INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH

Int. J. Tourism Res. 12, 4964 (2010)

Published online 21 June 2009 in Wiley InterScience
(www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/jtr.736

A Comparison of Different Approaches

to Segment Information Search
Behaviour of Spring Break Travellers
in the USA: Experience, Knowledge,
Involvement and Specialisation Concept
Sangwon Park1 and Dae-Young Kim2,*
1
School of Tourism and Hospitality Management, Temple University, Pennsylvania, USA
2
Department of Hotel and Restaurant Management, University of Missouri, Missouri, USA
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this research is to compare
salient approaches for identifying the
patterns of college students information
search behaviours while preparing for their
spring break trips. Comparing four different
prominent constructs (i.e. past experience,
prior knowledge, involvement and a
concept of specialisation combining those
three variables), the results of the study
indicate that involvement and the
specialisation concept have more distinctive
results than the others in terms of
measurement of travellers perceived
usefulness of information sources and the
importance of information content. In
addition, the different groups assigned
different priorities for usage of main
information sources. As a result,
involvement and the specialisation concept
appear to provide more distinctive
clarification for identifying the information
search behaviours of spring break travellers.
Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Received 19 March 2008; Revised 5 May 2009; Accepted 7 May
2009

* Correspondence to: Dr. Dae-Young Kim, Department

of Hotel and Restaurant Management, 219 Eckles Hall,
University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, USA.
E-mail: kimdae@missouri.edu

Keywords: specialisation concept;

involvement; past experience; prior
knowledge; information search behaviour.
INTRODUCTION

ith college enrolment reaching a

record of 17.5 million in the fall of
2005 and with expected increases of
0.1 million per year, college students have
become a major travel market in the USA. In
addition, the anticipation is for college enrolment to increase an additional 13% from 2006
to 2015 (National Center for Education Statistics, 2006). According to the report of the
Federation of International Youth Travel Organizations (2003), the average trip expenditure
of college students in the USA is $1200, which
is more than that of other high-spending tourists during shorter stays. Besides, substantial
data reveal an increase of college students and
trip expenditures, which suggests that college
students are a major tourism market for the
tourism and hospitality industries. Following
this trend, over 5000 travel organisations in
about 100 countries promote destinations targeting student travellers (International Student
Travel Confederation, 2003).
The research for understanding college students tourism behaviour has been investigated
with regard to activity preferences for both
international and domestic students (Sung and
Hsu, 1996; Kim and Jogaratnam, 2003), travel
behaviours (Hobson and Josiam, 1996; Field,
1999), travel motivations (Kim et al., 2006),
Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

50
tourism attribute selection (Klenosky, 2002;
Michael et al., 2003), tourism involvement
(Josiam et al., 1999), tourism destination image
(Sirakaya et al., 2001), and the selection criteria
of fast food restaurant (Baek et al., 2006). Some
researchers have examined the perspectives of
college students with regard to travel sites
characteristics such as drinking (Corbin et al.,
1996; Smeaton et al., 1998), sex (Byers et al.,
1998) and drug use (Mattila et al., 2001). In a
study focusing on online information channels, Bai et al. (2004) explored college students
online behaviour in vacation planning through
a study of selected websites.
As reported, due to the intangible nature of
tourism products, a critical aspect of travellers
awareness is sufficient information about the
products and services they will purchase. Thus,
information search behaviour is a significant
factor influencing tourism behaviour such as
selecting destinations, spending money, visiting
duration, experiencing attractions, and so on
(Fodness and Murray, 1999; Gursoy and Chen,
2000; Gursoy and McCleary, 2004). The research
efforts to understand students information
search behaviours, particularly related to the
usefulness of information contents and preferences for information channels, are parsimonious. Due to the lack of understanding of college
student travellers information search behaviours, destination marketing organisations
(DMOs) have difficulty designing contents and
utilising appropriate information channels.
Numerous bases for differentiating information seekers have been developed, each with its
own set of advantages and disadvantages for
particular types of consumers and products.
However, previous studies examining the
information search behaviour in the context of
both consumer and tourist have collectively
suggested three core concepts affecting information search behaviour: past experience, prior
knowledge and involvement (Dholakia and
Baggozzi, 2001; Peterson and Merino, 2003;
Cai et al., 2004). Based on this recognition, the
purpose of this research is to identify a relatively better traveller differentiation method
and explore four salient approaches: past experience, prior knowledge, involvement and a
specialised concept that integrates the previous
three variables. More specifically, the study is
to identify (i) underlying dimensions of spring
Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

S. Park, and D.-Y. Kim

break traveller information search behaviour
based on the perceived importance of information contents and usefulness of information
sources and (ii) antecedent variables on traveller information channel choices considering the
identified dimensions in the study. In addition,
in order to suggest market strategies for DMOs,
the different propensities for information search
behaviour, including information search channels and information contents, are examined
with segmented groups from which the most
effective segmentation may occur.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Online information search behaviour of
college students
With the emergence of the Internet, people rely
a great deal on it to obtain information, and
college students are an ardent user group (e.g.
Flanagin and Metzger, 2001; Pew Research
Center, 2002). According to the Pew Report
about college students Internet use (Pew
Research Center, 2002), 59% of all US adults
access online websites to obtain information;
however, 86% of college students use online
sources for their own purposes. In addition,
apparently, about 20% of college students began
using the Internet between five and eight years
ago; 47% of them began utilising the Internet the
first time at home before attending college, and
85% possess their own computers (Aiken et al.,
2003). In case of tourism, the study conducted
by Bai et al. (2004) revealed that about 80% of
college students answered that they prefer
online travel agencies when making trip plans,
and 86.7% of students have experience in
purchasing online products. All the statistics
indicate that college students are significantly
involved in the Internet as an information
channel, and the degrees and efforts towards
searching online information are substantially
higher than those of other age groups.
Selection of information sources and
importance of information contents
In general, it has been noted that travellers
utilise various types of external information
sources in order to make plans for their trips:
family and friends, prior visits, destinationInt. J. Tourism Res. 12, 4964 (2010)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr

Information Search Behaviour of Spring Break

specific literature, media, and travel consultants (Snepenger and Snepenger, 1993). Fodness
and Murray (1999) suggested that tourist information search strategies are the result of a
dynamic process in which travellers use various
types and amounts of information sources to
respond to internal and external contingencies
in vacation planning (p. 229). A variety of
studies reporting tourists behaviours in selecting information search sources were found in
tourism literature in relation to the purpose of
the trip (Fodness and Murray, 1998), involvement (Dodd, 1998), timing of the destination
decision (Milner et al., 2000), demographic
profile (Kim et al., 2007), cultural differences
(Chen, 2000), previous experience (Perdue,
1985), prior knowledge (Gursoy and McCleary,
2003, 2004) and socio-economic characteristics
(Fesenmaier and Johnson, 1989).
Compared with the travellers selection of
information sources, there has been relatively
less research efforts on travellers perceived
value of information content. It has been known
that the perceived value of information contents vary depending on what type of needs
information searchers are in. Hanna and Millar
(1997) proposed the importance of information
content in specific information channels. Specifically, they suggested that the information
supplied in an information channel is an important element of any marketing initiative. In
related veins, the result of Weber and Roehls
study (1999) showed the significance of information content in which 85.6% of online travellers responded that the quality of information
is very important towards purchase choices.
Segmentation bases
Many tourism scholars have suggested diverse
segmentation approaches and applied them to
understand travellers behaviours including
benefit sought (Loker and Perdue, 1992), geographies (Shaw and Williams, 1994), psychographics (Galloway, 2002), sensation-seeking
(Galloway and Lopez, 1999), travel motivation
(Bieger and Laesser, 2002), past experience
(Petrick, 2002), travel personality (Plog, 2002),
involvement (Park et al., 2002), and sociodemographics (Schul and Crompton 1983).
Specifically, in the information search behaviour points of view, many researchers argued
Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

51
the vital role of past experience, previous
knowledge and involvement, which explains a
wide range of behavioural and decision processes (Perdue, 1985; Alba and Marmorstein,
1987; Mazursky, 1989; Havitz and Dimanche,
1990). The effects of the three variables on
tourism information search behaviour will be
reviewed in this part.
Past experience. A number of studies suggested
that past experience is a main factor affecting
purchase intention, behaviour and the future
destination decision (Sonmez and Graefe, 1998;
Petrick et al., 2001). Tourism research has considered the differences between first-time and
revisit visitors in terms of expenditure (Oppermann, 1997), length of stay (Oppermann, 1998),
demographics (Gitelson and Crompton, 1984),
destination perception (McKercher and Wong,
2004), travel motivations (Lau and McKercher,
2004), perceived value (Petrick, 2004), and
activity pattern (Fakeye and Crompton, 1992).
With regard to information search behaviour,
previous studies revealed a positive relationship between past experience of a product and
efficiency of the information search process. It
is also reported that first-time visitors tended
to use commercial information sources such as
brochures/travel guide books and advertisements; however, repeat visitors are inclined
towards not only commercial but also noncommercial information sources such as articles/news, books/movies and friends/family
groups (Bagloglu, 2001). In a study concerning
online information search behaviour, Lehto
et al. (2006) identified that travellers prior
experience with destinations influenced not
only contents of information but also the degree of online and off-line search behaviour.
Prior knowledge. Prior knowledge positively
affects not only consumer purchase decisions
and brand choice tactics (Hoyer and Brown,
1990; Lin and Chen, 2006) but also assessment
of product quality on the assumption that
knowledge increased as a result of past experience with a product (Rao and Monroe, 1988).
In the context of information search behaviour,
prior knowledge has been regarded as a
rudimentary determinant to understanding
an individuals information search behaviour
(Baker et al., 1986; Park et al., 1988). A
Int. J. Tourism Res. 12, 4964 (2010)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr

52
consumer who lacks product knowledge
endeavours to gain more information and to
use more information sources than one who
has sufficient product knowledge. This logical
association arises from the fact that the consumer who has a low level of product knowledge does not have a specific standard for
evaluation of information obtained (Alba and
Hutchinson, 1987). Similar to past experience,
tourism studies have identified that travellers
prior knowledge, which consists of familiarity
and expertise, influences travellers utilisation
of internal and external information sources
(Gursoy, 2003; Gursoy and McCleary, 2004).
Involvement. Involvement theory, originally
introduced in social psychology, has been
adopted and studied extensively in the context
of marketing since Sherif and Cantril (1947)
first presented the concept. The involvement
theory has been applied to understanding
consumer behaviour, segmenting groups for
increasing advertising response productivity
(Wu, 2001), comprehending the decisionmaking process (Bunn, 1993; Dimanche et al.,
1994) and generating awareness of information
processing (Lee et al., 1999). Of several comprehensive involvement models, Zaichkowsky
(1985, p. 342) defined involvement as a persons perceived relevance of the object based
in inherent needs, values, and interests and
suggested a personal involvement inventory.
Several tourism and leisure researchers examined involvement theory in regard to leisure
activities (Dimanche et al., 1994), leisure
product purchases (Celsi and Olson, 1988; Reid
and Crompton, 1993), and travel motivation
(Clements and Josiam, 1995). From the
perspective of information search behaviour,
Fesenmaier and Johnson (1989) segmented
travellers who visit Texas based on their assignment to one of four groups: high involvement,
high-medium involvement, low-medium
involvement and low involvement with information sources. Cai et al. (2004) segmented
travellers into three group levels based on the
different degrees of involvement by using
Zaichkowskys (1985) involvement construct.
Cai et al. (2004) investigated the different
information preferences involving contents
information and the information channels.
The study showed that the user preferences
Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

S. Park, and D.-Y. Kim

for information content vary depending on the
degree of involvement.
In summary, many researchers argued that
past experience, prior knowledge and involvement are essential factors influencing travellers information search behaviour. Due to the
indicated significance, the three variables have
been used as criteria to classify travel groups
for supporting advertising, information and
products that can meet travellers needs. For
the sake of contributing theory building as
well as suggesting practical marketing methods,
the current research proposes a concept of specialisation to combine the three recognised
variables (i.e. past experience, prior knowledge
and involvement).
Specialisation concept. Bryan (1977) first proposed recreation specialisation as a continuum
of behaviour from the general to the particular,
reflected by equipment and skill used in the
sport, and activity setting preference. In other
words, different groups represent different
needs and behaviours. The position of groups
along the continuum of level of specialisation
is based on their past experiences in a given
activity, the level of involvement with or
knowledge about the activity and the level of
investment in the activity (McFarlane, 2004;
Thapa et al., 2005). A substantial amount of
research has applied the concept of specialisation in nature-based tourism and recreation
activities such as fishing (Bryan, 1977; Ditton
et al., 1992), hunting (Miller and Graefe, 2000),
bird watching (Lee and Scott, 2004), white
water activities (Bricker and Kerstetter, 2000),
canoeing/boating (Donnell et al., 1986), scuba
diving (Thapa et al., 2005), wildlife watching
(Cole and Scott, 1999; Martin, 1997), and
camping (McFarlane, 2004). In the tourism
field, Kerstetter et al. (2001) employed the specialisation concept as a segmentation of heritage tourism. Taking into account travellers
past experiences, knowledge, involvement and
investments, they divided heritage travellers
into three levels of specialisation groups: as
low, medium and high.
The specialisation concept was also used to
understand information search behaviours of
recreationists making decisions about trips to
Montana (Cole and Scott, 1999; Ditton et al.,
1992). Travellers were segmented by using
Int. J. Tourism Res. 12, 4964 (2010)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr

Information Search Behaviour of Spring Break

53

specialisation concepts based on behaviour,

skill/knowledge and involvement components
(Martin, 1997). The three segmented groups
were novices, intermediates and specialists,
and according to the three groups, the tendencies towards different information contents
searched and information sources exploited
were determined. In terms of the types of
information, the three groups tended to seek
different information contents. Specifically,
specialists were likely to have more interest in
the habits of wildlife, the natural history of
wildlife species, and wildlife management
activities than novices and intermediates.
Research framework
This study is based on the notion that the four
antecedent attitudinal and behavioural dimensions create a distinctive traveller information
search behaviour structure in both information
contents and sources (see Figure 1). Based on
the literature review, a reasonable assumption
is that the four prominent concepts are valid
influences on spring break travellers in terms of
information search behaviour. That is, traveller
information search behaviour varies according
to the degree of influence of the four antecedents. This study explores and compares the four
constructs in order to suggest a more effective
market differentiation strategy that leads DMOs
to better target and attract potential visitors by
providing tailored information through the
most appropriate information channels.
METHODS
Data collection
The data used for this study arise from a paperbased survey from Midwest college students.

To increase the validity of the data, the survey

was conducted just after the spring break
season between 4 May and 11 May 2007. The
questionnaires were distributed in general
requirements classes in order to ensure that the
sample would comprise a representation of all
students at the university. Before students
answered the questionnaires, a research assistant, in every class with the same narration,
fully explained the purpose of this study and
the technique for responding. Of a total 250
survey responses, 194 questionnaires were
completed and a total of 176 students responses
were identified valid samples for this study,
creating a response rate of 70%. In order to
extract the valid sample from all completed
surveys, the respondents were asked, Did you
take a trip during spring break this year 2007?
for the recent spring break trip research. The
survey was conducted to obtain data of spring
break travel according to the categories past
travel experience, prior knowledge about
destination and event/festival, involvement in
spring break, usage of main information,
usefulness of information sources used,
importance of information content, general
travel behaviour, and respondents sociodemographic backgrounds.
Both past experience and prior knowledge
were developed based on the previous measurements techniques (Kerstetter et al., 2001).
Specifically, respondents were asked, How
many times have you travelled on vacation
while attending college? for past experience
and How would you rate your amount of previous knowledge about your recent spring
break destination? and Did you have any
previous knowledge of the festival or events
occurring at your recent spring break destination? for prior knowledge. Measurement used

Antecedent Attitudinal/
Behavioral Dimensions

Past Experience
Prior Knowledge
Involvement
Specialization

Perceived Value
Information
Search Behavior
for Spring Break

Perceived Usefulness of
Information Contents
Perceived Importance
of Information Channel

Figure 1. A proposed research framework of traveller information search behaviour.

Note: Research variables are in the dotted area
Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Tourism Res. 12, 4964 (2010)

DOI: 10.1002/jtr

54
a seven-point Likert-type scale. The Involvement construct, developed by Zaichkowsky
(1985), was applied with a 15-item, five-point
bipolar scale. The second set of questions
measured students usage of main information
sources for gathering information about their
recent spring break travel destinations. These
items were (i) previous experience; (ii) online
travel community; (iii) recommendation; (iv)
brochures/newspapers; (v) travel magazine;
(vi) television/radio; (vii) portal website; (viii)
travel guide books; (ix) online travel agency;
(x) travel agency; (xi) state/city website; and
(xii) airline directly. The respondents were
required to select only one as their key information source.
The third set of questions investigated the
perceived value of information content sought
and information sources used. The perceived
value was measured by the degree of importance of 13 information contents such as (i)
travel tips; (ii) activities; (iii) attractions; (iv)
history and culture; (v) nature; (vi) sports; (vii)
museums; (viii) accommodations; (ix) dining
facilities; (x) the community calendar; (xi)
getting around; (xii) coupons; and (xiii) maps
(Cai et al., 2004; Kim et al., 2007) with a sevenpoint Likert-type scale. The perceived value of
information sources was estimated by using
the same variables in the second set (i.e. main
information source) with a balanced sevenpoint Likert-type scale in which 1 represented
not useful and 7 represented extremely
useful. Finally, the fourth set of questions
asked for the respondents demographic
information.
Statistical process
Data analysis included a four-step procedure.
First, frequency analysis was used to identify
the demographic profiles of the surveys
respondents. Second, a Z-score was conducted
to segment respondents into the three levels of
travel groups by taking into account past experience, previous knowledge, involvement and
specialisation concept combining those three
variables respectively. Specifically, the reason
for choosing Z-score over other segmentation
techniques is that the assumption of specialisation group is constructed on the continuum of
variables (Wellman et al., 1982; Williams and
Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

S. Park, and D.-Y. Kim

Huffman, 1986; Kerstetter et al., 2001). Third,
principle component analysis and reliability
tests were utilised to examine the dimensions
underlying the information contents and information channels with 13 and 12 items, in that
order. At the same time, the KaiserMeyer
Olkin (KMO) and Bartletts Test of Sphericity
were explored to measure sampling adequacy
and to identify satisfactory results of factor
analysis. The Bartletts Test of Sphericity was
used to determine whether the variables considered in factor analysis correlate highly
enough to provide a reasonable basis for factor
analysis (Hair et al., 2006). Fourth, a series of
analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were performed to identify the differences between
the segmented college student groups and the
perceived value of information contents and
sources. Finally, correspondence analysis was
applied to find the link between main information usage and the level of the most distinctive
segmentation group out of the four bases.
RESULTS
The trip characteristics
Table 1 shows the spring break trip characteristics of participants. The length of stay (in
days) at the travel destination was one to three
(12.5%), 45 (55.7%), six to eight (29.0%) and
more than eight (2.8%). A large proportion of
college students travelled during vacation less
than 5 times (78.4%), and students who travelled 610 times (16.5%) possessed the second
highest majority of all the groups. It appears
that spending money for a spring break trip
is normally distributed, and most college
students travelled less than five times during
the previous year (92.7%).
Segmentation of travellers based on
the antecedents
With the aim of segmenting college students
four ways past experience (the length of
stay at the destination and total spring break
trip expenditure), prior knowledge (knowledge about the destination and festival or
events), involvement (involvement in the
spring break trip) and specialisation concept
(combining those three variables) Z-score
Int. J. Tourism Res. 12, 4964 (2010)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr

Information Search Behaviour of Spring Break

55

Table 1. Respondents demographic characteristics.

