An Exploratory Study about Obese People’s Flight Experience

Abstract

This qualitative study explores the flight experiences of obese people. The in-depth semistructured interviews (n = 24) with self-identified obese people revealed that they confront difficulties and barriers that arise from their interaction with the physical environment. While these entail some inconvenience, it is mostly the interaction with the social environment that results in a sense of embarrassment and humiliation. The aforementioned have an adverse effect on the flight experience. The flight is perceived as a three-part experience—boarding, flight, and deplaning—affected by mediating factors such as the staff approach, participants’ appearance, and the flight attributes (e.g., short/long, direct/indirect). An important finding is that people’s body, and specifically their self-perception of it as stigmatized, play an important role in the contextualization of the travel experience. The article concludes with managerial implications and suggestions for future research.

Keywords

obesity airport airplane flight experience disability

Introduction

Obesity is the accumulation of excess body fat that adversely affects people’s health (Major et al. 2014). While obesity is widely prevalent and on the rise (Small, Darcy, and Packe 2012), it has yet to be examined by tourism and hospitality scholars. This gap in the literature is even more unexpected as previous studies have indicated that people’s tourism experience is affected by their body size and their physical appearance (Berdychevsky, Gibson, and Poria 2013; Small 2007).

Flight and airport experiences, an essential part of today’s tourist experience (Martín-Cejas 2006; Mattila, Hanks, and Zhang 2013), are often neglected in tourism studies and in air-transportation management literature (Arif, Gupta, and Williams 2013; Small and Harris 2012). Furthermore, the idea that all members of society should have the right to travel or be involved in tourist activities is gaining prominence, impacting tourism research and tourism operation (Small and Harris 2012). This impact is compounded by new legislation that forces the industry to be attuned to various populations previously ignored by the tourism sector (Poria, Reichel, and Brandt 2010). Hence, for the industry to be able to accommodate a variety of customers, promoting research about the flight and airport experiences is essential.

The present exploratory research was designed to contribute information about the travel experience, and especially the flight experience, of a little-studied tourist population—obese people. The findings will have theoretical implications but also social ones when attempting to theorize obese people’s travel experience. The findings presented also have concrete, practical implications for airlines and airports regarding ways of managing service for obese people.

Literature Review

Obesity

The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics has defined obesity as a body mass index (BMI = weight in kilograms / (height in meters)²) of 30 or above. Although populations vary in their body fat distribution (Olshansky et al. 2005), this measure has been universally accepted. Obesity is now considered a worldwide epidemic affecting all countries and people of all socioeconomic levels, making it a clinical, public health, as well as economic problem (Arnold et al. 2016; Mackey et al. 2016; Spieker and Pyzocha 2016 ). The reasons for the ongoing spread of obesity revealed that limited physical activity, people’s diets, gene defects, and eating habits all linked with obesity (Wilson 2012). It should be noted that the prevalence of obesity among children and youth (Ebbeling, Pawlak, and Ludwig 2002) and the fact that more mothers are obese during their pregnancy, which is a predicator of children’s obesity, suggest that the share of obese people in the population may increase in the near future (Olshansky et al. 2005; Wilson 2012).

Aside from its many health risks—obesity is associated with type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease, cancer, and metabolic dysfunction—it also has psychosocial impacts linked with obese people’s body image (Blodorn et al. 2016; Koc 2013). People’s body serves as a way to signify capital and social echelon (Bourdieu 1984). Historically, being fat was considered a sign of robust heath (Ebbeling, Pawlak, and Ludwig 2002), but nowadays obese people are discriminated, prejudged, and stigmatized as stupid, unhealthy, academically unsuccessful, socially inept, unhygienic, lazy, lacking in control, and morally lax (De Brún et al. 2014; Ebneter, Latner, and O’Brien 2011; Hebl, King, and Perkins 2009). This image emerges from the belief that weight can be controlled and that obesity is a manifestation of character deficits (Bocchieri, Meana, and Fisher 2002) as well as from the belief “that people’s fortunes or misfortune are deserved” (Ebneter, Latner, and O’Brien 2011, 618). Obese people, who face these prejudices, have negative self-esteem, higher levels of sadness, and fewer social contacts (Bocchieri, Meana, and Fisher 2002; Ebbeling, Pawlak, and Ludwig 2002). The stigma results in fear of socializing, being mocked, high levels of depression, and development of eating disorders as well as emotional eating (De Brún et al. 2014). The stigma attached to obesity has also known to result in bullying and discrimination in areas such as education, health care, and employment (De Brún et al. 2014). Moreover, research suggest that obese people internalized this stigma (Major et al. 2014). The social stigma and its internalization should be considered when clarifying obese people’s flight experience, during which they come in physical and social contact with others in a relatively restricted small space. While stigma and its risk is a factor well known to affect people’s behavior in general and in leisure time in particular (Lewis and Puymbroeck 2008; Schmalz and Kerstetter 2006), its impact on people’s travel experience was ignored.

Obesity in Tourism Research

Recent tourism research has turned to the many tourists who are not the run-of-the-mill population. Among these populations are people with disabilities (Poria, Butler, and Airey 2003), children, and women (Berdychevsky, Gibson, and Poria 2013), all of whom are perceived as new target segments in a fiercely competitive market. It is also because of the prevailing view that all members of society have the right to travel as tourists to the point that this right is enforced by law (Poria, Reichel, and Brandt 2010). Additionally, feminist research has also called attention to giving minority groups a voice (Poria 2006). Surprisingly, very little research has been devoted to the travel experience of obese people despite the fact that obesity is clearly visible and has gained media attention because of air-carriers’ policies and actions toward obese people (e.g., Stephenson 2016).

