Tourism Management 33 (2012) 1468e1482

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Tourism Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tourman

Web users’ behavioural patterns of tourism information search: From online

to offline
Chaang-Iuan Ho a, *, Meng-Hui Lin b, Hui-Mei Chen c
a
Department of Leisure Services Management, Chaoyang University of Technology, 168 Jifong E. Rd., Wufong District, Taichung 413, Taiwan
b
Graduate Institute of Leisure Services Management, Chaoyang University of Technology, Taiwan
c
Department of Horticulture, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper presents a conceptual framework of Web users’ engagement in tourism information search for
Received 8 December 2010 a comprehensive understanding of their integrated online and offline search behaviour. The information
Accepted 21 January 2012 search experiences are characterised as a process constituting some common elements: prior knowledge
and searching experiences, online searching strategies, processing and recording information, barriers to
Keywords: online searching, reasons for ending an online search, summarising information, exchanging information
Tourism information search
and searching for more information through other sources. Such behaviour goes beyond the scope of
Online tourism information search
information searching and captures the other activities, including information processing, utilising and
Behavioural tourism information search
model
disseminating. The grounded theory research method is employed as an inductive investigative process
in which the authors construct the framework by systematically collecting and analysing data. The aim of
this research method is to build a theory. The data sets consist of both semi-structured in-depth inter-
views with subjects and their field observations based on online searching. A theoretical model incor-
porating 10 propositions is proposed for future testing.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Internet and other non-media information sources, including

1.1. Background and purpose
With the continued growth of population who regularly surf the
Internet, the World Wide Web (WWW) has become the indis-
pensable channel for people seeking to use tourism information
(Buhalis & Law, 2008). The Internet offers a rich environment for
the information and resources needed by potential travellers who
either want to browse the Web pages to gain familiarity with and to
locate something of interest to them, or else desire to search on
a given topic and retrieve the relevant information. The advantages
of online tourism information search include the relatively low cost,
customised information, ease of product comparison, interactivity,
virtual community formation, and 24-h accessibility (Wang, Head,
& Arthur, 2002).
However, the Internet is not the only channel for tourism
information searching. The information can be gathered electron-
ically, or from other information sources such as guidebooks and
word-of-mouth referrals (Pearce & Schott, 2005). Tourists even mix
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ886 4 23323000x4342; Fax: þ886 4 2374 2363.
E-mail address: ciho@cyut.edu.tw (C.-I. Ho).
commercial brochures and travel agents for planning trips (Seabra,
Abrantes, & Lages, 2007). Gronflaten (2009) indicated that tourism
information search depends on both online and offline modes.
Little is known about how individuals search for tourism infor-
mation using online and offline sources, how they search for
tourism information from online to offline, or how they use the
multiple information sources. The lack of studies in this regard is
evidence that would support more research on this issue. Posing
the above questions is meaningful, since tourism information
search may be characterised as a process: information seekers first
describe a request via a query in the e-commerce environment and
then the WWW system locates information that matches or
satisfies the request, after which they turn to other sources for
more information. Exploring tourism information search behaviour
with a combination of online and offline modes is one way to gain
a better understanding of the comprehensive search process, in
particular which activities form their search experiences and how
these activities occur sequentially during their searching.
As far back as the 1980s, a few researchers (e.g., Ellis, 1989;
Kuhlthau, 1987; Wilson, 1981) explored the library users’
perspective of information seeking behaviour and proposed several
models of information search process. An individual’s search
process is assumed to follow a certain pattern. Based on this

