Distinctive gaps in the IPA ratings of destination attributes were ap-parent for both Generalist and Immersionist respondents. Generalists
TABLE 13. Differentiating Market Niche Activity Characteristics
Percentage of Respondents
Activities Pursued Generalists Immersionists c2 Sig.
Historic sites 62.6 89.6 21.604 0.000
Exploring backcountry wilderness 32.9 58.8 15.915 0.000
Hiking/backpacking 45.6 71.1 15.470 0.000
Zoos, natural displays, gardens 68.0 89.6 15.030 0.000
Camping 30.8 53.6 12.617 0.000
Native (Indian) cultural sites 42.5 65.6 12.439 0.000
Swimming 45.6 64.6 8.422 0.004
Lake boating (sail/power) 20.5 37.5 8.391 0.004
Snowmobiling 16.4 32.3 8.288 0.004
Amusement or theme parks 41.5 58.3 6.594 0.010
Whale watching 27.2 42.7 6.276 0.012
Sightseeing in city/town 91.8 99.0 5.817 0.016
River canoeing/kayaking/rafting 22.4 35.4 4.890 0.027
Downhill skiing/snowboarding 19.9 32.3 4.798 0.028
Visiting National/Provincial park 72.6 84.5 4.740 0.029
Shopping 87.0 94.8 3.950 0.047
Saltwater fishing 21.9 33.3 3.880 0.049
TABLE 14. Differentiating Market Niche Trip Element Satisfaction Levels
Mean Response*
Item Generalists Immersionists t Sig.
Your overall trip experience 3.71 3.83 ⫺1.83920 0.06719
Attractions/culture/events 3.53 3.70 ⫺2.10301 0.03672
*Mean satisfaction scores based on a scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree. The higher the mean, the higher is the level of satisfaction with the trip elements.
Peter W. Williams and Karim B. Dossa 21 TABLE 15. Differentiating Market Niche Activity Satisfaction Levels
Mean Response*
Activities Assessed Generalists Immersionists t Sig.
Photography 3.09 3.77 ⫺4.93962 0.00000
Native (Indian) cultural sites 2.23 3.00 ⫺3.96607 0.00012
Dining out in restaurants 3.10 3.42 ⫺3.46288 0.00064
Visiting National/Provincial park 3.26 3.72 3.32681 0.00106
Golfing 2.90 2.01 3.14936 0.00223
Nightlife/entertainment 2.58 3.06 ⫺2.68407 0.00820
Sporting events 2.73 2.12 2.41248 0.01767
Snowmobiling 1.52 2.32 ⫺2.39239 0.02029
Sightseeing in city/town 3.33 3.53 ⫺2.08064 0.03858
Local festivals, fairs, events 2.63 3.08 ⫺2.06030 0.04181
Sightseeing in the country (outside city/town) 3.51 3.73 ⫺2.04128 0.04238
*Mean responses are sorted in descending order by absolute magnitude of the t value. Satisfaction scores based on a scale ranging from 1 = not at all satisfied to 4 = very satisfied. The higher the mean, the higher is the level of satisfaction with the ac-tivities.
TABLE 16. Differentiating Market Niche Destination Selection Factor Satisfac-tion Levels
Mean Response *
Item Generalists Immersionists t Sig.
Experiencing and seeing a mountain area 3.55 3.88 ⫺4.17119 0.00004
Visiting places with unique and interesting
restaurants 3.08 3.48 ⫺4.00990 0.00009
Visiting cities and/or towns 3.21 3.56 ⫺3.68703 0.00029
Indulging in luxury such as staying in first class
hotels 3.30 2.70 3.24438 0.00173
Having the opportunity to shop 3.09 3.41 ⫺2.76511 0.00626
Enjoying night life and entertainment 3.22 2.76 2.58751 0.01104
Visiting a place where people speak my
language 3.50 3.77 ⫺2.54494 0.01176
Attending sporting events 3.27 2.76 2.47913 0.01538
Having a variety of things to see and do 3.44 3.64 ⫺2.36516 0.01902
Viewing wildlife and birds 3.31 3.55 ⫺2.33917 0.02055
Visiting a place that takes good care of its
environment 3.42 3.65 ⫺2.33263 0.02069
Doing daring and adventuresome activities 3.23 2.87 2.09039 0.03919
Getting to know local people 3.22 3.43 ⫺1.98473 0.04882
*Mean responses are sorted in descending order by absolute magnitude of the t value. Satisfaction scores are based on a scale ranging from 1 = not at all satisfied to 4 = very satisfied. In other words, the higher the mean, the higher is the level of sat-isfaction.
were more satisfied than were Immersionists with those attributes they considered important in their selection of travel destinations. Overall, their satisfaction with each destination selection feature examined was higher than the corresponding level of importance they attached to that attribute.
