second, with, somewhat
surprisingly, WOM being used more frequently than e-WOM. A possible explanation for this
is that e-WOM sources will mainly report about their vacations in the past, a moment when
writing about economizing options was not a topic that was the main interest of other
vacationers, although costs played a role in holiday decisions all along. In this respect, WOM
has the bene?t of being more adaptive to changing questions that emerge when economic
conditions suddenly alter. Third-party sources are not used as often as the other sources;
Table I Composition of the sample
Number of
respondents
Percentage of
respondents
Overall sample 3,195 100
Economizers 734 23
Those who economized on at least one of ten
pre-de?ned subdecisions 676 21
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 33
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
obviously they are even less ?exible than marketer-generated sources and
consumer-generated sources. In addition, they will not be very helpful for deciding on
economizing options like ‘‘shorter length of stay’’, ‘‘changing the period’’, ‘‘selecting a later or
earlier booking moment’’ and ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour operator’’, which limit their usefulness.
5.2 RQ2. Strengths and weaknesses of information sources
The second research question focuses on the relative position of each information source:
do information sources stand out more or less clearly, or, do they have strong and weak
positions, for different subdecisions?
In order to obtain insight into the relative position or ‘‘market share’’ of the different
information sources used when economizing on a subdecision, a strength-weakness
analysis of information sources is performed. This analysis uses a method frequently
employed in brand strength and weakness analysis as developed by Marchant (1979). This
analysis entails the following steps:
1. Sumup the rowpercentages and the column percentages in Table II (see last rowand last
column in Table II).
2. Overall, information source and a subdecision are linked 843 times.
3. Marketer-generated websites get 226=843 ¼ 26:8 percent of the links; this can be
interpreted as the overall ‘‘market share’’ of marketer-generated websites.
4. Concerning the subdecision ‘‘Length of stay’’, marketer-generated websites get 22=84 ¼
26:2 percent of the links, which can be interpreted as the ‘‘market share’’ for that
particular subdecision.
5. Next, the percentage 26.2 percent (see step 4) is compared with the percentage 26.8
percent (see step 3Þ ¼ 20:6, which is interpreted as the difference between the overall
market share and the market share for this speci?c subdecision. Negative outcomes are
seen as a weakness and positive outcomes as a strength of the information source. In this
example the difference is small, so no clear strength or weakness of marketer-generated
websites for the subdecision ‘‘Length of stay’’ is found.
The results of this analysis are shown in Table III.
Table II Information sources used when economizing on a subdecision
Information sources
Vacation subdecisions
Marketer-generated
websites e-WOM WOM Brochures Advertising
Travel
guides
Sum of row
percentages
b
Shorter length of stay 22
a
15 18 10 7 12 84
Changing the destination (other
country) 22 20 20 11 6 15 94
Type of accommodation 22 17 24 9 6 13 91
Cheaper alternative within the
same type of accommodation 25 22 23 12 6 13 101
Using another means of transport 15 12 12 6 4 7 56
Choosing a self-arranged vacation
instead of using a tour operator 18 12 17 7 6 8 68
Choosing a cheaper tour operator 31 22 16 14 9 14 106
Changing the period (earlier or
later) 28 15 15 13 7 13 91
Earlier or later booking moment 34 17 17 11 10 12 101
Fewer kinds of activities on the spot 9 8 14 6 6 8 51
Sum of column percentages 226 160 176 99 67 115 843
(26.8) (19) (20.9) (11.7) (8.0) (13.6) (100)
Note: Figures in parentheses are percentages.
a
Reading example: 22 of the economizers on ‘‘length of stay’’ use marketer-generated
websites to get ideas about economizing opportunities.
b
The meaning of the speci?c row and column percentages will be explained
when Table III is presented
PAGE 34
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
In Table III, a ‘‘ þ ’’ sign indicates a relatively strong position of an information source, while a
‘‘ 2 ’’ sign indicates a relatively weak position. When comparing the columns in Table III with
reference to these signs, some striking differences are found.