0261-5177/$ e see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2012.01.016
 C.-I. Ho et al. / Tourism Management 33 (2012) 1468e1482
rationale, online tourism information search may be viewed as the
interaction between information seekers and the online system. If
the general search pattern could be identified and broken down
into the basic behavioural characteristics which are significant in
defining and maintaining the competitive advantages of e-
commerce, such a model of search behaviour would be able to serve
as the basis for improving the interfaces and functionality of
existing search systems. The varied needs of tourism information
searchers may be considered by using more sophisticated systems
in the future. Furthermore, the difficulties that individuals
encounter with the search process may be fully understood and
their searching experiences subsequently improved. The marketers
may then analytically follow through in developing marketing
strategies step by step based on the search process.
1.2. Research purpose
The main purpose of this study is to develop a conceptual model
to articulate and delineate the searching attributes that describe
Web users’ tourism information search behaviour. We attempt to
answer the following question: How do Web users describe their
tourism information search process? This research focuses on the
behavioural aspects of the search activities occurring during the
search process. The central research question has the following
associated research questions:
- Is there a common pattern for tourism information search for
Web users?
- What are the fundamental dimensions of the Web-based
search process model?
The results gained from this research project will contribute to
filling the gaps in the literature, including providing the con-
ceptualisation of tourism information search behaviour occurring
online, offline and in-between, thereby enabling research to move
forward to further empirically explore and understand the rela-
tionships based on various information search activities. The
framework that integrates both online and offline tourism infor-
mation search behaviour, incorporating 10 propositions is
proposed. However, the proposed theoretical model has not been
empirically tested. The existence of proposed relationships among
the variables can neither be confirmed nor be disconfirmed.
It should be noted that the terms Web users and tourism
information searchers are used interchangeably (and are some-
times identical). The latter refers to those who usually use the
Internet to search for various types of information, including
tourism information; their purpose in engaging in tourism infor-
mation search may be to gain some experiences or to achieve
specific goals. These individuals apparently do not include those
who do not use the WWW or do not search for tourism information
online.
2. Literature review
2.1. Tourism information search
Tourism information search includes internal search as well as
the multiple external information sources used. Beatty and Smith
(1987) claimed that people usually attempt to search for informa-
tion in their memory first and, if an internal information source
does not work, they then go out and search for relevant informa-
tion. It is therefore useful to review the literature which focuses on
internal search and multiple sources of tourism information.
Because of the increased attention paid to exploring tourism
information search behaviour from the search process perspective,
1469
we also review prior work on these issues. Finally, we review
existing studies related to tourism information search on the
Internet and examine the identified search patterns.
2.1.1. Internal tourism information search
Past studies indicate that tourism information search is initiated
by internal search by retrieving the personal experiences with
a specific destination or a similar one (e.g., Chen & Gursoy, 2000;
Fodness & Murray, 1997; Vogt & Fesenmaier, 1998) and the
knowledge accumulated through an ongoing search (e.g., Schul and
Crompton, 1983; Vogt & Fesenmaier, 1998). The internal informa-
tion is derived from previous experiences and past information
searches. The information is processed and stored in the tourists’
long-term memory which then forms their prior knowledge. The
knowledge regarding the destination affects tourist information
search behaviour and decision-making (e.g., Gursoy, 2003;
Snepenger, Meged, Snelling, & Worrall, 1990; Vogt & Fesenmaier,
1998; Woodside & Ronkainen, 1980). When they need to evaluate
a destination, tourists even retrieve information from their long-
term memory. Therefore, prior knowledge has an antecedent role
to play in tourism information search.
Prior knowledge is identified as a multidimensional construct
with familiarity, expertise and past experience (Kerstetter & Cho,
2004). Gursoy and McCleary (2004) indicate that tourists’ prior
knowledge has two components: familiarity and expertise. The
former refers to what tourists think they know about the destina-
tion and represents their subjective knowledge; the latter refers to
the ability to perform travel-related tasks and represents the
tourists’ objective knowledge. Previous visits to a destination are
influenced by the tourists’ prior knowledge of the destination and
their information behaviour (Gursoy, 2003; Vogt & Fesenmaier,
1998). Tourists’ memory utilisation and internal information
search are facilitated by the number of their previous visits and the
amount of their experience (Lehto, O’Leary, & Morrison, 2004). As
a whole, both prior knowledge and travel experiences have an
initial impact on tourism information search.
2.1.2. Multiple sources of tourism information
Tourists always search for information through various chan-
nels. They tend to use a combination of information sources as their
search strategies (Snepenger et al., 1990) and also use broad
external information sources for trip planning, including their
family and friends, destination-specific literature, the media, and
travel consultants (Snepenger & Snepenger, 1993). Some travellers
have been found to use other specific information sources, such as
welcome centres (Gitelson & Purdue, 1987; Howard & Gitelson,
1989), or travel agents (Kendall & Booms, 1989).
Baloglu (1999) identifies a diversity of information sources (e.g.,
professional advice, word-of-mouth, advertisements, and non-
tourism books or movies) as determining the tourists’ perceptual
and cognitive evaluation of tourism destinations. Apart from travel
agents and family members and friends, tourist information sour-
ces have been found to be more diverse than ever, and include
personal recommendations at the destination (Rompf, DiPietro, &
Ricci, 2005). Third party referrals, such as those by local residents,
have been found to serve as a highly relevant source of information
due to their expertise and trustworthiness (Rompf & Ricci, 2005). It
indicates that a multiplicity of tourism information sources were
utilised during the process of travel decision-making.
2.1.3. Past studies on tourism information search from a process
viewpoint
Over the past two decades, the attention of researchers has been
directed towards exploring tourism information search behaviour
from search process perspectives. Vogt and Fesenmaier (1998)
1470 C.-I. Ho et al. / Tourism Management 33 (2012) 1468e1482
propose a five-stage information search model with a heuristic
approach to investigate searchers’ information finding and
decision-making. Fodness and Murray (1998) indicate that tourist
information search is part of a dynamic process in which travellers
use various types and amounts of information sources in vacation
planning. Later, they argue that information searchers select
different search strategies during the process, of which there are at
least three dimensions: spatial, temporal and operational (Fodness
& Murray, 1999). The spatial dimension of an information search
strategy refers to the locus of search activity: internal and external.
The temporal dimension is related to the timing of the search
activity: ongoing or pre-purchase. The operational dimension
corresponds to the way the search is conducted and focuses on the
particular sources used. Indeed, these three components constitute
the skeleton of an information search process.
As a matter of fact, the associated tasks of tourism information
search are part of the decision-making, or the pre-decision neces-
sity. Fesenmaier and Jeng (2000) claim that the travel decision-
making/planning process may be decomposed into a number of
constituent facets: the decisions made in the earlier stages appear
to condition decisions made in later stages, while the sub-decisions
of a trip are grounded on the extent and nature of information
search. This finding is in agreement with Moutinho (1987),
implying that a tourism information search process reflects how
travellers make a series of related decisions.
Gursoy and McCleary (2004) propose a tourist’s information
search behaviour model which describes the early stage of a search
process for tourism information as well as the antecedents of the
pre-purchase information search. Bargeman and van der Poel
(2006) propose a four-staged vacation decision-making process:
making vacation plans, searching for internal and external infor-
mation, evaluating alternatives and making the final decision, and
preparing for the vacation. Hyde (2008) models pre-vacation
decision-making for a tour vacation as comprising three phases:
information search, vacation planning and vacation booking, and
shows that while these three concepts are unique phases, they are
related to each other. Information search and processing illustrate
how potential tourists utilize the information obtained and how
search activities correspond to decision-making. These studies
relate to travel/vacation decision-making and the role of informa-
tion search in the process. However, while a tourism information
search process contains many specific activities, very few attempts
have been made to examine tourism information search itself as
a whole and the complete process from an initial (internal search)
to the multiple external information sources used.
2.1.4. Tourism information search on the Internet
Along with the widespread acceptance of Internet technology,
the research issues related to online tourism information search
have attracted much attention. Earlier studies focus on who utilises
the Internet to search for tourism information and what kind of
information they are looking for (e.g., Bonn, Furr, & Susskind, 1998;
Weber & Roehl, 1999).
Although Mitsche (2005) provides the search patterns and the
beginning of the search process for tourism information on the
Internet, the research findings need to be critically reviewed due to
their derivations from a tourism domain-specific search engine.
Pan and Fesenmaier (2003, 2006) first consider Internet-based
tourism information search from the perspective of the search
process. Based on the mental model which emphasises information
search behaviour from the cognitive information retrieval
perspective and the knowledge structure of information searchers,
their major research findings are that tourists’ vacation planning
online follows a hierarchical structure of episodes, and the infor-
mation searchers use information hubs containing many links to
other related Websites to facilitate the navigation process. It
appears that various search activities contribute to the overall
episodes; however, little is known about how these tasks function.
Later, Xiang, Wöber, and Fesenmaier (2008) analyse online tourism
information search behaviour at a micro-level and propose
a conceptual framework illustrating the interactions between an
online tourism information searcher, a search engine and the online
tourism domain (including industry suppliers, intermediaries,
destination marketing organisations, and so on). Nevertheless, the
value of this kind of work is being respected. It may be useful to
consider adopting another perspective to gain insights into online
tourism information search and further the searchers’ offline
behaviour.
The progress in information communications technology has
been transforming and changing online tourism information search
behaviour. Meanwhile, it has enriched the context of information.
For example, virtual travel communities (VTCs) have become an
efficient way of obtaining informal information, such as the travel
experiences and recommendations of travellers. VTC users’
behaviour is related to their participation (e.g., Wang & Fesenmaier,
2004) and their purchasing behaviour (Kim, Lee, & Hiemstra, 2004).
More recently, a range of new online technological applications has
emerged as social media (e.g., blogs, vlogs) to facilitate the distri-
bution and accessibility of tourism information. Travel blogs have
become both the potential information sources and marketing
channels for tourists (e.g., Pan, MacLaurin, & Crotts, 2007; Pudliner,
2007; Pühringer & Taylor, 2008). Currently, social media not only
constitute a significant portion of results for online tourism infor-
mation search, but also demonstrate their increasingly important
role as an information source (Xiang & Gretzel, 2010).
2.2. Understanding information search behaviour from a user
perspective
Several researchers in the field of Library Science (e.g., Ellis,
1989; Marchionini, 1995; Kuhlthau, 1987, 1988; Wilson, 1981)
propose theoretical models in terms of information seeking and
information behaviour. Instead of the perspective of informants
and of intermediaries within the system where the perceptions
direct the users’ actions and affect their choices within a search,
they lay emphasis on the users’ perspective to the extent that users
exhibit common characteristics of information behaviour at
different stages of the information seeking process. That is, infor-
mation seekers’ perceptions are viewed as the constructs which are
