Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
com/locate/atoures
doi:10.1016/j.annals.2004.07.012
INTRODUCTION
Models of consumer behavior typically predict intention (or purchase decision) as the immediate antecedent of purchase (Engel,
Blackwell and Miniard 1993; Howard and Sheth, 1969; Peter and Olson
Roger March is Senior Lecturer in the School of Marketing, University of New South Wales
(Sydney 2052, Australia. Email <r.march@unsw.edu.au>). His tourism research interests
include international distribution systems, Japanese behavior, and unethical issues. Arch
Woodside is Professor of marketing at Boston College. He is a Fellow of Royal Society of
Canada, Society for Marketing Advances, American Psychological Association, and the
American Psychological Society.
905
906
TOURISM BEHAVIOR
1999). The resulting implication is that intention and subsequent consumption behavior are theoretically indistinguishable. Similarly, behaviors available within a given environment that are unplanned,
unintended, are not conceptualized in consumer behavior models.
Foxall labels marketing theorys aversion to the study of unplanned
and impulsive behavior as pathological (2000:93).
The present articles objective is to bridge this empirical gap and
offer insights into the similarities and differences between consumers
planned and actual purchase and consumption behaviors. The empirical research setting examined focuses on vacation destination behavior. Using a between subjects quasi-experiment (Cook and Campbell
1979), the field study examines consumption behaviors that respondents plan to undertake, as reported in an entry survey to the destination, and the behaviors undertaken, as reported in an exit survey to the
same destination. The study investigates several behaviors (length-ofstay, spending, and number of activities undertaken) and examines
effects of contingency influences (group composition, product experience, and motivations) on the differences between planned and realized length-of-stay and spending.
The field study reported here is not the conventional approach to
planned and actual behaviors. Previous research into intentions and
consumption overwhelmingly focuses on planned behaviors, or intentions, and specifically with two aims: to improve the use of intention
measurement in its predictive power of future behavior and to influence purchasing. Though a multitude of factors and situations interfere
or constrain an individuals ability to act upon his or her intentions
(Belk 1974, 1975; Filiatrault and Ritchie 1988), intention is still an
important construct found to relate significantly to actual behavior.
907
ing actual purchasing and other times overestimating actual purchasing (1998:189).
Studies often focus on the predictive powers and accuracy of intentions. Most models of consumer behavior incorporate intentions as
an important predictor variable to forecast sales (Kalwani and Silk
1982; Morwitz and Schmittlein 1992). Few distinctions are made between buyer intentions and actions. Situational variables are used to
rationalize divergences between intentions and behavior. In the words
of Juster, Purchases (actions) are directly related to (or predicted by)
intentions, modified by the incidence of unforeseen circumstances
(1964:66). This view remains both speculative and lacking in specificswhat unforseen circumstances affect intention-action gaps and
the effect size of such influences need examination. This article probes
the nature and size of such gaps as they relate to planning and doing
tourism behavior.
Lynch and Srull (1982) offer one reason for the apparent lack of
investigation into the final stage in the consumer consumption process. In their view, consumer research primarily is phenomenon, as opposed to theory, driven. For marketing practitioners, particularly in
advertising related fields, the predictive power of intentions to forecast
future consumption behavior accurately has obvious commercial appeal. This view builds on the assumption that consumers both attending to commercial messages and making plans have reciprocal
influencesintentions are worthy of study because they reflect benefit-seeking behavior that would enable destination strategists to craft
effective communication messages (Woodside and Jacobs 1985). Consequently, examining consumers planned strategies offers unique
strengths that relate especially to learning what brings tourists to a
destination the first-time as well as the second and future visits.
