Types of tourists and their motivation

1. Types of tourists and their motivation (from Ryan, C. (1991) Recreational Tourism Routledge, London)

2. Types of tourists and their motivation (from Ryan, C. (1991) Recreational Tourism Routledge, London) On the basis of the concept that different motivations differentiate between categories of tourists, a number of profiles of tourist types have been created. One of the earliest, and still much quoted, was that described by Cohen (1972). Cohen described four types of tourist based on the institutionalisation of the tourist and the nature of the impact on the host community. Briefly stated his four categories were:

3. The organised mass tourist These are the least adventurous tourists, who on buying their package holiday remain encapsulated in an ‘environmental bubble’, divorced from the host community as they remain in the hotel complex. They adhere to an itinerary fixed by the tour operators, and even their trips out of the complex are organised tours. They make few decisions about their holiday.

4. The individual mass tourist They are similar to the organised mass tourist in that they utilise the facilities made available by the tour operator, but they have some control over their own itinerary. They may use the hotel as a base and hire a car for their own trips. However, many will tend to visit the same places as the mass organised tourist in that they will visit the ‘sights’.

5. The explorer The explorers arrange their own trip alone, and attempt to get off the beaten track. Yet they will still have recourse to comfortable tourist accommodation. However, much of their travel will be prompted by a motivation to associate with the people, and they will often speak the language of the host community. Nonetheless, the explorers retain many of the basic routines of their own life style.

6. The drifter The drifters will shun contact with the tourist and tourist establishment, and identify with the host community. They will live with the locals and adopt many of the practices of that community. Income is generated by working within the community, but often through low-skilled work, which creates a tendency to mix with the lower socio-economic groups.

7. One way in which these tourist classifications have a value is to relate it to the destination that the tourist type will prefer. Plog (1977) was one of the first to do this. Essentially Plog argued that there was a continuum between types of tourist from the ‘allocentric’ to the ‘psychocentric’ tourist. The allocentric is akin to Cohen’s explorers in that they seek new destinations and are prepared to take risks in searching for new cultures and places. On the other hand the psychocentric tourists seek the familiar, and are happier in an environment where there are many tourists who are like-minded. They are not risk takers and adhere to the proven product, being conservative in choice.

8. Types of tourists and their motivation (from Ryan, C. (1991) Recreational Tourism Routledge, London) On the basis of the concept that different motivations differentiate between categories of tourists, a number of profiles of tourist types have been created. One of the earliest, and still much quoted, was that described by Cohen (1972). Cohen described four types of tourist based on the institutionalisation of the tourist and the nature of the impact on the host community. Briefly stated his four categories were: The organised mass tourist These are the least adventurous tourists, who on buying their package holiday remain encapsulated in an ‘environmental bubble’, divorced from the host community as they remain in the hotel complex. They adhere to an itinerary fixed by the tour operators, and even their trips out of the complex are organised tours. They make few decisions about their holiday. The individual mass tourist They are similar to the organised mass tourist in that they utilise the facilities made available by the tour operator, but they have some control over their own itinerary. They may use the hotel as a base and hire a car for their own trips. However, many will tend to visit the same places as the mass organised tourist in that they will visit the ‘sights’. The explorer The explorers arrange their own trip alone, and attempt to get off the beaten track. Yet they will still have recourse to comfortable tourist accommodation. However, much of their travel will be prompted by a motivation to associate with the people, and they will often speak the language of the host community. Nonetheless, the explorers retain many of the basic routines of their own life style. The drifter The drifters will shun contact with the tourist and tourist establishment, and identify with the host community. They will live with the locals and adopt many of the practices of that community. Income is generated by working within the community, but often through low-skilled work, which creates a tendency to mix with the lower socio-economic groups. One way in which these tourist classifications have a value is to relate it to the destination that the tourist type will prefer. Plog (1977) was one of the first to do this. Essentially Plog argued that there was a continuum between types of tourist from the ‘allocentric’ to the ‘psychocentric’ tourist. The allocentric is akin to Cohen’s explorers in that they seek new destinations and are prepared to take risks in searching for new cultures and places. On the other hand the psychocentric tourists seek the familiar, and are happier in an environment where there are many tourists who are like-minded. They are not risk takers and adhere to the proven product, being conservative in choice. It might also be that in many cases motivation has perhaps two essential drives. These may be described crudely as a ‘push’ motivation, that is a wish to get away from a place, and a ‘pull’ motivation, a desire to see some other area. Iso-Ahola (1982) clarifies this latter motivation as ‘a desire to obtain psychological [intrinsic] rewards through travel in a contrasting world’. The ‘push-pull’ factors can also be held to operate upon humans in two dimensions, man as the social animal seeking inter-personal relationships, and man as the solitary person seeking either refuge from others or solitude.

9. It might also be that in many cases motivation has perhaps two essential drives. These may be described crudely as a ‘push’ motivation, that is a wish to get away from a place, and a ‘pull’ motivation, a desire to see some other area. Iso-Ahola (1982) clarifies this latter motivation as ‘a desire to obtain psychological [intrinsic] rewards through travel in a contrasting world’. The ‘push-pull’ factors can also be held to operate upon humans in two dimensions, man as the social animal seeking inter-personal relationships, and man as the solitary person seeking either refuge from others or solitude.

10. 1. What is the writer, Ryan, actually trying to do in this text? In this text the author’s aim is to review literature (ideas) relating to classification of tourists and their motivation for travelling to a given destination.

11. 2. Ryan cites Cohen’s typology of 4 types of tourists. Is Ryan using Cohen’s own words or is he writing a summary in his own words? How do you know? Ryan appears to be using his own words – otherwise he would use quotation marks.

12. 3. Who developed the concept (and terminology) of allocentric and psychocentric tourists? Who relates these concepts to Cohen’s typology? According to this text, the concepts were developed by Plogg (1977). The author of this text, Ryan, brings these ideas together with Cohen’s typology of tourist types. N.B. He justifies the old reference (Plogg was writing 30 years ago) by pointing out that Plogg was among the first to develop theories of why tourists choose certain destinations and holiday types.

13. 4. Which of Iso-Ahola’s concepts has Ryan included in his review? “Push” and “pull”, which rather links back to migration theories.