This post is part of the continuing mini-series on RQ–RH–D–M across fields. Its purpose is to provide a compact, practical toolkit showing how research questions, research hypotheses or working propositions, data, and methodology can be aligned in one specific discipline.
Tourism is especially suitable for this exercise because it naturally combines traveler behavior, destination image, hospitality experience, mobility, sustainability, seasonality, local community impacts and digital platforms. It also supports quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods designs, making it ideal for showing how the same tourism issue can be studied through visitor metrics, survey data, reviews, interviews, observational material and integrated designs.
In tourism, research questions and hypotheses often build on frameworks such as destination image theory, tourist motivation models, experience economy, place attachment, service quality and satisfaction models, sustainable tourism frameworks, tourism impacts models, resident attitude theory, consumer behavior in travel and mobility and destination-choice approaches. These frameworks define constructs such as satisfaction, loyalty, destination attractiveness, perceived authenticity, travel intention, place attachment, sustainability orientation, resident support or tourist experience, which are measured through survey scales, booking or visitation data, reviews, observations, interviews, geospatial traces or integrated tourism datasets.
Note: The entries in the Methodology are intentionally general and indicative. They are meant to illustrate plausible methodological directions, not to exhaust the full range of possible methods, model variants or analytic choices available to the researcher. Researchers are not expected to apply all of the methodological tools listed in column Methodology in a single study. The entries are intended to indicate suitable methodological options or families of approaches from which the researcher selects those that best fit the research question, hypothesis, data, and design.
Tourism – quantitative research
Descriptive questions
-
RQ: What is the average daily expenditure of international tourists visiting a coastal destination during peak season?
RH: The average daily expenditure of international tourists visiting the coastal destination during peak season exceeds 120 USD.
D: Daily tourist expenditure (continuous/ratio); visitor type (categorical: international); destination type (categorical: coastal); season (categorical: peak).
M: Descriptive statistics, one-sample t-test against benchmark, confidence intervals, weighted estimation if survey-based.
-
RQ: What proportion of hotel guests post at least one online review after their stay?
RH: Fewer than half of hotel guests post at least one online review after their stay.
D: Review posting behavior (binary); guest ID/stay ID; hotel category (categorical).
M: Frequencies, proportions, binomial test, confidence intervals, property-level summaries.
-
RQ: What is the average length of stay among domestic tourists in mountain destinations?
RH: The average length of stay among domestic tourists in mountain destinations is below 4 nights.
D: Length of stay in nights (continuous/count); tourist type (categorical: domestic); destination type (categorical: mountain).
M: Descriptive statistics, one-sample t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test, confidence intervals.
-
RQ: How many museum visits do cultural tourists make on average during a city-break trip?
RH: Cultural tourists make more than 2 museum visits on average during a city-break trip.
D: Number of museum visits (count); tourist segment (categorical: cultural tourist); trip type (categorical: city break).
M: Descriptive statistics, one-sample tests, Poisson/negative binomial summaries, interval estimation.
Comparative questions
-
RQ: Do tourists staying in boutique hotels differ from tourists staying in chain hotels in overall satisfaction?
RH: Tourists staying in boutique hotels report higher overall satisfaction than tourists staying in chain hotels.
D: Overall satisfaction score (continuous/scale); hotel type (categorical: boutique/chain); guest ID.
M: Independent-samples t-test, ANOVA, OLS regression, ANCOVA if controls are added.
-
RQ: Do repeat visitors differ from first-time visitors in destination loyalty intention?
RH: Repeat visitors report stronger destination loyalty intention than first-time visitors.
D: Loyalty intention score (continuous/scale); visitor status (categorical: repeat/first-time); destination ID.
M: t-test, ANOVA, OLS regression, ordinal regression if categorized.
-
RQ: Are eco-certified accommodations different from non-certified accommodations in average occupancy rate?
RH: Eco-certified accommodations have higher average occupancy rates than non-certified accommodations.
D: Occupancy rate (continuous/proportion); certification status (binary); accommodation type; property ID.
M: t-test, OLS regression, beta regression, panel regression if tracked over time.
-
RQ: Do package tourists differ from independent travelers in perceived value for money?