The concept of unplanned behavior is one dimension of the issue
regarding the relationship between intentions and actual behavior that
has been examined in marketing. Sterns (1962) seminal article proposes four categories of unplanned purchases: pure impulse buying,
characterized by a total lack of preplanning; reminder impulse buying,
whereby purchases are sparked by previous personal experience or recall; suggestion impulse buying, where one sees the purchased product
for the first time and buys it; and planned impulse buying, typified by a
shopper entering a store with some specific items in mind, but with the
expectation and intention of making other purchases dependent on
such things as price and coupon specials. By the mid-80s, scholars
began to deconstruct the unplanned concept, and focus on its impulse
dimension (Rook and Hoch 1985; Rook and Gardner 1993). Though
an impulse purchase is unplanned, it is also includes substantial complexity in terms of antecedents, consequences, and subcategories of impulse behavior. Since the 80s an increasing number of scholars have
informed these impulse buying issues (Agee and Martin 2001; Beatty
and Ferrell 1998; Gardner and Rook 1987; Rook and Fisher 1995;
Weun, Jones, and Beatty 1998). However, the characteristics and antecedents of unplanned behavior in the broader sense remain
unexplored and unknown.
908
TOURISM BEHAVIOR
909
and during a vacation for a number of measures, including length-ofstay, activities, accommodation, and group composition. While they
found that people tend to plan more activities than they actuate, those
regarding length-of-stay, group, and transport mode were carried out
as planned (1999:91). For at least two reasons these results must be
treated with caution. First, significance tests were not applied. Second,
the same respondents were interviewed, thus creating two methodological problems: self-generated validity, whereby respondents attempt to
justify their earlier expressed intentions (Feldman and Lynch 1988)
and social desirability bias (Cobb and Hoyer 1986), in that impulse
or unplanned purchasing is underestimated in a persons effort to
appear rational and goal oriented.
Perdue (1986) touches upon the subject in an exploratory investigation seeking to empirically verify the proposition that unplanned yet
realized behavior yields higher spending than the unplanned and
unrealized. He reports that consumers who purchase a product not
planned for are likely to express satisfaction with it as a means of justifying the purchase to themselves and other members of their group.
Ajzen and Driver (1992) use leisure activities as the research setting
for testing the theory of planned behavior. They found that the theory
is useful in predicting influences upon intentions and actual behaviors
from intentions. Their study has the limitation of being confined to
college students and in being limited to five leisure activities. As Ajzen
and Driver (1992) conclude, future research needs to examine other
recreation activities and to use more accurate and valid reporting
means. Here again, this report builds upon the previous work discussed
by examining influences in a real tourism/leisure setting, with a large
number of respondents and across a wide range of activities and
experiences.
In this context, existing models of consumer decisionmaking (Howard and Sheth 1969) focus mostly on tangible products, rather than
intangible services in tourism. Its product is experiential with emotional
undertones whose decision process differs vastly from the rational,
problem-solving scenario applied to many tangible goods. Mayo and Jarvis (1981) argue that tourism is a special form of consumption behavior
involving an intangible, heterogeneous purchase of an experiential
product. As a consequence, existing models omit important realities.
Um and Crompton suggest, that perceptions of alternative destinations physical attributes in the awareness set . . . are susceptible to
change during the period of active solicitation of information stimulated by an intention to select a travel destination (1990:437).
Finally, several tourism researchers argue that the benefits realized
from a consumption experience may be more useful to understand
than the benefits that consumers say they intend to seek (Dann
1981; Pearce and Caltabiano 1983; Shoemaker 1994; Woodside and
Jacobs 1983). The present report advances the proposition that learning both benefits sought and plans made, as well as benefits realized
and activities done, provides valuable information for building tourism
theory of antecedents and consequences of such behavior. Research
that investigates the process by which some intentions are actualized
910
TOURISM BEHAVIOR
behavior and convincingly explains the influences resulting in unplanned as well as planned behaviors is likely to make a valuable contribution to the advancement of knowledge in the field of tourism.
Exploring Consumer Plans and Behaviors
The two hypotheses (as well as their rationales) relating planned and
actual behaviors focus on behavior within consumers tourism
consumption systems (Becken and Gnoth 2004; Woodside and Dubelaar 2002). A tourism consumption system is the set of related
thoughts, decisions, and behaviors by a discretionary tourist prior to,
during, and following a trip. The central proposition in a theory of
[tourism consumption system] is that the thoughts, decisions, and
behaviors regarding one activity influence the thoughts, decisions,
and behaviors for a number of other activities (Woodside and Dubelaar 2002: 120). The concept is similar but still distinct from Solomons
notion of consumption constellations. The latter are sets of products and activities used by consumers to define, communicate, and perform social roles (Solomon 1999:562). Distinct from this concept, a
tourism consumption system implies the likelihood of a contingent
causal chain of observable activities before and during discretionary
travel, for example, the decision by a Canadian couple to visit France
for two weeks might trigger a search for places to visit and accommodations.