Only a few studies have been published related to the links between obesity and tourism (Koc 2013; Small and Harris 2012), with health-related journals the first to include such research. Bauer (2008), for example, who revealed the health impact of tourism on local indigenous populations in resource-poor countries, argued that the locals’ attempts to imitate the tourist behavior and lifestyle is one of the reasons for the spread of obesity. Leatherman, Goodman, and Stillman (2010) argued that developing-world involvement in the tourism economy raises the level of obesity due to a nutrition transition associated with the presence of Western tourists. Other studies focus on medical procedures that obese people undergo outside their home country, for example, how obese Canadian people were approached in treatment centers outside Canada (Birch et al. 2010). In tourism journals, to date, studies related to obesity are rare. Herold, Garcia, and DeMoy (2001), who studied Caribbean beach boys, suggested that the locals regard obese women as more enjoyable sex partners. The locals reason that these women have less sex in their home country because of their unappealing appearance; thus, they “have tighter vaginas to provide more pleasure to the male” (989). In an earlier study, Moore (1985) indicated that Japanese tourists visiting Los Angeles are interested in observing obese people as part of their tourist experience. These two studies made minor reference only to the issue of obesity. Yet no attempt was made to reveal the actual travel experience of obese people.

Flight Experience in Tourism Research

Neal and Gursoy (2008), relying on Leiper’s (1990) systems approach, argued that tourism is a hybrid experience composed of various service encounters, including the way to and from the destination. Thus, the flight should play a major role in tourism studies in general, and especially in those that refer to the tourist experience. Despite its major part in tourism, few studies only have been conducted on certain elements of the airport and flight experience. Mattila, Hanks, and Zhang (2013) investigated unexpected airline upgrade and the effect of other people’s presence on that upgrade. Using blogs of obese and nonobese people, Small and Harris (2012) shortly reported on the flight experience of obese people and the attitudes toward obesity. However, in their exploratory study, participants were not provided with the opportunity to fully reveal and reflect on their various flight experiences. Poria, Reichel, and Brandt’s (2010) study of people with disabilities is the only research to investigate the actual flight experience in which participants were provided with a voice to reflect on their personal experience. This study will follow on their research, trying to highlight the flight experience of another segment of the population still ignored by tourism scholars.

Research Objective

This study objective is to provide obese people with a voice to reflect on their flight experience, addressing three main aims: (1) identifying the difficulties obese people confront during their flight; (2) revealing whether and how they overcome these difficulties; (3) learning how they would manage the flight experience for obese people. Attention focused on interpersonal, intrapersonal, and environmental barriers and difficulties (Smith 1987). Following studies that highlight the importance of understanding people’s emotional experience (Kim and Fesenmaier 2015), the feelings evoked in obese people when they confront difficulties linked to their obesity were revealed.

The research supposition was that the flight experience of obese people involves difficulties, mostly resulting from the physically tight and confined space on planes. This supposition rests on studies that focus on the role of the physical body in people’s travel experience, especially air travel (Abeyratne 1995; Poria, Reichel, and Brandt 2010), and on codes of conducts for airports and airlines (Poria, Reichel, and Brandt 2010). An additional supposition was that difficulties may arise as a result of the social interaction with the passengers sitting next to obese people. This supposition is based on popular literature that focuses on airfare policies for travelers who cannot fit into a standard airplane seat (Bhatta 2012; Stephenson 2016). It should be emphasized that because of the nature of this study, the research suppositions (as well as the literature review) were handled as provisional, taking into account that they may not block the trustability of the study.

Research Methodology

This study is part of a research project that focuses on obese people’s travel and tourism experience. The research method implemented here was inspired by the five-stage audit trail suggested by Akkerman et al. (2008).

The study began with the document stage (Akkerman et al. 2008). After a review of the literature (Mills, Bonner, and Francis 2006), a qualitative epistemology was adopted. The theoretical perspectives were mainly based on studies focusing on the barriers for tourism and research about the impacts of obesity and the social construction of disability. Relying on Strauss and Corbin (1998), attempts were made to manage the research process while aiming for theoretical sensitivity. As the interaction between the interviewer and the participants is important for achieving theoretical sensitivity, it should be noted that the researchers/interviewers are not obese.

The second stage was format selection. The form selected was an academic paper based on obese people’s reports that will point toward concrete managerial implications. The third stage concerned raw data collection. The aim of the sampling procedure was to provide a diversity of voices, and the researchers sought a variety of obese men and women. Participants were recruited through the researchers’ personal contacts and an online call for participation (each received $20 for their cooperation).

The researchers’ assumption was that interviews must be conducted with great sensitivity. Based on Diamond’s suggestions (1999) the participants were contacted prior to the interview and asked to choose where they would like it to take place (four participants asked to be interviewed on Skype). It was also decided to approach only individuals age 21 and older. The interview guide and the research design were approved by the ethical committee of the researcher’s university.

Stage 4, data collection, was a two-phase procedure: First, the interview guide was written following the literature review and four open interviews with obese people. The second phase was based on an in-depth semi-structured interview, which allows a comparison between participants’ responses. Each interview began with some brief warm-up questions. Next, the interviewers asked the participant to recall a positive or negative flight experience, and this recollection was followed by the participant relating to difficulties she or he encountered during the flight and how she or he overcame them. Participants were also asked to compare flight experiences they had had and to relate to the time spent at the airports before and after the flight. Based on the first interviews, participants were asked to compare three types of flight experiences—short flights (less than two hours), direct long flights (more than two hours), and connection flights. Although the interviews focused on participants’ views and preferences, participants were given the option to add personal stories, or accounts they had heard from other obese people.

Data were collected in 2013, during which the researchers interviewed 24 obese people who had had at least one flight experience. In an attempt to reduce the likelihood of gender bias, the sample included men (n = 11) and women (n = 13), age 22–64, of various socioeconomic backgrounds. In the sample, 16 were obese and 8 were morbidly obese. The average interview lasted 105 minutes. All the interviews—except those conducted on Skype—took place in the United States, in the area around Blacksburg, VA. Each interview was either recorded or transcribed, depending on the participant’s preference. The notes were subjected to thematic content analysis to illuminate underlying themes.

In line with the theoretical assumptions behind semiotic analysis (Manning and Cullum-Swan 1994), the actual words participants used received special attention in this study (e.g., words used to name parts of their body, such as “big ass,” or descriptions of the way others look at them—“stare,” “gaze”). To enhance analysis reliability, the transcripts were rechecked by another researcher to ensure that themes were firmly supported by the data. Attempts were made to find links between the participants’ characteristics and their responses. The difficulties were grouped into three: (1) difficulties assigned to the physical environment that resulted in a sense of inconvenience to the participants only; (2) difficulties associated with the physical environment that result in a sense of inconvenience for the participants and those next to them, further resulting in the participants feeling guilt and a sense of being unfair toward others; (3) difficulties that result from participants’ self-perception of others’ gaze at them, which cause them a sense of shame and humiliation.