Marketer-generated websites have a strong position when decisions are taken about ‘‘earlier
or later booking’’, ‘‘changing the period’’ and ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour operator’’. They
have weaker positions as regards ‘‘changing the destination’’, ‘‘choosing another type of
accommodation’ ’ and ‘ ‘choosing a cheaper alternative within the same type of
accommodation’’.
Consumer-generated websites have a less marked pro?le, which to some extent is the
inverse image of marketer-generated websites. The strongest positions are for ‘‘changing
the destination’’, ‘‘choosing another type of accommodation’’ and ‘‘choosing a cheaper
alternative within the same type of accommodation’’, and the weakest are for ‘‘earlier or later
booking’’, ‘‘changing the period’’ and ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour operator’’.
Word-of-mouth has the strongest position for ‘‘fewer kinds of activities on the spot’’,
‘‘choosing a self-arranged vacation instead of using a tour operator’’ and ‘‘another type of
accommodation’’. The weakest positions are for ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour operator’’,
‘‘changing the period’’ (earlier or later) and ‘‘earlier or later booking moment’’.
As regards the other information sources, the pro?les are less clear-cut. Somewhat
surprising is the relatively strong position of Advertising information sources for ‘‘fewer kinds
of activities on the spot’’.
A possible explanation for these patterns may be the notion of search-determined and
experience-determined subdecisions. Tentatively, but also based partly on the ?ndings by
Bronner and de Hoog (2010), the subdecisions in Table III are arranged along a continuum
ranging from subdecisions with a high ‘‘search’’ character to subdecisions with a high
‘‘experience’’ character. At the ‘‘search’’ end of this continuum are subdecisions like ‘‘earlier
or later booking’’, ‘‘changing the period’’, ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour operator’’, while at the
‘‘experience’’ end of the continuum are subdecisions like ‘‘fewer kinds of activities on the
spot’’, ‘‘another type of accommodation’’ and ‘‘cheaper alternative within the same type of
accommodation’’. The other subdecisions are somewhere in between. Accepting this,
tentative classi?cation marketer-generated sources have a stronger position for
search-determined subdecisions, while for experience-determined subdecisions, e-WOM
and WOM have a stronger position. This ?nding is in line with that of Bronner and de Hoog
(2010), and also of Bei et al. (2004). In this context, the strong position of advertising
information sources for ‘‘fewer kinds of activities on the spot’’ can be explained.
Economizing on this subdecision can be postponed until the actual vacation. On the spot,
vacationers can consult the advertising of suppliers of these activities, which are frequently
available at the holiday location.
Table III Analysis of strengths and weaknesses of information sources
Information sources
Vacation subdecisions
Marketer-generated
websites eWOM) WOM) Brochures Advertising
Travel
guides
Shorter length of stay 20.6 21.1 þ0.5 þ0.2 þ0.3 þ0.7
Changing the destination (other country) 23.4 þ2.3 þ0.4 0 21.6 þ2.3
Another type of accommodation 22.6 20.3 þ5.5 21.8 21.4 þ0.7
Cheaper alternative within the same type of
accommodation 22.0 þ2.8 þ1.9 þ0.2 22.1 20.7
Using another means of transport 0 þ2.4 þ0.5 21.4 20.9 21.1
Choosing a self-arranged vacation instead of
using a tour operator 20.3 21.3 þ4.1 21.4 þ0.8 21.8
Choosing a cheaper tour operator þ2.5 þ1.8 25.8 þ1.5 þ0.5 20.4
Changing the period (earlier or later) þ4.0 22.5 24.4 þ2.6 20.3 þ0.7
Earlier or later booking moment þ6.9 22.2 24.1 20.8 þ1.9 21.7
Fewer kinds of activities on the spot 29.1 23.3 þ6.6 þ0.1 þ3.8 þ2.1
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 35
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
5.3 RQ3. Variety of information sources used
The previous analysis focuses on the weak and strong points of information sources for the
different subdecisions. This does not answer the third research question: does the variety of
information sources used for economizing on each subdecision differ? In order to answer
this question, the average number of information sources used by vacationers when
deciding about economizing about a subdecision is computed. Table IV shows the results.
