This research paper was presented during the ENTER 2012 (Information & Communication Technologies in Tourism) conference in Helsingborg, Sweden. The accepted paper can be found in http://johnfotis.blogspot.com/p/publications.html The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com

1. Social media use and impact
during the holiday travel planning process
John Fotisa,
Dimitrios Buhalisa, and
Nicos Rossidesb
aSchool of Tourism, Bournemouth University, U.K.
{jfotis, dbuhalis}@bournemouth.ac.uk
bMASMI Research Group
nicos.rossides@masmi.com
ENTER 2012 Research Track 1

2. Agenda
• Introduction
• Literature review
• Research Questions and hypotheses
• Methodology
• Findings
• Conclusions, limitations and implications
ENTER 2012 Research Track 2

3. Introduction
• Social media (SM): Phenomenal rise in popularity among internet
users:
o Facebook: 800+ m users; 50%+ log in daily; 700+ billion minutes/month; 250+
m photos uploaded daily (Facebook, 2012)
o Twitter: 175 m users; 250 m tweets daily (Twitter, 2011; 2012);
o YouTube: 800 m unique users/month; 3+ billion videos viewed daily; 48hours
of video uploaded / minute (YouTube, 2012);
o 170+ m blogs worldwide (BlogPulse, 2011); 3m new blogs /month
(Technorati, 2011)
o TripAdvisor: 50+ m unique monthly visitors; 60+ m reviews (TripAdvisor
2012).
• Tremendous impact on travel (Gretzel et al. 2008)
• “are taking an important role in travellers’ information search and
decision-making behaviours” (Yoo et al. 2011, p. 526).
o 23% of US Internet users were “somewhat” or “significantly influenced” by
SM for their travel / holiday related decisions (eMarketer, 2010)
ENTER 2012 Research Track 3

4. Literature review
• SM: “a group of Internet-based applications that build on the
ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow
the creation and exchange of User Generated Content” (Kaplan &
Haenlein 2010, p.61).
• Types of SM (Constantinides, 2009; Fischer & Reuber, 2011; Kaplan &
Haenlein 2010 ; Kim, Jeong, & Lee, 2010; Mangold & Faulds, 2009):
o Social networking websites (e.g. Facebook, Linkedin)
o Blogs
o Content communities (e.g. YouTube, Flickr, Scrib, Slideshare, Delicious)
o Collaborative projects (e.g. Wikipedia, Wikitravel)
o Microblogs (e.g. Twitter)
o Consumer review & rating websites (e.g. TripAdvisor, Epinions)
o Internet fora (e.g. ThornTree, Fodor’s Travel Talk)
o Virtual social worlds (e.g. . Second Life), and virtual game worlds (e.g. World
of Warcraft). X
ENTER 2012 Research Track 4

5. Literature review
• Holiday travel related purchases: Complex due to the composite and
experiential nature of the holiday travel product, involve high risks
and as a result require extensive information search (Sirakaya &
Woodside, 2005).
o Consumers rely on other travellers’ experiences as a mean to increase the
exchange utility and decrease uncertainty (Kotler, Bowen, & Maken, 2010;
Litvin, Goldsmith, & Pan, 2008; Yoo, Lee, & Gretzel, 2007).
o Content of virtual communities perceived similar to recommendations
provided by friends, family and “like-minded souls” (Fernback & Thompson,
1995; Wang, Yu, & Fesenmaier, 2002)
o Vital information sources providing access to other travellers’ experiences
(Chung & Buhalis, 2008; Yoo et al., 2011).
• Web 2.0: Explosion of SM popularity; enable expression and sharing
o Enable storytelling, a usual post-travel activity, on a ‘24/7’ basis to large
audiences; provide a sense of belonging (Gretzel, Fesenmaier, & O'Leary,
2006).
ENTER 2012 Research Track 5

6. Related work
• Gretzel, Yoo, & Purifoy (2007): Online reviews facilitate decision
making: Increase travellers’ confidence; reduce risk; assist
accommodation selection. Used throughout the travel planning
process:
o Before trip: As a source of ideas, as a mean to narrow down choices, and
post accommodation choice in order to confirm the choice made; During
trip; after the trip to compare and share experiences; but also as an
ongoing process even if there is no trip ahead.
• Vermeulen & Seegers (2009): During accommodation selection,
consideration of a hotel is enhanced by exposure to both negative
and positive consumer reviews.
• Mack, Blose, & Pan (2008): traditional WOM is more trustworthy
than blog posts. Yoo et al (2009) and Del Chiappa (2011):
trustworthiness of tourism-related blogs is second only to
consumers’ reviews and ratings found in online travel agents’
websites. ENTER 2012 Research Track 6