The fifth and last stage was processing the document. It was decided that the document will reflect the research designs. Specifically, and in line with the data gathered, attention was given to participants’ emotions as they are crucial to the conceptualization of the flight experience. For ethical reasons, minimal information (age, gender, and BMI) is provided on the participants, and only when it was felt that it will contribute to the understanding of the informants’ experience.

Findings

The Flight Experience: Divided into Boarding, the Flight Itself, and Deplaning

Boarding

In discussing the boarding stage, participants referred to the physical environment (seats, aisles, toilets) but mainly to the social environment (the other passengers). Participants reported limited physical inconvenience regarding the seat (“pushing my big ass into an airplane seat is not an easy task”) and the width of the aisle (“it’s very difficult to walk in the aisles with 350 pound and a suitcase”). However, it is the interactions with the other passengers that caused most difficulties. Moreover, participants argued that these difficulties, in contrast to the physical ones, lead them to feel ashamed, embarrassed, and humiliated. Specifically, participants related to the fact that they have to touch others while walking through the aisle (“I can’t walk through the aisle without touching other passengers”) or when taking their seat (“I really try my best not to touch others, but that’s who I am”). The participants labeled the feelings accompanying these events as “uncomfortable,” “uneasy,” “unpleasant,” and “embarrassing.” Participants were all but unanimous in agreeing that the way people gaze at them during boarding is a humiliating and at times even shameful experience. Participants emphasized that even those who are not in direct physical contact with them stare at them, and they interpreted this as blaming them for being obese and unfair toward other passengers. The following quotations highlight the informants’ feelings resulting from the presence of others:

Even before we board, they look at me. And I know what they’re thinking of. They pray that I’II not seat next to them. For them I am not only a fat man but also ugly, lazy, someone who takes their money, and all this just because I sit all day in front of the TV eating junk food. They don’t know that I’m a construction worker. (Interviewee 5, man, BMI = 42, age = 44)

They stare at me. And I can see that they are looking at me hoping that I won’t sit next to them. I know that they hate me and people like myself. (Interviewee 6, woman, BMI = 34, age = 27)

Here in the US, they can’t tell me how much they hate me. But they hate me. You have to know that American people are disgusted by obese people. So instead of telling me, they use their eyes to do it. (Interviewee 12, man, BMI = 38, age = 40)

Participants were asked to describe how they overcome the difficulties of boarding. Their interpretation of the way people look at them may explain their will to board first and have a seat in the front or rear of the plane so they will be seen standing for a relatively short time and by fewer people. Participants also indicated that when standing in line before boarding they make attempts to be the first ones to board as in such a case they can relatively easily find their seat “and disappear.” Participants said that “I want to be seated far away from everyone else . . . ” or “you can’t imagine how happy I am when they turn off the lights.” Another strategy to avoid these feelings was to think of something else. This was done by reading a book, listening to music, or intentionally setting their mind on a specific topic. The next quotation illustrates this strategy: “When I’m boarding the plane, walking through the aisle I feel that everyone is looking at me. I purposely take my earphones and I listen to music. It helps me to avoid the way people stare at me.” However, most participants said that they have no way of overcoming the difficulties of boarding. It should be noted that when feasible, participants choose to drive rather than fly, all to avoid this sense of humiliation.

When seeking the reasons for their sense of humiliation and embarrassment, all participants related to the stigma toward obese people. Participants mentioned issues that have been mentioned in previous studies (e.g., Ebbeling, Pawlak, and Ludwig 2002; Hebl, King, and Perkins 2009), such as being perceived as lazy or not able to control themselves: “Obese people are viewed as lazy,” and “They think that obese people sit all day on their butt watching TV and eating doughnuts.” Participants indicated that people are disgusted by their appearance and even hate them, and that nonobese people see obesity as something that is preventable. Obesity is described as a lifestyle choice for which the individual is fully responsible: “They think that we chose to be obese,” and “Thin people think that it was my decision to be obese.” Additionally, people said that they are perceived as a burden that others have to economically sponsor as they are unemployed: “When they see obese people they think that we cost them money as we do not work.” Moreover, most of the participants indicated that the common notion is that not only that obese people are jobless but chose to be unemployed. Participants also indicated that nonobese people think that it is their taxes that pay for unemployment benefits as well as for the health insurance of obese people: “This is the US here. It’s all about money. They hate us because they think that we steal their money. They think that their taxes are used to pay my health care insurance. Another participant argued, “I work really hard. But I know that they think that because of me they pay higher health insurance rates. They think that they work for me.” Some participants indicated that obese white men are also stigmatized as pedophiles. One white man said, “they also think that we are pedophiles. But only obese white males, not African American . . . and you know what, when I looked at web sites of the police I found out that most of the pedophiles are actually obese white males.”

The flight

All participants regarded the flight as being a potentially devastating experience, citing three factors: the seat, those seating next to them, and the toilets. Some participants, mainly morbidly obese, related also to the seat tray and the safety belt. All participants indicated that the seat is too small for them, but that they can push themselves into it. Almost all participants indicated that they felt sorry for those sitting next to them, arguing that as a result of their body size they touch them during the flight. Moreover, participants claim that being obese they sweat more than the common average person: “I don’t know why but fat people sweat more than slim people . . . ” and “ . . . it’s not only that I am huge, I sweat and sweat and sweat. It’s so embarrassing.” Participants also argued that they themselves would prefer not to seat next to obese people: “Do you think that I would like to sit next to big people, of course not. Who wants to sit next to big people during a seven-hours flight?” Participants recognized that because of the inconvenience they are causing others, they felt guilty, uncomfortable, and embarrassed.

All participants stated that the toilets are not suitable for their size. Some said that they find it highly difficult to get in or out, and again related to the embarrassment and humiliation they feel when other passengers observe them as they are trying to enter or get out of the toilets. A few participants indicated that they are afraid of being stuck inside (“Can you imagine my feeling? I am really afraid to get stuck inside.”). Others indicated that they find it very difficult to close the toilets door after them (“I’ve been in situations where I had to stand on the toilet in order to get enough room to close the door.”) Also, participants who were not in an aisle seat felt that they were inconveniencing others when they had to go to the toilets, as those next to them had to leave their seats. Participants mentioned that even when nonobese people have to go to the toilet, others must stand up, but they feel that in their case they are blamed for making other people move.

