toward a symbiosis of social psychology and tourism

8/2/2019 Toward a Symbiosis of Social Psychology and Tourism

1/13

T O W A R D A S Y M B I O S I S O FS O C I A L P S Y C H O L O G Y

A N D T O U R I S M S T U D I E S

P e t e r F . S t r i n g e rUniversity of Nljmegen. The NetherlandsP h i l i p L . P e a r c eJames Cook University. Australia

ABSTRACTThis i n t rod uc to ry pape r ind ica te s some of the cha rac te r -i s t ic s o f a so c i o p sy c h o l o g i c a l p e r sp e c t i v e o n t o u r i s mstud ies . Br ie f po in t s a re made a bou t the na tu re o f bo thpsycho logy and socia l psycholog y as ac adem ic disc ip l ineswhic h mi gh t se rve tour i s m research . More pa r t i cu la ra t te nt io n i s pa id to the "models of Man" arg ume nt and toiss ues in the appli cat ion of social psychology. I t is sug-gested tha t f ru i t fu l in te rac t ion be tween soc ia l psychologyand tour i sm s tud ie s may be ach ieved by a nonp aras i t i cre l a t ionsh ip and by an inc rease in p re -pa rad igma t i c re-sea rch . Keyw ord s : tou r i s m s tud ie s , psycho logy , soc ia lpsychology, applied social psychology, models of Man, pre-pa rad ig mat i c re sea rch .

P e t e r Stringer is Professor and Head of the Department of Social Psychology(Montessorilaan 3, 6500 HE Nijmegen, The Netherlands). l~lllp. P~uree is SeniorLecturer in Psychology. Their interests include in the application of social psychologyto tourism.A n n a l s o f ' l ' o l t f i s m R e s e a r c h . Vol. I i. pp. 5-17. 1984l~Tint'd In the USA. All fi ght s rt'ser~,t.d 0160-73 83 ;84 $3 . 00 * . 001984 J Jafar i and Pergamon Press [ .td


2/13

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY AN[) TOURI SM

RI~SUMEVers un e sym bio se de la psycholo gie sociale et le tour isme.Cet art icle prelimi naire indiclue cmeklues-unes des charac-ter ls t iques d 'une perspect ive soclo-psychologlque su r lesetudes de tour tsme. On fal t quelques remarques som-maires au sujet de la nature de la psychologie et de lapsychologic sociale en tant que disciplines academi ques;ces re mar que s pou rrai ent cont r ibu er ~t la recherch e entour isme. On fair tout par t lcul ie rement a t tent ion a l 'a rgu-ment des "modeles de l 'Homme" et a des ques t ion s dansl'appllcatlon de la psychologle sociale. On suggt~re qu'llseral t possible de real lser une interact io n f ruc tueus e entrela psychologle soctale et les etu des de to url sme par moye nd'une re la tion non-parasi te e t par une intensif icat ion desrecherches pre-paradigmatiques. Mots Clef : e tudes detourisme, psychologie, psychologie sociale, psychologiesociale appllqu6e, modules de l 'Homme, recherches pre-paradigmatiques.

INTRODUCTIONMost to uri sm resea rcher s seek to throw light on a parti cular sl ice

or compo nen t of tour is t behavior . Economist s are concerned withthe f inancial implicat ions of tour is t spending, anthr opologis ts withbroad-scale Impacts of cultural interch ange, an d sociologists withthe societal impacts and mea nin gs of the tour ist experience. Thefocus of this special issu e of Anna ls qf Tourism Research issociopsychological. This int rod uct ory p aper will briefly indicatesome of the charact erist ics of a sociopsychological perspective.As a preface, a case st ud y m ay serve to highl ight som e o f the social,interactive aspects of tour is t exper ience which are funda mental tosoclopsychologlcal interest . The example co mes from fieldnotesmade by one of the aut hor s while he was s tudying package tours toMorocco from London.

