Comparing social media users and nonusers in rural tourism

Juho Pesonen, planner, PhD. student

juho.pesonen@uef.fi

University of Eastern Finland, Centre for Tourism Studies

The 21st Nordic Symposium for Tourism and Hospitality Research, November 7-10th 2012, Umeå, Sweden.

Presentation structure

10.04.2023Juho Pesonen 2

1. Introduction to the topic2. Background of the study3. Data and methods4. The results5. Discussion and conclusions

Introduction•What is social media?

10.04.2023Juho Pesonen 3

10.04.2023Sosiaalinen media / Juho Pesonen 4

10.04.2023Sosiaalinen media / Juho Pesonen 5

Sosiaalinen media tarkoittaa verkkoviestintäympäristöjä, joissa jokaisella käyttäjällä tai käyttäjäryhmällä on mahdollisuus olla aktiivinen viestijä ja sisällöntuottaja tiedon vastaanottajana olon lisäksi. Sosiaalisessa mediassa viestintä tapahtuu siis monelta monelle, eli perinteisille joukkotiedotusvälineille ominainen viestijän ja vastaanottajan välinen ero puuttuu. (Wikipedia, 2012, Kalliala, Eija & Toikkanen, Tarmo: Sosiaalinen media opetuksessa. Finn Lectura, 2009. 978-951-792-383-5.)

http://laureakirjasto.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/socialmedialandscape2.jpg

10.04.2023Sosiaalinen media / Juho Pesonen 7

http://www.webseoanalytics.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/social-media.jpg

10.04.2023Sosiaalinen media / Juho Pesonen 8

http://gisellert1987.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/social_media_sites1.jpg

Social media as a synonym for Facebook?

• ¾ of time spent in social media is spent in Facebook• 1 billion users!• Regional differences.

10.04.2023Esityksen nimi / Tekijä 9

1) Content production

2) Interactivity

3) Many to many

10.04.2023Sosiaalinen media / Juho Pesonen 10

Theoretical background•Social media are playing an increasingly important role as information sources for travelers (Xiang & Gretzel, 2010).

•Tourism regarded as important factor in rural area development.

•How important are social media in rural tourism marketing?

•Who are those rural tourist that use social media and how do they differ from other rural tourists that use the Internet?

10.04.2023Juho Pesonen 11

Theoretical background•Hargittai (2007) examined differences among users and non-users of social network sites:– Most of the differences in specific site usage.– Differences in gender, race and ethnicity, and

parental educational background.– People with more experience of Internet use.– Digital inequality in social media.

10.04.2023Juho Pesonen 12

- Research questions:

1. How important is social media in travel information search?

2. How social media users differ from non-users regarding their socio-demographics?

3. How social media users differ from non-users regarding their Internet use behavior?

4. How social media users differ from non-users regarding rural tourism activities?

5. How social media users differ from non-users regarding their online purchasing behavior?

6. How social media users differ from non-users in writing online reviews? 10.04.2023Juho Pesonen 13

10.04.2023Juho Pesonen 14

Data• Quantitative data.• Banner advertisement on three different rural tourism

websites during summer 2011.• 1967 usable questionnaires.• Internet use behaviour according to Jani et al. (2011).• How often they write online reviews.• 268 respondents (13,6 %) stated that they use social

media websites when they search for information regarding their holidays. -> Social media users.

10.04.2023Juho Pesonen 15

Methods• Cross tabulation with chi-square tests.

10.04.2023Juho Pesonen 16

Results: profile• Female respondents (74.8%) were overrepresented in the

sample. All age groups were very well represented with 40 to 49 year olds being the largest age group (26.0%) and less than 20 years the smallest age group (4.7%). 34.7 per cent of respondents had vocational education, 20.5 per cent had education from a polytechnic university and 14.8 per cent an university degree.