Trays presented another difficulty, particularly for women whose large breasts prevented them from opening the tray. Again, participants felt not only uncomfortable by not being able to use the tray but embarrassed when they thought others were looking at them: “the only good thing about being obese is that I have huge tits. However, when I am trying to open the tray and people look at me, I feel that I want to cry” (Interviewee 17, woman, BMI = 41, age = 22). Another issue participants related to was the safety belt. Some participants indicated that the standard safety belt was not long enough to buckle them. In such cases the flight attendant came over and handed them an extension, but when they did not, participants had to ask for the extension, and this resulted in a sense of awkwardness.

It was not surprising that when asked how they overcome difficulties, participants indicated that they would like to sit next to a vacant seat or a small person, and that at the check-in, informants ask for an aisle or window seat. On short flights, participants prefer window seats, which give them a little more space, while aisle seats were the long-flight preference. Aisle seats allow more legroom and eliminate the need to ask other passengers to move when one wants to use the toilets. Additionally, a few participants stated that when they reached the check-in counter they had offered to pay to sit next to a vacant seat, especially on long flights, but were denied the possibility. Others indicated that if roomier seats were offered in the economy class, they would be very interested in such a seat, especially on long flights: “I don’t have enough money to fly business or first class but if they’d have bigger seats in economy, I’m ready to pay more.” Participants also mentioned that if a crew member knows that there would be a free seat on the next flight they would be happy to have the option to change flights. Some participants indicated that they ask for this option when waiting for the flight. As for the toilets—some participants said that they refrain from eating and drinking for the same reason. Participants overcome the problem with the trays by asking for a snack or finger food instead of a meal or by bringing a sandwich.

Deplaning

In this third and final last stage of the flight, many of the problems of boarding reemerged. Participants stated that they wish to leave the plane without attracting other passengers’ attention, and many do so by remaining on board until all the other passengers had left the aircraft. Participants indicated that sitting in the rear of the plane allows them to leave last and avoid attracting attention. A special aspect of deplaning were connecting flights, when, at times, the distances between gates are very long and there is little time to spare. When using the “last off” strategy to avoid being stared at, participants risk missing their connection, especially as their weight often generates knees problems, which prevent them from running or even walking fast. When they finally reach the gate, they are sweaty, embarrassed, and cause further inconvenience for themselves and for others. Participants indicated that they would be more than happy to use the airport cart to move from one gate to another; however, they feel uncomfortable to ask for it or alternatively to ask a staff member to push them in a wheelchair.

Moderating Factors: The Flight Attributes, the Seat, the Crew, and People’s Size

Most often, a clear distinction was made between short flights and long flights. Most participants clearly indicated that the short flights entailed little inconvenience only. Participants also felt less guilt toward those sitting next to them as “they do not suffer for a long time,” they can avoid using the toilet, and as only beverages are served, there is no problem with the trays. All expressed preferences for direct flights, rather than connecting ones because of the tight time element involved in catching the next flight. Another moderating variable was whether they were located next to a vacant seat. Participants mentioned that in such a case they felt much more comfortable and less embarrassed.

Another factor that had an impact on the flight experience was the interaction with the crew. Participants mentioned that if the crew was able to recognize their difficulties and take care of them in a respectable and discreet way it had a major impact on the flight experience. For example, some participants related that at times the crew upgraded a person seated next to them to business or first class, or just moved the adjacent passenger to another seat. Some participants mentioned that the flight attendant discreetly provided them with an extension for the seat belt without being asked, which did not cause them to feel embarrassed.

Participants emphasized that the way the crew communicated with them about problems and challenges that emerge from their size had a great impact on the flight experience. For example, almost all participants emphasized that they would like to board first and deplane last; however, they were offended when asked to join people with disabilities or people with special needs. Their sentiment was “I do not want to be labeled as disabled” and this led to their decision not to board when allowed, despite recognizing that such service may improve their boarding process. Participants also noted that the use of terms such as “obese people,” “people with obesity,” or “size restriction” offended them. It is interesting to note that participants preferred being approached by other obese people, and some women mentioned that they perceive African American women as less judgmental toward obesity and preferred to communicate with them.

Another factor that should be taken into account is the participants’ body structure. The findings revealed that short participants, despite their high BMI (which is affected by their height), had a better flight experience than taller obese people. They fit in the airplane seat relatively easily and comfortably, and did not have to touch other people during the flight or when walking through the aisle. They did not report on substantial difficulties using the toilets and, most importantly, did not feel that other people stared at nor stigmatized them. Another issue was people’s perception of their body. Three participants described themselves as big and strong (“I have very big shoulders”), and because of their large frame they argued that they do not look fat, and people do not regard them as obese. Although these participants encountered many physical difficulties, they, too, felt neither stared at nor stigmatized. Additionally, participants’ approach to the stigma attached to obese people should be taken into consideration. Participants who claimed that the stigma does not reflect who they are, exhibited less social pressure, and did not go through a devastating emotional experience like those who did not reject (or even supported) the stigma attached to obese people.

Summary and Conclusions

The tourism industry is constantly on the lookout for new market segments, and one such sector is the obese tourist. Little has been written about this population (Small and Harris 2012), which is growing worldwide (Spieker and Pyzocha 2016). The present exploratory study aimed to narrow this gap in the literature by investigating the flight experience of obese people. This qualitative study revealed that obese people’s flight experience is rife with difficulties relating to the physical environment and the social environment. The findings demonstrate that certain elements of the flight experience cause a sense of embarrassment and humiliation, and these emotions, rather than the interaction with the physical environment, may be a barrier that prevents obese people from flying. However, the findings indicate that with proper responsible and sensitive management that is based on obese people’s voices, their flight experience can be improved.