H1: Realized consumption behaviors are greater in number than planned for a
set of customer activities related to a tourism consumption system.
Three contingencies common in consumer behavior and consumption plans are product experience, motivation, and in tourism, composition of the group. These were incorporated into the model as
moderating variables acting upon planned and realized behaviors.
First, product experience is critical when studying the dynamic choice
processes of consumers new to a market (Heilman, Bowman and
Wright 2000). Experience, which is the accumulation of routine and
habitual buyer behavior, allows for purposive and intelligent behavior
without deliberation (Katona 1975). Tourists who vacation at the same
place regularly are likely to engage in little pre-arrival planning, relying
instead on their accumulated knowledge and experience from previous visits (Fodness and Murray 1999).
Second, motivations underlying a leisure trip are likely to have significant influences on behavior (Morrison 1996). Tourists visiting friends
or relatives are more likely to rely on the advice of their hosts, less likely
to use product information, and thus more likely to deviate between
planned and eventual behaviors (Gitelson and Crompton 1983).
Leisure tourists, on the other hand, are more likely to engage in prearrival planning by obtaining information, particularly if they are
first-timers. Excitement and adventure seekers tend to look for more
information and undertake more activities (Gitelson and Crompton
911
Research Method
Two large-scale data files, from the 1992 face-to-face entry and exit
surveys to Prince Edward Island (PEI), Canada, were used to investigate
the research questions. The entry survey consisted of 2,239 individual
interviews and the exit survey 2,362. The long-interview method
(McCracken 1988) was employed for both data sets. The surveys were
undertaken by the Marketing Agency (a PEI government-sponsored
organization). While the data were collected over a decade ago, they
provide a rare ability for comparing planned versus realized tourism
behavior. Heretofore, the two data sets have never been used in a single
research project. The only previous use was a government descriptive
report profiling tourists demographics, attitudes, and behaviors (Marketing Agency 1993) and a study using only the exit interviews on the
impact of PEIs 1992 advertising campaign on attitudes, behaviors,
and expenditures (Woodside, Trappey and MacDonald 1997). The data
were collected using 13-page entry and 12-page exit questionnaires.
The interviews were completed during the peak tourism season (May
22 to October 5, 1992), a period when over 95% of leisure tourists visit
PEI. The questionnaire was administered at all points of entry and exit
(ferry, airports, and cruise ships) in matching proportions to total trip
visits for each travel mode. Over 93% of all tourists to PEI arrive by one
of two ferries; 6% via the airport and 1% via cruiseships. The interviews
912
TOURISM BEHAVIOR
Study Findings
The great majority of tourism decisions are likely made while considering issues related to temporal and financial affordability: whether
tourists can afford to take time off; how much they can afford to spend;
which destination option best fits within their time constraints; which
destination option best fits within their financial budget constraints;
and when trade-offs are necessary, what choice heuristics should apply
in selecting among destination options being considered.