The f irst shock of the tr ip was t he realization th at the party wasgoing to sleep overnight on the mini-bus as the driver headed non-stop for Spain. The sixteen travelers--an untidy collection of rela-t ively youn g " adve ntu rers" --sp ent their f irst night in a chaos of oneanother 's elbows, faces, shoulders, and legs, cramped into a spacethat comforta bly could have slept four schoolboys. The co mpos itio nof the group, eight me n an d eight women, mi ght have seemedab ou t r ight for convivia l i ty . They had not bar ga i ned for the

6 1984 ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH


3/13

PETE R STRINGER AND PHILIP PEARCE

Machiavellianism of the driver. At Tours he sent the women shop-ping. "O.K. everyone," he ann ou nc ed , "'the well-built blonde, Karen , ismine. Any one object?" Despite a couple of grum bles , t hei r powerless-ness was quickly appreciated. Here he was, their trusty guide,translator, hotel-organizer, tent- disp ense r an d driver, offering, albeitimplicitly, a m ost un com fo rta bl e holiday for an y would-be rival. It isremarkab le how the tho ug ht of a cold night in the worst tent coulddivert at ten tion from pro misc uou s or combative thought s.

After this incident, other individual identitie s quickly emerged.These included a somewhat aging alcoholic bricklayer, a pseudo-camp young actor forever trying in bars and restaurants to shockthe locals, several dith eri ng a nd disor ganiz ed New Zealand girls, anda paranoic young executive repeatedly accusing people of insultinghi m- -n ot to mentio n a fascinated social psychologist. Some of thesecharacters appeared to enjoy the trip thoroughly: two others con-ducted an unde rgro und campaign of dissat isfact ion and complaint .The trip p roceed ed at a hectic pace: hillside villages, coastal reso rts,desert plateaux, and big cities were but glimpsed at through thesmo ky haze of min i-b us travel. Complex gam es evolved in the group.These includ ed wildly sh ou ti ng "Local Color!" when ever a "local"scene or person was spot ted- -a parody of the ter ms In which the tripitself has been advertised. As a way of turn in g three weeks intowha t seemed to be a lifetime, the jou rn ey was wit ho ut equal.Several features of this experience might be of interest to socialpsychologists: the organ ization and definit ion of tourist roles, grouppressu res in the s hapi ng of individual behavior, and the influence ofdifferent cul tural b ackgro unds on the outcome of touris t -nat ivecontact and interaction. A psychological account would highlightthe fact that travel can be unpredictable and that the same set ofevents can be interp reted and seen differently by individual tourists.The example neces sarily specifies both a certain kind of tour istand holiday. It shoul d not be inferred, of course, t hat social psy-chologists are especially interest ed in package to urs a nd adventur e-style holidays for you nge r people. Equally relevant examples couldhave been dra wn from experiences of the solitary traveler, the retiredcouple, or the weal thy jet set. Irrespective of the type of tou ris t beingstudied , a sociopsychological appr oach essentially emp has izes theinteractio n of social context with individual and group behavior,experience, and relations.THE NATURE OF PSYCHOLOGY

Psychological qu est ion s are so varied th at it is doub tful whe th er1984 ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEAR CH 7


4/13

SOCIAL PSYC11OLOGYAND TOURISM

they could ever be answer ed by a ho mo ge ne ou s discipline. What onecalls "psychology" is an un eas y alliance of several qui te dif ferentintellectual projects--compare, for example, physiological, develop-mental , mathemati cal , or perso nali ty psychology. The multiplex orfragmented natur e of psychology someti mes o bscures the contr ibu-tion it can make to the und er st an di ng an d so lution of everydayproblems. Psychology is often pop ular ly identified with psychody-nam ics (Freud. Jun g, Adler), person ality theory, clinical psychology,or, more narrowly if less often, with the core exper iment al st udy oflearning, perception, and memory. But to appreci ate i ts full potentialfor applicati on to anot he r field of interest , one needs also to rangeaqross the di spar ate bodies of knowledge of (among o thers) cultural ,develop mental, educa tiona l, social, an d work psychology. All have acont r ib ut i on to make to tourism studies . To c ite only one of manyexamples, th e use of medical and physiological psycholo gy hasenabled r esearch ers to come to some und ers tan din g of the complex-ities of travel sic kne ss an d jet lag (cf. Reas on 1974).

It is the view of psycholo gy whi ch sees it as p aying specialatt ent ion to individuals and individual differences which has, in thepast. colored the psychological app roa ch to touri sm research. Socialpsychology as s uch has not bee n a sou rce of Ideas. Typical examplesare s tudies of touris t motivat ion which emp hasize such individualapproaches as psychoanalytic theory (Dichter 1967), individual l ifeexperiences (Rubenstein 1980), or personali ty traits (Crompton1979). Stu dies by psychologists of gro up travel seem often to haveignored the social context and si tuational factors which affectindividuals. Exampl es of this restr icted Individualist ic app roa ch arestu die s of the lea dersh ip style of to ur cou rie rs (Lopez 1980, 1981)and the effects of cultur e sh ock on tour ists in Africa (Cort and King1979). In both these cases, researchers were Intent on describinghow personal i ty variables , such as auth ori tar i anis m and internal-externa l locus of control , influenced tourist s ' reactions. Yet the veryfailure of these individual variables to explain the tourist s ' a t t i tud eshighlights the need for a broad er explana tory framework.

