The study being investigated in this article is all about the motivations of tourists in picking their destination for local tours. The study is focused on providing information about what local residents are looking for when they visit tourist attractions and what draws them. The research has been conducted to give additional insights to marketers of tourist attractions in order to enable them to attract more tourists in Melbourne, Australia to their destinations and create a better experience for them.
The research is done to find out the differences in the leisure preferences of the local tourists to visit the tourist attractions in Melbourne to be able to boost tourist traffic. This makes the research an aid in the country’s efforts to boost local tourism in the community, giving importance to the local price-sensitive market. The research was carried out through the collection of quantitative data integrated with the case study in Melbourne.
The quantitative data was gathered through a questionnaire conducted in a face-to-face interview in the participants’ homes. The questionnaire consists of two elements, “leisure motivations in relation to visiting tourist attractions” and “intentions to visit a cross-section of Melbourne’s tourist attractions” based on Unger and Kernan’s Subjective Leisure Scale (SLS). To measure the extent to how much the respondent agreed or disagreed with the SLS, the 7-point Likert scale was used from “strongly disagree” (1) and “strongly agree” (7).
The sample of tourist attractions in the study included the Melbourne Zoological Gardens, National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne Aquarium, Melbourne Museum, the Federation Square, Scienceworks and IMAX theatre. In analysing data, the behavioural intentions to visit are equated to visitation in the tourist attraction based on Azjen and Fishbein’s theory of reasoned action and Azjen’s theory on planned behaviour. The intentions recorded in the questionnaire were measured against the 11-point Juster scale.
The questionnaire was administered through convenience sampling from the residents ages 18 and above from March to April 2003 with a sample size of 1005 residents. It was coupled with a quota sampling method developed in relation to age, gender, occupational characteristics, and the profile of Melbourne Metropolitan region population. This was necessary to increase the rate of similarity between the population and the sample. In the analysis, the data was divided and clustered based on their behavioural intentions.
The resulting six clusters selected from the exploratory hierarchical cluster analysis were then subject to a K-means analysis. After the segmentation, the MANOVA test was utilized to see if the segments have significant statistical differences. The results excluded some questions not relevant to the study. The included relevant questions showed the following results: • Members of Cluster 1 (very passive/general) comprise 27% of the sample and were the most homogenous of the six clusters. The place most likely to be visited was the Federation Square. It ranked low (2. 4) on the 11-point Juster scale.
• Members of Cluster 2 (passive/commercial) comprise 19% of the sample. The average intended use on the was quite high, having an average of 7. 9. • Members of Cluster 3 (moderate/nature segment) include 15% of the sample. They show moderate tendencies to go to all attractions but were more likely to visit nature/adventure attractions. • Members of Cluster 4 (moderate/popular culture) include 18% of the sample and were similar to Cluster 3 to visit nature/adventure attractions but leaned toward Federation Square rather than Melbourne Zoo, the Aquarium and IMAX as in Cluster 3
• Members of Cluster 5 (active/arts and cultural segment) accounts for 13. 4%. The findings show that this group leans to go to art/cultural attractions such as the Museum and the National Gallery of Victoria. However, Scienceworks and the Melbourne Aquarium are not likely destinations. • Members of Cluster 6 (active/general segment) accounts for 14. 1% of the respondents. This segment indicates a high probability of visiting all seven attractions. It was also shown that respondents belonging to this cluster display a leaning toward nature/adventure attractions.
The responses satisfied the covariance assumption of the MANOVA test and are reported to be significant at (p < . 05). The criteria of intrinsic satisfaction, perceived freedom and arousal had a mean score in the Affective component. Mastery, involvement and spontaneity were calculated to arrive at a mean score in the Cognitive component. The study results reflect that most of the persons surveyed would want to have leisure activities outside their normal lives and that most cater to niche tourism, as discussed in class.
The niche markets catered by Melbourne’s local tourism covered the environmental, urban and other niche tours. Because of the results, it is important to note that segmentation of tourist attractions, as suggested in the Leisure Motivation Theory, can help attract and enhance the repeat visits of the people who gravitate toward their establishment. A considerable 46% of the respondents, however, are passive and should be focused on by marketers to expand their business. Moreover, attractions where respondents are passive should be developed to increase their interests and visits.
It is also important to note that further research on the activities of the tourists when visiting should be added to know what draws the locals to their attractions. Another point that can be noted is that the research lacks the question of whether or not distance is a factor in the increase in impetus to visit the attractions. I’ve learned that the marketing mix is very important in analyzing how the study can be used in marketing. Considering that the study has assumed that the local market is price sensitive, the study doesn’t give much information on the impact of the attraction (product), location, and promotions that marketers work on.
This is important in extending the marketing mix when considering whether to enhance their human resource, physical facilities, process management or branding. Also, as seen in the study, quantitative research is not applied easaily. There are several considerations and supporting formulas to make sure that the results are accurate and precise, and not a misrepresentation of the population or an off-tangent claim to the reality of the market.