Reports/Conference reports

visits are clear. Children need special provision - they have different needs, attention spans, energies and interests to other groups of visitors and yet it may be impractical to provide totally separate facilities and interpretive programmes. However, if an attrac- tion is to be successful in this in- creasingly competitive market these issues must be addressed. Educational parties appreciate provision in terms of educational material, catering and assistance with logistics of the visit. Marketing to educational groups de- mands additional resources for both promotion and research. To be effec- tive in this market, attractions may need full-time educational staff and a

management style which welcomes educational parties and understands their particular requirements to give the children an enjoyable yet informa- tive experience.

Or Chris Cooper Dr John L&ham

~ep~~rnenf of management Studies for Tourism and Hotel Industries

University of Surrey, UK

Notes: ‘N. McLaughlin, ‘Where art and commerce meet’, Marketing, 9 January 1986. pp 20- 22. *M. Dyer, Heritage Education, Heritage Education Trust, Twickenham, UK, 1984.

30PCS, Visitjng the rational ~arftjrne Museum, HMSO. London, 1985. %. Grant, A Survey of Visitors to National Museums and Galleries, Scottish Develop- ment Department, Edinburgh, UK, 1981. 5D.R. Prince, The museums data base project, Museums Bulletin, No 25, 1985, pp 21-22: and Department of Education and Science, Museums in Education. HMSO, London, 1971. ‘P.A. Gillies and A. Wilson, ‘Participatory exhibits. Is fun educational?’ Museums Journai, No 82, 1982, pp 131-l 34. 7C. Cooper and J. Latham. The Market for Educational Visits to Tourism Attractions, Corset Institute for Higher Education, Poole. UK, 1965. ‘Group for Education in Museums, ‘GCSE and the Museum Education Service.’ Teaching History, October, 1967, p 6. *I. Bain, ‘Threat to fieldwork’, Geographic- af Magazine, Vof 59, No 1, 1987, p 8.

Conference reports

Learning about leisure ‘Leisure, Labour and Lifestyles’ was the theme of a second conference held in Brighton by the Leisure Studies Association, 29 June-3 July 1988. Tourism, though only one of the areas covered, was well represented. Graham Brown and Dr Jonathan Edwards, Senior Lecturers in the ~epa~menf of Tourism at the Dorsef Institute review the conference’s touristic content.

Sussex University was the venue for the Second International Conference organized by the Leisure Studies Association and held from 29 June to 3 July 1988. For delegates who had attended its predecessor, ‘Leisure, Politics, Planning and People’ in 1984, much remained familiar. Although a replication of the venue and its timing contributed towards this feeling, it was the opportunity, provided by the event itself, to stimulate five days of wide ranging discussion that created the sense of ‘d&j&-vu’.

There is something particularly British about the style and organiza- tion of LSA conferences; an observa- tion proferred by several overseas visitors who returned to Sussex this year. The organizers explain that the conference operates on a ‘shoestring’ budget, doubts are expressed as to

whether it will reappear in four years time and, presumably because of the considerable efforts which are made to minimize fees, the accommodation is regarded as spartan by those accus- tomed to hotel venues, characteristic of North American events. Yet it is this refreshing informality, as well as the conference size of about 250 dele- gates, which generates an atmosphere of friendship and openess. The free expression of ideas moved one contri- butor from the USA to express sur- prise at participants’ ability to think!

International composition

The conference benefited from the international composition of the parti- cipants who represented Europe, the USA and even Japan and Australia. It was also enhanced, in comparison to

its forerunner, by the significant in- crease in the number of papers and plenary sessions presented by women.

Not surprisingly. a number of cross- cultural studies were reported in the sessions. These were divided into: Policy and Provision. Concepts and Theories, Culture and Lifestyles. Poii- tics and Economy, and Environments. The somewhat tenuous relationship between papers and session title which was evident at times may have been partly due to the diversity of subjects addressed. Topics included sporting excellence, youth lifestyles, leisure and ageing, gender inequalities. the arts, outdoor recreation, health and fitness and the role of covert organiza- tions in events such as the Olympic Games! It was evident on occasion that the 15’2 hour seminar sessions were more suited to the presentation of two papers, with more time allowed for discussion, than three rushed pre- sentations.

Twenty papers which paid particu- lar regard to tourism uere presented by delegates from the UK (the major- ity), Spain, Israel, Poland, Canada, the USA and the Netherlands.

