The relationship between the ‘push’ and ‘pull’ factors of a tourist destination: the role of nationality – an analytical qualitative research approach

Prayag, Girish; Ryan, Chris

doi:10.1080/13683501003623802

Cited by 290 publications

(205 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

186

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the tourism literature, push and pull factors in tourist motivation have been widely discussed (Baloglu and Uysal, 1996;Crompton, 1979;Dann, 1977;Pizam et al, 1979;Hsu et al, 2007, Uysal andJurowski, 1994;Prayag andRyan, 2011, Jeong 2014). The focus of this paper will now be on the application of push-pull theory, with an emphasis on the role of pull factors in motivating tourism to destinations.…”

Section: Push-pull Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pull factors include tangible resources (such as beaches, recreational activities, and cultural attractions), and travellers' perceptions and expectations of a destination. In fact, many researchers have acknowledged that pull factors are directly related to the features and attributes of a tourist destination (Pan and Ryan, 2007;Prayag and Ryan, 2011;Turnbull and Uysal, 1995).…”

Section: Push-pull Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Urban tourist motivations: why visit Ljubljana?

Kovačić

Kennell

Vujičić

et al. 2017

IJTC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe aim of this paper is to develop a new perspective on urban tourist motivations by applying the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) model to help to understand how tourists make decisions about which destinations to visit. MethodThis study was based on 30 1-hour long structured interviews with visitors to Ljubljana, the capital city of Slovenia. Respondents were asked to express their preferences between different pull-factor motives for their visit, using Saaty's scale, and further qualitative data was collected to examine these preferences in more depth. FindingsThe results of this study indicate that the most relevant criteria and thus predominant factors in motivation for visits to Ljubljana are the Cultural and Nightlife pull-factors, while Religious and Business motives are the lowest ranked factors. The paper argues that the results show the value of applying the AHP model to understand the role of pull-factors in urban tourism destination choice. Research limitations/implicationsAs a single-destination case study, it is important that the findings of this research are evaluated against similar studies in other cities. A limitation of this research is the fact that sub motives within major groups of pull-factor motives have not been explored in this study and this should be the subject of future, more detailed research. Originality/valueThis research shows the value of applying, AHP, an under-used method to understand urban tourist motivations. The new knowledge gained through applying this method is of value to destination marketing organisations as well as to researchers conducting future studies, who will be able to replicate it and test its value.

show abstract

Section: Push-pull Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Push-pull Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban tourist motivations: why visit Ljubljana?

Kovačić

Kennell

Vujičić

et al. 2017

IJTC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some people travel far to arrive in a place where they expect to meet their needs, while others prefer to stay at or close to home. Important motivational forces affecting mobility are push and pull factors (Prayag & Ryan, 2010), 'denoting perceptions of physical-functional and socio-cultural differences between places at home or "here" and on the other side or "there"' (Spierings & van der Velde, 2012, p. 10).…”

Section: Distance Proximity and Travel Motivationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The challenge of proximity: the (un)attractiveness of near-home tourism destinations

Jeuring

Haartsen

2016

Tourism Geographies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Imaginaries of touristic otherness have traditionally been closely related to geographical distance and travel far away from the everyday. But in today's context of sustainable tourism, a moral and behavioral shift may be expected, toward traveling near home. Distance may actually become a disadvantage and proximity a new commodity. This implies a need to disentangle subjective understandings of both distance and proximity in relation to perceived attractiveness of and touristic behavior in places near home. Thus, it is aimed to shed light on how 'proximity tourism' is constructed, endorsed and appreciated (or not). An online survey (N D 913) was administered to residents of the Dutch province of Friesland, exploring their attitudes toward their home province as tourism destination and representations of proximity and distance in relation to preferred vacation destinations. We grouped respondents into four categories, reflecting destination preferences: (1) proximate, (2) distant, (3) intermediate and (4) mixed. These groups were differentiated and characterized using quantitative and qualitative analyses. The 'proximate' and 'distant' preference groups, respectively, were most and least engaged in proximity tourism. However, the perceptions of proximity and distance expressed by the 'intermediate' and 'mixed' preference groups were associated in a nonlinear way with appreciation of the home region as a tourism destination. Additionally, respondents used proximity and distance in various ways as push, pull, keep and repel factors motivating their destination preferences. Interpretations of both proximity and distance were thus important in determining engagement in proximity tourism and, in turn, the potential for proximity tourism development in the region. This implies that such development will require a balanced consideration of the relative, temporally sensitive ways that people negotiate distance and proximity in their perceptions of being at home and away. Our results advance the discussion about imaginaries of travel, distance and proximity, and their impact on regional tourism. 抽象旅游者对他者感的想象传统上与地理距离和远离日常生活的旅行密切相关,但是在当今可持续旅游背景下,可能期望人们在道义和

show abstract

“…They also suggest that the market can be divided into four segments based on tourists" motivation: family togetherness, passive tourists, want-it-all, and learning and excitement. Prayag and Ryan [9] used qualitative research techniques to understand the relationship between the push and pull factors of a tourist destination and the influence of nationality on these factors. The results indicated that different motives for visiting Mauritius were found to exist between national groupings.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to a recent study conducted in 2012 by the Center for Sustainable Tourism and the Business School at East Carolina University, 57.6% of festival attendees think it is either very important or important for festival and events to implement green practices. The same study found that 66.5% are more likely to attend a festival or event that had implemented green practices, and 29.3% attendees would be willing to pay more to attend an event that had implemented green practices (abstract from www.agreenerfestival.com at Given the complexity of the motivation construct, it is not surprising that push and pull factors have been researched either as separate [4], [5] or related constructs [6]- [9]. The closer we move to appreciate what cause individuals to value an organization"s green efforts, the better marketers will be able to develop strategies specifically targeted at these tourists.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Survey of Push and Pull Motivations of Green Event Tourists

Chen¹,

Mo²

2014

IJIET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-This study offers an attempt to understand green event tourist motivation. The study suggests that the conceptual framework of push, pull, and constraint factors in the literature was generally supported. The study reconfirms that green event tourists' behavior is driven by internal and external factors. In other words, they decide to go on a green event because they want to fulfill their intrinsic desire, and at the same time, their decisions on where to go are based on destination attributes and constraints.Index Terms-Green event tourism, tourist motivation push and pull motive.

show abstract

The relationship between the ‘push’ and ‘pull’ factors of a tourist destination: the role of nationality – an analytical qualitative research approach

Cited by 290 publications

References 57 publications

Urban tourist motivations: why visit Ljubljana?

Urban tourist motivations: why visit Ljubljana?

The challenge of proximity: the (un)attractiveness of near-home tourism destinations

A Survey of Push and Pull Motivations of Green Event Tourists

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About