While the time a tourist allocates to a vacation is generally fixed (as is
confirmed below), the amount of money set aside for vacation purposes is more flexible. Or put another way, while most people have a
predetermined number of days they will or can be away from home,
the number of consumers with a specific monetary amount (say,
$1,500 for discretionary spending on non-essential items) is likely to
be much smaller. As found in the entry survey, more than one in three
(37%) did not state a specific budget for their trip. It is unlikely that all
the respondents who provided a monetary figure had that exact figure
in mind beforehand. Consumers are likely to have a ballpark figure
913
914
TOURISM BEHAVIOR
Sightseeing
Visiting museums and historical sites
Going to the beach
Lobster supper
General shopping
Antiques and handcrafts shopping
Live theater
Active sports
Land or harbour tour
Nightlife
Water sports
Golfing
Planned %
(n = 2,131)
81
36
22
25
21
16
14
8
6
5
11
9
Done %
(n = 2,239)
87
62
43
44
58
54
22
14
16
13
10
9
Chi-square
28.215
315.827
178.615
174.713
625.682
689.105
41.913
36.741
108.831
70.358
1.217
0.400
p<
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.672
0.842
915
% Planned% Done
% Difference
Behaviours
Shopping for antiques and handcrafts
Shopping in general
Land or harbour tour
Nightlife
Active sports
Visiting museums and historical sites
Lobster supper
Live theater
Going to the beach
Sightseeing
Water sports
Golfing
16
21
6
5
8
36
25
14
22
81
11
9
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
54
58
16
13
14
62
44
22
43
87
10
9
+235
+230
+171
+136
+80
+75
+67
+54
+48
+7
6
2
$394
3.0
Moderately
experienced
n = 489
$432
3.8
Realized
Heavy
experienced
n = 637
Firsttimers
n = 1184
Moderately
experienced
n = 397
Heavy
experienced
n = 524
$352
4.8
$518
3.5
$532
4.6
$453
5.5
916
TOURISM BEHAVIOR
917
the survey had been considered, formulated, or, in the case of a group
greater than one, discussed or mentioned before the survey was
administered.
CONCLUSION
This study reports the details of research findings with respect to the
relationship between planned and reported consumption behaviors
across two consumer samples. The key findings include empirical evidence supporting a contingency theory for understanding how realized
tourism strategy varies systematically from that planned. The changes
among activities done versus planned reflect what tourists actually find
available to do when in-destination rather than when arriving. Among
PEI tourists relatively few plan to engage in shopping during their Island stays; yet the majority do so. Consequently, the shopping reported
done likely reflects a cultural-sightseeing consumption system among
tourists. This cultural-sightseeing appears to be one of the two key
drivers for experiencing PEI as a unique destination brand. The other
key driver includes visiting museums and historical sites (PEI is recognized as the birthplace of the Canadian federation). These two key
918
TOURISM BEHAVIOR
drivers appear to offer the most effective brand positioning opportunity for marketing PEI as a leisure destination. Thus, rather than touting activities that call attention to the strengths of competing
destinations (such as beaches and water sports available in the Carolinas and Florida), the unique cultural heritage sites and unique product offerings by PEIs master craft persons reflect the planned-done
conjunctive strength of the Island. Rather than concluding that studies
focusing on one strategy type (planned or realized) is best, the more
useful recommendation is that research combining data on tourists
plans upon destination arrival and their realized behaviors offers unique and useful views toward understanding tourism and destination
marketing strategy. Research on planned strategy is suited uniquely
for gaining knowledge on how and why arriving tourists come to a specific destination. Research on realized strategy is suited for learning
benefits realized and for studying post-experience attitudes and intentions (satisfactions with specific services and the destination gestalt
experience).
Second, time often is a critical variable. Buehler, Griffin and Ross
(1994) found that, in general, people have a systematic tendency to
underestimate their own completion times, a phenomenon they label
planning fallacy. Applying this argument to a tourism setting, consumers may plan to do more than they can actually complete within
the time constraints of a trip away from home. However, the evidence
here refutes this logic. People engage in more activities and visit more
attractions than they had planned. Gross (1994) argues that responses
to time pressures are contingent upon the degree of intensity of
objective time pressure (clock and calendar time) and subjective
pressure (perceived urgency in response to the objective pressures of
clock or calendar deadlines). Another possible explanation for discrepancies between planned and actual behaviors may be that subjective
time pressures have an influence on consumers, who are cautious in
expressing intentions in an entry survey. Read and Loewenstein
(1995) argue that consumers compress future time intervals when making combined choices and hence overestimate the effect of satiation.
This factor helps explain the low levels of intended activity reported
prior to entry. While time issues are important factors to consider, it
would be nave to assumein the absence of further researchthat
time is a critical factor in the discrepancies between planned and actual
behaviors.