Age (p<0,001)

 

Age

Total

Less than 20 years 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59

At least 60

yearsUses social media

No Count 55 324 351 423 264 134 1551

% 3,5% 20,9% 22,6% 27,3% 17,0% 8,6% 100,0%

Yes Count 31 97 61 43 22 7 261

% 11,9% 37,2% 23,4% 16,5% 8,4% 2,7% 100,0%

Total Count 86 421 412 466 286 141 1812

% 4,7% 23,2% 22,7% 25,7% 15,8% 7,8% 100,0%

10.04.2023Esityksen nimi / Tekijä 17

Gender (p=0,025)

 

Gender

TotalMale FemaleUses social media

No Count 461 1222 1683

% 27,4% 72,6% 100,0%

Yes Count 55 209 264

% 20,8% 79,2% 100,0%

Total Count 516 1431 1947

% 26,5% 73,5% 100,0%

10.04.2023Esityksen nimi / Tekijä 18

Internet use (p<0,001)

 

Internet use a week

Total

Less than five

hours5-10 hours

11-20 hours

21-30 hours

More than 30 hours

Uses social media

No Count 296 555 402 190 214 1657

% 17,9% 33,5% 24,3% 11,5% 12,9% 100,0%

Yes Count 10 63 68 45 81 267

% 3,7% 23,6% 25,5% 16,9% 30,3% 100,0%

Total Count 306 618 470 235 295 1924

% 15,9% 32,1% 24,4% 12,2% 15,3% 100,0%

10.04.2023Esityksen nimi / Tekijä 19

10.04.2023Juho Pesonen 20

Website Uses social media websites

Does not use social media websites

Sig

Affiliate website 200 (74,6 %) 1059 (62,3 %) p<0,001Travel agencies’ websites 115 (42,9 %) 596 (35,1%) p=0,014

Destination websites 103 (38,4 %) 597 (35,1%) p=0,304

Search engine 245 (91,4 %) 1379 (81,2 %) p<0,001DMO website 53 (19,8 %) 246 (14,5 %) p=0,028

Portals 51 (19,0 %) 184 (10,8%) p<0,001

Newspaper and magazine websites

89 (33,2 %) 197 (11,6 %) p<0,001

Discussion boards / blogs 108 (40,3 %) 231 (13,6 %) p<0,001

What websites do you use when searching for information regarding your next holiday?

10.04.2023Juho Pesonen 21

Activity Uses social media websites

Does not use social media websites

Sig

Swimming 229 (85,4 %) 1230 (72,4 %) p<0,001Canoeing 95 (35,4 %) 426 (25,1%) p=0,001

Hiking / long walks 207 (77,2 %) 1195 (70,3%) p=0,020

Animal watching 132 (49,3 %) 597 (35,1 %) p<0,001

What activities would you be interested in attending during your rural holidays?

Online purchasing behavior

10.04.2023Esityksen nimi / Tekijä 22

Has purchased during the past 12 months.

Uses social media websites

Does not use social media websites

Sig

Accommodation 160 (58,7 %) 834 (49,1 %) p=0,001Flight tickets 128 (47,8 %) 581 (34,2%) p<0,001

Package holiday 69 (25,7 %) 315 (18,5%) p=0,008

Ticket in a destination 77 (28,7 %) 231 (13,6 %) p<0,001None of the above 54 (20,1 %) 532 (31,3 %) p<0,001

Writes online reviews (p<0,001)

 

How often you write online reviews about products and services you have bought?

Total

More than

once a week

Once a week

Several times a month

Once a month

Less than

once a month

Does not

write reviews

at allUses social media

No Count 4 11 30 45 322 1254 1666

% ,2% ,7% 1,8% 2,7% 19,3% 75,3% 100,0%

Yes Count 4 1 8 12 88 153 266

% 1,5% ,4% 3,0% 4,5% 33,1% 57,5% 100,0%

Total Count 8 12 38 57 410 1407 1932

% ,4% ,6% 2,0% 3,0% 21,2% 72,8% 100,0%

10.04.2023Esityksen nimi / Tekijä 23

10.04.2023Juho Pesonen 24

So what?• Social media users are young, technology-savvy and

information hungry. • Social media excellent way to get bookers.• Social media users have more influence to other

travelers as they write reviews more often.• Rural tourism companies offering canoeing, hiking or

animal watching / observation services should be more interested in social media than other companies.

• This study confirms the results of many earlier studies.• Search engine optimization and marketing still crucial

for success of a rural tourism company.• The results are also interesting because 60 % of

respondents are actively using Facebook but not for travel information search purposes!

• Digital inequality between different companies as well as consumers.

Questions, comments?Thank you!

www.uef.fi