7. Related work
• Yoo, Lee, Gretzel, & Fesenmaier (2009): User generated content is
perceived as more credible when posted to official tourism bureau
sites rather than in review sites, travel blogs social networking sites
and content communities.
• White (2010): Travel related photos in Facebook generate interest to
viewers and can very easily become part of the viewer’s travel plans.
Research gap
The majority of existing studies attempt to describe the role SM either
focusing on (a) Specific types of SM (e.g. Review sites, blogs); (b)
Specific communities (e.g. TripAdvisor), or (c) At a specific stage of the
travel planning process. No adequate academic research on the role
and impact of SM as a whole throughout the holiday travel planning
process.
ENTER 2012 Research Track 7

8. Related work
Cox, Burgess, Sellitto, & Buultjens (2009)
• SM are mostly used before the trip (primarily for accommodation
selection, rather than during the evaluation of destination choices).
During and after the trip their use was very limited (data collection
12/2007).
• User generated content was perceived as less trustworthy than
traditional sources of information (i.e. official tourism websites and
travel agents).
• Sampling issues (mailing list of an official tourism website),
hypothetical and not actual travel behaviour.
ENTER 2012 Research Track 8

9. Research questions and hypotheses
• RQ1: To what extent and for what reasons are SM used during the
holiday travel planning process?
o H1: SM are predominantly used before the trip for information search
purposes.
• RQ2: Do SM influence holiday plans?
o H2: The higher the perceived level of SM influence on holiday destination
choice or accommodation choice, the more likely is that changes would be
made to holiday plans.
• RQ3: Are SM more trustworthy than traditional sources of holiday
related information?
o H3: Holiday travel related information provided in SM is more trustworthy
than mass media advertising, travel agents and official tourism websites.
ENTER 2012 Research Track 9

10. Methodology
• Data Collection (October 2010):
o Online questionnaire survey commercial online research panel
o 900 panellists in 12 Former Soviet Union Republics (Azerbaijan, Belarus,
Estonia, Georgia, Kazakstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Russia, Ukraine,
Uzbekistan)
o Returned: 368 questionnaires (41%), used: 346
o Screening: Have taken at least 1 holiday trip during last 12 months
o Intro statement: Examples of SM websites in six categories: Blogs, photo &
video sharing websites, microblogs, wikis, social networking websites and
travel review websites (Constantinides, 2009; Fischer & Reuber, 2011; Kim,
Jeong, & Lee, 2010; Mangold & Faulds, 2009; Xiang & Gretzel 2010).
ENTER 2012 Research Track 10

11. Methodology
• A number of questions to enable them recall their last holiday trip
• Measures:
o 12 statements describing use of SM, 5 from Cox et al. (2009)
o Perceived level of SM influence on destination and accommodation choice:
7 point scale (1=“Not Influential At All”; 7=“Very Influential” (Lo, Cheung, &
Law, 2002).
o Trustworthiness of holiday travel related information sources: 13 sources
via 7 point Likert scale (1=“Strongly Disagree”; 7=“Strongly Agree” (Cox et
al., 2009).
ENTER 2012 Research Track 11

12. Research Findings
• Profile of sample
o Gender: 65.6% females; 34.4% males
o Age: 18.2% <25; 38.4% 25-39; 30.9% 40-54; 12.5% 55+
o Education: 30.3% Completed secondary school; 69.7% University graduates
o Country of residence: 64.2% Russia; 35.8% Other FSU Republics. Proportion
approximates distribution of actual internet users between the two regions
(InternetWorldStats, 2010).
o Level of SM use: 49% visit SM websites several times a day; 36% almost
every day, 9% only sometimes per week, and 3% very rarely.
ENTER 2012 Research Track 12

13. Research Findings
A. SM usage levels and reasons for use
POST-TRIP
PRE-TRIP
As per Cox et al. (2009) DURING TRIP
H1: SM are predominantly used before the trip for information search
purposes. H1 Rejected
ENTER 2012 Research Track 13

14. Research Findings
A. SM usage levels and reasons for use
No significant differences in usage levels among age groups, level
of education, and region of residence, except:
Pre-trip: To confirm that I made a good destination choice
Male 24%
χ2(1, Ν = 346) = 4.64, p = .03
Female 35%
During trip: Post-trip:
To provide comments and reviews about To share my experiences and photos with my
my holiday experience friends and / or relatives
Below 25 25.4% 23.8%
25-39 20.3% 36.1%
40-54 9.3 22.4%
55 and over 9.3 11.6%
χ2(3, Ν = 346) = 10.62, p = .01 χ2(3, Ν = 346) = 12.28, p = .01
ENTER 2012 Research Track 14