MODELS OF MANSuc h individ ualism in tour ism resear ch ls not only a result of a

limited span of att ent ion to the bread th of the discipline, but Is alsoa reflection of one of the ma ny and varied as su mp ti on s about thena tu re of Man on which psychological theor y and practice is based(Shotter 1975). Although they are usually implicit only, their moraland poli t ical force can c om mu ni cat e i tself in such a way as to make8 1984 ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH


5/13

PETER STRINGER AND PH ILIP PEARCE

t h e r e s u l t s o f p a r t i c u l a r p s y c h o l o g i c a l i n q u i r i e s i n t u i t i v e ly u n a t t r a c -t i v e . T h e m o s t i n f a m o u s " m o d e l o f M a n " i s p r o b a b l y t h e m e c h a n i s t i cm o d e l , w h i c h i s a s s o c i a t e d p a r t i c u l a r l y w i t h S k i n n e r i a n b e h a v i o r -i s m a n d i s u s u a l l y s e e n a s i n o p p o s i t i o n t o s o m e f o r m o f h u m a n i s m .W h a t e v e r t h e m o d e l i m p l i e d , i t s i m p o r t a n c e l l e s i n t h e p r e s u p p o s i -t i o n s w h i c h i t c o n t a i n s o n s u c h i s s u e s ( W e r t h e i m e r 1 9 7 2 ) a sw h e t h e r o r n o t M a n i s t h e v i c t i m o f h i s f a t e : i s g o v e r n e d b y h i s m i n do r b o d y , h i s c o n s t i t u t i o n o r e n v i r o n m e n t : i s s u b j e c t i v e l y o r o b j e c -t iv e ly k n o w a b l e , t h r o u g h b e h a v i o r o r e x p e r i e n c e : o r w h e t h e r h i sp r e s e n t i s a c c o u n t e d f o r b y th e p a s t , b y c o n c u r r e n t e v e n t s , o r b y a no r i e n t a t i o n t o t h e f u t u r e . A n o t h e r w a y o f i n d i c a t i n g s u c h d i f f e r i n gm o d e l s m i g h t , f o r e x a m p l e , d i s t i n g u i s h a n i n f o r m a t i o n - p r o c e s s i n ga p p r o a c h , a b io l o g i c a l a n d r e d u c t i o n i s t p o i n t o f v ie w , a m e c h a n i s t i cf o r m o f p r a g m a t i c b e h a v i o r i s m , a n d a h u m a n i s t i c , M a n - i s - s e l f -d e t e r m i n i n g p o s i t i o n .

A r e c e n t a n d d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e s e a n d o t h e r m o d e l s( C h a p m a n a n d J o n e s 1 9 8 0 ) l e a d s o n e t o t h e v i e w t h a t t h e c o m p l e x i t yo f h u m a n b e h a v i o r m a y demand s u c h a m u l t i p l i c i t y o f m o d e l s .S o m e m a y c e r t a i n l y p r o v e to b e u n f r u i t f u l , o r, m o r e p r o b a b l y ,a p p r o p r i a t e o n l y t o l i m i t e d a s p e c t s o f b e h a v i o r a n d e x p e r i e n c e . B u ta s F r u d e ( 1 9 8 0 ) h a s c o m m e n t e d :

I f a n y o n e t h i n k s w e h a v e d if f er e n t m o d e l s w a r r i n g o v e r t h e s a m et e r r it o r y t h e n h e o r s h e i s a b s o l u t e l y m i s s i n g t h e p o i n t . W e n e e da d i f f e r e n t m o d e l o f m a n t o l o o k a t d i f f e r e n t p r o b l e m s . . . I d o u b tw h e t h e r P a vl ov h a d v e ry m u c h t o s a y a b o u t h u m a n r e a c t io n s t ob e r e a v e m e n t . . . . I f t h e r e i s a w a r i t is b e c a u s e o u r v a r i o u s m o d e l so f m a n a r e l o c k ed i n t o o u r p o l it ic a l e n d e a v o u r s .