The highest averages are found for the subdecisions ‘‘changing the destination’’ and
‘‘shorter length of stay’’, which are also the subdecisions on which most vacationers
economize. The lowest averages are for ‘‘fewer kinds of activities on the spot’’, ‘‘choosing a
self-arranged vacation instead of using a tour operator’’ and ‘‘using another means of
transport’’. These are also subdecisions on which fewer vacationers economize, except for
‘‘fewer kinds of activities on the spot’’.
Apparently subdecisions which set the overall ?avor of the holiday, like length of stay and
destination, call for a larger variety in information sources used than subdecisions which
mainly concern the details of the holiday, like a cheaper alternative, earlier or later booking
and fewer activities on the spot. Overall, the averages in Table IV are fairly low: less than
‘‘half’’ an information source is used, which is much lower than the averages reported by
Fodness and Murray (1999). However, the scope of the decision in this study is narrower
than in the study of Fodness and Murray, i.e. economizing decisions only, as opposed to
decisions concerning the entire vacation. Also, a vacationer could economize on a
subdecision without using an information source (averages in Table IV are calculated
including these ‘‘zero’’ uses).
5.4 RQ4. Combinations of information sources
Another research question is whether the combination of information sources occurs across
subdecisions or not. For this analysis, six new variables are created. As an example, the
overall use of marketer-generated websites by a vacationer is computed by entering in the
numerator the number of times marketer-generated websites are used across the ten
subdecisions, and in the denominator, the number of subdecisions that are economized on.
The maximum score is 1, the minimum score is 0. A value of 1 indicates that every occasion
of economizing on a subdecision involves the use of an information source; this is at least a
marketer-generated one. A value of 0 indicates that an information source is never used for
any subdecision. In the same way, the scores are computed for the other information
sources. By correlating these scores, one obtains insight into whether different information
sources are combined across subdecisions.
Though all correlations are signi?cant in Table V, indicating a tendency to use several
information sources across subdecisions, the strengths of the correlations are different. The
Table IV Average number of information sources used for obtaining economizing ideas for
each subdecision
Subdecision
Average number of
information sources used
Changing the destination (other country) 0.45
Shorter length of stay 0.44
Another type of accommodation 0.38
Cheaper alternative within the same type of accommodation 0.33
Earlier or later booking moment 0.32
Changing the period (earlier or later) 0.30
Choosing a cheaper tour operator 0.25
Fewer kinds of activities on the spot 0.23
Choosing a self-arranged vacation instead of using a tour operator 0.23
Using another means of transport 0.18
Notes: A difference of proportions test shows that differences of 0.04 or more are signi?cant at
p , 0:05; n ¼ 734, economizers
PAGE 36
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
strongest correlations are found between marketer-generated sites and e-WOM (0.54), and
brochures and guides (0.54), which mean that those are used together most of the time. The
?rst correlation shows a kind of ‘‘internet effect’’, as marketer-generated sites and e-WOM
both depend on access to the internet. This is made even clearer by the relatively low
correlation between e-WOM and WOM (0.27). They both contain consumer-generated
information, but this seems to be less of a determining factor than accessibility by a
computer. The strong correlation between brochures and guides appears to point to a
segment of vacationers who mainly use printed sources when deciding on economies
relating to vacations. Finally, the low correlation of WOM with all other information sources
indicates that users of WOM mainly use this as the most important information source, and
can be seen as a ‘‘face-to-face’’ segment.
5.5 RQ5. Information sources and family discussions
The last research question focuses on the relation between the amount of discussion in a
family about economizing on a subdecision and the number of information sources used.
First, vacationers who were not part of a family (82 vacationers) were excluded from the
analysis. Table VI shows the results of correlating the number of information sources used for
a subdecision with the amount of discussion about this subdecision.