Two working suppositions guided this study. The first supposition was that the difficulties obese people may confront will be due to the mismatch between the physical environment and the participant’s body size. Surprisingly, almost no such difficulties were reported. Moreover, such difficulties did not have severe emotional consequences on the individual or serve as a barrier to the flight. The findings demonstrate that most of the difficulties reported by the participants resulted from the presence of other passengers and the emotional impact of these difficulties, which could bar participants from flying. The second supposition concerned social difficulties that may arise from the interaction between the participants and those sitting next to them. As indicated, the social difficulties resulted from all those who, as the participants felt, were looking at them. A gaze from other passengers in the plane or in the airport could lead to a sense of shame and insult due to participants’ self-perception of their image and the way they are stigmatized by others.

The flight experience is not homogenous. The findings clearly demonstrate that it is not people’s body per se but their self-perception of it and its stigmatization that is important when attempting to clarify obese people’s flight experience. Moreover, it is argued here that the individuals’ appearance (or their perception of their appearance) could put them in a sense of social danger. Similar findings were reported by studies of gay men’s travel experience, where they felt that people stared at them and were stigmatizing them (Poria 2006).

Flight duration also determined differences in the difficulties faced. Participants argued that on short flights they cause less discomfort for the other passengers, while on long flight they become a burden to others. Direct flights were also much preferred to connecting flights, which add the strain of moving swiftly between faraway gates in a short time.

The study is of potential contribution to a better understanding of the nature of the tourism experience. In their attempt to measure concepts of the experience economy Oh, Fiore, and Jeoung (2007) conceptualized the tourist experience as “everything tourists go through . . . be it behavioral or perceptual, cognitive or emotional, or expressed or implied” (120). It is common to divide the tourist experience into different stages. The current study clearly indicates that one’s body and its image plays a major role in the “experiential phase” as well as in the “reflective stage” (Craig-Smith and French 1994) or the “travel to” stage (Killion 1992). Moreover, it is claimed here that although this study’s findings relate only to the flight experience, the traveler’s body may have a dramatic impact on the destination experience.

The current findings challenge the claim that every traveler’s experience is unique, special, and different. It is common to claim that tourist experiences “are as diverse as the characteristics of destinations and tourists” (Oh, Fiore, and Jeoung 2007, 120) or inherently personal (Wang, Park, and Fesenmaier 2012). However, the findings clearly indicate that obese, and especially morbidly obese, passengers confront very similar experiences, which they explain using their own self-perception of others’ image of them. Moreover, participants claimed that their self-report represents American obese people in general. The body image is portrayed as a barrier for the escapist experience. As far as the flight experience is concerned, participants cannot “depart from their daily life” (Oh, Fiore, and Jeoung 2007, 122). Even though participants are unfamiliar with the other passengers or the crew, they feel ashamed embarrassed and guilty. Moreover, others’ unfamiliarity with the participants caused them to have shameful negative emotional experience. In contrast to Lounsdury and Polik (1992), it is argued here that tourists may not have the exact same experience but a very similar one, which can be characterized by the same attributes. Obese people, as indicated here, construct their social realm and rationalize it in a very similar way.

As indicated in the literature review, obese people are stigmatized by society (De Brún et al. 2014). Moreover, this stigmatization is accelerated despite the overall weight gain throughout society (Major et al. 2014). As indicated by Bedini (2000), often it is the individual’s self-perception (i.e., are they obese) and their attitude to the stigmas attached to obese people (i.e., is it justifiable) that will determine their reaction. Participants who, despite their high BMI, did not regard themselves as obese experienced fewer difficulties and less social pressure. Also, those participants who resisted the stigma attached to obese people reported fewer difficulties resulting from social pressure. Specifically, participants who claimed that they are not lazy, unemployed, or lacking in self-control more often claimed that they were able to ignore people’s gazes.

The findings can be discussed in reference to studies that focus on tourists whose body characteristics impact their travel and tourism experiences, among them blind people and those using wheelchairs and crutches (Poria, Reichel, and Brandt 2010). Although some of the difficulties reported here are similar to those faced by people using crutches (e.g., mobility difficulties) and wheelchairs (e.g., entering the toilets), this study demonstrates that it is the social interaction or other people’s presence that obese people find most difficult and often humiliating. The participants in this study referred to the belief, documented in the literature (Bocchieri, Meana, and Fisher 2002; Ebneter, Latner, and O’Brien 2011), that obese people feel that others view obesity as a life choice and a self-inflicted disability. The participants argue that they are looked upon as losers, as those who cannot control themselves, have no self-discipline, and are lazy (Ebbeling, Pawlak, and Ludwig 2002). However, in contrast to the current literature, the findings clearly revealed that the most common issue is that participants feel that nonobese people regard obese people as individuals who exploit others financially, as the common notion is that obesity is a self-chosen disability that results in unemployment. Consequently, the reasoning continues, it is nonobese people whose taxes pay for unemployment benefits and health insurance and treatments for the obese population, which results directly from their obesity. Also, a few obese white men who participated in this research felt that they were stigmatized as pedophiles. This self-reported image should be taken into consideration in future studies that focus on the psychological outcomes of obesity.

The findings suggest that the flight experience in itself is composed of various experiences, each a potential barrier for tourism participation. Also, in the literature, there is ongoing assumption that the conceptualizations of tourism, and its components, should be done based on recreation and leisure body of knowledge. The present findings clearly indicate that the flight should not be approached and conceptualized as leisure. Gunter (1987) characterizes leisure as a state of mind attributed by sense of separation from the everyday world, freedom of choice, feeling of pleasure, spontaneity, and timelessness. Based on Gunter’s approach, the body, weight, and appearance of obese serve as a major obstacle for considering the flight as leisure, or viewing the airplane as a pleasure-oriented environment (Carr 2002). As reported here, flights, and long flights in particular, are characterized by feelings of humiliation, avoiding drinking or eating to minimize going to the bathroom, and no freedom of movement due to the emotions created when observed or touching others, which make it a nonleisure environment. Like the flight experience of wheelchair users (Poria, Reichel, and Brandt 2010), the findings suggest that the flight is a means to an end, a necessary stage someone has to undergo to be a tourist.