built over time through prior experiences of searching and prior
knowledge of a problem. The perceptions might be reflected upon,
described and explained to provide a window into the search
process which offers an opportunity to investigate individual
search behaviour further.
Based on the above rationale, Wilson’s model of information
behaviour (Wilson, 1981, 1999) accommodates a range of factors
regarding searchers, including an activating mechanism, inter-
vening variables, information need, search behaviour as well as
information processing and use. Kuhlthau (1988) develops a well-
known six-stage model of the search process in which the
sequence of thoughts, actions and feelings commonly experienced
in a search for information is described. The six stages are task
initiation, topic selection, prefocus exploration, focus formulation,
information collection and search closure. The state of information
searchers is dynamic rather than static. Along with the search
process, the needs of information searchers change and affect the
use of information sources as well as the decisions of relevance.
Ellis (1989) proposes a behavioural model of the information
seeking patterns which are broken down into six characteristics:
starting, chaining, browsing, differentiating, monitoring and
 C.-I. Ho et al. / Tourism Management 33 (2012) 1468e1482
extracting. These identified characteristics constitute the principal
generic features of the different individual patterns, and together
provide a flexible and complete behavioural model. By using the
interviewing technique to collect the data, the model is derived
from the detailed perceptions of information seekers regarding
their associated activities from their point of view and as a whole.
Such a micro-level analysis regarding the activities and perceptions
of information seekers is considered to be useful for designing an
information retrieval system.
These theories have been well applied in the studies regarding
online information search. Based on Kuhlthau’s model (1993), Bilal
(2000) has conducted a series of studies to examine children’s
information seeking on the Web. Ford, Miller, and Moss (2003) map
most closely on to Wilson’s model of information behaviour
(Wilson, 1997, 1999) in a Web context. This indicates that Web users
may have a common behavioural pattern for their information
search on the Internet.
2.3. Literature regarding Web search strategies
A review of the literature on Information Science exploring the
Web user’s searching experiences shows a reasonably coherent
picture of Web search behaviour (e.g., Carroll, 1999). Web searching
characteristics have been identified as the searching strategies
which are commonly and widely used by information searchers.
Beyond that, the characteristics are the associated activities that
mostly occur during an online search process. The searching
strategies that have been identified in prior studies include: using
keywords, using search engines, browsing the Web, using a subject
directory and visiting the known sites. Each of these is now dis-
cussed in turn.
2.3.1. Using keywords search
To most Web-based information searchers, the easiest search is
a keyword search where they just try to type in the topic, and if that
does not work, they will try another idea. It is considered to be
a commonly utilised information seeking strategy due to its
benefits in locating relevant Websites. The WWW translates the
searcher’s request into a query and searches the information space
for appropriate matches, which are returned. Advanced keyword
searching allows searchers to enter more than one keyword and to
relate multiple keywords to each other via the use of Boolean
operators (“AND,” “OR,” and “NOT”) (Chen, Houston, Sewell, &
Schatz, 1998).
However, the extensive use of keywords is not equated with
sophisticated use. Information searchers rarely develop a wide
search definition and complex search statements and use Boolean
operators infrequently (Nachmias & Gilad, 2002). The most
common way is to directly type in the query subject. They modify
their query statements by merely giving up the old ones and
trying new ones. When failing to find what they expected, they
often just change one word for another using a broad query, or add
words by cross searching with more than one keyword in their
search.
2.3.2. Using search engines
Online search engines are used to for retrieving information
about a particular topic. Web users rely on search engines as
a major search strategy, and some prefer to start their searches with
a search engine (Hsieh-Yee, 1998). Some searchers are found to be
loyal to a specific search engine and access a specific portal Website
(Hawk & Wang, 1999; Sherman, 2004). However, it is not unusual
for searchers to use a couple of search engines for cross searching.
In fact, different search engines have different ways of “collecting”
Websites. Even if the same query statement is used in conducting
1471
the search by means of various search engines (e.g., Yahoo and
Google), the search results may not be highly overlapping.
2.3.3. Browsing the Web
Browsing or navigating is a typical search strategy on the Web,
and is supported by a structure that allows and encourages users to
follow links. Chen et al. (1998) argue that browsing is frequently
used in new or relatively unknown (explored) information spaces.
Searchers typically rely on pre-existing cognition of a problem (or
information) situation (i.e., mental models) (Marchionini &
Shneiderman, 1988) to help themselves represent and understand
the content, structure, and relationship of information in the
information space during navigation.
Hypertext browsing services support Internet browsing by
providing links between keywords and topics embedded in the text
so that users can explore the content freely (Chen et al., 1998).
Furthermore, Web users explore hyperlinks using the browse
supports as automatic summarisation, clustering and visualisation
tools, and Web directories, and finally evaluate the results by
scanning through them (Chung, 2006). To navigate and locate
information on a particular site, information searchers require
browsing skills in addition to proficiency in using other search
tactics such as backtracking (Catledge & Pitkow, 1995) and conduct
swift (or flexible) searches (Fidel et al., 1999). The movements of the
mouse include the following activities: looking at/for the naviga-
tional framework, linear reading and scanning of the whole page
(Chevalier & Kicka, 2006). Therefore, the browsing strategy plays an
intermediary role in performing the follow-up search activities
during an online session.
2.3.4. Using a subject directory
A Web directory is a pre-defined list of websites and categorised
according to subject/topic (Green, 2000). Some Web users start
their searches using a directory of topics provided by the search
engine (e.g., Nachmias & Gilad, 2002). They may feel that they have
a head start in identifying “the best of the Web” for the topic that
they are interested in. Usually, the system is partitioned into
distinct subject categories as the databases that are meaningful to
searchers to efficiently explore a large information space. The
subject directory leads searchers to “directory browsing” on the
Internet as a user-guided form of information seeking behaviour,
such as connecting to WWW sites of interest and browsing the
available directories at that site. If a directory appears to be of
interest, it can be explored in more depth. This frequently used and
simple search strategy facilitates Internet searching services to
make the subject categories more up-to-date (or real-time) and
fine-grained with features, such as the highlighting of new cate-
gories and newly-obtained homepages, and creating special cate-
gories such as “What’s Hot,” and “What’s New.”
2.3.5. Visiting the known sites
Another approach for Web users is to start their searches from
known sites or access a specific site (e.g., Tillotson, Cherry, &
Clinton, 1995). They also visit the known sites during their
searches. Their cognitive maps for information searching are
similar to routes through physical environments, marked by
bookmarked sites (e.g., Catledge & Pitkow, 1995; Fidel et al., 1999).
This search strategy requires information searchers with prelimi-
nary knowledge to look for the subject of interest. The Home button
is often utilised to re-start the search which has been interpreted as
an indication of “getting lost” and the home site is always familiar
to searchers (Palmquist & Kim, 2000). In addition, Web users also
visit known sites by simply typing the URL. This direct access
strategy has been effective in connecting to the Website (e.g.,
Nachmias & Gilad, 2002).
1472 C.-I. Ho et al. / Tourism Management 33 (2012) 1468e1482
In terms of these five most common search strategies, each
individual search tactic may not be sophisticated. Based on Wu,
Chuang, and Chen (2008), search engine use requires the cogni-
tive process of information searchers to involve the following
stages: recalling, selecting and inputting a search term (keywords
or queries), navigating and understanding the search results
(browsing), judging the relevance of the results, making choices
among the results, and refining the search if necessary. It is likely
that Web users initiate their online search tasks by a search engine
and then subsequently use other searching strategies. They would
usually rather adopt multiple strategies that constitute their
complex online information search behaviour than use a single and
simple way (Bilal, 2002; Fidel et al., 1999; White & Iivonen, 2001). It
seems most likely that Web users mix these search tactics and
employ them for online tourism information.
2.4. Impacts of prior knowledge and searching experiences on
WWW search
Search experiences play an important role in affecting the use of
the WWW when a search task is involved. Web users with a high
level of experience plan ahead in their searching behaviour based
on their knowledge of the Web, while novice searchers hardly plan
at all and are rather driven by external representations (what they
see on the screen) (Navarro-Prieto, Scaife, & Rogers, 1999). The
domain expertise enhances search performance in terms of effi-
ciency and effectiveness in hypertext systems (Marchionini, 1995;
McDonald & Stevenson, 1998; Patel, Drury, & Shalin, 1998). In
general, experts take less time to complete the search tasks and
produce a greater number of correct solutions. For example,
information searchers with WWW-experience are more proficient
in locating Websites than are novice WWW users (Lazonder,
Biemans, & Wopereis, 2000). Furthermore, both levels of domain
knowledge and search expertise have been identified as significant
factors that predict search success in an online environment
(MacGregor, 1999).
Oulasvirta, Karkkarinen, and Laarni (2005) argue that two types
of human memory influence searchers in Web navigation. An
implicit memory (memory without the conscious awareness of the
original event that caused it) for a particular Web page browsed
helps in directing the searcher to the target more efficiently. On the
other hand, explicit memories (consciously accessible memories of
Start an online
search session
Experiment
Objectives
Recruit the
Procedure
subjects for
Notification
experiments
Give an online
search assignment
Fig. 1. Data collection procedure of this study.
the searcher’s experience with the Web page) help in finding the
target when the automatic process based on implicit memories or
expectations fails. Therefore, it is likely that Web users’ previous
online searching experiences and knowledge may affect their
performance in searching the Web for tourism information.
To sum up the aforementioned studies, the previous experi-
ences, knowledge and memories both on Web users’ Web page
search and destination travels play a crucial role in online tourism
information search. In this study, the authors will explore how Web
users initiate their tourism information search process and how the
related mechanism is operated.
3. Research method
The research method that was used for this study was ground
theory. This approach is a primarily inductive investigative process
in which the researchers formulate a theory regarding a phenom-
enon by systematically gathering and analysing relevant data
(Glaser, 1998; Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). The
aim of the research method is to build theory. Instead of beginning
a study with a preconceived theory that needs to be proved, the
researchers begin with a general area of study and allow the theory
to emerge from the data. The ground theory method has been
gradually used in the field of humanecomputer interaction (e.g.,
Pace, 2004), as well as online tourism information (e.g.,
Papathanassis & Knolle, 2011).
3.1. Data collection
To derive a behavioural conceptual framework in terms of how
Web users initiate the search for tourism information on the Internet
and what the follow-up actions are, the associated activities and
perceptions of searchers need to be obtained. Based on Fidel et al.
(1999), Ho and Liu (2005) and Spink, Danby, Mallan, and Bulter
(2010), a field study was carried out using both the observations
relevant to Web navigation in an experimental setting and inter-
views with active Web-based information searchers. Few studies
have provided empirical observations of the online tourism infor-
mation experiences of searchers. Video-taping was used to record
the Web searches and the interviews to capture the participants’
interactions as the computer screen and Web search activities. The
detailed procedure for data collection was indicated in Fig. 1.
See the
Web-recorded film
Navigate & browse End an online Conduct an
on the Internet search session in-depth interview
Prepare for video-taping
 C.-I. Ho et al. / Tourism Management 33 (2012) 1468e1482 1473