Table VI shows that the more discussion occurs in a family about economizing on a
subdecision, the larger the number of information sources is used. This points to what might
be expected: the need to discuss economizing options with others leads to consulting a
larger number of information sources, as these sources can be used to inform or convince
family members of different economizing options for the same subdecision. The highest
ranking correlations are found for ‘‘earlier or later booking moment’’, ‘‘choosing a cheaper
tour operator’’ and ‘‘changing the destination’’. An explanation for these relatively strong
Table V Correlations between use of different information sources across subdecisions
Marketer sites eWOM WOM Brochures Advertising Guides
Marketer sites
eWOM 0.54
WOM 0.23 0.27
Brochures 0.34 0.34 0.26
Advertising 0.25 0.25 0.19 0.33
Guides 0.31 0.38 0.19 0.54 0.37
Notes: All correlations are signi?cant at the p , 0:05 level; n ¼ 676, only economizers who
economized on at least one of the ten pre-de?ned subdecisions are included
Table VI Correlations between discussion in families about economizing on a subdecision
and total number of information sources used for a subdecision
Vacation subdecision Kendall’s t B p value Sample size
Shorter length of stay 0.15 0.001 347
Changing the destination (other country) 0.22 0.001 309
Another type of accommodation 0.17 0.001 269
Cheaper alternative within the same type of
accommodation 0.20 0.001 220
Using another means of transport 0.21 0.002 176
Choosing a self-arranged vacation instead of
using a tour operator 0.18 0.002 216
Choosing a cheaper tour operator 0.27 0.001 155
Changing the period (earlier or later) 0.16 0.002 216
Earlier or later booking moment 0.29 0.001 198
Fewer kinds of activities on the spot 0.17 0.001 293
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 37
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
correlations may be that they can involve fairly ‘‘factual’’ information – that is, information not
open to many different interpretations. Information of the latter type will exacerbate the
differences in the family by generating new discussions, rather than help in resolving
existing differences of opinion.
6. Summary and implications
6.1 Summary
This paper investigates the role of information searching for vacations in a somewhat unique
context – economizing decisions in times of an economic recession. The results show that if
vacationers use information sources for economizing decisions, marketer-generated
sources are used most frequently, with their websites clearly in the lead.
Consumer-generated sources are second, though with a small margin, with WOM more
frequently used than e-WOM.
In terms of strengths and weaknesses of information sources for supporting economizing
decisions concerning speci?c subdecisions that constitute a vacation, marketer-generated
sources have a strong position when decisions are taken about ‘‘earlier or later booking’’,
‘‘changing the period’’ and ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour operator’’.
They have a weaker position on ‘‘changing the destination’’, ‘‘choosing another type of
accommodation’’ and ‘ ‘choosing a cheaper alternative within the same type of
accommodation’’. Consumer-generated websites do have a less marked pro?le, with a
strong position for ‘‘changing the destination’’, ‘‘choosing another type of accommodation’’
and ‘‘choosing a cheaper alternative within the same type of accommodation’’. The weakest
position is for ‘‘earlier or later booking’’, ‘‘changing the period’’ and ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour
operator’’. WOM has the strongest position for ‘‘fewer kinds of activities on the spot’’,
‘‘choosing a self-arranged vacation instead of using a tour operator’’ and ‘‘another type of
accommodation’’. The weakest positions are for ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour operator’’,
‘‘changing the period’’ and ‘‘earlier or later booking moment’’.
As regards the variety of information sources used, on average a limited number of
information sources was used, but they are most frequently used for the subdecisions
‘‘changing the destination’’ and ‘‘shorter length of stay’’, which are also the subdecisions on
which most vacationers economize.
Across subdecisions, a tendency is found to use several information sources
simultaneously. The strongest combined use is between Marketer-generated sites and
e-WOM, and between brochures and guides. Surprisingly, WOM and e-WOM do not go
together that much.
Finally, the role of discussions in the family concerning information searching for
economizing decisions is investigated. The more discussion in a family about
economizing decisions, the larger the number of information sources used. The highest
scores are for the subdecisions ‘‘earlier or later booking moment’’, ‘‘choosing a cheaper tour
operator’’ and ‘‘changing the destination’’.
Taken together, these results show that information searching plays a role in the
decision-making process concerning economizing on vacations. This information
searching depends largely on factors that are related to the nature of subdecisions
about which an economizing decision has been made, and on the amount of discussion in
a family about these subdecisions. The information sources used clearly have strong and
weak points for different subdecisions, but overall the use of information sources shows
quite some variety.