Variable

Gender
Female
Male

170

Grade
Freshman
Sophomore
Junior
Senior

169

Citizenship
US
Other

167

Ethnicity
Caucasian, not Hispanic
Asian-American
African-American
American Indian
Hispanic
Other

169

analysis was used similar to previous

researchers.
First, to analyse the past experience, prior
knowledge and involvement, Z-score of each
variable was calculated by combining all subitems of the three variables. The resulting
values of the three variables described their
relative positions within the distribution. Using
frequency analysis, respondents were divided
into three groups, each representing 33.3% of
the total. Thus, the three groups categorised by
past experience were high (n = 60), medium (n
= 58) and low (n = 58). The groups considered
by prior knowledge were high (n = 62), medium
(n = 49) and low (n = 65), and involvement
groups represented high (n = 59), medium
(n = 60) and low (n = 57). Second, in order
to divide specialisation groups, the average
Z-score of each respondent was calculated by
the Z-score of three variables. The equation is:
Z-score of specialization =
past experience + prior knowledge
+ involvement

3
Accordingly, frequency analysis was utilised
to categorise the three groups, each representCopyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Frequency

81
89

47.6
52.4

7
41
54
67

4.1
24.3
32.0
39.6

143
24

85.6
14.4

121
19
8
3
1
17

71.6
11.2
4.7
1.8
0.6
10.1

ing 33.3% of respondents: high (n = 59),

medium (n = 58) and low (n = 59).
Factor analysis for information sources
A principal components factor analysis with
Varimax rotation was performed on the 12
information sources. The 12 items clustered
into three factors with Eigenvalues greater
than 1.0 (see Table 2): 5.31, 1.48 and 1.06 for
each construct. These factors explained 67.4%
of the variance; 35.77 for the first factor, 19.20
for the second factor, and 12.44 for the third
factor. The three factors were labelled Off-line
External Information Sources, On-line External Information Sources, and Internal Information and Word of Mouth (WOM). Factor
loadings were greater than 0.54, and communalities for the 12 items were greater than 0.47.
The reliability (alpha values) provided adequate internal consistency: 0.89, 0.77 and 0.61
for off-line external information sources, online
external information sources, and internal
information and WOM respectively. The KMO
Measure of Sampling Adequacy was 0.88,
representing that the items were sufficient for
each factor. The Bartletts Test of Sphericity
Int. J. Tourism Res. 12, 4964 (2010)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr

56

S. Park, and D.-Y. Kim

Table 2. Principal components factor analysis for information sources.

Factor loadings
Itema

Off-line external
information sources

Online external
information sources

Internal information
and WOM

0.83
0.79
0.78
0.77
0.73
0.69
0.09
0.30
0.53
0.39
0.09
0.04
5.31
35.77%
35.77%
0.89

0.25
0.14
0.11
0.18
0.31
0.32
0.83
0.78
0.56
0.54
0.05
0.31
1.48
19.20%
54.97%
0.77

0.11
0.14
0.04
0.00
0.14
0.04
0.15
0.02
0.02
0.16
0.88
0.78
1.06
12.44%
67.41%
0.61

Travel guide books

Brochures/newspapers
Television/radio
Airlines directly
Travel agency
Travel magazine
Portal website
Online travel agency
Online travel community
State/city website
Previous experience
Recommendations
Eigenvalues
Variance explained
Cumulative variance explained
Reliability coefficients

a
Seven-point Likert-type scale was used (1 = not useful; 7 = extremely useful).
WOM, Word of Mouth.

with significant p-value (p < 0.000) indicated

that the variables highly correlated, which was
sufficient to provide a reasonable basis.
Factor analysis for information contents
To examine the dimensions underlying perceived value of information content, a principal components factor analysis with Varimax
rotation, the most common rotational criterion,
was employed on the 13 types of information.
The 13 items yielded three factors with Eigenvalues greater than 1.0; 5.17, 1.74, and 1.25 for
each construct (see Table 3). These factors
explained 62.7% of the variance: 26.71 for the
first factor, 20.31 for the second factor and
15.66 for the third factor. The labels for these
three factors are Inclusive Trip Information,
Education and Sightseeing, and Utilitarian
Information. Factor loadings were greater
than 0.51 and communalities for the 13 items
were greater than 0.37. The coefficients of
reliability (alpha values) provided adequate
support of internal consistency: 0.86, 0.77 and
0.59 for Inclusive Trip Information, Education
and Sightseeing, and Utilitarian Information
respectively. The KMO Measure of Sampling
Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Adequacy of 0.82 indicated that a satisfactory

number of items were predicted by each factor.
The Bartletts Test of Sphericity was statistically significant (p < 0.00) and showed that the
variables correlate highly to provide a reasonable basis for factor analysis.
Perceived usefulness of information sources
In Table 4, the result of ANOVA tests indicated
eight significant mean differences among the
involvement groups, while the other methods
had two or three significant variables. Specifically, past behaviour included two significant
variables: portal website and recommendations. Prior knowledge also had two significant
results in a summated variable (i.e. previous
experience and recommendation). Involvement showed the most numerous significant
results with eight variables. Last, the specialisation concept illustrated two significant variables: portal website and previous experience.
In terms of three summated variables
off-line external information sources, online
external information sources, and internal
information and WOM significant mean
differences exist for all in the three levels of
Int. J. Tourism Res. 12, 4964 (2010)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr

Information Search Behaviour of Spring Break

57

Table 3. Principal components factor analysis for information content.

Factor loadings
a

Item

Value of accommodation
Value of attractions
Value of activities
Value of dining facilities
Value of travel tips
Value of map
Value of getting around
Value of history and culture
Value of museums
Value of nature
Value of sports
Value of coupons
Value of community calendar
Eigenvalues
Variance explained
Cumulative variance explained
Reliability coefficients
a

Inclusive trip
information

Education and
sightseeing

Utilitarian
information

0.81
0.78
0.77
0.75
0.57
0.52
0.51
0.19
0.03
0.27
0.15
0.24
0.07
5.17
26.71%
26.71%
0.86

0.05
0.26
0.24
0.12
0.01
0.36
0.21
0.85
0.78
0.75
0.52
0.04
0.40
1.74
20.31%
47.02%
0.77

0.20
0.10
0.04
0.23
0.49
0.42
0.48
0.05
0.24
0.01
0.27
0.82
0.69
1.25
15.66%
62.68%
0.59

Seven-point Likert-type scale was (1 = not at all important; 7 = very important).

involvement. Medium- and high-involvement

students highly evaluated online external
information sources (F = 4.25, p < 0.01) and
internal information and WOM (F = 10.5, p <
0.01) respectively, whereas low-involvement
college students highly assessed off-line external information sources (F = 4.32, p < 0.01).
More specifically, travel guide book, airline
directly, travel agency, travel magazine, portal
website, online travel agency, previous experience and recommendation were statistically
significant with regard to usefulness of 12
information sources across spring vacation
involvement.

