Tourist shopping style preferences

Abstract

Shopping has been recognized as the most popular activity for both domestic and international tourists. With many destinations adopting shopping as a positioning strategy, the development of shopping products is central to tourism promotion. The present study attempted to develop a tourist shopping style typology by evaluating tourist’s shopping attitudes and preferences. The Consumer Style Inventory (CSI) was adapted into the tourism setting to develop a tourist shopping style typology. The adaptation of CSI assists in solidifying theoretical foundations for tourism shopping research. The exploration of the interrelationship between tourists’ shopping psychology, tourist demographics, and their actual purchases revealed valuable practical information on how to strategically integrate shopping into tourism planning and marketing.

Keywords

Consumer style inventory shopping management tourism shopping tourist shopping style trip purchases

Shopping has been recognized as the most popular activity for both domestic and international tourists (LeHew and Wesley, 2007; TIA, 2003). Tourist shopping adds to the attractiveness and revenue of a destination. With many destinations adopting shopping as a positioning strategy, the development of shopping products is central to tourism promotion. Business alliances have been built among retailers, tour operators, hotels, and airlines (Timothy, 2005). Tourist shopping literature can be divided into two categories: shopping as a main trip purpose and shopping as a tourist activity. Extensive studies have been conducted for shopping as a main trip purpose (Butler, 1996; Heung and Qu, 1998; Hopper and Budden, 1989; Keown, 1989; Patrick and Renforth, 1996; Timothy, 1999, 2005). The popularity of shopping as a tourist activity is not as well represented in the literature (LeHew and Wesley, 2007). Previous research in tourism shopping mostly focused on souvenir shopping (Swanson and Horridge, 2006). However, recent studies and surveys suggest that souvenirs are no longer the primary product that tourists purchase (TIA, 2001, Timothy, 2005). Researchers have started to examine the trend of general item shopping (Kim et al., 2011). They noted that tourists purchase many more items besides souvenirs.

In order to understand the reasons why tourists shop for general items, tourist shopping products have been categorized and tested with tourist demographics, trip typologies, and trip-specific characteristics (Lehto et al., 2004; Oh et al., 2004). Tourist shopping styles in souvenir shopping have also been classified based on tourist shoppers’ demographic and trip-specific characteristics (Anderson and Littrell, 1995, 1996; Timothy, 2005). While previous studies of tourist shopping styles were developed based on tourist demographics or trip typology, most of them are solely in the context of souvenir shopping and lack theoretical backing (Gordon, 1986; Timothy, 2005).

The present study attempted to develop a tourist shopping style typology by evaluating tourists’ shopping attitudes and shopping behaviors, which included purchases of souvenir and general items. The Consumer Style Inventory (CSI) was adapted to the tourism setting to develop a tourist shopping style typology. It was hoped that the adoption and adaptation of CSI could assist in solidifying theoretical foundations for tourism shopping research. By examining tourists’ psychographics, a better understanding of tourists’ shopping preferences and styles and their influences on purchase behavior could be achieved. The exploration of the interrelationship between tourist shopping psychology, tourist demographics, and their actual purchases would reveal valuable practical information on how to strategically integrate shopping into tourism planning and marketing.

Literature review

Previous research has contended that tourists shop on trips to take the memories home with them (Swanson and Horridge, 2006). Their shopping behavior is very different from when they are at home. Tourists do not have home- and work-bound obligations, and they get satisfaction from the shopping experience, in addition to the purchased products (LeHew and Wesley, 2007). Recent research has shown tourists shop for clothing, jewelry, books, arts and crafts, and electronics in addition to souvenirs (TIA, 2001; Timothy, 2005). Previous research has found that tourists typically spend one-third of their total trip expenditure on shopping (Turner and Reisinger, 2001). When tourists travel for reasons other than shopping, they do include shopping as an activity on vacation.

Shopping can also be a driving force to motivate tourists to travel to a certain destination. Various areas have been explored in relation to shopping as a trip purpose in tourism, which, in many cases, is called “outshopping.” When shopping serves as the primary motivational factor for tourists to travel to certain destinations, shopping usually accounts for the majority of tourist expenditures (Heung and Qu, 1998). Outshopping is motivated by the merchandise, destination, and price (Hopper and Budden, 1989; Timothy, 2005). Some destinations are famous for shopping or duty-free merchandise, and it is common that people make special shopping trips to the destinations. According to Keown (1989), relative price is one of the most important determinants in generating shopping trips. Past literature documented that exchange rates directly affect the level of tourist shopping (Patrick and Renforth, 1996; Timothy, 1999). Outshoppers have higher incomes than shoppers who stay at their home towns to shop, and they appear to be younger than home town shoppers. Shopping as the main trip purpose has drawn significant attention in academics and business. However, shopping as a tourist activity has not received the same level of attention.

Purchased items

Tourists shop for a variety of items. They tend to look for souvenirs that represent the destination they visit (Timothy, 2005). A souvenir is a tangible symbol and reminder of an experience that differs from the daily routine and that otherwise would remain intangible, such as memories of people, places, and events (Littrell, 1990; Timothy, 2005). Souvenirs help remind them of the experience, which is the primary reason for souvenir purchases (Timothy, 2005). However, the range of goods purchased by tourists is broadening and does not any longer consist of just souvenirs and necessary personal items (Turner and Reisinger, 2001). Additionally, as the use of self-catering accommodations continues to increase, the amount of grocery shopping by tourists has increased (Timothy and Butler, 1995). Big retail stores are now an important part of the tourism infrastructure (Timothy, 2005).

Previous research examined the dimensions of products tourists care about and the reasons for their purchases. The researchers all pointed out the fact that tourist shopping items are changing, but little attention was paid to the types of merchandise. More research efforts are needed to explore tourist preferences for types of goods and services, especially to test the assumption that arts and crafts, destination specialty goods, and souvenirs are preferred.