W h e n o n e c o n t e m p l a t e s a p a r t i c u l a r a r e a o f b e h a v i o r , i t i s p o s s i b l e t or e s t r i c t t h e m o d e l s o f M a n w h i c h a r e a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e t o p i c o fi n q u i r y . F o r e x a m p l e , m o d e l s o f b e h a v i o r w h i c h a r e l a b o r a t o r y - b a s e da n d d e e m p h a s i z e p e o p l e ' s a b i l i t y t o c h o o s e , s e l e c t , a n d d i r e c t t h e i rb e h a v i o r s w o u l d s e e m t o b e i n a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e a r e a o f l e i s u r e a n dt o u r i s m s t u d i e s . S i m i l a r l y , m o d e l s o f M a n w h i c h f al l t o c o n s i d e r t h et e m p o r a l p e r s p e c t i v e o n h u m a n b e h a v i o r m a y h a v e l i m i t e d a p p e a l t or e c r e a t i o n r e s e a r c h e r s w h o h a v e e m p h a s i z e d t h e l o n g i t u d i n a l n a -t u r e o f t o u r i s m e x p e r i e n c e s (c f . C l a w s o n a n d K n e t s c h 1 9 6 6 ) . R a t h e rt h a n i s s u e n o r m a t i v e p r e s c r i p t i o n s , h o w e v e r , a s to a n a p p r o p r i a t em o d e l , t h e p o i n t t o b e m a d e h e r e i s t h a t w h e n l o o k i n g to a n yp s y c h o l o g i c a l f r a m e w o r k f o r t o u r i s m r e s e a r c h , o n e s h o u l d f i r s tc a r e f u l l y e x a m i n e a n d w e i g h i t s i m p l i c i t a s s u m p t i o n s a l o n g a n u m -b e r o f d i m e n s i o n s (c f. S t r i n g e r , i n t h i s i s s u e ) .

1984 ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH 9


6/13

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGYAND TOURISM

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGYIn his int rod uct ion to the sociology of tourism, Cohen (1979)

advocated a contextual, processual, longitudinal, and emic appr oachto touri st studies. More recent t ren ds in social psychology take asimi lar app roach . Indeed sociology and social psychology have longbeen close cousins. However, this c on san gui ni ty has also stirred upfears of the disciplines' diss ipatio n a nd has led to a delineation, and apractice , of two ty pes of social psy chology. A mor e sociological socialpsychology is concer ned with the d ete rmi nat ion of individuals"behavior and exper ience by social inst i tut i ons and st ruc tures andwith people 's interactio n as framed by roles and normat ive expecta-tions. Socialization proces ses a nd the effects of social or organiza-tional st ruc tu re on role perf orma nce are typical areas of interest .Survey methodology is preferred to the labo ratory expe rime nt whichcha rac ter ize s mu ch of psychological social psychology. In the lattervar iant , the emphasi s is on behavior and intra- individual cogni t ionin social si tuations, with very l it tle att ent ion to socio struc turalconsid eration s. Areas of Interest include att i tud e cha nge a nd per-suasion, aggression, pe rson perception, attracti on, conformity, andgroup dynamics. An alternative way of indic ating these possibil i t iesfor sch is m wit hin social psycholog y would be to refer to the poles ofsocloblology (Wilson 1976) and symbolic inter acti onl sm (Laurer andHandel 1977).

Ano the r difficulty in defi ning social psychology is posed by a seriesofso-called "crises" that afflicted it du ri ng the 1970s: dis sati sfac tio nswith its nat ure , progr ess, an d poss ible role in society (cf. Duck 1980).The most persis tent of these was directed at i ts methodology. Thepre dom in anc e of posit ivistic exper iment s, i t was argued, was philo-sophically wrong and not a u seful model for social psychology. The yare much more diff icult to design and interpret than is normallyrecognized. In addition, they conceal the fact that the phe no me na ofinterest are bo un d in a cultural and historical context. Theoreticaland metat heoret ical "crisis" also revolved aro un d the model-of-Mandeba te already referred to, as well as th e do ub ts ab ou t w he th er socialpsycholog y is a science at all, is too American, o r is too consen sual ist.Its capacity for social imp act was q ues tio ned , n ot only in relation tomaj or social iss ues (such as violence, prejudic e, sex-roles), bu t also tomore specif ic problems, such as the decision to stop smoking.Associated with this ques tion were accusat ion s of "Irrelevance" Inlaboratory experiments on social behavior and experience. I t wassugges ted that there has been a distinct lack of social theoryunderl ying the discipline.10 1984 ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH


7/13

P E T E R S T R I N G E R A N D P H I L I P P E A R C E

It may, however, be mo re fruitful to look for the des tin ati on tha tsocial psychol ogy mig ht reach if It were to steer an even cours ebetween psychology and sociology. The former lures i t to the headydelights of fun dam ent al psychological process es (such as motivation,perception, and learning) for which the social envi ron men t would be amere container : the la t ter promises to imprison those processeswithin the det erm ina tio n of social roles, norms, and ex pectations .The middle cour se leads to sociopsychological knowledge which isnei the r too general nor too specif ic, and which is conc erned with theun der sta ndi ng of social behavior both throu gh the basic processesan d the social sys tem s whi ch give it its form. It is in the st ud y of therelationship, as such, between the individual and the social thatsocial psychology can f ind a uni qu e a nd less schisma tic identity.

The simples t escape from the trap of defining social psychologymig ht seem to be to point out reflexively th at everyone is a SocialPsychologist , and allow each person to arr ive at his or her owndefinit ion. However, the job of the social psycholo gist is prob ably bestseen as expl aining how people operat e as social psychologists: that is,how they make sense of their social world, of the relations betweenthemselves, others, society, and its insti tut ion s. Th e Social Psycholo-gist 's particular concern will be the context of those relations, thewider social and cultural backdrop.

These i mpor tant dif ferences of emph asis within social psychologyitself (cf. Rosnow 1981; Sa ha ki an 1982) have implic ation s for itspar tn ers hip wi th tour i sm s tudies . The s impl i fied c laim of thepresent paper is that sociopsychological appro aches are necessaryin tou rism research if one is to pay sufficient atten tio n to interactiveand context ual aspects of tour is t behavior and exper ience. From asociopsychological viewpoint, it is th rou gh inter actio n in par ticu larsi tuat ions that one learns about tour i sm-- i tse lf a social inst itu-ti on -h ow to experi ence it, relate to it, and even modify it. Tou ris mph eno me na are rarely enco unter ed and interpreted directly andindividually, but rath er thro ugh oth er people.

APPIAED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGYAn obvious difference between the two disciplines u nd er discus-

sion is that only tou ris m st udie s arise directly from and are con-cer ned centra lly with a specific field of everyd ay practice. Withinpsychology, social psychology Is a basic ra th er th an an appliedsubject. Nevertheless, there has always been some emphasis onapplication. At the end of the 60s, on e volume of The Handbook ofSocial Psychology (Llndzey and Aron son 1969) was devoted to1 9 8 4 A N N A L S O F T O U R I S M R E S E A R C I I l 1


8/13

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY AND TOURI SM

applic at ions -- in e thnic re la t ions, mass media , industry, economics.polit ics, education, international relations, religion, and mentalhealth. More recently there has been an explosion of interest inapplication, with special att ent ion to the f ields of envi ronm ent,heal th behavior , and law. As many as three ser ia ls have beenestab lish ed in the space of two years (Bickman 1980: Kidd and Saks1980: Step he ns on and Davis 198 I).

While social psych ology is cu rre nt ly in a frame of min d to con-tr ib ute to the more practical side of tourism, i t may be worthpoint in g out a nu mb er of s tumb ling blocks which have becomeapp are nt in the realm of applied studies. Th ese diff iculties areprobably relevant to any acad emic social science subject which seeksto jus tif y itself in t he "real world." Th ey need to be squ arel y faced.What follows is drawn from a discussion in Stringer (1982).

l .There is considerable confusion as to what is intended by"applied." Some people would req uire that applied research be thatwhich is actually put into practice; others require that results bepotentially applicable. Weaker definitions are satisf ied by researchwhich is in some unde fined way "useful;" which shows an interest insocial problems; or offers a tec hni que of deco mpos ing those prob-lems. However, criteria for what would constitute "application" inany of thes e forms are n ot specified.

2. There is a rhetorical insiste nce that no useful dist inct ion can bemade between "pure" and "applied" research. Little just if ic atio n isoffered in support. Arg ume nts that all "pure" research has practicalimplications, or that good applied research ca nno t be done witho ut atheoretical basis, serve to bolster the confusion above, and tosupport the exist ing academic emphasis on theoret ical ly-or ientedresearch. Th ere is little e v i d e n c e that theoretically-based research isin any sense more useful in practice. The fact that p ract it i one rs alsohave theories, however informal, is ignored.

