Antecedents for visitor and interaction types

Sections 4.2 and 4.3 already outlined several crucial differences between visitors.

Not only does their travel style impact the contextual situations for interactions with other visitors, but their individual sociability and attitude towards the social aspect of their holiday also showed a connection to the occurrence of social interactions.

These initial findings are supported by, and also contribute to an understanding of, the occurrence of antecedents amongst these visitor types, which show similar patterns. The highest amount of intrinsically motivated interactions was reported to occur in accommodation settings (and therefore by backpackers and young FITs), whereas especially organized tourist activities and, to a lesser extent, independent tourist activities often relevant for mature FITs provide situations within which conformity is required more frequently. In addition, accommodation interactions provide a greater time span and less distraction, whereas the initial desire for contacts with other visitors might not be as present during other circumstances.

Backpacker travellers (Box B, Figure 4.2), the majority of whom were single long-term travellers, strongly emphasized the personal importance of contacts with other visitors and the intrinsic rewards they hope to gain from them. Not surprisingly, over two thirds of their reported specific interactions were entered into for intrinsic reasons, with the remaining third divided between a desire to conform and, to a far lesser extent, extrinsic antecedents. Due to the nature of their interaction settings, extrinsically motivated interactions originated for the most part in accommodations from to the need to locate either facilities, kitchen utensils or travel information.

Only four interactions were reported to have occurred during organized activities, in which cases intrinsic antecedents and conformity are equally represented. The personal context on the other hand provides further support for the findings that showed a preference to interact in situations without time restraints – the longer visitors spent at their respective location, the higher the amount of intrinsically motivated interactions.

Young FITs (Box C, Figure 4.2) placed a lower importance on contacts with other visitors and were found to initiate less readily than other visitors. However, they still reported that over two thirds of their interactions were intrinsically motivated, but a further quarter of their interactions were entered into for conformity. Conformity based interactions occurred most frequently during both organized and

132

independently undertaken tourist activities, while only one interaction was entered into for extrinsic reasons. Their personal context (i.e. time spent at the location and purpose/activities) shows no relation to their antecedents. This supports the assumption that young FITs generally have fewer interactions than other visitors, therefore leading to less variety within their reported interactions.

Mature FITs (Box D, Figure 4.2), who have shown more socially oriented individual characteristics than their younger counterparts, provide the greatest variety and distribution amongst possible antecedents. While nearly half of their reported social interactions were entered into for intrinsic reasons, a third originated from a desire for conformity and the remaining five interactions resulted from an extrinsic need.

Nearly all their interactions in accommodation settings were entered into for intrinsic reasons, whereas both transport interactions (limited to regional public transport) and interactions during organized activities were based more upon conformity.

Interactions during independently undertaken tourist activities include the whole range of possible antecedents, with a tendency towards conformity. It can thus be suggested that the high proportion of conformity-related interactions is not necessarily due to the sociability of this visitor type but due to the variations in their environmental and personal contexts.

When looking at the differences in antecedents depending on the type of interaction as summarized in Box E (Figure 4.2), these are again relevant for all visitor types, whose preferred contexts for initiating interactions were those with more available time and fewer distractions. Social interactions were therefore more readily initiated for intrinsic reasons when they occurred within these preferred contexts.

Accommodation interactions in combination with a longer timeframe spent within this setting were more likely to originate from intrinsic antecedents for all visitor types, and social interactions on transport modes that went beyond short regional travels were also frequently initiated for intrinsic reasons. When looking at responded interactions, these showed a higher proportion of conformity-related antecedents. This can be traced back to the previously established contexts of responded interactions, which are more likely to take place in combination with time restraints and other commitments which negatively impact intrinsic antecedents. This applies mostly to young and mature FITs, who experience a significant number of

133

their social interactions within both organized and independent tourist activity settings that show the largest number of conformity-related responded interactions.

4.5 Conclusion

This chapter has classified the interviewees within the sample into the three visitor types of backpackers, young and mature FITs and clearly identified several external factors that influence the occurrence of social interactions between visitors as well as confirming the reasons for which visitors enter into interactions with others. The impact that the chosen travel style has on both the environmental and personal contexts within which interviewees experienced social interactions with other visitors has been illustrated. Figures 4.1 and 4.2 provide a summary of both the situations during which interactions have occurred and how the main reasons for entering them differ by both visitor type and setting. The distinction by visitor type has been found to be a useful indicator of contexts, as travel style determines the settings within which visitors have the opportunity to interact with others. Within these settings, specific personal contexts are preferred to allow for sufficient time to conduct these interactions – especially when they are intrinsically motivated. As indicated in Section 3.5.5, the importance of both visitor and interaction type has been found to be especially applicable to the occurrence of social interactions, as they determine where and under which circumstances social interactions with other visitors occur – it can therefore be assumed that they impact the interaction process as well.

Chapter 5 will now look closely at the process of social interactions and will examine what happens during these occurrences. Section 3.2.2 suggested that the previously illustrated factors of both environmental and personal context as well as the original antecedents are influential for the interaction process. They will thus be taken into account when presenting the findings, and interrelationships as well as impacts will be illustrated.

134 5 Processes of social interactions

5.1 Introduction

After outlining the contexts and antecedents of social interactions between visitors in New Zealand, this chapter will now examine the process of these interactions as represented by Part 3 of the analytical framework (Figure 3.2). It will include a number of aspects of the social interaction that involve the physical presence of the other visitors that interviewees were interacting with and corresponds to research sub-question 2 (Section 3.2.2). The conceptual framework (Figure 2.3) incorporated Darley and Fazio’s (1980) interaction loop, which begins when a target responds to the interaction proposal of the initiator and ends when one or all participants decide not to interact further but bring the interaction to an end. The behavioural elements that are exchanged are characterised by their dimensions (e.g. duration and topics) and are influenced by the dynamic motivations. These are not necessarily the same as the original antecedents but can change throughout the course of an interaction.

All of this, in turn, is impacted by external factors as well as by concepts, structures, and rules that apply to this specific social interaction and therefore determine what types of behaviour are considered appropriate and in what sequence they are displayed. First, the criteria upon which visitors choose their potential interaction participants will be determined. This will be followed by a discussion of the dimensions and dynamic motivations of interactions – factors such as duration and conversation topics will be illustrated, as well as potential changes in antecedents.

The reasons why these social interactions were ended will then be outlined, and based upon all previously discussed information, the underlying rules, structures, behavioural elements and their sequences will be drawn out.

Whereas both interaction context and antecedents were investigated in regards to their applicability to and relevance for different visitor types, the process of social interactions does not depend upon the personal characteristics as directly or to the same extent. The large number of different variables relating to the interaction process and their interrelationships as well as the variety of settings, the differences within individual characteristics and travel style, and the diversity of findings between interaction types all contribute to a complex and multi-layered construct

135

that cannot be adequately displayed, examined, and understood by limiting both analysis and presentation to the two differentiating variables (interaction and visitor type). Therefore, each of the following sections will be approached individually and its respective structure will depend upon the contents’ relations with previously illustrated aspects of social interactions. First, the interaction participant selection will be discussed, taking into account visitor type, original antecedents and the type of interaction. The dimensions and dynamic motivations – namely duration, conversation topics, changes in antecedents, and perceived formality – will be examined, followed by how and why social interactions were ended. Based upon this information, the rules, elements, and sequences of behaviour will then be drawn out.