Tourist shopping item lists vary from study to study and from country to country. However, from the merchandise list adopted in previous research, what tourists generally purchase can still be discovered. A study by Turner and Reisinger (2001) used a list of products that includes food, cigarettes, clothing, household, souvenir, art, books, photographs, toys, cosmetics, electrical, jewelry, travel, and postal goods. Oh et al. (2004) used five groups of purchased items: books and music, antiques, gourmet foods, local arts and crafts, and clothes, shoes, and jewelry. Heung and Qu (1998) examined Visitor Arrival Statistics collected by the Hong Kong Tourist Association (HKTA). The purchased items in HKTA surveys were garments, jewelry, leather, perfume, cosmetics, alcohol, foodstuffs, medicine/herbs, other durable goods, clock/watches, camera/optical goods, sound equipment/electrical, souvenirs/handicrafts, and toys. Lehto et al. (2004) investigated the data from the 1999 Annual Survey on Taiwan Outbound Travelers. The list of purchased items from the survey included clothes, tobacco and wine, arts and handicrafts, electronic products, watches and jewelry, toys, perfumes and cosmetics, local food, and medicine. Overall, clothes (53%), cigarettes and wines (44%), and arts and crafts (34.8%) were purchased in the greatest quantities. The Shopping Traveler report by the Travel Industry Association of America (TIA, 2001) provides a profile of trips that include shopping and a profile of the consumer who takes the trips. The report used a set of purchased items that includes clothes or shoes, souvenirs, books or music, specialty food/beverage items, children’s toys, items/crafts unique to destination, jewelry or accessories, home furniture, home electronics, sports equipment, camera or camera equipment, artwork, luggage, and camping equipment. Their report noted that tourists most often spend money on clothes or shoes (77%) followed by souvenirs (49%) and books or music (42%).

In summary, the following merchandise item categories have been consistently used by researchers: clothes, shoes, books and music, tobacco and wines, perfumes and cosmetics, jewelry and accessories, toys, food, cameras, souvenirs, arts and crafts, home goods, and electronics. However, food and beverage are excluded from the definition by the Tourism Shopping Implementation Committee (1990). In addition, local arts and crafts and items/crafts unique to the destination were considered souvenirs not only in souvenir shopping studies but also by the definition of souvenir (Littrell, 1990; Timothy, 2005). Variations can be found based on tourist cultural or nationality background. Item lists for Asian tourists usually include medicine, watches, and duty-free products (Heung and Qu, 1998; Lehto et al., 2004), while items lists for Americans or Canadians do not (Oh et al., 2004; TIA, 2001; Turner and Reisinger, 2001).

Factors influencing tourist purchased items

Previous studies attempted to shed light on factors that can affect tourist shopping behavior. Nationality, for instance, creates differences in tourist shopping. Asians tend to spend more time and money on shopping, while European and North American tourists spend more on accommodations (Heung and Qu, 1998). Yuksel (2003) discovered that domestic and international tourists have significantly different expectations and needs for shops at the destination. In a study conducted by Popelka and Littrell (1991), 50% of producers distinguished tourists by nationality and connected tourists taste and preferences their the nationalities. Previous research identified that nationality accounts for differences in tourist shopping time, amount spent, and items purchased (Heung and Qu, 1998; Thompson and Cutler, 1997; Yuksel, 2003).

Gender and age contribute significantly to the differences in tourist shopping preferences. Jansen-Verbeke (1987) found that spending on shopping items other than daily goods was more important for female tourists, while spending on dining out was more important for male visitors. Oh et al. (1994) tested the effectiveness of gender, age, and trip typologies as predictors for tourists’ shopping preferences and behavior. Their results indicated that age, gender, and trip typologies were significant factors in predicting tourist shopping patterns. For example, female travelers showed a greater tendency to browse or shop for clothes, shoes, and jewelry. Lehto et al. (2004) confirmed that factors such as trip purpose, travel style, age, and gender are effective indicators for tourist shopping. Lehto et al. explored the relationships of these factors and items tourists purchased on trips. Tourists with lower incomes were the heavy buyers of clothes. A lower income group was inclined to spend more than a higher income group. Female tourists spent more on clothes and perfumes or cosmetics than male tourists spent, while their male counterparts were more interested in tobacco and cigarettes as well as wines and liquor products. In terms of age, the younger age group—those in their 20s and 30s—had a higher tendency to purchase clothes, while the older age groups preferred spending on tobacco or wine products. While previous research has found that demographics, trip typologies, and trip-specific characteristics were influential on tourists’ shopping behavior, including the purchased items and expenditure level, the role of a tourist’s psychology has received little attention.

Tourist shopping style typologies

In order to effectively analyze tourist shopping behavior, previous research has attempted to group tourists into different shopping typologies. Littrell (1990) identified five groups of tourists for textile souvenir shopping: shopping-oriented tourists, authenticity-seeking tourists, special-trip tourists, textiles for enjoyment tourists, and apparel-oriented tourists. Based on tourists’ perception of certain travel activities, their purchased items, and where they bought them varied. Littrell uncovered four tourist styles in souvenir purchases: ethnic, arts and people style, history and parks style, urban entertainment style, and active outdoor style. Littrell then profiled souvenir shopping patterns and further predicted the types of products tourists may buy.

Littrell conducted further research based on differences in sociodemographic backgrounds of tourists. She discovered that women contributed to the majority of souvenir purchases (Littrell et al., 1993). In addition, Littrell et al. (1993) addressed age difference in souvenir shopping. Anderson and Littrell further researched female tourists in 1996. They grouped women into five profiles based on their trip planning and souvenir purchasing styles: goal-attainment travelers preplanned their trips and made both planned and unplanned purchases; low-involvement travelers made minimal trip plans, unplanned purchases, and the fewest purchases; eclectic travelers used a combination of planning for trips in that they made both unplanned and planned purchases, and they made the most purchases; centrist travelers made preplanned trips but unplanned purchases; and laid-back travelers were minimal trip planners who made unplan-ned, planned, or both unplanned and planned purchases (Anderson and Littrell, 1996).

