Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Stanley Plog’s model of allocentricity and psychocentricity, a seminal tourism model, has been widely cited in the tourism literature and is included in virtually every hospitality and tourism text. At the same time, it has been scrutinized by a host of critics who questioned aspects of the model’s applicability and validity. This study of travelers’ vacation histories seeks to add to the research regarding this important model. The results present an interesting dichotomy, indicating that although the model does not really help to predict where travelers are likely to visit, it is highly effective in suggesting where they would ideally like to visit. These findings should be of significant value to tourism marketers and researchers attracted to Plog’s model.

Keywords

tourist preferences Plog tourism model Singapore travel preferences

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

see also P. Burns and A. Holden , Tourism; a New Perspective (London: Prentice Hall, 1995).

Plog , “Why Destination Areas Rise and Fall in Popularity,” 56-56.

S. C. Plog , “Why Destination Areas Rise and Fall in Popularity: An Update of a Classic,” Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 42, no. 3 (June 2001): 13-24.

Plog, “Why Destination Areas Rise and Fall in Popularity: An Update of a Classic,” 21. Readers should note that Plog’s more recent writings suggest use of the term dependables to replace pscychocentrics and venturers to replace allocentrics. However, these have not been generally adopted by others, and the traditional terms are used throughout this article.

D. Weaver and L. Lawton , Tourism Management, 2nd ed. (Milton, Australia: John Wiley & Sons Australia, 2002).

Weaver and Lawton , Tourism Management.

S. Hudson , “Consumer Behavior Related to Tourism,” in Consumer Behavior in Travel and Tourism, ed. A. Pizam and Y. Mansfeld (New York: Haworth Hospitality Press, 1999), 7-32.

J. C. Crossley and L. M. Jamieson , Introduction to Commercial and Entrepreneurial Recreation (Champaign, IL: Sagamore Publishing, 1993).

E. Lowyck , L. Van Langenhove , and L. Bollaert , “Typologies and Tourist Roles,” in Choice and Demand in Tourism, ed. P. Johnson and B. Thomas (London: Mansell Publishing, 1993), 13-32.

10.

Smith , “A Test of Plog’s Allocentric/Psychocentric Model.”

11.

Plog , Leisure Travel.

12.

Weaver and Lawton , Tourism Management.

13.

Chon and Sparrowe , Welcome to Hospitality, 83-83.

14.

Smith , “A Test of Plog’s Allocentric/Psychocentric Model.”

15.

Ibid., 40.

16.

S. C. Plog , “A Carpenter’s Tools: An Answer to Stephen L.J. Smith’s Review of Psychocentrism/Allocentrism,” Journal of Travel Research 29, no. 2 (1990): 43-45.

17.

S. L. J. Smith , “Another Look at the Carpenter’s Tools: A Reply to Plog,” Journal of Travel Research 29, no. 2 (1990): 50-51.

18.

Plog , “Why Destination Areas Rise and Fall in Popularity: An Update of a Classic,” 21-21.

19.

S. C. Plog , “Developing and Using Psychographics in Tourism Research,” in Travel, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 2nd ed., ed. J. R. B. Ritchie and C. R. Goeldner (New York: John Wiley, 1994), 209-218.

20.

Smith , “A Test of Plog’s Allocentric/Psychocentric Model,” 41-41.

21.

Ibid. and

22.

I. Azjen M. Fishbein , Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1980).

23.

P. L. Pearce introduced the concept of a “tourism career ladder” in The Ulysses Factor: Evaluating Visitors in Tourist Setting (New York: Springer-Verlag, 1988).

24.

S. C. Plog , “The Power of Psychographics and the Concept of Venturesomeness,” Journal of Travel Research 40, no. 3 (2002): 244-251.

25.

S. C. Plog , Leisure Travel: A Marketing Handbook (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice-Hall, 2004).

26.

Ibid., 58.

27.

P. L. Pearce , “Fundamentals of Tourist Motivation,” in Tourism Research, Critiques and Challenges, ed. D. Pearce and R. Butler (London: Rutledge, 1993), 112-134.

Revisiting Plog’s Model of Allocentricity and Psychocentricity... One More Time

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References