The findings can be theorized based on studies that focus on difficulties and barriers for tourism. Smith’s (1987) classification, one of the most cited in tourism studies, refers to interactive barriers as those linked with the interaction of host and guest. In the present study, it was the interaction with the other passengers, not the crew, that led to a barrier or difficulty during the flight experience. Based on Smith’s analysis, the difficulty was the passenger (customer)–passenger (customer) relationship, not the passenger (customer)–service provider (host). Jackson’s (1988) classification of barriers is based on internal (e.g., personal skills, abilities, and health problems) and external constraints (e.g., lack of time, cost). In the present study, obese people did not report on external constraints linked with their obesity—quite the opposite, the internal barriers were at the core of obese people’s flight experience, as not all the participants were ready to confront people’s gazing at them. In contrast to other classifications, Gladwell and Bedini’s (2004) classification of barriers considers a person’s emotions. The findings of the present study support their approach, and indicate that the emotional barriers are crucial to the understanding of people’s responses.

Studies use BMI values as indicators of obesity (e.g., Ebneter, Latner, and O’Brien 2011), and obesity-related morbidity (e.g., Ebbeling 2002). While the BMI may be important for health-related studies, when attempting to conceptualize people’s experiences within a sociocultural context, appearance should also be taken into consideration. Large-framed participants, men and women alike, felt less social pressure than others who describe themselves as fat or obese. Also those participants who were smaller reported much less social pressure than did the very large participants, who felt they attract more negative attention. Confidence in one’s appearance may also explain the differences reported here between obese people who consider themselves to be “big” (or big and beautiful or big and strong) and those who consider themselves “fat.” Thus, when contextualizing body embodiment, self-confidence should be considered when learning people’s travel behaviors. These observations indicate that people’s body size and structure as well as self-confidence—and not only BMI—should be emphasized when studying obese people’s behaviors in the public domain.

Gender plays an important role in this study. First, participants, mainly women, prefer to sit next to people of their own gender, suggesting that they would feel less uncomfortable if they inadvertently touched a woman. Second, participants illustrated high preferences to be served by people of the same gender when it comes to matters linked with their weight and size. These findings are consistent with results of marketing and psychology studies that revealed links between customer gender and preference of service provider’s gender (e.g., Fisher, Gainer, and Bristor 1997). The preferences as to the service-provider’s gender revealed here are also supported by studies on health-service provision revealing that patient interest in intimacy during the service encounter has a major effect on preferred physician gender (Fennema, Meyer, and Owen 1990; Kerssens, Bensing, and Andela 1997). Fisher, Gainer, and Bristor’s (1997) argument that customers who expect extensive interaction with a service provider anticipate receiving superior service from someone of the same sex “simply because they feel they might be more comfortable interacting with them” (364), is also of importance to this study. Based on the interviews, it is argued that as issues such as weight and size are considered personal and intimate, participants prefer interacting with people of the same gender.

To conclude, it is the interaction with the social environment that was a predominant factor in explaining obese people’s flight experience. It is not participants’ measureable size or weight but their interpretation of the way others stare at them that causes negative emotional experiences. In his study of the carriage of elderly and disabled people, Abeyratne (1995) regarded people with obesity as disabled, highlighting their possible difficulties in maneuvering during the flight. In the current study, the obese people interviewed were rarely limited functionally by their weight and size. Obesity was found to be a social disability, a disability that results from the interaction with the social environment. Obese people feel aesthetic anxiety (Hann 1988), which in turn limits their abilities, especially in societies that promote the thin ideal (Hebl, King, and Perkins 2009) or bodies that project an image of efficiency, productivity, and diligence—an image applauded by capitalism and the Protestant work ethic.

Managerial Implications

The findings of the present study have managerial implications for passenger airlines, airport management, and for those who serve obese customers. These implications focus on two main topics: airplane design and service quality. However, there is a need to take into account the qualitative nature of the study, and the fact that this study was conducted in a certain sociocultural context (Virginia, United States). Moreover, the managerial implications are based on the thought that airline management as a business organization should aim to be socially sensitive and responsive, by attempting to offer passengers an attentive and respectful flight experience.

In discussing airplane design, participants refer to three issues: the seat, the toilets, and the aisle width. Participants challenged the current situation where the economy department does not have seats to meet the need of passengers of different sizes (small for children, medium for average-size people, and big for large people). Airlines might consider offering different size seats and charging by size. As part of the discussion of seats, participants, especially women, related to the trays, suggesting that a shorter, adjustable pull-out tray would enable them to open it without it leaning on their breasts. Participants also indicated that because of their size they find it difficult to eat the warm meals served. They mentioned that cup holders in the seat handle would enhance the meal experience. Based on participants’ experience, providing snacks instead of standard meals may also facilitate the eating experience, as these can be eaten without opening the tray. Airlines may also consider designing toilets suitable for obese people, which would also help people with physical disabilities (Poria, Reichel, and Brandt 2010).

A modification in the service provision process may benefit obese people’s flight experiences. Specifically, the implications are concerned with the flight attendants and the ground crew involved in the boarding process. It is clear from the findings that participants would like to hide themselves from others. In line with the above, the option to provide obese people with the opportunity to board first and deplane last should be considered. Also, the allocation of an aisle seat (on long flights) or window seat (on short flights) would have a positive impact on obese people’s flight experience. Participants also indicated that if the crew is aware that in the next flight there is a vacant seat they would like to be offered this option, as they may prefer to postpone their flight to have a free seat next to them. It should be noted that participants demonstrated that they may be ready to pay for the option to sit next to a vacant seat. Crew should also take into account that when obese people are seated between other passengers, they are more comfortable sitting next to people of the same gender.

It is common in the tourism literature to emphasize the physical and technical aspects of the tourist space, ignoring the human aspect of service (Shaw, Veitch, and Coles 2005; Yates 2007). However, this study clearly indicates that the technical aspects (i.e., what you get) may be less important than the functional aspects (i.e., how you get) (Grönroos 2001). The findings suggest implications as to communication with obese passengers about difficulties that may arise because of their size and weight. Participants indicate that this should be done with respect and sensitivity. Participants also argued that although they would like to be treated like people with physical disabilities, they do not want to be labeled as such in public. Participants suggested that they would be happy to be issued a document that designated their special needs. Participants also indicated that they feel much more comfortable communicating with obese employees and especially by African American employees as they feel that they are less stigmatized by them.

