Research approach

Due to the limitations of the literature upon which the conceptual framework as introduced in Section 2.5 is based, it was necessary to pursue the research question as outlined in Section 3.2 in a series of steps to ensure data quality and make informed decisions on further research instruments and foci. This also includes the selection of potential interviewees and the settings in which they should be approached. The lack of comprehensive data also made it likely that aspects that factor into the nature, process, and evaluation of social interactions between visitors had not yet been considered. This made it necessary to first gain an initial understanding and knowledge of the issue, with a certain amount of flexibility and adaptability in the methods to react to the emergence of hitherto unknown factors.

Due to the particular characteristics of this research, the research process needed to evolve during different steps of the methods, with data evaluation and method adjustment preceding each step, which is in accordance with the post positivist view that the issue on hand should determine the research tools.

74

 Identify and select research settings for main interviews

 Gain first impressions on motivations, circumstances, processes and meanings of social interactions to determine interview contents

 Observation of social interaction behaviour in tourism related setting

 Identify and select research settings for exploratory interviews

 Gain first impressions on behavioural aspects to determine interview contents

 Collect data to answer the research question and its sub-questions

 76 personal semi-structured in-depth interviews with international visitors in two New Zealand cities

Main interviews

 Literature review

 Identifying the research gap, research question and sub-questions

Purpose

Purpose

 Identify and select research settings for main interviews

 Provide first overview of antecedents, dimensions, processes and impacts of social interactions to determine further methodology

 Qualitative data analysis of exploratory interviews

Data analysis Purpose

Part 2Part 1

 Two pilot interview rounds with six respondents each

 Develop a categorization of social interaction types to effectively communicate research interest to future respondents

 Determine number of specific examples on social interactions to be collected

 Determine timeframe within which these examples had occurred

Pilot tests Purpose

Purpose

Part 3

 Qualitative and quantitative data analysis of main interviews

 Combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches

 Answer the research question and its sub-questions

 Discuss and interpret results

Data analysis Purpose

Part 4

 Develop a methodological approach that takes into account the preliminary results emerging throughout Part 2 of the research process

 Decision to proceed with personal semi-structured in-depth interviews in neutral locations

Determine further methodology Purpose

Figure 3.1 Multi-stage research process for examining social interactions between international visitors in New Zealand

75

The research process as outlined in Figure 3.1 thus consisted of a multi-step approach. After identifying the research gap in Part 1, a qualitative exploratory phase (Part 2) followed. Only after the results of the exploratory phase were analysed, were the methods for Part 3 developed.

Part 1 consisted of identifying the research gap and aims and objectives of this study based upon the literature review, as outlined in Chapters 1 and 2. This was followed by the development of the research design of the exploratory phase as depicted in Part 2. It was necessary to first gain insight into the settings and circumstances in which visitors to New Zealand interact with and talk to each other (sub-question 1), how they perceive and evaluate different types of interaction (sub-question 3) and what possible impact these might have on their visitor experience and satisfaction with it (sub-question 4). Without this knowledge, neither an informed selection of interviewees nor of appropriate research settings would have been possible. It was essential to ensure that the phenomenon to be studied actually occurred in the chosen research settings and that the interactions to be studied in this context would not be overly specific but could provide a general overview of how visitors interact with each other during their overall travels, not just during one specific activity or situation. This knowledge then enabled an informed decision about the methodological approach employed in Part 3, during which the processes and dimensions of social interactions could be examined more closely with minimal recall and selective perception issues (sub-question 2). Therefore, Part 2 of the research design consisted of exploratory semi-structured in-depth interviews with international visitors in New Zealand.

After analysing the information originating from these interviews, the use of further personal semi-structured in-depth interviews was determined. Had a certain pattern relating to the interviewees’ experiences and perceptions (settings, circumstances, influencing factors, importance, impacts) emerged throughout the interviews, the methodology would have been adapted to account for the possibility of using more quantitatively oriented research instruments in possible combination with participant observation. As the exploratory interviews did not reveal sufficient information to select specific sites, the process as displayed in Part 3 of Figure 3.1 was chosen to continue qualitative data collection not at specific sites or during particular activities but within a wider and more generalized approach. It was thus necessary to first

76

define the major differences in the data and the detailed factors or issues that did not allow for a more targeted investigation. After identifying the issues that needed further attention, the research methods were refined. In this case, further qualitative research was advisable.

Data collected during the exploratory interviews of Part 2 did not highlight any situations, circumstances or locations in which social interactions with other visitors seemed either more frequent or more significant, and the importance and evaluation of interactions that interviewees have had so far did not depend on geographical or circumstantial factors. In addition, a wide array of social interactions was described during Part 2 that differed not only in the circumstances of their occurrence but also in regards to their processes, dimensions, and their assigned importance. It was therefore not possible to identify specific locations that would have provided the researcher with a large number and representative variety of social interactions.

Neither was it possible to collect enough information on specific social interactions to regard those as representative. Therefore, further data was collected using personal in-depth interview. Interview guidelines were developed by putting a particular focus on further investigating these differences, aided by two pilot tests to explore the feasible interview length, the timeframe within which the interviewees’

specific social interactions had to be located, and how the research interests and the whole range of potential social interactions could effectively be communicated to interviewees.

In Part 4, the data gained during the main interviews was then analysed in a way appropriate to the nature of data collection and research questions using a combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches (see Section 3.5.5), followed by its discussion as related to the original research question and its sub-questions, the underlying theoretical framework and the literature review.

77

3.4 Exploratory interviews – Research process Part 2