The existing tourist shopping style typologies mostly focus on souvenir shopping, while souvenirs are no longer the most popular items tourists shop for (TIA, 2001; Timothy, 2005). Additionally, these tourist shopping style typologies tend to lack theoretical backing. In generic shopping literature, however, shopping style typologies have been studied intensively with an established construct. Theory-based shopping style typologies can potentially help evaluate the tourists and build a more comprehensive tourist shopping style typology. In a study by Lesser and Hughes (1986), psychographic segmentation based on consumer lifestyles were used to classify consumer shopping styles. The authors studied 17 communities in 12 US states in 6 geographical regions. Seven types of shoppers were found in almost every community. The seven shopper types include inactive shoppers, active shoppers, service shoppers, traditional shoppers, dedicated fringe shoppers, price shoppers, and transitional shoppers. Despite the generality of Lesser and Hughes’ shopper classification, part of the instrument was about shoppers’ daily activities. Therefore, the Lesser and Hughes shopper classification is not applicable to tourism.

Sproles and Kendall (1986) focused on the psychographics that affect consumer selection of products. They identified 8 characteristics from consumer-interest literature and developed 40 items to evaluate the characteristics. Eight consumer styles were established as CSI. They include (1) perfectionistic, high-quality conscious consumer; (2) brand conscious, “price equals quality” consumer; (3) novelty–fashion-conscious consumer; (4) recreational, hedonistic consumer; (5) price conscious, “value for mon-ey” consumer; (6) impulsive, careless consumer; (7) confused by overchoice consumer; and (8) habitual, brand-loyal consumer. Each consumer style represents a shopping style. Sproles and Kendall (1990) regard the CSI as reflecting the “basic consumer personality.” After the CSI was proposed and validated, it was used in various studies including Sproles and Sproles (1990) and Bakewell and Mitchell (2004). Most of the CSI was proven to be applicable to consumers across different populations and nationalities.

The 40 items of the CSI measure elements that the consumer cares about concerning shopping, which is suitable for evaluating consumer’s shopping attitudes when on vacation. Each of the eight consumer styles was generated from extensive consumer literature. The eight shopping style typology is theoretically supported.

Study objectives

Gaps existed from our review of shopping tourism literature. Due to the change in merchandise preference, the findings in souvenir shopping literature may not be applied to generic tourist shopping. For example, women are a major force of souvenir shopping but not necessarily a major contributor to generic tourist shopping. Men sometimes outspend women while at a tourist destination (Timothy, 2005). Past research recognized uniqueness as what tourists are looking for, but such generalizability is questionable as more tourists shop at shopping centers (TIA, 2001). Many shopping centers are similar from location to location (LeHew and Wesley, 2007). Tourists look for high-quality, well-designed products, and they think that purchasing items from a well-known manufacturer is very important (Littrell et al., 1993; LeHew and Wesley, 2007). “These well-known products are brands with which they are familiar; thereby they feel confident in their purchase decisions” (LeHew and Wesley, 2007).

On the other hand, people have work and family obligations in the home environment and they are too busy to shop. The home-bound pressure is gone when they are taking a trip, so they can spend substantial time and money on generic shopping (Gordon, 1986). The driving motivation for generic tourist shopping is different from souvenir shopping, which could lead to different types of shopping patterns. Questions about tourist shopping need to be answered: Do the characteristics of souvenir shopping styles apply to all tourists? What are the shopping styles of tourists? What are the popular retail products for tourists? Previous literature documented demographics and trip typologies as factors influencing tourist’s shopping items and expenditure. Yet are tourists’ shopping attitudes also related to their trip-specific characteristics and shopping items?

This study had three specific objectives:

To understand tourist shopping attitudes and preferences by integrating a theory-based shopping style typology from generic shopping literature.

To identify the popular merchandise items tourists purchase on vacation and explore their correlation with shopping style preferences.

To explore the relationship between tourist shopping style preferences and their demographic characteristics.

Methodology

A questionnaire was developed based on an extensive review of existing literature about tourist shopping. The 40-item CSI was adapted into the tourism context to account for tourists’ perceptions and preferences. CSI documented eight shopping personalities. These are (1) perfectionism or high-quality consciousness; (2) brand consciousness; (3) novelty–fashion-consciousness; (4) recreational, hedonistic shopping consciousness; (5) price and “value for money” shopping consciousness; (6) impulsiveness; (7) confusion over choice of brands, stores, and consumer information; and (8) habitual, brand-loyal orientation toward consumption. While the CSI may be applicable for tourist shopping, it may not capture some of the variances unique in a tourism setting. Tourists are in a different state of mind, and they have different shopping preferences from when they are home (Timothy, 2005). Past research documented that shopping travelers tend to look for uniqueness on their trips (LeHew and Wesley, 2007; Littrell et al., 1993). Based on this consideration, the present study added a set of uniqueness measurement items from the desire for unique consumer product construct (DUCP) developed by Lynn and Harris in 1997. The DUCP contains eight questions measuring individual differences in the DUCP. The final instrument measuring tourist shopping style consisted of 48 Likert-scaled items using a scale from 1 (stro-ngly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The original CSI and DUCP items were adapted into the tourism setting. For example, one original item was stated as “I shop quickly, buying the first product or brand I find that seems good enough.” The item was modified as “When I travel, I shop quickly, buying the first product or brand I find that seems good enough.” A complete list of tourist shopping style measurement items can be found in Table 2.

The survey questionnaire collected the following categories of information: (1) respondents’ demographic background, including gender and age; (2) respondents’ shopping attitudes and preferences (CSI and DUCP); (3) information about most recent vacation trip such as destination, travel party composition, duration, and purpose of visit; (4) purchased items and amount spent during the most recent vacation. The tourist shopping item list from The Shopping Traveler report (TIA, 2001) was adapted for this study. “Clothes or shoes” were the most popular items in the TIA report, and it was decided that further classification was better. Therefore, “clothes or shoes” from the TIA report was divided into “clothes” and “shoes.” The adapted list included clothes, shoes, jewelry or accessories, books or music, home accessories or furniture, home electronics, children’s toys, sports equipment, cameras or camera equipment, souvenirs/arts and crafts, luggage, and camping equipment.