Regarding the airport, participants spoke about the difficulty to stand for a long time or to walk long distances, especially on tight connecting schedules. In line with Arif, Gupta, and Williams’s (2013) claim that airports are in immense competition to attract more airlines, they should consider providing more cart facilities and more seating areas. This in turn may assist other populations such as the elderly, pregnant women, and people with physical disabilities.

Limitations and Future Studies

The exploratory nature of the findings and the research epistemology adopted precludes generalization. Moreover, it should be recognized that the participants who agreed to be interviewed on such a sensitive topic may not represent the general obese population. Also, this study was conducted in a very specific sociocultural context. Nevertheless, it is argued that before large-scale quantitative studies that will allow generalization are conducted, because of the nature of the current body of knowledge it is necessary to conduct a series of small-scale exploratory studies, with each extending the insights gained from previous work. Specifically, cultural differences were found of importance to the conceptualization of people’s flight experiences (Aksoy, Atilgan, and Akinci 2003). Further studies with obese people outside of the United States may shed additional light on obese people’s flight experience. As tourism is a holistic experience, future studies should also focus on other elements of the travel experience of obese people. For example, studies should look at obese people’s hotel experience, a space in which people’s body may be of crucial importance to the onsite experience.

Future studies may adopt a business-related approach and reveal obese people’s demand patterns for flights, and specifically for flights that accommodate their needs. Based on the findings, future research should clarify issues such as willingness to pay for bigger seats in the economy section or for being located next to a vacant seat. Finally, future studies should also focus on the flight experience of nonobese passengers seated next to obese people, using the prism of fairness (Chung and Petrick 2012).

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Yaniv Poria is the Chairman of the Department of the Hotel and Tourism Managemenet, Guilford Glazer Faculty of Buisiness and Management, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Israel.

Jeremy Beal is a graduate of the Hospitality and Tourism Management Program at VT.

References

Abeyratne

R. I. R.

1995. “Proposals and Guidelines for the Carriage of Elderly and Disabled Persons by Air.” Journal of Travel Research 33 (3): 52–59.

Akkerman

Admirall

Brekelmans

Oost

2008. “Auditing Quality of Research in Social Sciences.” Quality & Quantity 42:257–74.

Aksoy

Atilgan

Akinci

2003. “Airline Services Marketing by Domestic and Foreign Firms: Differences from the Customers’ Viewpoint.” Journal of Air Transport Management 9:343–51.

Arif

Gupta

Williams

2013. “Customer Service in the Aviation Industry—An Exploratory Analysis of UAE Airports.” Journal of Air Transport Management 32:1–7.

Arnold

Leitzmann

Freisling

Bray

Romieu

Renehan

Soerjomataram

2016. “Obesity and Cancer: An Update of the Global Impact.” Cancer Epidemiology 41:8–15.

Bauer

2008. “The Health Impact of Tourism on Local and Indigenous Populations in Resource-Poor Countries.” Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease 6 (5): 276–91.

Bedini

L. A.

2000. “‘Just Sit Down So We Can Talk:’ Perceiving Stigma and Community Recreation Pursuit of People with Disabilities.” Therapeutic Recreation Journal 34:55–68.

Berdychevsky

Gibson

Poria

2013. “Women’s Sexual Behavior in Tourism: Loosening the Bridle.” Annals of Tourism Research 42:65–85.

Bhatta

B. P.

2012. “Pay-as-You-Weight Pricing of an Air Ticket.” Journal of Air-Transport Management 18:30–33.

10.

Birch

D. W.

Karmali

Stoklossa

C. J.

Sharma

A. M.

2010. “Medical Tourism in Bariatric Surgery.” American Journal of Surgery 199:604–8.

11.

Blodorn

Major

Hunger

Miller

2016. “Unpacking the Psychological Weight of Weight Stigma: A Rejection-Expectation Pathway.” Journal of Experiential Social Psychology 63:69–76.

12.

Bocchieri

L. E.

Meana

Fisher

B. L.

2002. “A Review of Psychosocial Outcomes of Surgery for Morbid Obesity.” Journal of Psychosomatic Research 52 (3): 155–65.

13.

Bourdieu

1984. Distinction. A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

14.

Carr

2002. “The Tourism-Leisure Behavioural Continuum.” Annals of Tourism Research 29 (4): 972–86.

15.

Chung

J. Y.

Petrick

J. F.

2012. “Price Fairness of Airline Ancillary Fees: An Attritional Approach.” Journal of Travel Research 52 (2): 168–81.

16.

Craig-Smith

French

1994. Learning to Live with Tourism. Melbourne, AU: Pitman.

17.

De Brún

McCarthy

McKenzie

McGloin

2014. “Weight Stigma and Narrative Resistance Evident in Online Discussions of Obesity.” Appetite 72:73–81.

18.

Diamond

1999. Practical Evaluation Guide: Tools for Museums and Other Informal Educational Settings. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.

19.

Ebbeling

C. B.

Pawlak

D. B.

Ludwig

D. S.

2002. “Childhood Obesity: Public-Health Crisis, Common Sense Cure.” The Lancet 360:473–82.

20.

Ebneter

D. S.

Latner

J. D.

O’Brien

K. S.

2011. “Just World Beliefs, Causal Beliefs, and Acquaintance: Associations with Stigma toward Eating Disorders and Obesity.” Personality and Individual Differences 51:618–22.

21.

Fennema

Meyer

D. L.

Owen

1990. “Sex of Physician: Patients’ Preferences and Stereotypes.” Journal of Family Practice 30 (4): 441–46.

22.

Fisher

Gainer

Bristor

1997. “The Sex of the Service Provider: Does It Influence Perceptions of Service Quality?” Journal of Retailing 73 (3): 361–82.

23.

Gladwell

N. Y.

Bedini

L. A.

2004. “In Search of Lost Leisure: The Impact of Caregiving on Leisure Travel.” Tourism Management 25:685–93.

24.

Grönroos

2001. Service Management and Marketing: A Customer Relationship Management Approach. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

25.

Gunter

B. G.

1987. “The Leisure Experience: Selected Properties.” Journal of Leisure Research 19 (2): 115–30.

26.

Hann

1988. “The Politics of Physical Differences: Disability and Discrimination.” Journal of Social Issues 44 (1): 39–47.

27.

Hebl

M. R.

King

E. B.

Perkins

2009. “Ethnic Differences in the Stigma of Obesity: Identification and Engagement with a Thin Ideal.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 45:1165–72.