15. Research Findings
B. Perceived level of SM influence on holiday plans
Influence on Influence on
Destination choice Accommodation choice
Mean scores* (SD)
All respondents 4.84 (1.63) 4.61 (1.81)
Before your final decisions about your last holiday, did
you make any changes to your original holiday plans
because of other travellers’ opinions, reviews, photos,
videos, or other information that you found in SM
websites? (n=273)
I am not sure / cannot remember
2.2% 2.75 (1.50) 2.75 (2.36)
if I made any changes
I did not make any changes 33.7% 4.10 (1.80) 3.93 (1.91)
I did make few changes
49.5% 5.25 (1.37) 5.02 (1.58)
to my original holiday plans
I did make significant changes
14.7% 5.35 (1.21) 5.00 (1.73)
to my original holiday plans
Pearson Correlation test: 1 r(268) = .34, p <.001 r(268) = .27, p <.001 2
(*) 7-point scale: 1=“Not influential at all” to 7=“Very Influential”
1 2 As influence from SM on destination / accommodation choice increases the
more likely is that there are changes in the holiday plans.
H2: The higher the perceived level of SM influence on holiday destination
choice or accommodation choice, the more likely is that changes would be
made to holiday plans. H2 Accepted. Research Track
ENTER 2012 15

16. Research Findings
C. Trustworthiness of travel related information sources
I trust information about holidays provided by… (N=346) Mean* (SD)
Friends and relatives 6.36 (1.14)
Information provided by other travellers in various websites 5.15 (1.41)
SM 4.61 (1.37)
6 3
Official tourism websites (state / government owned) 4.36 (1.57)
Shows or documentaries in TV, in radio, or articles in newspapers and magazines 7 3.97 (1.45) 4
Travel agents 3.83 (1.36)
8 5
Advertisements in TV, radio, newspapers and magazines 3.56 (1.35)
(*) 7-point Likert scale: 1=Strongly Disagree, 7 = Strongly Agree)
3 t(345) = -9.442, p = .000 4 t(345) = -18.019, p = .000 5 t(345) = -21.890, p = .000
6 t(345) = -3.024, p = .003 7 t(345) = -10.634, p = .000 8 t(345) = -14.453, p = .000
H3: Holiday travel related information provided in SM is more trustworthy than mass
media advertising, travel agents and official tourism websites. H3 Accepted
ENTER 2012 Research Track 16

17. Conclusions
• SM are used during all stages of the holiday planning process
(before, during and after holidays) however, to a different extent and
for a different purpose.
• In FSU Republics, SM are mostly used: After the trip for sharing
experiences and photos, and during the trip to stay connected with
friends. Possible reasons contributing:
o Russians’ high level of engagement with social networking websites
(comScore, 2010)
o Very low individualist / very high collectivist nature of the Russian culture
(Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010).
• In relation to Cox et al. (2009): Differences in terms of SM use among
national markets, supporting claim by Gretzel et al. (2008). Also
indications for differences in trustworthiness of SM.
o Such differences may not be present in closely related national cultures
(e.g. Russians vs other F.S.U. Republics), but more evident between distant
national cultures (e.g. Australians and Russians).
ENTER 2012 Research Track 17

18. Conclusions
• Strong correlation between social media level of influence on
destination and accommodation choice, and the changes made in
holiday plans before final decisions were taken.
o As the perceived level of influence from social media on destination /
accommodation choice increases, the more likely is that there were
changes to holiday plans in terms of destination / accommodation
selection.
• Friends and relatives evidence the highest level of trustworthiness
among the information sources examined, followed by information
from other travellers in various websites.
o In contrast to the findings of Cox et al. (2009), this study found that
information from other travellers in various websites is trusted more than
official tourism websites, and travel agents.
ENTER 2012 Research Track 18

19. Managerial implications
• SM are being used during all stages of the holiday travel planning
process, however to a different extent and for a different scope.
• In combination with Cox et al:
o Preliminary indications: National source tourism markets behave differently
in terms of scope of use, as well as in levels of trustworthiness among travel
related information sources. Therefore:
National source markets should be studied individually prior to the design and
implementation of SM campaigns.
• The “during the holidays” stage is a challenging domain: Lower SM
use that the other stages. Creative strategies needed to stimulate
increase use
• No need for major differentiation in SM campaigns aiming at
travellers in those two regions, since minor differences between
Russia and the other F.S.U. Republics source markets in terms of the
impact of SM on the holiday planning process:
ENTER 2012 Research Track 19

20. Limitations
• Findings apply only to the specific geographical context (F.S.U.
Republics) and therefore cannot be generalised especially to other
national markets with distant cultural characteristics
• Not a random sample due to the self-response nature of the specific
online panel survey;
• No treatment for non-responses
Further research
• Equal research emphasis in all stages of the travel planning process.
• Need of cross-cultural studies to substantiate claims about
differences in SM use between national cultures.
ENTER 2012 Research Track 20

21. Thank you
jfotis@bournemouth.ac.uk
School of Tourism
Bournemouth University, UK
Visit the BU eTourism Lab:
www.bournemouth.ac.uk/etourismlab
ENTER 2012 Research Track 21