Perceived usefulness of information

contents
To compare the four approaches in terms of
importance of information contents, ANOVA
was utilised with the same procedure as that
for information source. As illustrated in Table
5, involvement and specialisation shows a
greater number of significant mean differences
than that of past behaviour and prior knowlCopyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

edge. The number of significant results, taking

into account involvement and the specialisation concept, was 8 and 7 out of 13 respectively. To the contrary, both past behaviour
and prior knowledge showed three significant
variables in 13 information content items. In
both cases of involvement and specialisation,
high groups tended to reflect a high importance for inclusive trip information. Furthermore, the high groups in both involvement
and specialisation highly rated the importance
of accommodation, attraction, activities,
dining facilities, and getting around.
However, the result of map and museums
were statistically significantly different only in
involvement, and sports was significant in
the specialisation. Those three variables were
highly rated by middle groups in both involvement and specialisation. With regard to travel
tips, different results exist between involvement and specialisation. While in involvement,
the middle-level group estimated a higher
importance for travel tips than the other
groups, the high specialisation group highly
rated travel tips from information contents
more than the other two groups.
Int. J. Tourism Res. 12, 4964 (2010)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr

Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

4.9
5.0
4.8

Internal information and WOMc

Previous experience
Recommendations
5.2
5.2
5.2

3.7
4.4
3.6
3.3
3.6

3.0
3.1
3.0
2.9

3.0
3.2
2.9

5.6
5.7
5.5

4.0
5.2
3.9
3.4
3.5

3.0
3.0
3.2
3.3

3.1
3.1
3.2

3.68*
2.18
3.34*

1.31
4.60**
0.26
1.05
0.21

0.08
0.28
0.16
0.96

0.13
0.13
0.79

Past experience

4.6
4.4
4.8

3.5
4.3
3.4
3.0
3.2

3.1
2.9
2.9
2.8

3.0
3.1
2.9

* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.

a
Seven-point Likert-type scale was used (1 = not useful; 7 = extremely useful).
b
L = low-level group; M = middle-level group; H = high-level group.
c
The summated mean value was used for each construct.
WOM, Word of Mouth.

3.5
4.2
3.7
3.0
3.4

3.1
2.9
3.2
3.0

3.1
3.3
3.2

On-line external information sourcesc

Portal website
Online travel agency
Online travel community
State/city website

Television/radio
Airlines directly
Travel agency
Travel magazine

Off-line external information sourcesc

Travel guide books
Brochures/newspapers

Variables

5.1
5.0
5.1

4.0
4.7
4.2
3.7
3.6

3.2
3.3
3.5
3.4

3.3
3.3
3.1

6.0
6.4
5.5

3.8
4.8
4.7
3.1
3.7

2.9
2.9
3.1
3.0

3.1
3.1
3.3

17.3**
27.5**
3.18*

2.08
1.05
2.47
2.04
1.05

0.58
0.76
1.39
1.51

0.74
0.22
0.72

Prior knowledge

Table 4. Comparison among four segmentation methods in terms of information sources.

4.7
4.8
4.7

3.5
4.1
3.4
3.0
3.4

3.2
3.3
3.4
3.1

3.3
3.4
3.1

5.4
5.4
5.4

4.2
5.3
4.3
3.4
3.7

3.3
3.2
3.4
3.5

3.3
3.6
3.2

5.6
5.8
5.4

3.6
4.4
3.4
3.2
3.3

2.7
2.6
2.7
2.5

2.7
2.6
3.0

5.98**
5.20**
3.67*

4.25**
6.67**
4.31**
0.67
0.87

2.22
3.13*
3.30*
5.69**

4.32**
4.31**
0.32

Involvement

5.8
6.1
5.5

3.8
4.6
3.7
3.4
3.5

2.9
3.1
3.0
3.1

3.0
3.0
3.1

5.2
5.3
5.2

4.0
5.2
4.1
3.3
3.6

3.3
2.9
3.2
3.2

3.2
3.4
3.3

4.7
4.5
4.8

3.4
4.0
3.4
3.0
3.3

3.0
3.1
3.2
2.9

3.0
3.2
2.9

10.5**
13.7**
2.87

2.96*
6.22**
1.94
0.72
0.46

0.70
0.17
0.36
0.62

0.37
0.65
1.08

Specialisation

58
S. Park, and D.-Y. Kim

Int. J. Tourism Res. 12, 4964 (2010)

DOI: 10.1002/jtr

Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

3.6
3.9
3.3

Utilitarian informationc
Coupons
Community calendar
3.8
4.2
3.3

3.9
3.7
3.5
4.4
4.1

5.2
5.2
5.4
5.3
5.2
4.8
5.1
5.1

Mb

3.7
4.4
3.1

4.1
4.1
3.5
4.6
4.1

5.5
5.9
5.7
5.6
5.8
5.0
5.3
5.3

Hb

0.15
0.77
0.29

0.32
1.47
0.47
0.24
0.44

3.9*
5.79**
0.83
1.05
4.25*
3.27*
0.59
2.99

3.7
4.3
3.2

4.0
3.9
3.6
4.6
4.1

5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
4.4
5.4
4.9

3.6
4.0
3.1

4.0
4.0
3.7
4.3
3.9

5.2
5.4
5.3
5.4
5.6
4.8
5.1
5.1

3.8
4.1
3.4

4.1
4.2
3.6
4.6
4.0

5.4
5.8
6.0
5.8
5.6
4.8
4.9
5.1

0.28
0.32
0.56

0.11
0.64
0.04
0.29
0.18

2.90
5.83**
6.69**
5.63**
3.19
1.31
1.06
0.36

Prior knowledge

* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.

a
Seven-point Likert-type scale was (1 = not at all important; 7 = very important).
b
L = low-level group; M = middle-level group; H = high-level group.
c
The summated mean value was used for each construct.

4.1
4.2
3.8
4.5
3.8

4.9
5.0
5.3
5.3
5.0
4.2
5.0
4.7

Lb

Education\sightseeingc
History and culture
Museums
Nature
Sports

Inclusive trip information

Accommodation
Attractions
Activities
Dining facilities
Travel tips
Map
Getting around

Variables

Past experience

Table 5. Comparison among four segmentation methods in terms of information contents.

3.4
3.8
3.0

3.9
3.8
3.5
4.2
3.9

4.6
4.8
4.8
4.8
4.8
3.9
4.7
4.6

3.9
4.4
3.5

4.3
4.2
4.1
4.6
4.3

5.4
5.5
5.7
5.5
5.6
5.2
5.6
5.0

3.7
4.2
3.3

3.9
4.0
3.2
4.7
3.8

5.5
5.9
5.8
5.9
5.6
4.8
5.2
5.4

Involvement

1.96
1.55
1.20

1.67
1.08
3.23*
0.83
1.25

11.6**
9.04**
9.63**
8.67**
6.32**
8.59**
3.73*
3.51*

3.5
4.0
3.1

3.9
3.7
3.5
4.4
3.8

4.8
4.8
5.0
5.0
5.0
4.2
5.1
4.6

3.6
4.0
3.2

4.3
4.2
3.9
4.7
4.5

5.3
5.4
5.5
5.5
5.5
4.8
5.3
5.2

3.9
4.4
3.4

3.9
4.1
3.4
4.4
3.8

5.5
6.0
5.9
5.6
5.6
5.0
5.0
5.2

Specialisation

1.08
0.89
0.70

2.13
1.32
1.37
0.51
3.67*

5.40**
9.26**
4.77**
3.24*
3.53*
3.75*
0.55
2.97*

Information Search Behaviour of Spring Break

59

Int. J. Tourism Res. 12, 4964 (2010)

DOI: 10.1002/jtr

60

S. Park, and D.-Y. Kim

Different usage of main information sources

among involvement groups

groups were inclined to utilise online travel

community, travel magazine and travel guide
books.