Each experiment that included an online search session and researchers select additional cases to be studied according to the
a follow-up interview lasted up to an hour and the same experi- potential for developing new insights or expanding and refining
menters guided all sessions. The experiments were conducted those already gained (Taylor & Bogdan, 1998). It aimed to maximise
individually and each subject was paid for participating. Before the opportunities for exploring emerging concepts. Therefore, neither
experiments were conducted, each participant was asked to fill out the number nor the type of subjects needed to be specified
a questionnaire regarding Internet and travel-related website beforehand (Taylor & Bogdan, 1998). The data collection continued
usage. At the beginning of an online search session, the subjects until the researchers achieved theoretical saturation. Based on
were informed of the purpose of the study and received instruc- Glaser and Strauss (1967), the sample size was determined in
tions. A search assignment regarding a vacation plan in the near accordance with this concept to the extent where there were no
future was given and each subject was observed throughout the additional data from additional interviews with new samples, and
information search process. The subjects could freely end the thus it could stop. Our study reached saturation after 30 subjects.
online search sessions any time they wanted to do so. Table 1 presents the corresponding profiles of the participants.
All the online search sessions were conducted in a laboratory, There were more females (19) than males (11). They included
but within a completely uncontrolled environment with almost graduate and undergraduate students from the five colleges and all
unlimited information. The desk-top personal computer was departments of the University. As regards the weekly Internet
equipped with the software WinCAM 2000 for data collection, usage, nearly two-thirds reported that they used the Internet in
which has been designed to record everything on the computer excess of 20 h each week. When asked to report on the frequency
screen from the recording engine, to provide functions for frame- with which they had clicked on to the travel-related websites in the
by-frame editing and to serve as a playback tool. Note that the 14 days prior to the date on which they were surveyed, 24 partic-
computer screen was set to be blank in order to make for ipants stated that they had visited the websites at least once. With
a progression when conducting the search started on the same regard to the average time spent on the travel-related websites for
screen. The interactive nature of the WWW easily reflected Web browsing and surfing, nearly 90% of the participants spent 30 min
users’ search behaviour for tourism information, including how (or less) online. In terms of the online purchasing experiences for
they would commence the search. The various activities engaged in travel products, 90% of the participants had never had such an
during the online search were therefore recorded in full motion and experience. In addition, 21 participants reported that they had
directly examined. travelled around in the 6 months prior to the date on which they
Before launching the online search session, each subject was were surveyed. Therefore, in spite of university students making up
asked two questions: “What do you plan to do?” and “Why do you the sample in this study, they were a good representation of
plan to do it?” When the online session ended, semi-structured in- medium or heavy users of the Internet and their tourism infor-
depth interviews were conducted to gain insights into the subjects’ mation search behaviour might have reflected the general
search behaviour and to uncover their perceptions regarding online phenomena.
and related tourism information search. Through this flexible and
dynamic style of discussion, the participating information 3.3. Data analysis
searchers responded to five questions: “What did you gain on the
Internet?” “Did you find what you were looking for?” “How do you The Web-recorded online search and video-recorded interview
feel about the search?” “Why did you stop searching online?” data were qualitatively analysed by the researchers. The data
“What will you do after this online searching?” The interviewers analysis was based on a constant comparative analysis to construct
usually asked additional questions so that they obtained a better emergent sets of themes from the interview transcripts. A thematic
understanding of the searching experiences and the action-to-take
from the viewpoint of the searchers and as a whole. The complete Table 1
online search session of each subject was demonstrated during the Profiles of the participants (N ¼ 30).
interview, which was needed to help them recall specific features of Variables This study Variables This study (Number)
their search activities. This technique can be likened to the way in (Number)
which personal documents such as diaries and letters are some- Gender Number of travel-related websites
times used in interviews to spark memories and to help people visited in last 14 days
recall old feelings. All of the interviews were tape-recorded with Male 11 None 6
Female 19 1 6
the subjects’ permission, and were later transcribed in full to College 2 4
provide accurate records for analysis. Graduate school 5 3 3
Management 10 4 1
3.2. Sampling Engineering 6 5 or above 10
Humanities & 8 Avg. frequencies of travel websites
Social Science visited in last 14 days
Web users were recruited to participate in this study. For Design 1 Non 6
convenience and due to budget constraints, all of the participants Weekly Internet usage 1 11
were college students who were recruited from the university at 5 hours or below 1 2e3 9
which the authors worked/studied. The recruitment message was 6e10 h 5 4e5 4
11e15 h 2 Avg. time spent browsing and surfing
posted in the BBS (Broadcasting Bulletin System) of the campus. travel websites
The applicants were selected mainly based on the information 16e20 h 1 30 min or below 26
regarding their Internet usage and experiences of online tourism 21e25 h 11 30e60 min 3
information searching. The students majoring in leisure services 26e30 h 6 1e1.5 h 1
31 h or above 4 Online purchasing experiences
and information management were excluded because they may
of travel products
have been well aware of travel planning or information searching. Yes 3
There were a total of 30 participants who contributed to the data No 27
collection. Travelling experiences in last 6 months
Although these subjects were purposively selected, the data Yes 21
No 9
collection followed the theoretical sampling procedure whereby
1474 C.-I. Ho et al. / Tourism Management 33 (2012) 1468e1482