3.A theoret ical and hypothesis- test ing or ientat ion devalues thecont r ibu t ion of descr ipt ive research which would give insight intothe " na tu ral hist ory" of a problem. As a result, the social andhistorical context, within which practice has ultimately to fit, issuppres sed or taken for granted.4. There is a t ende ncy for the selection of problem s for stud y to bereactive, uncrit ical, opportunistic, and subject to fashion. For ex-ample, u ne mp lo ym en t was relatively ignored as a problem until i tbecame chronic. Now it is widely used as an aren a for con tin uin g towork on existing theoretical questions. Other so-called "problems"are simply taken over in whatever form they are given--p ropag ated,for example, by the mas s media, polit icians, or in effective prac-12 1984 ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH


9/13

PETER STRING ER AND PtlILIP PEARCE

t i t ioners. There is a shor tage of a priori and cri t ical problem-analysisbefore empirical resear ch ls at tempted.

5.T his is in part the result of the tradit io nal presc ripti on ofscien ce as value-free, whi ch in tu rn feeds the cons ider able reluc-tance to see or accept that the stru ctu ral inser tion of practice intoresea rch will entail a value com po ne nt of a moral a nd /o r poli t icalnature . The personal involvement and com mit men t which canstimulate an applied researcher, and which are present in certainforms of actio n research, is equally suspect.

6. One suc h value choice concer ns the potenti al beneficiary of theresearch. Cynically, it is most often an academic career. Implicitly,because of fundin g processes and the s t r uct ure of socia l scienceitself, it is likely to benefit government agencies and industrial-commercia l interests more than the man-in-the-s t ree t . Science.forthe People is a jour nal whose influence has not pen etra te d very farinto social psychology.

7. Allowing lay people "ins ide" o ne's rese arch , in wh ate ver role, onlythreatens to muddy the river. The goal is crisp and definit iveproced ures and resul ts . The complexi ty and indet ermi nate n atur e ofmost social problems, however, sugge sts that single stu dies or evenprograms can at best be only indicative. A modest " ' triangulation"approach is more realistic.

8. Tha t app roa ch entails collaboration, joi nin g the fate of one 'sresear ch to another 's . The problem's complexity will probably sug-gest a multidisciplinary collaboration. But although l ip-service iscertainly paid to the principle, other disciplines are simply left topursue their own path. Their priori t ies and procedures are rare lyallowed critically to inters ect with one's skills and interests.

TOURISM STUDIES AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGYExisting sociopsychological researc h on tour ism is fragmentary.

What s tudi es there are may be seen as the reflection of no more thana casual e nco unt er between touris m a nd socia l psychology ra therthan the product of a serious re la t ionship. Domi nant themes, todate , inc lude a t t i tudinal outco mes of intern at ional t ravel and con-tacts (Smith 1955, 1957: Steinkalk and Taft 1979; Pearce 1982),to ur is t- gu id e rela tio ns (Taft 1977: Lopez 1980, 1982; Holloway 1981 )an d the effects of cul tur e sh ock (Cort and King 1979; Pearce 1981 )."Visitor evaluation " studies have also been co ndu cte d which con-sider not only sociopsychological que sti on s (such as gro up size,gro up composit ion, and i nterp erson al relationships), but also designIssues (cf. Borun 1977: Zube 1980; Hayward 1980). The inclusion of

1984 ANNALS OF TOURIS M RESEA RCH 13


10/13

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY AND TOURISM

par t icular tour is t s tu dies und er the sociopsychological rubr ic issomew hat problematic, however . A nu mb er of s tudies condu cted bysociologists, geographers, anthropologists, and leisure researchersalso tackle sociopsychological question s, particularly in the generalarea of tourists' and locals" attitudes. (For a review of the researchbroadly related to the social psych ology of tou ris t behavior, seePearce 1982).

While the papers which follow in this special issue do cont ri bu te toa developing relationship between tourism and social psychology,they should a lso be read as foreshadowing some of the fut uredirections which this relationship might take. Whatever kinds ofsociopsychological tourist studies evolve in the future, their uti l i tyand accept abili ty is likely to be related to their sym biot ic value. Theresearch exercises should be useful to both scholarly communities.The tourism setting can be a complicated and fascinating f ieldlaborato ry for the social psychologist , while t ouri sm research mayprofit from incorporating conceptual, methodological, and analyticskills from the psychological arena.