Through the series of ANOVA tests on information contents and sources, involvement
appears a relatively more distinctive segmentation base than the other three. The correspondence analysis was applied to explore different
tendencies of main information source usage.
The result of a chi-square test (2 (22) = 41.04;
p = 0.008) shows statistical significance at the
0.05 level for main information sources. Results
of correspondence analysis, shown in Figure 2,
provide graphic information for examining the
underlying relationship between involvement
groups and main information sources used.
The horizontal axis (Dimension 1) accounted
for 59% of the variance (singular value = 0.38)
and the vertical axis (Dimension 2) accounted
for 41% of the variance (singular value = 0.32);
accordingly, the associations of the involvement groups and main information sources
were explained on Dimensions 1 and 2 (100%).
The joint plot (Figure 2) derived from the
correspondence analysis represents apparent
dissimilarities of information usage among the
three groups. High-involvement groups tended
to seek previous experience and recommendation sources as main information sources.
Middle-involvement groups were apt to use
state/city website, brochures/newspapers
and television/radio. Lastly, low-involvement

CONCLUSIONS
Information search has been proven to be substantially useful for risk reduction and uncertainty avoidance for tourists (Money and
Crotts, 2003). Consequently, due to tourisms
product intangibility, understanding the information search preferences depending on distinction bases is critical for DMOs and tourism
practitioners who wish to attract travellers by
advantageously offering appropriate information. In this study, four segmentation
bases past experience, prior knowledge,
involvement and a combination of three
variables were assessed for classifying the
information search behaviour and information
contents tendencies. The results of this study
showed involvement, and the specialisation
concept, which integrates the three bases,
appears to be relatively more effective for
differentiating traveller information search behaviour in terms of the number of statistically
significant mean differences of information
sources and contents. As the results show,
involvement indicates relatively more numbers
of significant information sources such as offline external information sources (travel guide

Online travel community

Travel agency
Portal website
Airlines directly
Online travel agency

Brochures/newspapers

2
Low

Television/radio
Middle

1
-3.0

-2.0

-1.0

1.0

2.0

Travel guide books

State/city website

Travel magazine

-1
High
Recommendations

-2

Previous
Experience

Figure 2. Correspondence analysis between three involvement groups and main information sources.
Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Tourism Res. 12, 4964 (2010)

DOI: 10.1002/jtr

Information Search Behaviour of Spring Break

books, airlines directly, travel agency and
travel magazine), online external information
sources (portal website and online travel
agency), and internal information and WOM
(previous experience and recommendation).
By contrast, most variables of usefulness of
information sources, by analysing past experience, prior knowledge and the specialisation
concept, are not significantly different among
the categorised groups.
With regard to the perceived importance of
information content, involvement and the
specialisation concept showed relatively more
significant mean differences for inclusive trip
information than the other segmentation bases.
In related veins, the result of correspondence
analysis revealed some meaningful insights
between the level of involvement and preferred information sources. High-involvement
groups sought previous experience and
recommendation, middle groups were closely
linked to brochures/newspapers, television/
radio, and state/city website, and last, low
groups were corresponded with travel guide
books, travel magazine, and online travel
community.
This researchs findings contribute to both
theoretical and practical perspectives. On the
theoretical side, the suggestion is for an alternative basis for future tourism marketing and
information search behaviour research. While
many tourism researchers have attempted to
create an effective segmentation variable by
using individual differences and demographics, this study proposes a specialisation concept
as an inclusive approach that encompasses the
three prominent variables. In addition, this is
one of the first attempts to apply the specialisation concept from outdoor recreation to the
context of tourism information search behaviour. Although many previous studies found
the significance of the standard three variables,
only limited effort applies to the holistic investigation of multiple facets of traveller behaviour. In the sense, the results of the level of
travellers based on a concept of specialisation
imply a meaningful insight for the future
marketing and information search behaviour
studies.
Today, virtually all DMOs and tourism
organisations try to solicit potential and current
tourists by providing information about their
Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

61
destinations through selected advertising and
information channels. Within the context of
this competitive environment and due to
limited marketing budgets and resources,
DMOs and tourism organisations identification of the most efficient information channels
and appropriate contents is critical. In that
sense, this study provides some insightful suggestions regarding information channel strategies. Based on the research findings, this study
suggests a direction for destination marketers
entailing the offer of more tailored and customised information contents through more
appropriate information channels according to
the nature of particular segmented groups. In
addition, for marketing purposes, the study
lends itself to different types of target market
selection and differentiation strategies. Destination marketers may need to consider travellers involvement or the level of specialisation
rather than only one segment basis such as
past experience and prior knowledge since the
two approaches seem to more distinctively
identify the categorised traveller information
search behaviour.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE STUDY
This research has several limitations. First, this
study used convenience sampling, and the
results of this research cannot be generalised
to represent all college-age travellers. Second,
individuals information search behaviour has
an historical contingency. Examining a oneshot survey might not accurately reflect the
dynamics of a travellers information research
behaviour. In this sense, a longitudinal, realtime study is recommended to increase internal validity by enabling the research to track
cause and effect. In order to generalise the specialisation concept to tourism research, more
research should not only replicate the current
investigation with a broader random sample to
verify the results but also conduct similar
research in different settings.

REFERENCES
Alba J, Hutchinson W. 1987. Dimensions of consumer expertise. Journal of Consumer Research 13:
411454.
Int. J. Tourism Res. 12, 4964 (2010)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr

62
Aiken M, Vanjani M, Ray B, Martin J. 2003. College
student internet use. Campus-Wide Information
Systems 20(5): 182185.
Alba J, Marmorstein H. 1987. The effects of frequency knowledge on consumer decision making.
Journal of Consumer Research 14: 1425.
Baek S-H, Ham S, Yang IS. 2006. A cross-cultural
comparison of fast food restaurant selection
criteria between Korean and Filipino college
students. International Journal of Hospitality
Management 25: 683698.
Bagloglu S. 2001. Dimensions of customer loyalty:
separating the friends from the well wishers.
Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration
Quarterly 43(1): 4759.
Bai B, Hu C, Elsworth J, Countryman C. 2004. Online
travel planning and college students: the spring
break experience. Journal of Travel and Tourism
Marketing 17(2/3): 7991.
Baker WH, Hutchinson JW, Moore D, Nedungadi
P. 1986. Brand familiarity and advertising: effects
on the evoked set and brand preference. Advances
in Consumer Research 13(1): 637642.
Bieger T, Laesser C. 2002. Market segmentation by
motivation: the case of Switzerland. Journal of
Travel Research 41(1): 6876.
Bricker KS, Kerstetter DL. 2000. Level of specialization and place attachment: an exploratory study
of white water recreationists. Leisure Sciences 22:
233257.
Bryan H. 1977. Leisure value systems and recreational specialization: the case of trout fishermen.
Journal of Leisure Research 9(3): 174187.
Bunn MD. 1993. Taxonomy of buying decision
approaches. Journal of Marketing 57(1): 3856.
Byers ES, Purdon C, Clark DA. 1998. Sexual intrusive thoughts of college students. Journal of Sex
Research 35(4): 359369.
Cai LA, Feng R, Breiter D. 2004. Tourist purchase
decision involvement and information preferences. Journal of Vacation Marketing 10(2):
138148.
Celsi RL, Olsen JC. 1988. The role of involvement in
attention and comprehension processes. Journal of
Consumer Research 15: 210224.
Chen JS. 2000. Cross-cultural differences in travel
information acquisition among tourists from
three Pacific-rim countries. Journal of Hospitality
and Tourism Research 24(2): 149167.
Clements CJ, Josiam BM. 1995. Role of involvement
in the travel decision. Journal of Vacation Marketing 1(4): 337348.
Cole J, Scott D. 1999. Segmenting participation
in wildlife watching: a comparison of casual
wildlife watchers and serious birders. Human
Dimensions of Wildlife 4(4): 4461.
Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

S. Park, and D.-Y. Kim

Corbin WR, McNair LD, Carter J. 1996. Self-esteem
and problem drinking among male and female
college students. Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education 42(1): 114.
Dholakia U, Baggozzi R. 2001. Consumer behavior
in digital environments. In Digital Marketing,
Wind J., Mahajan V. (eds). John Wiley & Sons:
New York; 163200.
Dimanche F, Havitz M, Howard D. 1994. Testing
the involvement profile scale in the context of
selected recreational and touristic activities.
Journal of International Consumer Marketing 6(3/4):
123134.
Ditton RB, Loomis DK, Choi S. 1992. Recreation
specialization: reconceptualization from a social
worlds perspective. Journal of Leisure Research
24(1): 3351.
Dodd TH. 1998. Influences on search behavior of
industrial tourists. Journal of Hospitality & Leisure
Marketing 5: 7794.
Donnell MD, Vaske JJ, Graefe AR. 1986. Degree
and range of recreation specialization: toward a
typology of boating related activities. Journal of
Leisure Research 18(2): 8195.
Fakeye PC, Crompton JL. 1992. Importance of
socialization to repeat visitation. Annals of
Tourism Research 19(2): 364367.
Federation of International Youth Travel Organizations. (2003). Youth travel international. Available at http://www.fiyto.org/Docs/index.php4
(accessed 5 May 2007).
Fesenmaier DR, Johnson B. 1989. Involvement-based
segmentation: implications for travel marketing in
Texas. Tourism Management 10: 293300.
Field AM. 1999. The college student market segment:
a comparative study of travel behaviours of
international and domestic students at a southeastern university. Journal of Travel Research
37(4): 375381.
Flanagin AJ, Metzger MJ. 2001. Internet use in the
contemporary media environment. Human
Communication Research 27: 153181.
Fodness D, Murray B. 1998. A typology of tourist
information search strategies. Journal of Travel
Research 37: 220230.
Fodness D, Murray B. 1999. A model of tourist
information search behavior. Journal of Travel
Research 37: 220230.
Galloway G. 2002. Psychographic segmentation of
park visitor markets: evidence for the utility of
sensation seeking. Tourism Management 23(6):
581596.
Galloway G, Lopez K. 1999. Sensation seeking
and attitudes to aspects of national parks: a
preliminary empirical investigation. Tourism
Management 20(6): 665671.
Int. J. Tourism Res. 12, 4964 (2010)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr

Information Search Behaviour of Spring Break

Gitelson RJ, Crompton JL. 1984. Insights into the
repeat vacation phenomenon. Annals of Tourism
Research 11(2): 199217.
Gursoy D. 2003. Prior product knowledge and its
influence on the travellers information search
behavior. Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing
10(3/4):113131.
Gursoy D, Chen JS. 2000. Competitive analysis of
cross cultural information search behavior.
Tourism Management 21: 583590.
Gursoy D, McCleary KW. 2003. An integrative
model of tourists information search behavior.
Annals of Tourism Research 31(2): 353373.
Gursoy D, McCleary KW. 2004. An integrative
model of tourists information search behavior.
Annals of Tourism Research 31(2): 353373.
Hair JF, Black C, Babin B, Anderson R, Tatham R.
2006. Multivariate Data Analysis. 6th edn. Prentice
Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Hanna JRP, Millar RJ. 1997. Promoting tourism on
the Internet. Tourism Management 18(7): 469470.
Havitz ME, Dimanche F. 1990. Propositions for
testing the involvement construct in recreation
and tourism contexts. Leisure Science 12:
170197.
Hobson JSP, Josiam B. 1996. Spring break student
travel: a longitudinal study. Journal of Vacation
Marketing 2(2): 137150.
Hoyer WD, Brown PS. 1990. Effects of brand awareness on choice for a common, repeat-purchase
product. Journal of Consumer Research 17:
141148.
International Student Travel Confederation. (2003).
The ISTC Network. Available at http://www.istc.
org/sisp /index.htm (accessed 5 May 2007).
Josiam BM, Smeaton G, Clements CJ. 1999. Involvement: travel motivation and destination selection.
Journal of Vacation Marketing 5(2): 167175.
Kerstetter DL, Confer JJ, Graefe AR. 2001. An
exploration of the specialization concept within
the context of heritage tourism. Journal of
Travel Research 39: 267274.
Kim D-Y, Lehto XY, Morrison AM. 2007. Gender
differences in online travel information search:
implications for marketing communications
on the internet. Tourism Management 28: 423
433.
Kim K, Jogaratnam G. 2003. Activity preferences
of Asian international and domestic American
university students: an alternate basis for segmentation. Journal of Vacation Marketing 9(3):
260270.
Kim K, Jogaratnam G, Noh J. 2006. Travel decisions
of students at a US university: segmenting
the international market. Journal of Vacation
Marketing 12(4): 345357.
Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