The setting was particularly appropriate for the reporting of cross-

334 TOURISM MANAGEMENT December 1988

cultural research. This theme was reflected by papers which compared travel patterns in the UK and the USA, decision making in the national parks of the UK and the USA and the marketing of skiing holidays in the UK and the Netherlands. Cross-cultural comparisons also emerged in discus- sions of both the integration of the UK and Spanish tourism industries and in a comparison of the development of rural tourism in south-west England and northern Portugal. These compa- rative studies were complemented by theoretical considerations on model- ling the tourism industry and papers which considered the interaction of tourism and the environment.

Variety

The varied nature of the tourism papers make them difficult to catego- rize although Mike Stabler, of Read- ing University, in coordinating these contributions had clearly sought to accentuate the ‘lifestyles’ theme of the conference. As an example, one ses- sion included David Botterill’s psychological perspective of tourists’ active reconstruction of reality in their everyday experience. Another co- vered Peter Kent’s symbolic interac- tionist’s approach to destination choice and an assessment of satisfac- tion derived from different forms of tourism at different stages of the lifecycle by Andrew Yunnakis. It was encouraging to note the increased interest in the study of the history of tourism. Work such as that by Nigel Morgan, who described the origins of Ilfracombe’s development, and Sarah Whittle’s appraisal of the history of Bournemouth’s tourism industry, with reference to the role of the local authority in marketing and promo- tion, help to counter approaches which deny the significance of historic- al processes in the pattern of contem- porary tourism activities. These ses- sions, which were well attended, pro- duced lively and informed discussions, confirming that the seeds of potential- ly fruitful areas of future research had been sown.

It was perhaps to be expected that a theme - which emerged during several of the earlier plenary sessions - con-

cerning the prospects for our in- creasingly consumer-orientated lei- sure society, should dominate the final plenary session. While these forecasts sent many away on a note of gloom, they nevertheless provided a focus for many to anticipate an opportunity of meeting again in four years time to assess the validity of the prognoses.

The LSA will be publishing pro- ceedings of the conference and those interested in obtaining all or part of

Conference reporrs

these should contact the Association’s conference administrator, Myrene Mcphee, at 19 Vicarage Road, East- boume BN20 8AS. UK.

Graham Brown and Jonathan Edwards

Department of Tourism Dorset Institute

Wallisdown Road, Poole Dorset BH12 5BB,lJK

19th annual TTRA conference Cindy Guernsey, Gin Hayden, Sarah Richardson and C.R. Goeldner briefly summarize the 79th Annual Conference of the Travel and Tourism Research Association held in Montreal, Canada on 1%23 June 1988. The conference discussed a variety of research methods and applications, ways of improving demand for different attractions, and the future of tourism generally.

The conference opened with a work- shop on ‘Pushing proficiency - making better use of existing research tools’. Mike Sandler of Research 100, discus- sed qualitative research and how it can be best utilized in the travel and tourism industry. Qualitative research allows interviewers to obtain in-depth information on a topic or particular area. It is not definitive but permits the interviewer the freedom to probe the subconscious feelings of the sub- ject. Quantitative research can then be used to verify those findings. Speci- fic areas in which qualitative research can be used include imagery studies, sorting exercises for brands or com- panies, and benefit techniques which are used to translate product attri- butes into consumer values. Sandler stressed the importance of the moderator/interviewer fully under- standing the problem to be addressed. Selection of a reputable and respon- sive field service is equally critical.

Joan M. Bullen of McGraw-Hill Research, addressed the advantages and disadvantages of using mail survey research. She discussed three rules to be applied to ensure that you get the maximum benefit from your research investment:

0 define the research objective clearly and concisely;

TOURISM MANAGEMENT December 1988

0 select the research technique that best meets your objective; and

0 apply state-of-the-art research knowledge.

Mail surveys have an advantage in terms of cost, geographic coverage, avoidance of interviewer bias, accessi- bility of respondent, respondent anonymity, length of interview, and type of question.

Laurie Harris of NFO Research, discussed a unique sampling option - the mail panel. The mail panel tech- nique can be used for studies with targeted samples, studies that require respondents to check their records, and studies that must contact the same respondents over time. Types of stu- dies which can use a panel include advertising awareness, diaries, track- ing studies, and travel habits and trends. Harris listed five questions which she believes must always be asked about research:

0 Is the sample appropriate? 0 Is the interviewing method the

best to meet my needs? 0 Have I asked the right questions? 0 Are the questions worded cor-

rectly? and 0 Will my results provide a basis for

action?

335