The present study population comprised local residents in a Midwestern city, where a major university is located. Convenience sample was used. However, the sample captured the tourist shopping attitudes of Midwestern Americans. In fact, the Midwestern region represents the demographic of a target market used to extrapolate appeal to a broader U.S. audience (Sisson et al., 2007). The survey was distributed at multiple locations such as shopping malls, supermarkets, churches, and offices to get a cross section of respondents. Individuals at these locations were approached by trained researchers. The respondents were screened based on whether they have traveled overnight for pleasure in the recent past 6 months. About 400 individuals were approached for this study in a span of 4 months, in 2008. The total sample size of the present study was 212, representing about 50% response rate. The rest of the individuals approached either did not take a vacation in the stated time frame or declined to take the survey.

There were several statistical methods used for the present study. First, descriptive statistics aimed to profile the respondents in terms of their demographics, trip-specific information, and purchases. An exploratory factor analysis was used to identify different shopping styles among respondents. Once the factor structure of tourist shopping style was determined, multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and one-way ANOVA were employed to examine the relationships between tourist shopping styles and demographics as well as purchase characteristics.

Results

Of the respondents, the largest age group, accounting for 27.4% of the people surveyed, was between 21 and 34 years. The second largest group was between 45 and 54 years, accounting for 24.2%. More than half were female (65.2%), and the majority of the participants were Caucasian (90.9%). About two-third had a bachelor’s degree or higher (67.4%), and 22.4% of the sample had a high school education or less. Regarding the annual household income, approximately a third of the participants (29.2%) earned from $50,000 to $74,999, followed by those earning from $25,000 to $49,999. As for participant trip-specific characteristics, most of the participants (89.1%) took their recent vacation within the United States. About two-third of the sample (66.1%) traveled for pleasure, followed by those visiting friends and relatives as their trip purpose (19.9%). Nearly a third of the participants (64.2%) traveled with their family. All respondents were independent travelers. About a third (32%) of the sample traveled to their destinations for the first time. Regarding trip length, the majority (74%) of the respondents took a vacation for one week or fewer days. Thirty-three states were reported as respondents’ trip destinations. The state that registered the highest number of mentions was Florida (23.4%).

Trip purchases of sample

Table 1 describes the items respondents purchased on their trip and the average amount spent on each item. Clothes and souvenirs are the items purchased most frequently. About half of the participants (49.7%) bought clothes on their most recent vacation, followed by the purchase of souvenirs (48%). The findings were similar to The Shopping Traveler report by TIA (2001). “Clothes and shoes” are the items tourists shop for most in the TIA report, with souvenirs as the second favorite. While the TIA report grouped clothes and shoes in the same category, clothing is the most favored item in the present study. In addition to clothes, tourists bought a variety of other items on their vacations, including books or music (23%), accessories (22%), children’s toys (21%), shoes (12%), camera equipment (7%), sports equipment (5%), home accessories (4%), home electronics (3%), luggage (3%), camping equipment (2%), beauty and fragrance (3%), and liquor (2%). These results confirm the trend that general items are favored by tourists in addition to souvenirs, and sometimes their popularity exceeds souvenirs (Lehto et al., 2004; TIA, 2001; Timothy, 2005).

Table 1.

Tourist shopping items.

Item	Count	%	Average	Total spending	Ranking
Clothes	92	49	$101.81	$9366	1
Souvenirs/arts and crafts	89	48	$73.14	$6509	2
Books or music	43	23	$45.79	$1969	5
Jewelry or accessories	39	21	$93.43	$3644	3
Children’s toys	39	21	$51.26	$1999	4
Shoes	23	12	$62.35	$1434	6
Cameras and/or camera equipment	12	6	$36.50	$438	10
Sports equipment	10	5	$55.83	$558	8
Home accessories or furniture	7	4	$106.43	$745	7
Beauty and fragrance	6	3	$57.50	$345	12
Home electronics	5	3	$108.00	$540	9
Luggage	5	3	$36.80	$184	14
Liquor	4	2	$22.50	$90	15
Camping equipment	3	2	$116.50	$350	11
Other	2	1	$157.50	$315	13

Table 2.

Exploratory factor analysis for tourist shopping styles.