Destination selection features that received highest satisfaction ratings in the minds of the Generalists and were also relatively high on their im-portance ratings were related to opportunities to enjoy scenic areas, as well as clean and safe communities with hospitable people (Table 17).
Important attributes which elicited particularly poor satisfaction evalua-tions were associated with providing opportunities to pursue more out-door oriented and other adventuresome pursuits in high quality natural and cultural environments. Overall, Generalists were seeking more fea-tures which added value to their experience through activities that af-forded them opportunities to increase their knowledge and interaction with local people (Figure 1).
Generally, Immersionists expressed less satisfaction than did their Gen-eralist counterparts with those regional attributes they considered most im-portant to their selection of a travel destination. Only one of the ten most important destination selection factors identified by Immersionists re-ceived mean satisfaction scores as good or better than their correspond-ing importance ratcorrespond-ings (Table 18).
TABLE 17. Generalists’ Destination Selection Factor Importance-Performance Gaps
Mean Response*
Destination Selection Factor Importance Performance Difference
Participating in outdoor activities 3.31 3.43 0.12
Visiting scenic areas 3.21 3.73 0.52
Doing daring and adventuresome activities 3.14 3.23 0.09
Getting value for the cost of the trip 3.09 3.37 0.28
Visiting clean cities and towns 3.08 3.56 0.48
Travelling to places where I feel safe and secure 3.03 3.52 0.49
Viewing wildlife and birds 2.99 3.31 0.32
Going to places with friendly and hospitable people 2.97 3.62 0.65 Visiting a place that takes good care of its environment 2.95 3.42 0.47
Visiting a place where people speak my language 2.90 3.50 0.60
*Mean responses are sorted in descending order of importance based on a scale ranging from 1 = not at all satisfied to 4 = very satisfied. In other words, the higher the mean, the higher is the level of satisfaction.
Peter W. Williams and Karim B. Dossa 23
2.80 3.00 3.20 3.40 3.60
Importance
FIGURE 1. Generalists’ Destination Selection Factor Importance-Performance Analysis
Legend:
Key Variable Key Variable
1 Attending sporting events 16 Learning about Native (Indian) culture and art 2 Being physically active 17 Learning new things, increasing my
knowl-edge
3 Doing daring and adventuresome activities 18 Participating in outdoor activities 4 Enjoying night life and entertainment 19 Resting and relaxing
5 Experiencing and seeing a coastal area 20 Travelling to places where I feel safe and se-cure
6 Experiencing and seeing a mountain area 21 Viewing wildlife and birds
7 Getting a good currency exchange rate 22 Visiting a place that takes good care of its environment
8 Getting to know local people 23 Visiting a place where people speak my lan-guage
9 Getting value for the cost of the trip 24 Visiting attractions such as museums, art gal-leries, zoos, etc.
10 Going to a place that is good for the family 25 Visiting cities and/or towns 11 Going to place I've heard about from friends or
relatives
26 Visiting clean cities and towns
12 Going to places with friendly and hospitable people
27 Visiting historic sites or areas
13 Having a variety of things to see and do 28 Visiting places with unique and interesting restaurants.
14 Having the opportunity to shop 29 Visiting scenic areas 15 Indulging in luxury such as staying in first class
hotels
30 Visiting wilderness and undisturbed areas
Important destination features for which Immersionists expressed considerable satisfaction were associated with opportunities to experi-ence well-managed safe, scenic, and natural areas with wildlife. Key destination attributes which failed to measure up to satisfaction expec-tations of these Immersionists were tied to limited opportunities to ex-perience more culturally and socially interactive adventures involving local people and undisturbed places (Figure 2).