6.2 Implications
The research can have implications for tourism research as well as tourism practice.
For tourism research, information searching in the context of an economic recession is
largely virgin territory. The results of this study show that information searching for
PAGE 38
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
economizing decisions seems to be largely determined by the nature of the subdecisions on
which a vacationer wants to economize. Marketer-generated sources have a strong position
concerning search-oriented subdecisions, that is, subdecisions for which reliable
information can be found in advance. Consumer-generated sources have a stronger
position for experience-oriented subdecisions, that is, subdecisions whose ‘‘true’’ value can
mainly be experienced on the spot.
The question arises as to whether this pattern is different from what vacationers do with
information sources under ‘‘normal’’ conditions. Although studies that explicitly link the
use of information sources to subdecisions are rare and comparisons with older studies
are dif?cult due to the rise of the internet, a limited comparison can be made. Printed
material seems to be more important in ‘‘normal’’ pre-vacation information searching,
while in this study the internet, WOM and e-WOM are used most frequently (see Hyde,
2006). An explanation for this difference may be that for current economizing decisions,
very recent information is relevant, which requires information sources that are quickly
updated.
The amount of discussion in a family also makes a difference. The more discussion about the
booking moment and choosing a cheaper tour operator, the more the information sources
that are used. This could be related to the factual information needed for these
subdecisions, that is, information not open to too many different interpretations. For less
factual information, a risk is that this will exacerbate the differences of opinion in a family,
rather than resolve them.
The research here relies on data obtained at a single point in time. As holiday decision
making is mostly a process that unfolds over a longer time span, collecting data about
economizing decisions and used information sources at different points in time will shed light
on the dynamics of these decisions. This longitudinal approach will also provide information
about intentions to economize and actual economizing behavior, as well as shifts between
different economizing options in the short and middle term.
For tourismpractice, things relate to the kind of information that should be made available by
information suppliers, and by which suppliers. Tour operators, can assist vacationers when
comparing vacation alternatives that differ on subdecisions like booking moment and
period, and can offer a range of options fromexpensive to inexpensive. Also, making options
more ?exible in terms of downgrading on vacation features can help vacationers who want to
economize.
Consumer-generated sources can focus more on providing information and comparison
opportunities for subdecisions like another destination closer to home, a cheaper type of
accommodation and cheaper accommodation within the same type. Finally, mediator
websites, like Bookings.com, can play a role. They can capitalize on the ?nding that
marketer-generated information and e-WOM are mostly sought together. Placing this
combined information in the context of opportunities for economizing, can make their sites
more attractive for vacationers who want to economize. For example, these sites can
provide a search facility that tries to ?nd cheaper alternatives within certain constraints
proposed by the vacationer, not unlike the current practice of sites for booking cheap ?ight
tickets.
Though the depth of the recession will likely recede in the near future, it seems to be
beyond doubt that vacationers will experience the effects in terms of their personal
incomes. During the coming years, most governments will likely cut back on expenses or
increase taxation to deal with huge de?cits incurred during the crisis. This will leave a mark
in the future on travel expenditures too. As a consequence, this notion will become more
salient for the tourism industry, as well as for academic tourism research. Though the
industry may deplore this development, tailoring information can be part of a ?exible
response to this new reality.
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 39
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
References
Bargeman, B. and van der Poel, H. (2006), ‘‘The role of routines in the vacation decision-making process
of Dutch vacationers’’, Tourism Management, Vol. 27, pp. 707-20.
Bei, L.-T., Chen, E.Y.L. and Widdows, R. (2004), ‘‘Consumers’ online information search behavior and the
phenomenon of search vs. experience products’’, Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Vol. 25 No. 4,
pp. 449-67.
Bronner, A.E. (2006), ‘‘Increasing family democracy and the implications for advertising’’, in Diehl, S.
and Terlutter, R. (Eds), International Advertising and Communication, Deutscher Universita¨ ts-Verlag,
Wiesbaden, pp. 301-18.