RH: Package tourists report higher perceived value for money than independent travelers.
D: Perceived value for money score (continuous/scale); travel mode (categorical: package/independent); tourist ID.
M: t-test, ANOVA, OLS regression, propensity score adjustment as alternative.
Relational / correlational questions
-
RQ: Is destination image associated with revisit intention among international tourists?
RH: A more positive destination image is associated with stronger revisit intention among international tourists.
D: Destination image score (continuous/scale); revisit intention score (continuous/scale); tourist demographics.
M: Pearson/Spearman correlation, OLS regression, SEM as alternative.
-
RQ: Is perceived crowding associated with lower satisfaction in urban tourism settings?
RH: Higher perceived crowding is associated with lower tourist satisfaction in urban tourism settings.
D: Perceived crowding score (continuous/scale); satisfaction score (continuous/scale); site/attraction ID.
M: Correlation, OLS regression, multilevel regression if visitors are nested in attractions.
-
RQ: Is online review score associated with hotel booking volume?
RH: Higher online review scores are positively associated with greater hotel booking volume.
D: Review score (continuous); booking volume (count/continuous); hotel ID; time period.
M: Correlation, OLS regression, panel regression, count models for booking volume.
-
RQ: Is environmental awareness associated with willingness to pay for sustainable tourism products?
RH: Higher environmental awareness is associated with greater willingness to pay for sustainable tourism products.
D: Environmental awareness score (continuous/scale); willingness-to-pay amount or score (continuous/ordinal); tourist segment variables.
M: Correlation, OLS regression, Tobit/ordinal regression, SEM as alternative.
Causal / experimental-style questions
-
RQ: What is the effect of personalized destination recommendations on booking intention compared with generic recommendations?
RH: Personalized destination recommendations will generate higher booking intention than generic recommendations.
D: Recommendation condition (categorical: personalized/generic); booking intention score (continuous/scale); respondent ID.
M: Experimental design analysis, ANOVA, OLS regression, ANCOVA with prior destination familiarity as control.
-
RQ: Does dynamic pricing information affect hotel booking conversion on travel platforms?
RH: Exposure to dynamic pricing information will increase booking conversion relative to a no-information condition.
D: Pricing information condition (binary/categorical); booking conversion outcome (binary); user/session ID.
M: A/B test analysis, logistic regression, chi-square test, mixed-effects logistic model if nested by property.
-
RQ: What is the effect of queue-time disclosure on attraction abandonment rates?
RH: Providing queue-time disclosure will reduce attraction abandonment rates compared with not providing it.
D: Queue-time disclosure condition (binary); abandonment outcome (binary); visitor/session ID; attraction ID.
M: Randomized field experiment, logistic regression, difference-in-differences if quasi-experimental, multilevel models.
-
RQ: Does a guided cultural interpretation program increase heritage-site satisfaction?
RH: Visitors participating in the guided cultural interpretation program will report higher heritage-site satisfaction than non-participants.
D: Program participation status (binary); site satisfaction score (continuous/scale); visitor ID; site ID.
M: Experimental or quasi-experimental analysis, ANCOVA, mixed-effects model, propensity score matching as alternative.
Tourism – qualitative research
Tourist experience and meaning-making
-
RQ: How do solo travelers describe the experience of safety and freedom during international travel?
WP / RH: Solo travelers are likely to describe safety and freedom as interdependent, shaped by place, gender, routine, and situational judgment.
D: In-depth interviews, travel diaries, reflective narratives, route notes.
M: Thematic analysis, narrative inquiry, phenomenological analysis, qualitative case study.
-
RQ: How do tourists describe memorable moments during heritage-site visits?
WP / RH: Tourists are likely to describe memorable moments through emotional intensity, narrative connection, sensory experience, and social sharing.
D: Interviews, visitor diaries, photo-elicitation prompts, reflective accounts.
M: Thematic analysis, narrative analysis, phenomenological analysis, experience-centered qualitative inquiry.
-
RQ: How do family travelers interpret “good value” during vacation planning and travel?
WP / RH: Family travelers are likely to interpret value through convenience, predictability, comfort, and child-related needs rather than price alone.