63
Klenosky DB. 2002. The pull of tourism destinations: a meansend investigation. Journal of
Travel Research 40: 385395.
Lau ALS, McKercher B. 2004. Exploration versus
acquisition: a comparison of first-time and repeat
visitors. Journal of Travel Research 42: 279285.
Lee H, Herr PM, Kardes FR, Kim C. 1999. Motivated
search effects of choice accountability, issue
involvement, and prior knowledge on information acquisition and use. Journal of Business
Research 45(1): 7588.
Lee JH, Scott D. 2004. Measuring birding specialization: a confirmatory factor analysis. Leisure
Sciences 26: 245260.
Lehto XY, Kim D-Y, Morrison AM. 2006. The effect
of prior destination experience on online information search behaviour. Tourism and Hospitality
Research 6(2): 160178.
Lin L-Y, Chen C-S. 2006. The influence of the
country-of-origin image, product knowledge and
product involvement on consumer purchase
decisions: an empirical study of insurance and
catering services in Taiwan. Journal of Consumer
Marketing 23(4/5): 248265.
Loker LE, Perdue RR. 1992. A benefit-based segmentation of a nonresident summer travel market.
Journal of Travel Research 31(1): 3035.
Martin SR. 1997. Specialization and differences in
setting preferences among wildlife reviewers.
Human Dimensions of Wildlife 2(1): 118.
Mattila AS, Apostolopoulos Y, Sonmez S, Yu L,
Sasidharan V. 2001. The impact of gender and
religion on college students spring break
behavior. Journal Travel Research 40: 193200.
Mazursky D. 1989. Past experience and future
tourism decisions. Annals of Tourism Research 16:
333344.
McFarlane BL. 2004. Recreation specialization and
site choice among vehicle-based campers. Leisure
Sciences 26: 309322.
McKercher B, Wong DYY. 2004. Understanding
tourism behavior: examining the combined
effects of prior visitation history and destination
status. Journal of Travel Research 43(2): 171
179.
Michael I, Armstrong A, King B. 2003. Travel behaviour of international students: the relationship
between studying abroad and their choice of
tourist destinations. Journal of Vacation Marketing
10(1): 5766.
Miller CA, Graefe AR. 2000. Degree and range of
specialization across related hinting activities.
Leisure Sciences 22: 195204.
Milner LM., Collins JM., Tachibana R, Hiser RF.
2000. The Japanese vacation visitor to Alaska: a
preliminary examination of peak and off season
Int. J. Tourism Res. 12, 4964 (2010)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr

64
traveler demographics, information source utilization, trip planning and customer satisfaction.
Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 9: 4356.
Money BR, Crotts JC. 2003. The effect of uncertainty
avoidance on information search, planning and
purchases of international travel vacations.
Tourism Management 24(2): 263277.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2006).
Digest of Education Statistics: 2006. Available at
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d06/
(accessed 5 May 2007).
Oppermann M. 1997. First-time and repeat visitors
to New Zealand. Tourism Management 18(3):
177181.
Oppermann M. 1998. Destination threshold potential and the law of repeat visitation. Journal of
Travel Research 37(2): 131137.
Park CW, Gardner MP, Thukral, VK. 1988. Selfperceived knowledge: some effects on information processing for a choice task. American
Journal of Psychology 101(3): 401424.
Park M, Yang X, Lee B, Jang HC, Stokowski PA.
2002. Segmenting casino gamblers by involvement profiles: a Colorado example. Tourism
Management 23(1): 5565.
Perdue RR. 1985. Segmenting state information
inquirers by timing of destination decision and
previous experience. Journal of Travel Research 23:
611.
Peterson RA, Merino MC. 2003. Consumer information search behaviour and the Internet. Psychology
and Marketing 20(2): 99121.
Petrick JF. 2002. Experience use history as a segmentation tool to examine golf travellers satisfaction,
perceived value and repurchase intentions. Journal
of Vacation Marketing 8(4): 332342.
Petrick JF. 2004. First timers and repeaters perceived
value. Journal of Travel Research 43(1): 2938.
Petrick JF, Morais DD, Norman WC. 2001. An
examination of the determinants of entertainment
vacationers intentions to revisit. Journal of
Travel Research 40: 4148.
Pew Research Center. 2002. The Internet Goes To
College: How Students Are Living in the Future with
Todays Technology. Available at http://www.
pewinternet.org/reports/pdfs/PIP_College_
Report.pdf (accessed 15 January 2007).
Plog SC. 2002. The power of psychographics and
the concept of venturesomeness. Journal of Travel
Research 40(3): 244251.
Rao AR, Monroe KB. 1988. The moderating effect of
prior knowledge on cue utilization in product
evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research 15:
253264.
Reid IS, Crompton JL. 1993. A taxonomy of leisure
purchase decision paradigms based on level of
Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

S. Park, and D.-Y. Kim

involvement. Journal of Leisure Research 25(2):
182202.
Schul P, Crompton JL. 1983. Search behavior of
international vacationers: travel-specific lifiestyle
and sociodemographic variables. Journal of Travel
Research 22(2): 2530.
Shaw G, Williams AM. 1994. Critical Issues in Tourism:
A Geographical Perspective. Blackwell: Oxford.
Sherif M, Cantril H. 1947. The Psychology of Ego
Involvement. John Wiley: New York.
Sirakaya E, Sonmez S, Choi H-S. 2001. Do destination images really matter? Predicting destination
choices of student travellers. Journal of Vacation
Marketing 7(2): 125142.
Smeaton G., Josiam BM, Dietrich UC. 1998. College
students binge drinking at a beach-front destination during spring break. Journal of American
College Health 46(6): 247254.
Snepenger D, Snepenger M. 1993. Information
search by pleasure travelers. In Encyclopedia of
Hospitality and Tourism, Kahn MA, Olsen MD,
Var T (eds). Van Nostrand Reinhold: New York;
pp. 830835.
Sonmez SF, Graefe AR. 1998. Determining future
travel behavior from past travel experience and
perceptions of risk and safety. Journal Travel
Research 37: 171177.
Sung S, Hsu CHC. 1996. International students
travel characteristics: an exploratory study. Journal
of Travel and Tourism Marketing 5: 277283.
Thapa B, Graefe AR, Meyer LA. 2005. Moderator and mediator effects of scuba diving
specialization on marine-based environmental
knowledge-behavior contingency. The Journal
of Environmental Education 37(1): 5367.
Weber K, Roehl WS. 1999. Profiling people searching for and purchasing travel products on the
World Wide Web. Journal of Travel Research 37:
291298.
Wellman JD, Roggenbuck JW, Smith AC. 1982.
Recreation specialization and norms of depreciative behaviour among canoeists. Journal of
Leisure Research 14(4): 323340.
Williams DR, Huffman MG. 1986. Recreation specialization as a factor in backcountry trail choice.
In Proceedings of National Wilderness Research Conference: Current Research, (USDA Forest Service
General Tech. Rep. No. UNT-212). Lucas R (ed).
Intermountain Research Station: Ogden, UT,
pp. 339344.
Wu S-I. 2001. An experimental study on the
relationship between consumer involvement and
advertising effectiveness. Asia Pacific Journal of
Marketing and Logistics 13(1): 4356.
Zaichkowsky JL. 1985. Measuring the involvement
construct. Journal of Consumer Research 12: 341352.
Int. J. Tourism Res. 12, 4964 (2010)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr