Survey implementation and sample

The survey was undertaken over two months in the summer of 2004: in Kaikoura in February 2004 and in Rotorua in March 2004. The survey was held throughout the week including weekends. In Kaikoura two sites were chosen for the collection of data, the Visitor Information Centre and the seal colony, and in Rotorua the sites chosen for the collection of data were the Visitor Information Centre, the lake front and the Government Gardens. These sites were chosen as they were ‘free’ sites and this would not bias the questions that related to spending money. Evidently tourists who were asked at paid attractions if they had paid for additional attractions would always answer yes, although it could be argued that ‘free’ sites may attract a bias of people who do not spend additional money on activities and attractions.

Chapter 3

116

The sample was designed to include a broad definition of the tourist as a person

“...away from their immediate home communities and daily work environments for business, pleasure and personal reasons” (Chadwick 1994: 65). This would include those on working holidays, business, visiting friends and relatives and staying in second or holiday homes.

On the basis of the findings from the first phase of research and from the pilot studies it was necessary to filter and exclude certain respondents:

• Firstly, it was found from the first stages of research that it was difficult to intercept package tourists. As time and resources were limited it was decided not to spend time attempting to fill a quota for package tourists, that is those on a package tour which had pre-purchased accommodation, transport and attractions from the country of origin and these were excluded from the sample.

• A further filter question was used to select the sample on the basis of the time spent in either Kaikoura or Rotorua. While all respondents could comment on the generalised questions (i.e. their actions relating to recycling, water conservation and crime awareness in New Zealand), only those who had spent some time in Kaikoura and Rotorua could comment on their experience of local culture and whether or not they had spent additional money on activities and attractions. In this case, respondents who had been at the destination for less than half a day were excluded from continuing with the full questionnaire.

• Some respondents had to be filtered on the basis of their level of English language ability.

All those respondents who were filtered from the sample were thanked and the interview terminated.

Respondents were approached and informed of the questionnaire’s length and content. They were also assured of their confidentiality in accordance with Victoria University of Wellington’s Human Ethics Committee requirements. As the conceptual basis of the questionnaire was founded on social-psychology, it was important in a group of tourists to identify only one main respondent. This was done by asking who in the group had the next birthday and this person was

Chapter 3

117

then asked to be the main respondent. The questionnaire was quite lengthy so was designed to be split into two smaller questionnaires, in the following combinations:

Option 1: Sections A, B and D Option 2: Sections A, C and D Option 3: Sections A, B, C and D

Sections B (relating to the key issues) and C (based on information provision in realistic scenarios) could be taken in isolation from each other with Sections A and D (relating to general details and to demographics). Although all respondents were informed at the beginning of the questionnaire the full length, they were asked halfway through the survey if they were happy to continue, allowing the questionnaire to be terminated if the respondent was fatigued by the length. In total 444 useable questionnaires were collected; 357 (80.4%) of these had all sections of the questionnaire completed, a sub-sample of Sections A, B and D had 429 (96.6%) respondents and a sub-sample of Sections A, C and D had 372 (83.8%) respondents. Throughout the presentation of the results the number of questionnaires relevant to each response will be made explicit.

The sample is summarised in Table 3.5, showing demographic details, and Table 3.6, showing travel details.

The sample did have limitations: some tourists were excluded from the sample due to language difficulties and domestic tourists were also under-represented.

This was thought to be due to the time of year the survey was held. New Zealanders tend to take their main holiday in January, during the school summer holidays. Advice was sought from the Visitor Information Centres by the researcher asking for suggestions to maximise responses from domestic tourists. However, it was confirmed that February and March were not the optimum time of year for domestic tourists. January, Easter or a longweekend were said to be a better time to include more domestic tourists. This could be borne in mind for future research. In Rotorua it was suggested that the researcher undertake the survey at Skyline Skyrides as this was frequented by domestic tourists. However, this approach was not followed as it would bias the question which asked if additional money had been spent on activities and attractions.

Chapter 3

118

Table 3.5: Sample summary 1, demographic details

Sub-sample A, B & D Highest level of education achieved

University undergraduate

Agricultural/trade/manual 35 9.28 32 9.94 31 10.0 Other 30 7.96 26 8.07 25 8.06

Missing 52 50 47

Chapter 3

119

Table 3.6: Sample summary 2, travel details

Sections A, B & D

Median stay in New Zealand

30.5 days 35 days 35 days