28.

Herold

Garcia

DeMoy

2001. “Female Tourists and Beach Boys: Romance or Sex Tourism?” Annals of Tourism Research 28 (4): 978–97.

29.

Jackson

E. L.

1988. “Leisure Constraints: A Survey of Past Research.” Leisure Sciences 10:203–15.

30.

Kerssens

J. J.

Bensing

J. M.

Andela

M. G.

1997. “Patient Preferences for Gender of Health Professionals.” Social Science & Medicine 44 (10): 1531–40.

31.

Killion

G. L.

1992. Understanding Tourism: Study Guide. Rockhamton, AU: Central Queensland University.

32.

Kim

Fesenmaier

D. F.

2015. “Measuring Emotions in Real Time: Implications for Tourism Experience Design.” Journal of Travel Research 54 (4): 419–29.

33.

Koc

2013. “Inversionary and Liminoidal Consumption: Gluttony on Holidays and Obesity.” Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing 30:825–38.

34.

Leatherman

Goodman

A. H.

Stillman

2010. “Changes in Stature, Weight, and Nutritional Status with Tourism-Based Economic Development in the Yucatan.” Economics & Human Biology 8 (2): 153–58.

35.

Leiper

1990. “Tourist Attraction Systems.” Annals of Tourism Research 17 (3): 367–84.

36.

Lewis

S. T.

Puymbroeck

M. V.

2008. “Obesity-Stigma as a Multifaceted Constraint to Leisure.” Journal of Leisure Research 40 (4): 574–88.

37.

Lounsdury

Polik

1992. “Leisure Needs and Vacation Satisfaction.” Leisure Sciences 14 (1): 105–19.

38.

Mackey

E. R.

Olson

DiFazio

Cassidy

2016. “Obesity Prevention and Screening.” Primary Care Clinic Office Practice 43:39–51.

39.

Major

Hunger

J. M.

Bunyan

D. P.

Miller

C. T.

2014. “The Ironic Effects of Weight Stigma.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 51:74–80.

40.

Manning

P. K.

Cullum-Swan

1994. “Narrative, Context and Semiotic Analysis.” In Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by Denzin

N. K.

Lincoln

Y. S.

, 463–77. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

41.

Martín-Cejas

R. R.

2006. “Tourism Service Quality Begins at the Airport.” Tourism Management 27:874–77.

42.

Mattila

A. S.

Hanks

Zhang

2013. “Existential Guilt and Preferential Treatment: The Case of an Airline Upgrade.” Journal of Travel Research 52 (5): 591–99.

43.

Mills

Bonner

Francis

2006. “The Development of Constructivist Grounded Theory.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 5 (1): 1–10.

44.

Moore

1985. “Rosanzerusu Is Los Angeles: An Anthropological Inquiry of Japanese Tourists.” Annals of Tourism Research 12 (4): 619–43.

45.

Neal

J. D.

Gursoy

2008. “A Multifaceted Analysis of Tourism Satisfaction.” Journal of Travel Research 47:53–62.

46.

Fiore

A. N.

Jeoung

2007. “Measuring Experience Economy Concepts: Tourism Applications.” Journal of Travel Research 46:119–32.

47.

Olshansky

S. J.

Passaro

D. J.

Hershow

R. C.

Layden

Carnes

A. B.

Brody

Hayflick

Butler

R. N.

Allison

D. B.

Ludwig

D. S.

2005. “A Potential Decline in Life Expectancy in the United States in the 21st Century.” New England Journal of Medicine 352:1138–45.

48.

Poria

2006. “Assessing Gay and Lesbian Hotel Experience: An Exploratory Study of Sexual Orientation in the Travel Industry.” Journal of Travel Research 44 (3): 327–34.

49.

Poria

Butler

Airey

2003. “Tourism, Religion, and Religiosity: A Holy Mess?” Current Issues in Tourism Research 6 (4): 340–63.

50.

Poria

Reichel

Brandt

2010. “The Flight Experiences of People with Disabilities: An Exploratory Study.” Journal of Travel Research 49 (2): 216–27.

51.

Schmalz

Kerstetter

D. L.

2006. “Girlie Girls and Manly Man: Children’s Stigma Consciousness of Gender in Sports and Physical Activities.” Journal of Leisure Research 38 (4): 536–57.

52.

Shaw

Veitch

Coles

T. E.

2005. “Access, Disability and Tourism Changing Responses in the United Kingdom.” Tourism Review International 8 (3): 167–76.

53.

Small

2007. “The Emergence of the Body in the Holiday Accounts of Women and Girls.” In Tourism and Gender: Embodiment, Sensuality and Experience, edited by Pritchard

Morgan

Ateljevic

Harris

, 73–91. Wallingford: CABI.

54.

Small

Darcy

Packe

2012. “The Embodied Tourist Experiences of People with Vision Impairment: Management Implications beyond the Visual Gaze.” Tourism Management 33 (4): 941–50.

55.

Small

Harris

2012. “Obesity and Tourism: Rights and Responsibilities.” Annals of Tourism Research 39 (2): 686–707.

56.

Smith

R. W.

1987. “Leisure of Disabled Tourists: Barriers to Participation.” Annals of Tourism Research 14:376–89.

57.

Spieker

E. A.

Pyzocha

2016. “Economic Impacts of Obesity.” Primary Care Clinic Office Practice 43:83–95.

58.

Stephenson

2016. “Why Fat People Should Be Charged More to Fly: It’s Not Fair for Thin People to Suffer through the Age of the Supersize Traveler.” Mail Online. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3289014/Why-fat-people-charged-fly-s-not-fair-people-suffer-age-supersize-traveller.html (accessed February 21, 2016).

59.

Strauss

A. L.

Corbin

1998. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. London: Sage.

60.

Wang

Park

Fesenmaier

D. R.

2012. “The Role of Smartphones in Mediating the Touristic Experience.” Journal of Travel Research 51 (4): 371–87.

61.

Wilson

S. E.

2012. “Introduction.” Economics and Human Biology 10:329–32.

62.

Yates

2007. “Understanding the Experience of Mobility-Disabled Tourists.” International Journal of Tourism Policy 1 (2): 153–66.