D: Interviews, trip-planning narratives, booking reflections, travel notes.
M: Thematic analysis, narrative inquiry, framework analysis, qualitative content analysis.
Hospitality service and guest perception
-
RQ: How do hotel guests describe the experience of service recovery after a negative stay event?
WP / RH: Hotel guests are likely to describe service recovery through responsiveness, sincerity, compensation, and restoration of trust.
D: Interviews, complaint narratives, service interaction records, guest reflections.
M: Thematic analysis, service case study, narrative inquiry, framework analysis.
-
RQ: How do restaurant tourists interpret authenticity in local food experiences?
WP / RH: Tourists are likely to interpret authenticity through taste, setting, host interaction, storytelling, and perceived localness.
D: Interviews, dining reflections, photo prompts, field notes.
M: Thematic analysis, discourse analysis, phenomenological analysis, qualitative case study.
-
RQ: How do guests in eco-lodges describe the meaning of sustainable hospitality?
WP / RH: Eco-lodge guests are likely to describe sustainable hospitality as meaningful when environmental practice is visible, coherent, and not experienced as sacrifice.
D: Interviews, guest journals, property materials, observation notes.
M: Thematic analysis, case study, qualitative content analysis, phenomenological inquiry.
Destination, community, and local culture
-
RQ: How do residents in tourism-intensive areas describe the impact of tourism on everyday life?
WP / RH: Residents are likely to describe tourism impacts as a mix of economic opportunity, crowding, cultural change, and loss of control over local space.
D: Resident interviews, community discussions, local notes, municipal documents.
M: Thematic analysis, community case study, narrative inquiry, qualitative policy analysis.
-
RQ: How do local business owners interpret seasonality in tourism-dependent destinations?
WP / RH: Local business owners are likely to describe seasonality through financial volatility, staffing strain, and adaptation strategies.
D: Interviews, business diaries, operational notes, local economic reflections.
M: Thematic analysis, case study, practitioner inquiry, framework analysis.
-
RQ: How do guides describe the challenge of presenting local culture to international visitors?
WP / RH: Guides are likely to describe presentation as a balancing act between simplification, authenticity, visitor expectation, and cultural responsibility.
D: Interviews, guiding narratives, tour scripts, observation notes.
M: Thematic analysis, discourse analysis, narrative inquiry, ethnographic case study.
Digital tourism and platform-mediated travel
-
RQ: How do travelers experience destination discovery through social media platforms?
WP / RH: Travelers are likely to describe social media discovery as inspiring but also repetitive, performative, and expectation-shaping.
D: Interviews, platform-use diaries, screenshot prompts, trip inspiration narratives.
M: Thematic analysis, digital ethnography, narrative inquiry, discourse-informed analysis.
-
RQ: How do tourists interpret online review credibility when planning accommodation bookings?
WP / RH: Tourists are likely to judge review credibility through detail, balance, reviewer similarity, and consistency across platforms.
D: Interviews, booking narratives, review screenshots, planning reflections.
M: Thematic analysis, qualitative content analysis, decision-process case study, framework analysis.
-
RQ: How do hosts describe their experience of managing guest expectations through short-term rental platforms?
WP / RH: Hosts are likely to describe expectation management as shaped by platform rules, review pressure, communication effort, and emotional labor.
D: Interviews, host communication logs, listing descriptions, platform reflections.
M: Thematic analysis, digital platform case study, practitioner inquiry, narrative analysis.
Sustainability, ethics, and responsible travel
-
RQ: How do tourists describe the tension between sustainable intentions and actual travel choices?
WP / RH: Tourists are likely to describe this tension through convenience, price sensitivity, aspiration, and rationalization.
D: Interviews, travel planning reflections, booking narratives, sustainability attitude notes.
M: Thematic analysis, phenomenological analysis, narrative inquiry, qualitative case comparison.
-
RQ: How do tourism workers interpret overtourism in heavily visited destinations?
WP / RH: Tourism workers are likely to describe overtourism as both economically beneficial and operationally exhausting, with uneven local consequences.
D: Interviews, operational reflections, local records, field notes.
M: Thematic analysis, case study, qualitative policy analysis, framework analysis.
-
RQ: How do adventure tourists describe ethical limits in wildlife-based tourism experiences?
WP / RH: Adventure tourists are likely to describe ethical limits through proximity, animal welfare concerns, thrill seeking, and personal justification.
D: Interviews, trip reflections, visual prompts, tour accounts.
M: Thematic analysis, discourse analysis, phenomenological inquiry, qualitative case study.
Tourism – mixed methods
Visitor experience, satisfaction, and loyalty
-
RQ: How is destination image associated with revisit intention, and how do tourists describe the experiences that most strongly shape that image?
RH / WP: A more positive destination image will be associated with stronger revisit intention; tourists are likely to describe image formation through atmosphere, service encounters, scenery, and emotional resonance; integration is expected to explain why similar image scores can produce different loyalty outcomes.
D: Quantitative: destination image score, revisit intention, satisfaction, tourist profile variables; Qualitative: interviews, travel narratives, visitor reflections.
M: Explanatory sequential design, regression/SEM plus thematic analysis, joint display integration.
-
RQ: What differences exist in satisfaction across hotel types, and how do guests explain those differences in lived experience?
RH / WP: Guests in accommodation types with more personalized service will report higher satisfaction; guests are likely to explain satisfaction differences through atmosphere, responsiveness, and uniqueness; integration is expected to refine interpretation of score differences across hotel types.
D: Quantitative: satisfaction score, hotel type, stay characteristics; Qualitative: interviews, guest stories, review reflections.
M: Convergent mixed methods design, group comparison/ANCOVA plus thematic analysis, merged interpretation through joint displays.
Digital platforms, reviews, and booking behavior
-
RQ: How are online review scores associated with booking volume, and how do travelers interpret review credibility during booking decisions?
RH / WP: Higher review scores will be associated with greater booking volume; travelers are likely to interpret review credibility through specificity, reviewer fit, and consistency; integration is expected to explain why strong scores sometimes fail to drive bookings.
D: Quantitative: review score, booking volume, property characteristics, time period; Qualitative: interviews, booking narratives, screenshot-based review discussions.
M: Explanatory sequential design, panel regression plus thematic analysis, integrated interpretation.
-
RQ: What is the relationship between social media engagement and destination interest, and how do travelers describe the role of digital content in trip inspiration?
RH / WP: Higher social media engagement will be associated with stronger destination interest; travelers are likely to describe digital inspiration through visual appeal, social proof, and imagined experience; integration is expected to reveal how inspiration translates into actual planning interest.
D: Quantitative: engagement metrics, destination interest score, click behavior; Qualitative: interviews, content reflections, inspiration diaries.
M: Convergent mixed methods design, regression analysis plus thematic analysis, joint display and subgroup integration.
Sustainability, community impact, and responsible travel
-
RQ: How is environmental awareness associated with willingness to pay for sustainable tourism options, and how do tourists describe the meaning of “responsible travel” in practice?
RH / WP: Higher environmental awareness will be associated with greater willingness to pay for sustainable tourism options; tourists are likely to describe responsible travel through low-impact choices, symbolic identity, and practical compromise; integration is expected to explain why expressed values do not always match spending behavior.
D: Quantitative: environmental awareness score, willingness-to-pay measure, tourist characteristics; Qualitative: interviews, planning reflections, sustainability narratives.
M: Explanatory sequential design, regression/Tobit models plus thematic analysis, matrix-based integration.
-
RQ: What differences exist in perceptions of tourism impact between residents and visitors, and how do both groups explain those differences?
RH / WP: Residents will report more critical perceptions of tourism impact than visitors; both groups are likely to explain differences through everyday exposure, economic dependence, and spatial experience; integration is expected to clarify the mechanisms behind the observed perception gap.
D: Quantitative: tourism impact perception scores, respondent group (resident/visitor), location variables; Qualitative: interviews, community and visitor narratives, local reflections.
M: Convergent mixed methods design, group comparison/regression plus thematic analysis, integrated interpretation using joint displays.
Director of Wellington based My Statistical Consultant Ltd company. Retired Associate Professor in Statistics.
Has a PhD in Statistics and over 45 years experience as a university professor, consultant, international researcher and government advisor.