Loading		Reliability
Factor 1—Perfectionistic, high-quality conscious style (eigenvalue = 8.168, variance = 16.669)
When I shop on vacation, I make a special effort to choose the very best quality products.	0.86
When I shop on vacation, I usually try to buy the best overall quality.	0.85
When it comes to purchasing products on vacation, I try to get the very best or perfect choice.	0.82
When I shop on vacation, getting very good quality is very important to me.	0.73
My standards and expectations for products I buy on vacation are very high.	0.62	0.90
Factor 2—Brand conscious, “price equals quality” style (eigenvalue = 5.369, variance = 10.958)
When I shop on vacation, I prefer buying the best-selling brands.	0.85
When I shop on vacation, I believe the higher the price of the product, the better its quality.	0.75
When I shop on vacation, the most advertised brands are usually very good choices.	0.74
When I shop on vacation, the more expensive brands are usually my choice.	0.73
Nice department and specialty stores offer me the best products on vacation.	0.70
When I shop on vacation, the well-known national brands are best for me.	0.66	0.86
Factor 3—Novelty-seeking style (eigenvalue = 4.096, variance = 8.359)
On vacation, I enjoy shopping at stores that carry merchandise, which is different and unusual.	0.67
When I travel, to get variety, I shop at different stores and choose different brands.	0.54
When I travel, it is fun to buy something new and exciting.	0.46	0.65
Factor 4—Fashion-conscious style (eigenvalue = 2.991, variance = 6.104)
When I travel, I keep my wardrobe up to date with the changing fashions.	0.89
When I travel, I usually have one or more outfits of the very newest style.	0.86
When I travel, fashionable, attractive styling is very important to me.	0.80
I tend to be a fashion leader rather than a fashion follower on vacation.	0.67	0.89
Factor 5—Recreational, hedonistic style (eigenvalue = 2.682, variance = 5.474)
When I travel, going shopping is an enjoyable activity for me.	0.83
When I travel, shopping in many stores wastes my time.	−0.80
When I travel, I enjoy shopping just for the fun of it.	0.78
When I travel, shopping is not a pleasant activity for me.	−0.77
When I travel, I make shopping trips fast.	−0.67	−0.44
Factor 6—Price conscious, “value for money” style (eigenvalue = 2.139, variance = 4.366)
When I shop on vacation, I look carefully to find the best value for the money.	0.72
When I shop on vacation, I buy as much as possible at sale prices.	0.65
When I shop on vacation, I take time to shop carefully for the best buys.	0.6
When I shop on vacation, I carefully watch how much I spend.	0.61
When I shop on vacation, lower price products are usually my choice.	0.51	0.67
Factor 7—Impulsive, careless style (eigenvalue = 1.890, variance = 3.856)
When I shop on vacation, I should plan my shopping more carefully than I do.	0.72
Often when I shop on vacation, I make careless purchases I later wish I had not.	0.74
When I shop on vacation, I am impulsive when purchasing.	0.65	0.68
Factor 8—Confused by overchoice style (eigenvalue=1.625, variance=3.316)
When I shop on vacation, all the information I get on different products confuses me.	0.81
When I shop on vacation, the more I learn about products, the harder it seems to choose the best.	0.80
When I shop on vacation, sometimes it is hard to choose at which stores to shop.	0.76
When I shop on vacation, there are so many brands to choose from that often I feel confused.	0.75	0.84
Factor 9—Habitual, brand-loyal style (eigenvalue = 1.470, variance = 2.999)
Once I find a product or brand I like on vacation, I stick with it.	0.86
I go to the same store each time I travel.	0.78
When I shop on vacation, I have favorite brands I buy over and over.	0.76	0.81
Factor 10—Uniqueness-seeking style (eigenvalue = 1.262, variance = 2.576)
When I shop on vacation, I am more likely to buy a product if it is scarce.	0.80
I enjoy having items that others do not on vacation.	0.78
When I shop on vacation, I would prefer to have items custom-made than to have them ready-made.	0.73
When I shop on vacation, I rarely pass up the opportunity to order custom features on the products I buy.	0.69
When I shop on vacation, I am very attracted to rare objects.	0.51	0.77
Factor 11—Variety-seeking style (eigenvalue = 1.191, variance = 2.431)
I change brands I buy each time I travel.	0.76
I like to try new products and services before others do when traveling.	0.52	0.51
Factor 12—Incidental, apathetic style (eigenvalue = 1.018, variance = 2.077)
On vacation I really do not give my purchases much thought or care.	0.68
When I travel, I shop quickly, buying the first product or brand I find that seems good enough.	0.66
When I shop on vacation, a product does not have to be perfect, or the best, to satisfy me.	0.64	0.79

Clothes, home accessories/furniture, home electronics, camping equipment, and other miscellaneous items are the items that had higher average spending, ranging from US$101 to US$158. Home furniture, home electronics, camping equipment, and other miscellaneous items were less popular purchases made by the sample. The respondents spent the most money on clothes ($9366), followed by souvenirs ($6509) and jewelry/accessories ($3644). As for reasons why people purchase general items in addition to souvenirs, more than a third of the participants bought general items due to the availability of certain brands and/or stores (41%). Other reasons cited included “less distraction/more time to shop” (32%), better prices of the merchandise (15%), and “needed things” (12%).

Factor structure of tourist shopping style items

Exploratory factor analysis with varimax rotation identified 12 style factors. As reported in Table 2, all 12 separate factors had eigen values greater than 1 and together they explained 69.19% of the variance. The Cronbach’s α coefficients for all factors were at an acceptable level, indicating satisfactory levels of reliability. These factors were:

Perfectionistic, high-quality conscious (5 items): This style measures a tourists’ search for the very best quality in products by shopping carefully, systematically, or by comparison.

Brand conscious, “price equals quality” (6 items): This style measures tourists’ orientation toward buying expensive, well-known national brands.

Novelty seeking (3 items): This style measures tourists’ tendency of gaining excitement and pleasure from seeking out new things.

Fashion conscious (4 items): These items measure tourists tendency to keep up to date with styles, and being in style on vacation.

Recreational, hedonistic (5 items): These items measure whether tourists find shopping pleasant and fun.

Price conscious, “value for money” (5 items): These items measure whether tourists look for sale prices and appear conscious of value for money.

Impulsive, careless (3 items): These statements measure the level of impulsiveness when shopping.

Confused by overchoice (4 items): This dimension measures how much tourists feel overloaded with brand and store options.

Habitual, brand loyal (3 items): This factor measures whether tourists tend to choose brands and stores that they are accustomed to when they are not traveling.

Uniqueness seeking (4 items): This factor measure tourists’ tendency of seeking unique, scarce, or customized products.

Variety seeking (2 items): This factor measures tourists’ brand switching behavior and their desire for trying and buying new products when traveling.

Incidental and apathetic (3 items): This factor depicts a lack of interest in shopping when traveling.

Tourist shopping styles and demographics

The results attested to the linkage between gender and tourist shopping styles. Compared with the male tourists, females were significantly more brand conscious (F = 20.87), more fashion conscious (F = 8.74), more confused by overchoice (F = 4.84), and exhibited higher level of tendency to seek variety (F = 10.43). Female tourists also tended to purchase well-known brands and believed that a higher price means better quality (F = 20.87). Women liked to shop in department and specialty stores and prefer best-selling, advertised brands. Moreover, female tourists like being in style when traveling (F = 8.74). Hence, they were more attracted to trendy products. Female tourists also looked for new and different products on their trips (F = 4.84). No significant age difference was detected for tourism shopping styles.