framework was developed as the interviews progressed, and this
framework was revised in response to new information generated
by additional interviews.
The analysis was conducted in three steps. First, to ensure
intercoder reliability, three researchers (the second author of the
study and two independent researchers who were experienced in
issues pertaining to tourism information search) performed
a separate, line-by-line, open-coding procedure, which was fol-
lowed by mutual comparisons and negotiated outcomes. Initial
descriptive coding using the participants’ own words or phrases
involved looking for repetition within and across the transcripts. In
addition, the Web-recorded data was coded to identify key aspects
of Web users’ online tourism information searching.
In the second step, the coding of online searching data and
transcript analysis were used to identify the categories that Web
users invoked in their descriptions and interactions in relation to
online searching. The codes were meaningful to Web users and the
search activities thorough their interactions. After the open-coding
was completed for each transcript, three researchers worked
independently to identify common concepts that illustrated the
participants’ descriptions. Similar code terms and phrases were
grouped together and then regrouped to include all of the identi-
fied concepts into categories of similar topics. In the third step, the
researchers went back and forth between the data and the classi-
fication system to identify dominant categories by recognising code
words or phrases that were repeated consistently within and across
the transcripts. The findings represented a consensus regarding the
analyses, and the interrater reliability was 94.4%.
4. Research results
Eight major categories seemed to satisfactorily subsume the
important characteristics of tourism information search behaviour:
prior knowledge and experiences, online searching strategies,
processing and recording information, barriers to information
searching, reasons for ending an online search, summarising
information, exchanging and sharing information, and searching
for more information through other auxiliary sources. These cate-
gories and their properties illustrated in Fig. 2 represent the
conceptual framework that emerged from the data in this study.
The diagram consists of a collection of boxes connected by arrows.
The boxes represent concepts and the arrows represent relation-
ships between concepts. The concept at the tail of an arrow is
assumed to exert an influence on the concept at the head. The
concepts show the temporal order in a search process and are
grouped into four stages: a start to online searching, online
searching, an end of online searching, and offline searching. The
framework commonly portrays tourism information search
behaviour via the Internet and other information channels. The
next four sub-sections of this paper will each discuss a group of
related concepts and relationships from the framework.
4.1. A start to online searching
This section discusses the role that prior knowledge and
searching experiences play in the initiation of a Web user’s tourism
information searching on the Internet, and how his/her internal
search influences the external search.
During the study, Web users reported relying on their memories
associated with the search task right from the beginning of the
search. For most of them, the tourism information search required
a bit more planning; that is, prior to their online search sessions, the
Web users engaged in internal information search (including past
online search experiences or the obtained search results) to
determine the best way to start a new search. It assumed that
a previously successful search should guide them to complete such
a search task. Meanwhile, the memories regarding the travel
destinations or the travelling experiences also served as the clues to
initiate the follow-up search actions. The previous experiences
were regarded as the domain knowledge in terms of travelling and
had an impact on information search. Table 2 presents some
examples of the interviewers’ comments.
Proposition 1. Prior knowledge in terms of travelling and past
searching experiences is positively related to Web users’ online
searching for travel information.
4.2. Online searching
This section discusses the strategies that Web users employ
when searching for tourism information on the Internet, the

Barriers Process

to search information
Exchange
Information
P3
P5 P4 P8

Prior P1 Online Reasons P7 Summarize

P10
knowledge searching for ending information
P6
P2
P9
Search for more
information
A B C D E

A start of online An end of online

Online searching Offline searching
searching searching
Fig. 2. The conceptual framework of Web users’ tourism information. Note: “A” denotes: using the search engine; “B”: using keywords; “C”: using a landmark Website; “D”:
comparing search results; “E”: browsing Web pages.
 C.-I. Ho et al. / Tourism Management 33 (2012) 1468e1482
Table 2
Properties that constitute Web users’ start of an online searching.
Content property Example comment
Past online I visited the Website of the county
search government directly. Once I planned
experiences to visit Ilan and wanted to search for
information regarding the activities of
the destinations. Thus, I looked for the
information on the local county
government Website.
We once sought related information
on the website of Lion Travel (a travel
agency) for our last trip. I was impressed
with the information service. ... Afterwards,
when I decided to go travelling, I would click
on that website first...
I clicked “Recreation” (the sub-directory of Yahoo).
I have even searched for information by keying
in the keyewords. However, it showed too much
information related to travel agencies. I did not
intend to look for travel agencies. I merely
wanted the information regarding the destinations.
Memories regarding ..Taitung was my first destination when I
the travelling previously travelled around the island.
experiences I immediately recall having visited the Chipen
hot spring...
When I got the search assignment, I recalled
having been to the hot spring and Green Island.
I would like to visit that place again.
processing and recording of the information that they obtain, and
the barriers (difficulties) that they encounter during the online
search.
4.2.1. Online searching strategies
The five most common search strategies on the Internet for
tourism information were identified and included using a search
engine, using keywords, using a landmark Website, comparing
search results and browsing Web pages. The selection among
various search strategies often translated into a decision influenced
by considerations regarding the amount of information or the
amount of effort involved in creating a viable search statement.
Web users would get a couple of ideas in their heads about what
they were looking for and what they should then do. The inter-
viewers’ comments are summarised in Table 3.
4.2.1.1. Using the search engine. Search engines provided access to
all kinds of information available on the Web. Most of the Web
users began online searches by selecting Yahoo search engine (see
Fig. 3). The others chose Google which has been ranked No. 1
among those generating most of the upstream traffic to travel-
specific Websites (Hitwise, 2011). Online travellers even used the
search engine for travel-related information search in social media
Websites (Xiang & Gretzel, 2010).
However, search engine users were often faced with very large
hit lists, low recall, and low precision. In order to facilitate their
searches, some searchers simultaneously utilised two (or more)
search engines to seek tourism information. Other searchers,
instead of using only one search engine that resulted in a fruitless
search, were found to obtain more travel information from another
new search engine.
4.2.1.2. Using keywords. Web users were found to enter a keyword
or set of keywords that, in their opinion, best characterised their
tourism information needs. They usually started with a name, and if
it did not work in obtaining the satisfactory result pages, they went
back to the initial page to start a new search that usually required
new search terms. It indicated that keywords reflect the generic
1475
Table 3
Properties that constitute Web users’ online searching strategies.
Content property Example comment
Using the ..the interfaces of PChome and Yahoo are
search engine similar, Yahoo with the introduction to hotels.
It has more information. ...
... Now I want to look for the maps. Google
searching is faster and there are more Web pages...
..I think that the internal search engine could
focus on and immediately access the information I want.
Using keywords .I would first search for tourism information
using the word “Taitung” and expect the articles
related to Taitung shown on the Internet...
..I once searched for tourism information by
directly entering “Nantou tourism” as the keyword
and then I was shown plenty of information. Now,
I wanted to search for tourism information on
Taitung, and so I used the same approach. ..having
a general way for searching at first and then searching
for information specifically.
Using a landmark I checked the advertisement here (Yahoo). Some
Website headlines aroused my attention, for example,
a vacation to Southeast Asia only needed a few
thousand dollars. I wanted to take a look
at the itinerary.
We once sought related information on the
website of Lion Travel (a travel agency) for
our last trip. I was impressed with the information
service. ... Afterwards, when I decided to go
travelling, I would click on that website first...
Comparing ..I kept on switching Web pages because I
search results wanted to make comparisons of the contents
between two itineraries.
After reviewing the content of the itinerary here
(Welcome to Taiwan), I wanted to see if there was
anything similar on that Website (Taitung
Travelling Expert), ...
I kept on switching the windows of the Websites
to browse the information.. I had to read it
repetitively. I’m afraid that I might miss something..
Browsing Web ..I would review the Web pages carefully to
pages see if I had missed anything and to consider
whether there was more information related
to the trip.
.. I visited the website again and review the
information regarding the itinerary and
estimated expenses. ..
.. I clicked the Web pages again because I
wanted to see if there were any other tourism products.
terms or broad categories that represent tourism and form the
queries to search for information (e.g., Xiang et al., 2008). At times
Web users made attempts to express the same concept using
different keywords to the extent that the terms were either more
specific (or general) by adding words or changing words in the
search box. They believed that the more specific the statement was,
the more likely they were to find good sites.
4.2.1.3. Using a landmark Website. Some Web users started a search
from their landmark Websites. According to our understanding, the
best consideration for a landmark site was either their habitually
favourite site or the portal Website. Yahoo served as not only
a search engine, but also a dominant portal Website on which
searchers could look for information by clicking on the subject
categories or advertisements. The most frequently clicked subject
category was “travel”. In this category, there were several sub-
categories, including: flights, hotels, vacations, and so on.
4.2.1.4. Comparing search results. Information multitasking is the
human ability to handle the demands of multiple tasks regarding
information searching; such behaviour involves the ordering of
multiple tasks and switching between tasks (Spink et al., 2010).
1476 C.-I. Ho et al. / Tourism Management 33 (2012) 1468e1482