Third, situational factors are an obvious explanatory variable. The
extent to which unforeseen events will change a persons intention depends on how accurately people can predict how their preferences will
change (Simonson 1993). Using the logic of the theory of reasoned action, intentions would most likely match behavior the more the purchase behavior is within the volitional control of the individual.
Fourth, Shapiro and Krishnan (1999) state that consumers often forget
intentions. They argue that marketing models used to forecast sales
should incorporate memory as a variable to explain why some intentions do not lead to purchases. They also point out the complexity of
memory processes (Krishnan and Shapiro 1999). Memory that a per-
919
920
TOURISM BEHAVIOR
duration on Prince Edward Islandand probably provided a ballpark figure for intended spending when surveyed. On the other
hand, the more widely held view of behavior might suggest that the
low figure of 7% reflects the desire of survey respondents to appear rational in their consumption behavior.
The nature and effect of questioning in the pre-consumption (entry
survey) and post-consumption (exit survey) phases also shed light on
discrepancies between reported intentions and actual behavior. Questions asked in the exit point elicit a cognitive response from respondents. The survey requests simple facts derived from very recent
memorysuch as number of days stayed, places visited, attractions visited, and money spent. Affective reactions are not requested and may
not be retrieved. One can compare this situation with the entry survey.
Respondents are asked to make a series of choices among, for example,
attractions and activities. This forces them to cognize places, objects
and experiences, yet the reality is that the decisions (putting aside
the doubtful legitimacy of this nomenclature) reported in the survey
are much more likely to constitute affective reactions than be rationally
conceived goals. In a sense, there is a psychic gap between the asking of
the question and the moment in the consumption system that the decision to consume the product is considered (if in fact that moment does
arrive). The magnitude and influence of this psychic gap far exceeds
the time lapse between the surveying of intentions and the actualization of behaviors.
Tests of the competing theoretical propositions as to why planned
are often less than realized behaviors need to be examined in future
research. This study focuses on probing the extent of the differences
between planned and realized, not on providing a critical test as to
the efficacy of the multiple rationales found in the literature regarding
such differences.
In sum, this report complements and extends Young, DeSarbo
and Morwitz, who propose, [I]ntentions appear to almost always
provide biased measures of purchase propensity, sometimes underestimating actual purchasing and other times overestimating actual
purchasing (1998:189). Both studies to examine planned and realized behavior are valuable: research focusing on intentions is helpful
in particular for learning motivational and strategic planning drivers
that result in destination visits; research focusing on realized behaviors is helpful in particular for learning tourists reports on done
activitiesand consequently what experiences likely encourage and
discourage repeat visits. Therefore, examining both planned and
realized strategies contributes to tourism theory and management
insight.
AcknowledgementsThe authors are grateful for use of the data sets provided by the Tourism
Department, Province of Prince Edward Island, Canada, for the empirical analyses that this
article reports.
921
REFERENCES
Abdul-Muhmin, A.
1999 Contingent Decision Behavior: Effect of Number of Alternatives to be
Selected on Consumers Decision Processes. Journal of Consumer Psychology
8:91111.
Abratt, R., and S. Goodey
1990 Unplanned Buying and In-Store Stimuli in Supermarkets. Managerial
and Decision Economics 11:11121.
Agee, T., and B. A. S. Martin
2001 Planned or Impulse Purchases? How to Create Effective Infomercials.
Journal of Advertising Research (December):3542.
Ajzen, I., and B. Driver
1992 Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior to Leisure Choice.
Journal of Leisure Research 24:207224.
Bagozzi, R., and U. Dholakia
1999 Goal Setting and Goal Striving in Consumer Behavior. Journal of
Marketing 63:1932.
Bagozzi, R., and R. Nataraajan
2000 The Year 2000: Looking Forward. Psychology and Marketing 17:111.
Bass, F., D. Tigert, and D. Lonsdale
1968 Market Segmentation: Group versus Individual Behavior. Journal of
Marketing Research 5:264270.
Beatty, S., and M. Ferrell
1998 Impulse Buying: Modeling its Precursors. Journal of Retailing
74:169191.