Respondents with a high school diploma are more brand conscious than respondents who had a PhD degree (F = 2.19). Additionally, the high school graduate group rated significantly higher than the master’s degree group for fashion consciousness (F = 3.04). Tourists with a lower education level were generally more brand conscious and fashion conscious than tourists with a higher educational level. Less educated tourists were more concerned about traveling in style; they were more attracted to well-known brands or best-selling brands when shopping on the road.

The results showed that tourists with the lowest household income ($10,000–$24,999) were concerned about getting the best value for their money, especially when compared with income group of $25,000—$49,999. This lowest income group had a higher tendency to look for unique products when traveling than the $25,000–$49,999 and $50,000–$74,999 income groups. The income group of $25,000–$49,999 cared more about fashionable styling and tended to be confused by too many brands and stores compared with higher income groups such as people earning $100,000 and more. Tourists with lower income desire to be in style when traveling. They could be younger tourists who might have less travel experience than tourists with a higher income. Therefore, they are more likely to be confused by the shopping choices at a destination.

MANOVA was employed to identify the statistical differences between tourist shopping styles and demographics. All of the 12 tourist shopping styles were considered according to gender, age, education, and income. The results indicated that there was a statistically significant difference in gender (Sig. = 0.000***) and income (Sig. = 0.016*); there was no statistically significant difference in age and education. Gender and income showed a statistically significant difference for tourist shopping styles in both one-way ANOVA and MANOVA results. There seemed to be a relationship between education and tourist shopping styles in the one-way ANOVA results. The difference in education, however, was not significant in the MANOVA results. With regard to age, no significant difference was shown between age and tourist shopping styles. The results in the present study indicated that age appeared to be unrelated to tourist shopping styles.

Tourist shopping style and purchased items

One-way ANOVA on tourism shopping styles and purchased items was conducted. The following items were excluded in the analysis due to a small sample: home accessories or furniture, home electronics, sports equipment, camera and/or camera equipment, luggage, camping equipment, beauty and fragrance, and liquor. The results revealed significant mean differences for several tourism shopping styles for clothes, shoes, and jewelry/accessories. Clothes shoppers rated statistically higher with brand consciousness (mean = 6.96, F value = 15.07***). Shoe shoppers rated significantly higher in quality consciousness (mean = 19.25, F value = 6.88**), brand consciousness (mean = 9.73, F value = 19.40***), novelty seeking (mean = 19.13, F value = 4.00*), fashion consciousness (mean = 20.35, F value = 10.59**), and habit/brand loyalty (mean = 14.02, F value = 4.20*). Jewelry/accessories shoppers were statistically higher for brand consciousness (mean = 7.39, F value = 6.69*), fashion consciousness (mean = 19.25, F value = 7.62**), and variety seeking (mean = 12.24, F value = 4.91*).

Tourists who shop for clothes tend to be quality conscious. They are insensitive to price if the quality provides comfort and a sense of well-being. Tourists who purchase shoes are more likely to possess shopping attitudes of quality consciousness, brand consciousness, novelty seeking, fashion consciousness, and habit/brand loyalty. Tourists who shop for shoes search for the best quality of products. They also look for their favorite brands and stores. Shoes have to be in style, and preferably a new style, to fit their needs. With regard to jewelry/accessories shoppers, they had greater tendency to be brand conscious, fashion conscious, and variety seeking. They desire more highly advertised brands and higher priced brands which offer styling, newness, and a variety of products. No relationship was found between tourists’ shopping styles and their purchase pattern of books or music, children’s toys, and souvenirs/arts and crafts.

Discussion

The present study identified 12 tourist shopping style factors: (1) perfectionistic, high-quality consciousness; (2) brand consciousness, “price equals quality”; (3) novelty seeking; (4) fashion conscious; (5) recreational, hedonistic; (6) price conscious, “value for money”; (7) impulsive, careless; (8) confused by overchoice; (9) habitual, brand loyal; (10) uniqueness seeking; (11)variety seeking; and (12) incidental and apathetic. Compared with the original CSI for generic shopping, tourist shopping styles are more diversified. The results concur with previous research in that tourists are in a different state of mind and show different shopping attitudes (Gordon, 1986; LeHew and Wesley, 2007)

Trip purchases were investigated. The most popular trip purchase was clothes, followed by souvenirs/arts and crafts, books or music, children’s toys, and jewelry or accessories. Tourists spend the most on clothes, and the category of souvenirs/arts and crafts comes in the second. The result shows that tourists purchase general items because of the availability of certain brands or stores and/or they have more time to shop and experience less distraction. These results were consistent with the previous findings (TIA, 2001; Timothy, 2005).

The present study identified a relationship between demographics and tourist shopping styles. Females have greater tendencies toward brand consciousness, fashion consciousness, confusion due to overchoice, and variety seeking when compared with males. Tourists with lower educational levels are generally more brand conscious and fashion conscious than those with higher educational levels. Tourists who fall into the lowest income range of $10,000–$24,999 appear to be more price conscious and seek uniqueness. Additionally, tourists with lower income are more likely to be fashion conscious and confused by overchoice compared with those tourists with a higher income. Gender and age were found to be influential on shopping styles in generic shopping literature (Bakewell & Mitchell, 2003, 2004). However, age seems to be unrelated to tourist shopping styles. Tourists have different expectations toward shopping (LeHew and Wesley, 2007), which might lead to different relationships with tourist shopping styles.

In addition, the present study found that relationships exist between purchased items and tourist shopping styles. Tourists who shop for clothes appear to be more quality conscious. Shoe shoppers tend to exhibit styles of quality consciousness, brand consciousness, novelty seeking, fashion consciousness, and habitual/brand loyalty. Jewelry/accessories shoppers seem to be more brand conscious, fashion conscious, and variety seeking.

Conclusion and implications

The present study contributes to the shopping and retail tourism literature by drawing attention to the rise of tourist shopping for general items and tourist shopping styles. Compared with the previous tourist shopping studies, which have focused extensively on souvenir shopping and its styles, the present study considers psychographic measurements in order to provide a richer portrait of the tourist shopping phenomenon.