It is imp ort ant to place suc h formative researc h in an epistemologi-cal context. Social psychology need s to show more clearly tha t it hasso me th in g useful to say in the t ou ris m field at the levels of bothconcept and action. This demand could be satisf ied by more pre-para dig mati c research; that is, stu dies which are descriptive, specificas to cont ext and setting, and sufficiently detailed to be of practicalsignificance. An example is Pearce's (1981) stu dy of tourists ' reac-tions to tropical holiday islands. He establ ished that their moo ds andsatisfaction with the holiday declined sharply on the third day of asix-day tr ip. I t was demonstrated that this dissatisfaction could berela ted to the joint cont r ibu t ion s of the tour is ts ' physical heal th andto their boredom with provided as opposed to self- init iated touristactivities. The significance of this research for the to urist operato rs ofthe islands was immedi ate. I t sugges ted the need to provide bett erhealth-care facilit ies for the troub lesom e irr i t ants of tropical holidays(sun burn , bites, st ings, etc.) and a res tr uc tu ri ng of resort activit ies toprovide greater freedom for guests earlier in their week-long vaca-tions. The symbiotic value of the study for socio-psychologicalresearch der ived f rom an improved un der sta nd ing of cul ture shock(cf. Fu rn ha m in this issue). It appea red that an Imp ort ant part of thediso rien tati on associated with traveling may be due to "en viro nmen tshock" as well as to the change in roles which tourists experience.(These roles are referred to furt her by Strin ger in th is issue).

Pre-paradigmatic research is particularly likely to provide im-mediate points of interest across the t our ism- social psychology14 1984 ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH


11/13

P E T E R S T R I N G E R A N D P H I L I P P I ~ Z ~ k R C E

divide. One can envisage a range of endeavo rs in touris m-soci alpsychology inqu i ry which might achieve th is end. Among theaut hors ' favor i tes are a systematic appraisal of a chosen theory ormodel for a mat rix of different touri st s i tuati ons. For example, theapplicatio n of ideas from hu ma n ethological stud ies to a representa-t ive range of tour i s t -ho st encou nters would const i tut e one suchsystem atic endeavor. Others o ccur in the work with role theory ofSmall an d Khach atoo rian, or Woolley's use of personal con str ucttheory (see Stringer, this issue). Practical avenues for sociopsycho-logical inqui ry lie in the gro up dyn ami cs of tou rin g parties, advice onservices for special gro ups suc h as the han dicap ped, the task ofguiding people in s t range environmen ts , and the asses smen t of hostresponses to tourism.

If ther e is to be a fruitful inte rpla y of sym bio sis betw een socialpsycho logy and to uri sm studies , each will need to see its benef itsand avoid charges of parasi t ism. The tour ism researcher can tempthis psychologi cal colleague's colla bora tion in a n um b er of ways.Tou ris m offers a natu ralist ic laboratory, a self-contained and limitedset of social behavio rs in which traditional topics such as att i tudeformation and change or group dyna mics are unavoidable . It invi tesat tent ion simultan eously to the environment , cul tural context, and(short- term) temporal processes more immediately than do manyot he r applied fields. But the social psycholog ist will not wan t to trysimply to answe r any qu est ion present ed to him, in whatever form.He will prefer to select questions which appear to give him a goodcha nce of advan cing at the same time some aspect of his ownsubject . A purely technical a pp rop r ia t io n of sociopsychologicaltheory or method is unlikely to be int erestin g to the academic.

Reciprocal respect is also due. Social psychology can offer a u ni qu ecollection of theories and met hod s lying between sociology andpsychology. It is parti cular ly rich methodologically: usi ng labora toryand field experiments, natural experiments, controlled and partici-pan t observation, and survey techniq ues. It is diff icult to see how itsconc ern with aspects of hu ma n Interaction could not be a centralpart of the comp rehe nsi ve study of tourism. But, at the same time, itwill not expect un qu es ti on in g accep tanc e of whate ver i t has to offer ,nor expe ct to exercise the impe riali sm o f a basic discip line over amor e p ractica l study. [] [3

REFERENCESB i c k m a n , L ., e d .

1 9 8 0 A p p l i e d S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y A n n u a l 1. B e v e r l y H i ll s: S a g e .

