tourism social media transforming tourism practices ana maría munar center for leisure and culture...
TRANSCRIPT
Tourism Social MediaTransforming Tourism practices
Ana María MunarCenter for Leisure and Culture Services
Tourlex Conference, 30 October, 2014
STUDIES
• How and why do tourists contribute to social media? A case of mass tourism.
• What do digital review making tell us about the heritage experience? A case of cultural tourism.
Study 1 - Objectives
1. When, where and types of content shared
2. Motives for sharing3. New method – (not
online panel) but an route exit survey. Destination based.
Acknowledging complexity in social media surveysThe approach of the study
• Combination of the multiple categories’: diferentiation of type of site, control of audience and between textual and visual content
• Comparison with non-electronic media and with Web 1.0 media.
• Relevance of nationality and type of destination
Motivation schemes of experience-sharing in tourism social media
Social cognitive theory: Individual actions in specific environments are based on personal cognition (Hsu et al 2007).
Self-efficacy
Personal outcome expectations that may lead to
motivation
E-literacy, Individualism Self-centred Community-oriented
Personal cognition
Motivation schemes of experience-sharing in tourism social media
Self-centred outcome expectations:
Social capital (reputation) Pleasure & entertainment
Efficiency and efficacy
Community-related
expectations:Helping the
community to achieve its goals or to
continue operatingJoint-affirmation
AltruismSocial support
Method MethodThe study is based on self-instructing questionnaires in Danish and Norwegian
Denmark & Norway
Among the world highest ICT use and high levels of English
proficiency
Sample: In total 434 respondents travelling with scheduled and charter flights57% females, 50% has higher education
Selected respondent characteristics and e-literacy (%)
Results: Involvement
• Facebook (and similar sites with control of audiences) most popular
• Social media more important for sharing (specially visual content) than for decision-making
• More lurkers than posters (78% have a FB profile only 42% shared visual content)
• More important as platforms of sociability than as information sources
Resultsinvolvement in social media (UGC)
Poor real-time effect
Resilience of traditional practices in
tourism
Results MotivationDominance of community-centred expectations
Despite the popularity of rewards/ranking systems, increased social recognition is not important
ResultsMotivation and IT use for trip
Membership , usage of social media and age matters for self-centred expectations
Discussion & conclusion (1)
1. Increase use of social media for experience sharing and as information source, but weak relevance for decision-making
2. Resilience of personal non-electronic sources and Web 1.0. Relevance of accommodation (also related to social media review sites)
3. Social media type matters; involvement differs depending of type and genre.
4. Clear preference for sharing visual content
Discussion & conclusion (2)
5. Overestimated ‘real-time’ effect 6. Younger and self-centred motivations:
Generational divide matters - younger tourists consider self-centred motivations to be more important
7- Intensive IT users and self-centred motivations: Self-efficiency matters - tourists with intensive social media and internet use consider self-centred motivations to be more important
What do digital review making tell us about the heritage experience?
Research streams1. NOVELTY: The heritage product is unique, part of the
tourist’s quest for cultural authenticity and local experiences.
2. FAMILIARITY: Tourists want to experience authenticity based on their own preconceived images of what is authentic about a particular destination
3. MANAGEMENT: the heritage site must be accessible and meaningfully conserved.
4. POLITICS & NATIONHOOD: Heritage sites are often used to represent and symbolize a society and culture; they are even used as social engineering devices
Case & Method
Tourist Review 1: Partial views on heritage
• Tourists’ reviews are not centred on cultural or historical expertise but on personal experiences
• Historical knowledge is to be found elsewhere• Experiential value is expressed as a type of
lifeworld knowledge/daily life knowledge
I will not go on about the individual buildings as others have already described them far better than I can do.(Acropolis, WestSaxon)
Tourist Review 2: Immediacy and authenticity
• Reflex vs. reflection• Raw emotionality
All I can say is WOW WOW WOW, it is one of the most amazing places I have been to.
(Forbidden City, Aussielea)
The forbidden city is SO disappointing! (Forbidden City, CRSM)
Tourist Review 3: The practical tourist
• Risk reduction: physical and emotional anxiety• ‘embodiment’ of the heritage experience
Just one important reminder wear comfortable shoes and take some water!!! Enjoy ...
Interaction1. Joint-affirmation
• Shaping and Reaffirmation of preconceptions• Ritualization of the tourism experience
A visit here certainly makes you feel like you can check a box in your ‘Things to See Before You Die’ list.
(Acropolis, uncvic)
Interaction 2. Socialization and meritocracy
• free revealing innovators • collaborative online systems that reward
expertise and merit
This is a big area to view and there are many big groups of tourists, often wearing matching baseballs caps and moving as one, like ants on the march!TripAdvisor, Forbidden City, elizalily
(Munar and Ooi, 2011)
Interaction 3: Paradox
CONCLUSION
• Complementarity of different types of knowledge on the historical site
• Missing voices: The host should get lost!• The quality of the content remains an issue• By concentrating on the uniqueness of the
heritage, promoters are ignoring tourists’ concerns and the imagination and embodiment of tourism, which are an important part of the heritage experience
Thank you!