One of the most important theoretical contributions of the present study lies in its recomposition of the factor structure of the CSI. Although previous research in retail shopping suggested and confirmed the eight-factor structure of shopping styles (quality conscious, brand conscious, novelty–fashion conscious, recreational, price conscious, impulsive, confused by overchoice, and habitual), this research assessed the CSI in a tourist shopping context. Additionally, the present study integrated tourist’s uniqueness-seeking attitudes with the original CSI theory in an attempt to better understand tourist shopping. Results of exploratory factor analysis indicated that tourist shopping styles were more diverse than general shopping styles identified in CSI. While obviously further empirical validations are needed in order to propose a tourist shopping style inventory, there is initial evidences from this research to support a 12-factor structure when it comes to assessing tourist shopping attitudes.

This research, in the meantime, bears practical implications. It offers managers a basis for understanding tourist shopping attitudes and preferences. The results can assist tourism planners and retailers to better understand the psychographic construct behind tourist shopping. The present study demonstrates that tourists do possess various shopping attitudes and that their shopping attitudes may go beyond those of home-based retail shopping. Retailers that target tourist shoppers should examine the identified twelve tourist shopping styles and tailor their merchandising and marketing strategies toward each shopping style. Retailing and marketing in a popular tourist area may need to have different strategies from the stores where local residents are the major sale contributors.

Examining tourists by relating their shopping styles to demographic information can provide a useful linkage between consumer purchasing tendencies and the reasons behind them. According to the present study, female tourists are more brand conscious, fashion conscious, and variety seeking. Brand-conscious tourists usually focus on higher quality; fashion-conscious and variety-seeking tourists desire new styles and diverse products and styles. Therefore, retailers targeting tourists may consider strategies such as displaying diverse and yet unique brands in stores and emphasizing design factors. Due to unfamiliarity with the environment and shops at a destination, tourists tend to be confused by the range of choices. Retailers at a destination should attempt to formulate effective layout and information strategies to reduce tourist cognitive overload and better assist tourists in selecting merchandise and making purchasing decisions.

It is interesting to know that tourists with lower educational levels are generally more brand conscious and fashion conscious than those with higher educational levels. Tourists with lower educational levels are more aware of new styles. They desire to purchase well-known brands and believe that higher prices mean higher quality. To attract this group of tourists, tourist shopping planners can provide the best advertised national and international brands. Products should represent the newest designs and styles.

As shopping continues to be increasingly popular as a tourist activity, tourists are interested not only in souvenirs or arts and crafts but also in general merchandise items, as shown in this research. The top five items tourists buy are clothes, souvenirs/arts and crafts, books or music, jewelry or accessories, and children’s toys. The purchases of clothes, shoes, and jewelry/accessories were significantly related to tourist shopping preferences, as reflected in shopping styles. Clothes shoppers are more quality conscious. They are less sensitive to price if the quality provides comfort and a sense of well-being. It may suggest that destination retailers need to emphasize the high quality of their merchandise. The shopping environment and store presentation should be stylish and comfortable. Shoe shoppers are more concerned about quality, brands, novelty, and fashion; shoe shoppers are more brand loyal. Due to this sensitivity to brands, shoe marketers and retailers may offer well-known brands, with high quality and newer products, to better align with tourist shoe shoppers’ needs. Due to shoe shoppers’ higher brand loyalty, consumers who are loyal to a store or brand are likely to visit the same store or brand when traveling. Destination retailing planners should have national and international chain shoe stores available at a destination.

As for jewelry/accessories shoppers, they have a greater tendency to be style conscious and variety seeking. They desire style, newness, and variety. Tourists who shop for jewelry/accessories are likely to be less loyal to brands and stores that they are familiar with back home. As a result, it may be strategic for retailers at a tourist destination to consider jewelry and accessory merchandise that reflects destination-specific features and unique styles.

Results in this present research can be potentially meaningful for a destination at large. Tourists’ shopping preferences and attitudes can help tourism marketers position a destination from a shopping perspective. The proposed measure for understanding tourist shopping styles can provide a practical tool for a destination to assess their targeted tourist markets and develop a better positioning strategy. For example, while Chicago might attract fashion-conscious tourists, Napa Valley might attract tourists who seek uniqueness. Caution needs to be excised, however, when interpreting the results of this research. Some observations that are certainly true for the sample may not be true for the larger cohorts of tourists. Further validations of patterns uncovered in this research need to be conducted in the future in order to draw affirmative conclusions.

Limitations and future research

This present study has the ability to give insight into the rise of general item shopping by tourists and provides a richer portrait of tourist shopping than studies focused on souvenir shopping. The intention of creating a tourist shopper-based analog to the CSI that would facilitate interdisciplinary data manipulation between the general shopping population and the tourist shopper population may create more questions than answers. The ability to interpret the data across disciplines is a powerful concept, but as the literature review clearly demonstrates, the road to the CSI has been difficult. The present study has several limitations that need to be addressed, though these flaws cannot mask its robust theoretical and managerial implications. First, the data were collected solely from the Midwestern city of the United States. Therefore, generalizing the results to other geographical regions in the United States and other countries may not be valid, though Midwestern cities are often seen as a primary indicator used as test markets for various products such as restaurant menus and retail products (Sisson et al., 2007). Regardless of position with respect to interdisciplinary use of the data, future studies will need to consider 12 tourist shopping styles in other regions and examine whether all of the tourist shopping styles apply. To increase the validity of the 12 tourism shopping styles typology explored by this research, a large sample size that allows split sample confirmatory factor analysis would be desirable. Future research needs to further validate and codify the factor structure to better differentiate between different types of tourists, the different types of markets found throughout the world, and standardize time frame factors.

The survey for the present study asked participants to recall their most recent vacations. Participants’ memories may be different from the actual situation. Future research about trip purchases can try to capture tourist experience closer to the time after the trip was taken to increase accuracy in memory. The convenience sampling did not allow the researchers to conduct a follow-up survey to counter the limited response rate. The sampled respondents were independent travelers. Their responses may not be able to speak for package group travelers. Additionally, the list of shopping items used for this study may bear a US-centric approach as the list was adopted from the TIA. Shopping activities that can be fairly prevalent in other marketplaces such as market style shopping and gift buying were not included in the list nor were perishable goods such as food and beverages. This limitation of the research design needs to be acknowledged. Finally, the adaptation of the CSI to the study of tourism shopping activities and behaviors may have its inherent limitations as some items may not be as readily applicable in the tourism shopping context. Acknowledging and tackling these issues will provide a better understanding of the exploratory results of this study and strengthen the validity of the findings uncovered in this study. In fact, it would be best to look at this work as a validity statement of the perceived need for a system of standards for study of tourism shopping that will allow results to be applied globally. Of course, this endeavor is outside the scope of this work and would indeed require extensive study of data from different destinations around the world, to seek out cultural differences as well as geographical differences and isolate those variables. It cannot be denied that the power of the ability to extrapolate from global data is desirable and will prove indispensable in developing tourist markets in the future. A major function of this work is to highlight the potential of this path of exploration.

Footnotes

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References

Anderson

Littrell

(1995) Souvenir-purchase behavior of women tourists. Annals of Tourism Research 22(2): 328–348.

Anderson

Littrell

(1996) Group profiles of women as tourists and purchasers of souvenirs. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal 25(1): 28–56.

Bakewell

Mitchell

(2003) Generation Y female consumer decision-making styles. Interna-tional Journal of Retail and Distribution Management 31(2/3): 95–106.

Bakewell

Mitchell

(2004) Male consumer decision-making styles. International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 14(2): 223–240.

Butler

(1996) West Edmonton mall as a tourist attraction. Canadian Geographer 35(3): 287–295.

Gordon

(1986) The souvenir: messenger of the extraordinary. Journal of Popular Culture, 20(3): 18–47.

Heung

VCS

(1998) Tourism shopping and its contributions to Hong Kong. Tourism Management 19(4): 383–386.

Hopper

JAS

Budden

(1989) Predicting consumer outshopping activity: a propensity to O. Akron Business and Economic Review 20(2): 40–47.

Jansen-Verbeke

(1987) Women, shopping and leisure. Leisure Studies 6(1): 71–86.

10.

Keown

(1989) A model of tourists’ propensity to buy: the case of Japanese visitors to Hawaii. Journal of Travel Research 27(3): 31–34.

11.

Kim

Timothy

Hwang

(2011) Understanding Japanese tourists’ shopping preferences using the decision tree analysis method. Tourism Management 32(3): 544–554.

12.

LeHew

MLA

Wesley

(2007) Tourist shoppers’ satisfaction with regional shopping mall experiences. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research 1(1): 82–96.

13.

Lehto

Cai

O'Leary

Huan

(2004) Tourist shopping preferences and expenditure behaviours: the case of the Taiwanese outbound market. Journal of Vacation Marketing 10(4): 320–332.

14.

Lesser

Hughes

(1986) Towards a typology of shoppers. Business Horizons 29(6): 56.

15.

Littrell

(1990) Symbolic significance of textile craftss for tourists. Annals of Tourism Research 17(2): 228–245.

16.

Littrell

Anderson

Brown

(1993) What makes a crafts souvenir authentic? Annals of Tourism Research 20(1): 197–215.

17.

Lynn

Harris

(1997) The desire for unique consumer products: a new individual differences scale. Psychology and Marketing (1986–1998) 14(6): 601.

18.

JYJ

Cheng

Lehto

O’Leary

(2004) Predictors of tourists’ shopping behaviour: examination of socio-demographic characteristics and trip typologies. Journal of Vacation Marketing 10(4): 308–319.

19.

Patrick

Renforth

(1996) The effects of the peso devaluation on cross-border retailing. Journal of Borderlands Studies 11(1): 25–41.

20.

Popelka

Littrell

(1991) Influence of tourism on handcrafts evolution. Annals of Tourism Research 18(3): 392–413.

21.

Sisson

Zacher

Cayton

(2007) The American Midwest: An Interpretive Encyclopedia. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

22.

Sproles

(1990) Consumer decision-making styles as a function of individual learning styles. Journal of Consumer Affairs 24(1): 134–147.

23.

Sproles

Kendall

(1986) A methodology for profiling consumers' decision-marking styles. Journal of Consumer Affairs 20(2): 267–279.

24.

Swanson

Horridge

(2006) Travel motivations as souvenir purchase indicators. Tourism Management 27(4): 671–683.

25.

Thompson

Cutler

(1997) The effect of nationality on tourist arts: the case of the Gambia, West Africa. International Journal of Hospitality Management 16(2): 225–229.

26.

TIA (Travel Industry Association of America) (2001) Executive summaries: the shopping traveler. Available at: http://www.tia.org/researchpubs/executive_summaries_shopping_traveler.html (accessed 7 Febuary 2007).

27.

TIA (2003) TIA travelscope, travel industry association of America. Available at: www.tia.org/tiaweb/travel/domestictravel.asp.

28.

Timothy

(1999) Cross-border shopping: tourism in the Canada–United States borderlands. Visions in Leisure and Business 17(4): 4–18.

29.

Timothy

(2005) Shopping Tourism, Retailing, and Leisure. Clevedon, UK: Channel View Publications.

30.

Timothy

Butler

(1995) Cross-border shopping: a North American perspective. Annals of Tourism Research 22(1): 16–34.

31.

Tourism Shopping Implementation Committee. (1990). Tourism Shopping in the Nineties. Canberra, Australia.

32.

Turner

Reisinger

(2001) Shopping satisfaction for domestic tourists. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 8(1): 15–27.

33.

Yuksel

(2003) Shopping experience evaluation: a case of domestic and international visitors. Tourism Management 25(6): 751–759.