Fig. 3. Home page of Yahoo Taiwan Screenshot (http://tw.yahoo.com).

 C.-I. Ho et al. / Tourism Management 33 (2012) 1468e1482 1477

Searching for tourism information on the Internet and making information needed. Table 4 presents some examples of the Web
product comparisons based on the searching may be regarded as researchers’ experiences.
information multitasking behaviour. Although Web users did not As such, the search activities and the recording of the relevant
necessarily make buying decisions in relation to tourism products/ information were executed continuously and alternatively until the
services, they usually engaged in the analysis and evaluation of online search sessions ended. Hence,
alternative solutions. Thus, they sought and found the relevant
Proposition 3. Web users’ online searching corresponds to their
information, and used it for their next move on the screen. They
recording the tourism information.
also tended to open two or more windows and browsed Web pages
within the information categories on a Website in order to check if Proposition 4. Web users’ recording tourism information corre-
the content was correct. In addition, they visited two or more sponds to their continuous online searching.
Websites and moved among the sites to examine the information
context from the different sources. Moreover, the price searches
4.2.3. Barriers to online searching
were commonly used for screening alternatives online and making
A special feature regarding the difficulties encountered during
comparisons among selected alternatives. Compared with the
the online session disturbed the search activities of Web users for
search strategy identified in past studies, the comparable strategy
tourism information. As described, the most common inconve-
was frequently used for tourism information search online in
nience was that the content of the Web pages and the sources were
particular.
out-of-date. Some information searchers were frustrated when
what they found (the text posted on the sites) did not correspond to
4.2.1.5. Browsing Web pages. Being dedicated to their goal of
their needs and they then had to click on another site to continue
completing the search assignments, almost all Web users made
with their searching. Fidel et al. (1999) and Nazim (2008) reported
quick decisions about where to click next, and whether or not a site
similar situations that happened to interfere with searching.
was relevant. Most of them scanned sites quickly before they
Another disturbance was the slow speed of connection to the
clicked in order to move from one site to another. If there were too
Website. It usually made searchers less patient so that they would
many sites to visit, or if there was lengthy text on a page, they
click on another website. The failures to link the Web pages were
forged ahead by clicking on new links and looking for new sites.
commonly identified as a problem as well. Added to this, searchers
These links were also involved in the connections to the BBS or the
frequently found that the result pages had been removed. All of
virtual community of travel-related Websites.
these identified inconveniences constituted the troubles Web users
The back button was used most frequently in almost all
faced while searching for tourism information on the Internet.
searches, and Web users spent a considerable amount of their
Consequently, they were forced to change search strategies or even
searching time going back to the previously visited sites. The result
end their online search activities. Most of the situations occurred
pages which were read before were regarded as landmarks so that
unexpectedly because the troubles were caused by the connected
Web users clicked back to these sites. They either ensured no
Websites (see Table 4). Thus,
important information was missed or they expected to obtain more
information.
Overall, these aforementioned search approaches were almost Table 4
identical to those in the literature. For example, young children Properties that constitute Web users’ other online searching activities.
engage in complex Web search, including keywords searching and Content property Example comment
browsing, query formulation and reformulation, relevance judge- Processing and I copied the information regarding
ments, successive searches, and so on (Spink et al., 2010). Web users recording the special food. .. I don’t want
were found to adopt several search tactics, instead of a single information to miss any delicacies...
method, to look for information on the Internet. For example, I would look for the destinations that
I want to visit and add the Websites
keywords, search engines and browsing strategy were frequently
into “My Favourites”. Then, I would
used together. In addition, the search strategies were employed classify the information in “My
alternatively as a looping to backtrack (to browse previously Favourites”. .... In addition, I added
retrieved Web pages) or re-activate previously executed searches. the good Websites to “My Favourites”
so that I could connect with them
Thus,
directly in the future.
Proposition 2. Web users employ five strategies throughout an The itinerary information on this
Website (CTIN) was different from
online search session, including using the search engine, using
that on other sites. It was
keywords, using a landmark Website, comparing search results, detailed. .. I pasted its URL into
and browsing Web pages. my references for trip planning in
the future. ...
Barriers to The connection to the websites was
4.2.2. Processing and recording information online searching slow, and the related information was
Recording information frequently occurred in the interim of not available. Thus, I left that site...
online searching and it appeared to facilitate an efficient comple- .. That system was disconnected. Thus,
I revisited this site (the previously visited
tion of the search task. Some Web users made copies of the relevant Website) to look for other information....
text from the screen directly into Microsoft Word files or wrote the Also, it was inconvenient to me without
relevant lines on their note paper. A similar research result was the links to other related sites.
identified in a study by Kude lka, Snǎsel, Lehecka, El-Qawasmeh, .... The information of the Webpage
was different from what I expected. It
and Pokorný (2008) in that Web users made the profiles for
gave me trouble in my searching.
recording and clustering the search results. Instead of selecting the .. It was difficult to find the e-maps. ...
text from the screen, some other searchers further recorded the Sometimes I found nothing on the Webpage...
URL of the result pages directly into their favourite file as a refer- .. Although there were site-connections
ence. Interestingly, information searchers did not seem to read the provided, they could not work. So, I had to
switch to another Website ...
text on the screen carefully and they merely collected the
1478 C.-I. Ho et al. / Tourism Management 33 (2012) 1468e1482

Proposition 5. The barriers which Web users encounter on Table 6

the Internet correspond to their online searching for tourism Properties that constitute Web users’ offline information searching.