1 9 8 4 A N N A L S O F T O U R I S M R E S E A R C H 1 5


12/13

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY AND TOURISM

Borun, M.1977 Measuring the Immeasurable. Washington: Association of Science Tech-

nology Centers.Cha pma n, A.. and D. Jones . eds.1980 Models of Man. Leicester: Brit ish Psychological Society.Clawson, M., and J. K net sch

1966 Economics of Outdoor Recreation. Baltimore: Jo hn s Hopkins Press.Cohen, E.

1979 Ret hin kin g the Sociology of Tourism. Ann als of Tour ism Research 6:18-35.Cort, D.. and M. King

1979 Some Correlates of Cultu re Sh ock a mo ng Ame rican Touri sts in Africa.International Jou rnal of Intercultural Behaxiour 3:211-26.

Crompton. J.1979 Motivations for Pleasure Vacation. Anna ls of Tour ism Research 6:408-24.

Dichter. E.1967 What Motivates People to Travel? Addr ess to the Indi an Gov ernm ent Depart-

mcn t of Tourism, Kashmir, October.Duck. S.

1980 One of the Futures of Social Psychology. In The Development of SocialPsychology. R. Gllm our a nd S. Duck. eds. Londo n: Academic Press.

Frude. N.1980 Com men t in Ch ap ma n an d Jone s, op. cit., p. 12.

t tayward. D.G.1980 Visitor-oriented Rcseareh at Old Sturbridge Village. Unpublished Manu-

script, The En~tron ment Institute. University of Massachus etts, Amherst.Holloway, J.C.

1981 The Gu ided Tour: A Sociological Approach. Annal s of Tou ris m Researc h8:377-402.

Kldd, R.F., and M.J. Saks1980 Adva nces in Applied Social Psychology. Volume 1. ttlllsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Lauer. R.H., and W.M. Handel1977 Social Psychology: The Theory an d Ap plication of Symbolic Interacti onism .

Boston: Floughton Mifflin.Lindzey. G.. an d E. Aro nso n, eds.

1969 The Han dbo ok of Social Psychology, Volume 5. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.l,opez. E.M.1980 The Effects of Leade rship Style on Satisfactio n-levels of Tour Quality. Jou rna l

of Travel Res ear ch 18:20-3.1981 The Effect of Tour Leaders' Trai nin g on Travellers' Satisf actio n with Tour

Quality. Jou rn al of Travel R esea rch 19:23-7.Pearce, P.I,.

1981 Env iro nm ent Shock: A Stud y of Tourists" Reactions to Two Tropical Islands.Jo ur na l of Applied Social Psychology 11:268-80.

1982 The Social Psychology of Tour ist Behaviour. Oxford: Perga mon.Reason. J.

1974 Man in Motion. London: Weidenfeld an d Nlcholso n.Rosnow, R.1981 Pa rad ig ms in Tran sit ion : New York: Oxford Unive rsity Press.Rubenstei n, C.

1980 Vacation s. Psychology Today (Mayl:62-76.Sahak ian. W.S.1982 1 istory and Sys tems of Social Psychology. Washin gton: tl emis pher e.16 1984 ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH


13/13

PETER STRINGER AND PHILIP PEARCE

Shotter. J.1975 Images of Man In Psychological Research. London. Methuen.

Smi th. H.P.1955 Do Intercultural Experiences Affect Attitud es? Jou rnal of Abnormal an dSocial Psy chology 51:469-77.1957 The Effects of Intercult ural Experience: A Follow-up Investigation. Jou rna l of

Abnorm al and Social Psychology 54:262-9.Steinkalk. E.. and R. Taft

1979 The Effect of a Plan ned In tercultural Experienc e on the Attitu des andBcha~iour of the Participants. International Journal of Intercultural Relations3:187-98.

Stephenson, G.M.. and J.H. Davis1981 Prog ress in Applied Social Psychology. Chl che stcr : Wiley.

Str ing er. P.. ed.1982 Co nfr on tin g Social Issues: Applic ations of Social Psychology. Volumes l a nd

2. London: Acade mic Prcss.Taft. R.

1977 Coping with Unfamiliar Cultures. In Studies in Cross-Cultural Psychology.Volume I. London: Academ ic Press.

Werthelmer, M.1972 Fu nd am en ta l Is sue s in Psychology. New York: IIolt. Rin eha rt an d Winst on.

Wilson, E.O.1976 Socioblology: The New Synthesi s. Cambridge : IIarvard University Press.

Zube. E.1980 Env iron men tal Evaluation. Monterey: Brooks/Cole.

1984 ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH 17

toward a symbiosis of social psychology and tourism

Documents