Becken, S., and J. Gnoth
2004 Tourist Consumption Systems among Overseas Visitors: Reporting on
American, German, and Australian Visitors to New Zealand. Tourism
Management 25:375385.
Belk, R.
1974 An Exploratory Assessment of Situational Effects in Buyer Behaviour.
Journal of Marketing Research 11:156163.
1975 Situational Variables and Consumer Behaviour. Journal of Consumer
Research 2:157163.
Bettman, J. R.
1979 Memory Factors in Consumer Choice: A Review. Journal of Marketing
43:3753.
Bettman, J., M. Luce, and J. Payne
1998 Constructive Consumer Choice Processes. Journal of Consumer Marketing 25:187217.
Bruce, V., and P. R. Green
1991 Visual Perception. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Buehler, R., D. Griffin, and M. Ross
1994 Exploring the Planning Fallacy: Why People Underestimate their
Task Completion Times. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
67:366381.
Chadwick, R.
1987 Concepts, Definitions, and Measures Used in Travel and Tourism
Research. In Travel, Tourism and Hospitality Research, B. Ritchie and C.
Goeldner, eds., pp. 101116. New York: Wiley.
Clawson, C.
1971 How Useful are 90-day Purchase Probabilities? Journal of Marketing
Research 35:4347.
Cobb, C. J., and W. D. Hoyer
1986 Planned Versus Impulse Purchase Behaviour. Journal of Retailing
62(Winter):384409.
Cook, T., and D. Campbell
1979 Quasi-Experimentation. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
922
TOURISM BEHAVIOR
923
924
TOURISM BEHAVIOR
Shoemaker, S.
1994 Segmenting the U.S. Travel Market According to Benefits Realized.
Journal of Travel Research 33(1):821.
Simonson, I.
1993 Get Closer to Your Customers by Understanding How They Make
Choices. California Management Review 27:6884.
Solomon, M.
1999 Consumer Behavior (4th ed.). Upper Saddle: Prentice Hall.
Stayman, D., and R. Deshplande
1989 Situational Ethnicity and Consumer Behavior. Journal of Consumer
Research 16:361371.
Stern, E.
1962 The Significance of Impulse Buying Today. Journal of Marketing
26:5962.
Stewart, S., and C. Vogt
1999 A Case-based Approach to Understanding Vacation Planning. Leisure
Sciences 21:7995.
Tauber, E.
1975 Predictive Validity in Consumer Research. Journal of Advertising
Research 15:5964.
Tobin, J.
1959 On the Predictive Value of Consumer Intentions and Attitudes. Review of
Economics and Statistics 41:111.
Warshaw, P.
1980 Predicting Purchase and Other Behaviors From General and Contextually Specific Intentions. Journal of Marketing Research 17:2633.
Weick, K. E.
1998 The Social Psychology of Organizing. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Weun, S., M. A. Jones, and S. E. Beatty
1998 The Development and Validation of the Impulse Buying Tendency Scale.
Psychological Reports 82:11231133.
Woodside, A., and L. Jacobs
1985 Step two in Benefit Segmentation: Learning the Benefits Realized by
Major Travel Markets. Journal of Travel Research 24(1):713.
Woodside, A., and C. Dubelaar
2002 A General Theory of Tourism Consumption Systems: Conceptual
Framework and an Empirical Exploration. Journal of Travel Research
40:120132.
Woodside, A., R. Trappey, and R. MacDonald
1997 Measuring Linkage-Advertising Effects on Customer Behavior and Net
Revenue: Using Quasi-Experiments of Advertising Treatments with Novice
and Experienced Product-Service Users. Canadian Journal of Administrative
Sciences 14:214228.
Wright, P., and B. Weitz
1977 Time Horizon Effects on Product Evaluation Strategies. Journal of
Marketing Research 14:429443.
Young, M., W. DeSarbo, and V. Morwitz
1998 The Stochastic Modelling of Purchase Intentions and Behavior.
Management Science 44:188202.
Submitted 21 November 2003. Resubmitted 4 May 2004. Resubmitted 5 June 2004. Accepted
28 July 2004. Final version 21 December 2004. Refereed anonymously. Coordinating Editor:
Jeurgen Gnoth