information. Content property Example comment

Exchanging and I would discuss with my friends first.
sharing information If the idea is not good enough, I
4.3. An end of online searching will click on the visited website
to browse the related information
This section describes both the reasons why Web users stop carefully, or seek more information
at another new site. ...
their online search and their subsequent behaviour regarding how
.., I would listen to my dad and
they process the obtained information. mom and get their opinions because
it’s a family trip. ..
4.3.1. Reasons for ending an online search .. I would ask my friends to provide
The online search was ultimately ended for whatever reason. me the information that they have.
Then I certainly would discuss with
Most Web users stopped one-spot searching on the Internet either
them again. ...
because they obtained the fundamental information that corre- Searching for more ..I would click on the websites
sponded to their needs, or because the wanted information was not information through that I had visited to browse and examine
available. However, some searchers ended the online search simply other auxiliary sources the destination-related information.
And I would read the tourism books
because they wanted to quit. On average, the total search time for
in the bookstore to see if there were
an online session was around 30 min. It indicated that both new destinations.
searchers’ personal willingness and their experiences in the one- .., I would look over the itinerary
spot search may have contributed to the reasons for quitting .., or even make a phone call to
online searching (see Table 5). ask the travel agencies about the
transportation and time arrangement.....
Proposition 6. The online searching for tourism information by .. I will search for more information
Web users ultimately corresponds to their ending an online session. from travel-related magazines to compare
with the information that I already have
.., and perhaps perform another online search.
.., I will call Master Bear Resort (the
4.3.2. Summarising information
name of a resort village) first for the
The characteristics of Web users’ summarising information information regarding the room price...
referred to the extent to which they integrated the online infor- .. The online information about
mation obtained to find that it fulfilled their purposes. While they accommodation seems unreliable. I usually
had dealt with what they found on the Internet, many of them seek more information from the travel
books afterwards and compare it with
would reorganise the information, including reviewing the content
the contents of these two sources
as a whole, deleting the redundant or useless information, and of information....
preserving what they really wanted. Then, the elaborate informa- .., I will review the online information
tion would be classified based on their needs. Furthermore, the that I had again and ask my friends to
classified information was saved as an electronic file. If necessary, share with me their travel experiences
regarding the destination choice...
the information content would be printed out. A similar phenom- .. I will read the travel magazines, ..,
enon has been identified in a study where young children engaged and write down the important information
in processes to manage the results they retrieved from the Web regarding the destination location, itinerary
search engine (Spink et al., 2010). and transportation... Perhaps I will call the
travel agencies, or seek the suggestions of
my friends who have already gone there.
Table 5 They (the friends) may know some people.
Properties that constitute Web users’ end of an online searching. I would like to know about others’ travel
experiences, ...
Content property Example comment
Reasons for I have had a preliminary understanding
ending an regarding the hotels, destinations or their Table 6 presents some examples of the interviewers’ comments.
online search locations. I cannot check all the accommodation Thus, Web users indicated that they will engage in this information
information in a one-spot search. If I want to do
so, I have to search for more tourism information
seeking activity followed by their finishing their online information
...So, I stopped. search. As such:
I had sufficient information about accommodation,
destinations, food and transportation. Then I will
Proposition 7. The end of an online search corresponds to the
make my travel plan according to what I got. Web users’ summarising and integrating the obtained tourism
I will search for more information if needed. information.
During this searching, I intended to find out
general information regarding Taitung. I have
obtained the information related to accommodation, 4.4. Offline information searching
trips and transportation...
Summarizing As to the following task (after searching), I will
information save the electronic files with pasted information This section discusses the offline searching activities of Web
into the computer and then classify them into users for tourism information, including the various information
several sub-directories..... sources that they use and how relationships are formed between
.. I will certainly print out the maps that I
the activities.
find.....
.. I will save the collected information as a Nearly all Web users found more or less tourism information in
computer file first... an online search. However, their responses from the interviews
.. When finding out the good websites, I will revealed that they would like to look for more information. Some of
add them to “My Favorites” as the references for them explained that they would go on back online later, but most
my future online searching...
would have turned to the subsequent search activities offline.
 C.-I. Ho et al. / Tourism Management 33 (2012) 1468e1482
Online searching became the primary and dominant source of
tourism information; it did not serve as a substitute for other
traditional information channels, however. It indicated that
tourism information search is a time-consuming activity due to its
iterative characteristics.
Based on the Web users’ descriptions, their offline search
activities were almost identical to those in the traditional infor-
mation environment. They still relied heavily on the traditional
information sources (e.g., magazines and booklets) to seek more
travel-related information. Word-of-mouth communication and
the referrals by family and friends were central influences as well.
Two search-related activities were described as representing those
features of tourism information search behaviour.
4.4.1. Exchanging and sharing information
According to the interviews, after online searching and sum-
marising the obtained information, Web users liked to discuss the
content of the information or even exchange mutual opinions with
their family members or friends. They wished to gain agreements
or suggestions from those who were important to their decision-
making. Then, according to the discussions, they would search for
more information, or engage in other search-related activities such
as asking the reference group for assistance. Table 6 presents some
examples of the interviewers’ comments.
Apparently, the discussions with others, opinion-exchanges,
and asking for further assistance occur right after the Web users
finish their online search and collect some useful tourism
information.
Proposition 8. Web users summarising tourism information
corresponds to their exchanging and sharing information with
others.
4.4.2. Searching for more information through other auxiliary
sources
In spite of the Internet being the primary source for tourism
information search, almost all those interviewed expressed that
they would continue to collect the needed and additional infor-
mation after an online search. While some of them wanted to
complement Web searching with another online search, others
might turn to other information sources. They were not only aware
of using other information sources for future search activities, but
also knew the characteristics of each information source.
The frequently employed information sources included tourism
service providers (travel agencies, hotels, resorts and so on), travel-
related booklets and magazines, and the suggestions acquired
through interpersonal networks. A couple of those interviewed
made comments on this point (see Table 6). In light of the afore-
mentioned description, we have:
Proposition 9. Web users summarising the tourism information
obtained corresponds to their searching for more information from
other sources.
Proposition 10. Web users exchanging and sharing tourism
information with others corresponds to their searching for more
information from other sources.
To sum up, Web users were captured using the Internet first and
then employing various search skills (and actions) in relation to
tourism information. They might access a Website directly or
launch a search engine. Browsing episodes could lead them directly
to a solution, but more often than not, a return to the search engine
for further queries was observed. They quite frequently switched
back and forth between browsing and querying if necessary. The
online search actions might have appeared to be simple and
straightforward when being made. However, Web users drew on
1479
a range of considerations and employed relatively complex
thinking regarding the search tasks, potential sources of informa-
tion, and the capabilities of the options for search strategies.
Beyond that, the search outcomes were selected by a series of
information processes (creating a profile and storing the profile)
and of most interest were the surrogates for various forms (docu-
mentation or visualisation). Then, the actions of disseminating
messages were taken, which in turn led to more and follow-up
tourism information search via multiple information channels. It
indicated that Web users engaged in tourism information seeking
activities online and subsequently offline.
The information search process constitutes four stages with
eight concepts: a start to online searching, online searching, an end
to online searching, and offline information searching. In brief, the
previous two stages are related to the search activities and the
factors influencing tourism information search on the Web. The
progression of a search is rarely linear, with each site leading to one
new site. This research result coincides with the finding of Fidel
et al. (1999) and Spink et al. (2010). An end of online searching,
which includes the reasons why the Web users quit searching as
well as their behaviour in relation to information use, presentation,
filtering and giving, bridges their follow-up offline searching to an
extent which is identical to search activities occurring in traditional
information environments.
The above-mentioned results reveal some similarities to the
findings of Correia (2002) and Vogt and Fesenmaier (1998), by
reporting the process of decision-making with an information
acquisition phase and a procession phase. The findings also corre-
spond to previous studies (e.g., Bieger & Lasser, 2004; Walmsley &
Lewis, 1984) in which individuals collect and utilise information
from a wide range of sources in their pre-decision stage in the
decision-making process. The Internet appears to be a source of
general information, while personal information (from family and
friends) is more critical to facilitating the follow-up search activities
that are ongoing.
In addition, this study partially reflects the four-staged vacation
decision-making process of Bargeman and van der Poel (2006).
Instead of laying an emphasis on different vacation destination
choice models (EPS, LPS or RPS), we present the general behav-
ioural patterns regarding all Web users’ tourism information
search: the search activities took place internally while the
previous experiences and knowledge formed the basis. We then
employed the Internet as a primarily external search channel, and
finally used other auxiliary information sources. The most note-
worthy point concerns the search-related actions such as infor-
mation use and dissemination which were seldom mentioned in
the literature. In this study, specific tasks including processing and
recording information, summarising information or even
exchanging information with others were observed for Web users
in evaluating their alternatives or choices.
5. Conclusion
5.1. Theoretical implication
The conceptual framework described in this paper provides
a relatively comprehensive answer to the research question: How
do Web users search for tourism information from online to offline?
The user-centred approach of humanecomputer interaction has
been adopted to describe tourism information search as a behav-
iour that includes cognitive aspects of information searches and
their interaction with the information environments (Kuhlthau,
1993). This research not only highlights Web users’ engagement
in a tourism information search process, but also focuses on the
actions themselves. The developed framework deals with the
1480 C.-I. Ho et al. / Tourism Management 33 (2012) 1468e1482
concepts and relationships during the search process for tourism
information and describes the behavioural characteristics and the
sequences as well.
In accordance with Fodness and Murray (1997, 1999) and Pan
and Fesenmaier (2006), our research findings identify extensive
behavioural characteristics and specifically describe the dynamic
search process across both online and offline information envi-
ronments. It provides researchers with an effective tool for iden-
tifying behavioural aspects of Web users, discerning their
interaction and determining the search process of connected
activities over time, in order to gain new insights into tourism
information search problems. This study also contributes to the
literature in terms of the provision of a representative search model
beyond the boundaries of different information environments to
highlight that individuals engage in complex search-related activ-
ities as a means of approaching their travel decision-making. The
information search process model involves search tactics or moves,
user judgements, interactive feedback loops and cycles, which is
similar to the research findings of Spink and Saracevic (1997).
5.2. Implications for practice
Tourism industry practitioners may benefit from the framework
presented in this paper. This study has adopted a more holistic
approach to understand the tourism information searching expe-
riences of Web users, exploring concepts such as how they process
and record information, and specifically how they interact with
online tourism information systems and sources. These character-
istics constitute the principal generic patterns, and together form
a flexible behavioural mode. The extent to which the characteristics
reflect information searchers’ needs can be considered to improve
existing Websites (including Web page design and the associated
information retrieval system design), and the future advanced e-
commerce system (such as various modes of search interfaces, and
the identification of needed search results) may be developed
based on user-centred design principles (Chung, 2006; Jansen,
Booth, & Smith, 2009).
Spink, Bateman, and Jansen (1999) suggest that allowing Web
users to save and reuse their search terms, strategies and results for
later reformulation should be a feature of Web search interfaces
and systems. Therefore, a better understanding of Web users’
online tourism information search experiences may contribute to
the development of more effective customer-driven marketing
concepts and campaigns, for example, the addition of more per-
sonalised services. These services may include recommendations
for searchers, a browsing history setting, viewing and editing
browsing history, and advertising preferences, so that the Website
may become a landmark for tourism information searching in the
increasingly competitive travel market environment.
5.3. Limitations and further research
Some limitations should be noted based on the research findings
and these suggest several issues for future research. Firstly, this
proposed theoretical framework was derived from a group of
university students who were thought to have heavy usage of the
Internet. It is not known how accurately their behaviour reflected
that of the Internet population as a whole. Future research that is to
be undertaken must begin to generalise the findings of this study
and even to explore the model and determine if the proposed
concept dimensions are indeed the most representative of tourism
information search characteristics. Furthermore, the model
requires assessment to determine its generalisability and validity.
The detailed tasks include deducing and testing null hypotheses for
each of the propositions stated in this paper. Analytical techniques
such as structural equation modelling and multiple regression
models will enable assessment of the value of each of the concepts
to the associated relationship strength index. In addition, the model
may be tested and verified by subgroups of the sample.
Secondly, the influential factors regarding tourism information
search characteristics may not be included in this study. For
example, the recommended systems that can provide valuable
information to facilitate consumers’ decision-making (e.g., Ricci &
Werthner, 2002) have not been widely implemented in Taiwan. In
addition, the use of electronic Word-Of-Mouth (e-WOM) to
disseminate complaints regarding tourism services (Gelb &
Sundaram, 2002) or seeking/offering online peer advice may not
be effective due to Oriental culture. These may colour the online
searching features.
The subjects in this study were assumed to be engaging in
information gathering for purchasing decisions or pre-purchasing
search. Their tourist information search behaviour was goal-
directed, which may not have been identical to that which is
experiential, such as that related to entertainment and/or relaxa-
tion. Based on Hoffman and Novak (1996), two types of information
search behaviour may have been derived.
In spite of some studies exploring the cognitive needs of online
tourism information searchers (e.g., Pan & Fesenmaier, 2006; Xiang
et al., 2008), the current study is in need of replication and