Bronner, A.E. and de Hoog, R (2008), ‘ ‘Agreement and disagreement in family vacation
decision-making’’, Tourism Management, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 967-79.
Bronner, F. and de Hoog, R. (2010), ‘‘Consumer-generated versus marketer-generated websites in
consumer decision-making’’, International Journal of Market Research, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 231-48.
Bronner, F. and de Hoog, R. (2011), ‘‘A new perspective on tourist information search: discussion in
couples as the context’’, International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 5 No. 2,
pp. 128-43.
Bronner, A.E. and Kuijlen, T. (2007), ‘‘The live or digital interviewer: a comparison between CASI, CAPI
and CATI with respect to differences in response behaviour’’, International Journal of Market Research,
Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 167-90.
Continuous Vacation Panel (2010), ‘‘NBTC-NIPO Research 2010’’, Continuous Vacation Panel,
Amsterdam.
Fodness, D. and Murray, B. (1997), ‘‘Tourist information search’’, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 24
No. 3, pp. 503-23.
Fodness, D. and Murray, B. (1999), ‘‘A model of tourist information search behavior’’, Journal of Travel
Research, Vol. 37, pp. 220-30.
Frechtling, D.C. (1982), ‘‘Tourism trends and the business cycle: tourism in recession’’, Tourism
Management, Vol. 3, pp. 285-90.
Grøn?aten, O. (2009), ‘‘Predicting travelers’ choice of information sources and information channels’’,
Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 230-44.
Gursoy, D. and McCleary, K.W. (2004), ‘‘An integrative model of tourists’ information search behavior’’,
Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 353-73.
Hyde, K.F. (2006), ‘‘Contemporary information search strategies of destination-na? ¨ve international
vacationers’’, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, Vol. 21 Nos 2/3, pp. 63-76.
Hyde, K.F. (2008), ‘‘Information processing and touring planning theory’’, Annals of Tourism Research,
Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 712-31.
Kim, D-Y., Lehto, X.Y. and Morrison, A.M. (2007), ‘‘Gender differences in online travel information search:
implications for marketing communications on the internet’’, Tourism Management, Vol. 28, pp. 423-33.
Litvin, S.W., Xu, G. and Kang, S.K. (2004), ‘‘Spousal vacation-buying decision making revisited across
time and place’’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 43, pp. 193-8.
Marchant, L.J. (1979), ‘‘Systematic analysis of market behaviour and attitudes: two case studies’’, LMA,
London.
Mottiar, Z. and Quinn, D. (2004), ‘‘Couple dynamics in household tourism decision making: women as
the gatekeepers?’’, Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 149-60.
Nelson, P. (1974), ‘‘Advertising as information’’, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 83 No. 4, pp. 729-54.
Pan, B. and Fesenmaier, D.R. (2006), ‘‘Online information search: vacation planning process’’, Annals of
Tourism Research, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 809-32.
Papatheodorou, A., Rossello, J. and Xiao, H. (2010), ‘‘Global economic crisis and tourism:
consequences and perspectives’’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 39-45.
PAGE 40
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Rosenbaum, M.S. and Spears, D.L. (2006), ‘‘An exploration of spending behaviors among Japanese
tourists’’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 3-13.
Sheldon, P. and Dwyer, L. (2010), ‘‘The global ?nancial crisis and tourism: perspectives of the
academy’’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 3-4.
Smeral, E. (2010), ‘‘Impacts of the world recession and economic crisis on tourism: forecasts and
potential risks’’, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 31-8.
About the authors
Fred Bronner is Professor of Media Research and Advertising Research at the Faculty of
Social and Behavioral Sciences, the University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Furthermore, he is an advisor to several Dutch marketing research agencies. His main
interests are advertising and information searching by consumers.
Robert de Hoog is Professor of Information and Knowledge Management at the Faculty of
Behavioral Sciences, the University of Twente, The Netherlands. His main interests are
choice processes and computer-supported knowledge sharing. Robert de Hoog is the
corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected]
VOL. 7 NO. 1 2013
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 41
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
2
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
doc_552209461.pdf