expansion to help build cognitive models of Web users’ interaction
with Web technologies. Furthermore, an inferential model that
links the cognitive aspects of the searcher and their searching
characteristics is still lacking. More research work is needed to
highlight the relationship between the cognitive process and
exhibited searching characteristics, in terms of some moderating
effects such as searching expertise and the environment.
Finally, the external or intervening variables for online tourism
information search may be added for more advanced frameworks.
According to Buhalis and Law (2008), the main axes of eTourism, in
particular, technological innovation may serve as the sources of the
factors. For example, Meta search engines enable Web users to
search across several search engines and Web directories simulta-
neously and help them find more results without the need to search
on multiple Web search engines. In addition to the increasing
amount of multimedia information on the Web, such a wide range
of (i.e., more complete) searches and collections is expected to be
presented (Tjondronegoro & Spink, 2008). In addition, with the
development of Internet technology such as cloud computing,
information searchers are expected to take advantage of some
innovative functions including Web page editing and web
mastering as well as photo storage and editing (Johnson, 2011).
These concepts may be added to more precisely reflect and identify
the tourism information search behaviour of Web users. It is hoped
that further studies can be conducted to refine the features of the
framework itself.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the National Science Council of
Taiwan, R.O.C. for financially supporting this work under the
contract NSC95-2415-H-324-004-SSS.
Thanks are also extended to the anonymous reviewers and the
Editor-in-Chief, Professor Chris Ryan, for their valuable suggestions
and comments.
References
Baloglu, S. (1999). A path analytical model of visitation intention involving infor-
mation sources, socio-psychological motivations and destination images. Jour-
nal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 8, 81e90.
 C.-I. Ho et al. / Tourism Management 33 (2012) 1468e1482
Bargeman, B., & van der Poel, H. (2006). The role of routines in the vacation
decision-making process of Dutch vacationers. Tourism Management, 27,
707e720.
Beatty, S. E., & Smith, S. (1987). External information search: an investigation across
several product categories. Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 83e95.
Bieger, T., & Lasser, C. (2004). Information sources for travel decisions: toward
a source process model. Journal of Travel Research, 42, 357e371.
Bilal, D. (2000). Children’s use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine: I. Cognitive,
physical, and affective behaviors on fact-based search tasks. Journal of the
American Society for Information Science, 51(7), 646e665.
Bilal, D. (2002). Children’s use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine: III. Cognitive,
and physical behaviors on fully self-generated search tasks. Journal of the
American Society for Information Science, 53(13), 1170e1183.
Bonn, M. A., Furr, H. L., & Susskind, A. M. (1998). Using the Internet as a pleasure
travel planning tool: an examination of the sociodemographic and behavioral
characteristics among Internet users and non-users. Journal of Hospitality &
Tourism Research, 22(3), 303e317.
Buhalis, D., & Law, R. (2008). Progress in information technology and tourism
management: 20 years on and 10 years after the Internet e the state of
eTourism research. Tourism Management, 29, 609e623.
Carroll, J. B. (1999). Expert Internet information access. Journal of Educational
Computing Research, 20(3), 209e222.
Catledge, L. D., & Pitkow, J. E. (1995). Characterizing browsing strategies in the
world-wide web. Computer Networks ISDN Systems, 27, 1065e1073.
Chen, J. S., & Gursoy, D. (2000). Cross-cultural comparison of the information
sources used by first-time and repeat travelers and its marketing implications.
International Journal of Hospitality Management, 19(2), 191e203.
Chen, H., Houston, A., Sewell, R. R., & Schatz, B. R. (1998). Internet browsing and
searching: user evaluations of category map and concept space techniques.
Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(7), 582e603.
Chevalier, A., & Kicka, M. (2006). Web designers and web users: influence of the
ergonomic quality of the web site on the information search. International
Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64, 1031e1048.
Chung, W. (2006). Studying information seeking on the non-English web: an
experiment on a Spanish business web portal. International Journal of Human-
Computer Studies, 64, 811e829.
Correia, A. (2002). How do tourists choose? Tourism, 50(1), 21e29.
Ellis, D. (1989). A behavioural approach to information retrieval system design.
Journal of Documentation, 45(3), 171e212.
Fesenmaier, D. R., & Jeng, J. (2000). Assessing structure in the pleasure trip planning
process. Tourism Analysis, 5, 13e27.
Fidel, R., Davies, R. K., Douglass, M. H., Holder, J. K., Hopkins, C. J., Kushner, E. J., et al.
(1999). A visit to the information mall: web searching behavior of high school
students. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(1), 24e37.
Fodness, D., & Murray, B. (1997). Tourist information search. Annals of Tourism
Research, 24(3), 503e523.
Fodness, D., & Murray, B. (1998). A typology of tourist information search strategies.
Journal of Travel Research, 37(2), 108e119.
Fodness, D., & Murray, B. (1999). A model of tourist information search behavior.
Journal of Travel Research, 37(3), 220e230.
Ford, N., Miller, D., & Moss, N. (2003). Web search strategies and approaches to
studying. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
54(6), 473e489.
Gelb, B. D., & Sundaram, S. (2002). Adapting to “word of mouth”. Business Horizons,
45(4), 15e20.
Gitelson, R. J., & Purdue, R. R. (1987). Evaluating the role of state welcome centers in
disseminating travel-related information in North Carolina. Journal of Travel
Research, 25, 15e19.
Glaser, B. C. (1998). Doing ground theory: Issues and discussions. Mill Valley, CA:
Sociology Press.
Glaser, B. C., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of ground theory: Strategies for
qualitative research. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
Green, D. (2000). The evolution of web searching. Online Information Review, 24(2),
124e137.
Gronflaten, O. (2009). Predicting travelers’ choice of information sources and
information channels. Journal of Travel Research, 48(2), 230e244.
Gursoy, D. (2003). Prior product knowledge and its influence on the traveler’s
information search behavior. Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing, 10(3/4),
113e130.
Gursoy, D., & McCleary, K. W. (2004). An integrative model of tourists’ information
search behavior. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(2), 353e373.
Hawk, W. B., & Wang, P. (1999). User interaction on the world wide web: problems
& problem-solving. In L. Woods (Ed.), Proceedings of the annual meeting of the
American society for information science, Vol.36 (pp. 256e270). Medford, NJ:
Information Today.
Hitwise. (2011). Top 10 travel websites. Retrieved December 9, 2011, from http://
www.hitwise.com/us/datacenter/main/dashboard-10133.html.
Ho, C., & Liu, Y. (2005). An exploratory investigation of web-based tourist infor-
mation search behavior. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 10(4), 351e360.
Hoffman, D. L., & Novak, T. P. (1996). Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated
environments: conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing, 60, 50e68.
Howard, D. R., & Gitelson, R. J. (1989). An analysis of differences between state
welcome center users and non-users: a profile of Oregon vacationers. Journal of
Travel Research, 27(1), 38e40.
1481
Hsieh-Yee, I. (1998). Search tactics of web users in searching for texts, graphics,
known items and subjects: a search simulation study. Reference Librarian, 60,
61e85.
Hyde, K. F. (2008). Information processing and touring planning theory. Annals of
Tourism Research, 35(3), 712e731.
Jansen, B. J., Booth, D., & Smith, B. (2009). Using the taxonomy of cognitive learning
to model online searching. Information Processing & Management, 45, 643e663.
Johnson, D. (2011). Technology connection: libraries in the cloud. Library Media
Connection, 29(6), 50e51.
Kendall, K. W., & Booms, B. H. (1989). Consumer perceptions of travel agencies:
communication, image, needs, and expectations. Journal of Travel Research, 27,
29e37.
Kerstetter, D., & Cho, M. (2004). Prior knowledge, credibility and information
search. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(4), 961e985.
Kim, W. G., Lee, C., & Hiemstra, S. J. (2004). Effects of an online virtual community
on customer loyalty and travel product purchases. Tourism Management, 25(3),
343e355.
Kudelka, M., Snǎsel, V., Lehecka, O., El-Qawasmeh, E., & Pokorný, J. (2008). Web
pages recording and clustering based on Web patterns. In V. Geffert, et al. (Eds.),
SOFSEM 2008, LNCS 4910 (pp. 731e742). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Kuhlthau, C. C. (1987). An emerging theory of library instruction. School Library
Media Quarterly, 16(1), 23e28.
Kuhlthau, C. C. (1988). Developing a model of the library search process: cognitive
and affective aspects. Reference Quarterly, 28, 232e242.
Kuhlthau, C. C. (1993). Seeking meaning: A process approach to library and informa-
tion services. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
Lazonder, A. W., Biemans, H. J. A., & Wopereis, G. J. H. (2000). Differences between
novice and experienced users in searching information on the world wide web.
Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(6), 576e581.
Lehto, X. Y., O’Leary, J. T., & Morrison, A. M. (2004). The effect of prior experience on
vacation behavior. Annals of Tourism Research, 31, 801e818.
MacGregor, S. K. (1999). Hypermedia navigation profiles: cognitive characteristics
and information processing strategies. Journal of Educational Computing
Research, 20(2), 189e206.
Marchionini, G. (1995). Information seeking in electronic environments. Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press.
Marchionini, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1988). Finding facts vs. browsing knowledge in
hypertext systems. IEEE Computer, 21(3), 70e79.
McDonald, S., & Stevenson, R. J. (1998). Navigation in hyperspace: an evaluation of
the effects of navigation tools and subject matter expertise on browsing and
information retrieval in hypertext. Interacting with Computers, 10, 129e142.
Mitsche, N. (2005). Understanding the information search process within a tourism
domain-specific search engine. In A. J. Frew (Ed.), Information and communi-
cation technologies in tourism 2005: Proceedings of the international conference in
Innsbruck, Austria, 2005 (pp. 183e193). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Moutinho, L. (1987). Consumer behavior in tourism. European Journal of Marketing,
21(10), 3e44.
Nachmias, R., & Gilad, A. (2002). Needle in a hyperstack: searching for information
on the world wide web. Journal of Research Technology in Education, 34(4),
475e486.
Navarro-Prieto, R., Scaife, M., & Rogers, Y. (1999). Cognitive strategies in web
searching. In Proceedings of 5th conference on human factors and the web,
Retrieved June 4, 2007, from http://zing.ncsl.nist.gov/hfweb/proceedings/
navarro-prieto/index.html.
Nazim, M. (2008). Information searching behavior in the internet age: a users’ study
of Aligarh Muslim University. The International Information and Library Review,
40, 73e81.
Oulasvirta, A., Karkkarinen, L., & Laarni, J. (2005). Expectations and memory in link
search. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 773e789.
Pühringer, S., & Taylor, A. (2008). A practitioner’s report on blogs as a potential
source of destination marketing intelligence. Journal of Vacation Marketing,
14(2), 177e187.
Pace, S. (2004). A grounded theory of the flow experiences of web users. Interna-
tional Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 60, 327e363.
Palmquist, R. A., & Kim, K. (2000). Cognitive style and on-line database search
experience as predictors of web search performance. Journal of the American
Society for Information Science, 51(6), 558e566.
Pan, B., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2003). Travel information search on the Internet:
a preliminary analysis. In A. J. Frew, M. Hitz, & P. O’Connor (Eds.), Information
and communication technologies in tourism 2003: Proceedings of the international
conference on information technology and tourism (pp. 242e251). New York:
Springer-Verlag.
Pan, B., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2006). Online information search: vacation planning
process. Annals of Tourism Research, 33, 809e832.
Pan, B., MacLaurin, T., & Crotts, J. C. (2007). Travel blogs and their implications for
destination marketing. Journal of Travel Research, 46(1), 35e45.
Papathanassis, A., & Knolle, F. (2011). Exploring the adoption and processing of
online holiday reviews: a grounded theory approach. Tourism Management, 32,
215e224.
Patel, S. C., Drury, C. G., & Shalin, V. L. (1998). Effectiveness of expert semantic
knowledge as a navigational aid within hypertext. Behavior and Information
Technology, 17(6), 313e324.
Pearce, D. G., & Schott, C. (2005). Tourism distribution channels: the visitors’
perspective. Journal of Travel Research, 44, 50e63.
1482 C.-I. Ho et al. / Tourism Management 33 (2012) 1468e1482
Pudliner, B. A. (2007). Alternative literature and tourist experience: travel and
tourist weblogs. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 5(1), 46e59.
Ricci, F., & Werthner, H. (2002). Case base querying for travel planning recom-
mendation. Information Technology & Tourism, 3(3/4), 215e226.
Rompf, P., DiPietro, R. B., & Ricci, P. (2005). Locals’ involvement in travelers’ infor-
mation search and venue decision strategies while at destination. Journal of
Travel & Tourism Marketing, 18(3), 11e22.
Rompf, P., & Ricci, P. (2005). Gratuitous referrals: a subset of visitor search activities
and decision strategies at destination for travel-related services. Journal of
Travel & Tourism Marketing, 18(2), 39e52.
Schul, P., & Crompton, J. (1983). Search behavior of international vacationers:
Travel-specific lifestyle and Sociodemographic variables. Journal of Travel
Research, 22(3), 25e31.
Seabra, C., Abrantes, J. L., & Lages, L. F. (2007). The impact of using non-media
information sources on future use of mass media information sources: the
mediating role of expectations fulfillments. Tourism Management, 28,
1541e1554.
Sherman, C. (2004). Search engine user attitudes. Retrieved December 12, 2010, from
http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page¼3357771.
Snepenger, D., Meged, K., Snelling, M., & Worrall, K. (1990). Information search
strategies by destination-naïve tourists. Journal of Travel Research, 29(1),
13e16.
Snepenger, D., & Snepenger, M. (1993). Information search by pleasure travelers. In
M. A. Kahn, M. D. Olsen, & T. Var (Eds.), Encyclopedia of hospitality and tourism
(pp. 830e835). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Spink, A., Bateman, J., & Jansen, B. J. (1999). Searching the web: a survey of EXCITE
users. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 9(2),
117e128.
Spink, A., Danby, S., Mallan, K., & Bulter, C. (2010). Exploring young children’s web
searching and technololiteracy. Journal of Documentation, 66(2), 191e206.
Spink, A., & Saracevic, T. (1997). Interaction in IR: selection and effectiveness of
search terms. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(8),
741e761.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and proce-
dures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Taylor, S. J., & Bogdan, R. (1998). Introduction to qualitative research methods: A
guidebook and resource (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.
Tillotson, J., Cherry, J., & Clinton, M. (1995). Internet use through the University of
Toronto Library: demographics, destination and users’ reaction. Information
Technology and Libraries, 14(3), 190e198.
Tjondronegoro, D., & Spink, A. (2008). Web search engine multimedia functionality.
Information Processing & Management, 44, 340e357.
Vogt, C. A., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (1998). Expanding the functional information search
model. Annals of Tourism Research, 25(3), 551e578.
Walmsley, D. J., & Lewis, G. J. (1984). Human geography: Behavioural approaches.
New York: Longman.
Wang, Y., & Fesenmaier, R. D. (2004). Towards understanding members’ general
participation in and active contribution to an online travel community. Tourism
Management, 25(6), 709e722.
Wang, F., Head, M., & Arthur, N. (2002). E-tailing: an analysis of web impacts on the
retail market. Journal of Business Strategies, 19(1), 73e93.
Weber, K., & Roehl, W. S. (1999). Profiling people searching for purchasing travel
products on the world wide web. Journal of Travel Research, 37(3), 291e298.
White, M. D., & Iivonen, M. (2001). Questions as a factor in web search strategy.
Information Processing & Management, 37, 721e740.
Wilson, T. D. (1981). On user studies and information needs. Journal of Documen-
tation, 37(1), 3e15.
Wilson, T. D. (1997). Information behavior: an interdisciplinary perspective. Infor-
mation Processing & Management, 33(4), 551e572.
Wilson, T. D. (1999). Models in information behavior research. Journal of Docu-
mentation, 55(3), 249e270.
Woodside, A. G., & Ronkainen, I. A. (1980). Vacation planning segments: self plan-
ning vs. users of motor club and travel agents. Annals of Tourism Research, 7,
385e393.
Wu, L., Chuang, Y., & Chen, P. (2008). Motivation for using search engines: a two-
factor model. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Tech-
nology, 59(11), 1829e1840.
Xiang, Z., & Gretzel, U. (2010). Role of social media in online travel information
search. Tourism Management, 31, 179e188.
Xiang, Z., Wöber, K., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2008). Representation of the online
tourism domain in search engines. Journal of Travel Research, 47(2), 137e150.