Socio-Cultural Approaches to Tourism: A Research on the “Tourist” Notion of Young Turkish People

doi:10.4236/sm.2012.22026

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Sociology Mind

2012. Vol.2, No.2, 200-203

Published Online April 2012 in SciRes (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/sm) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/sm.2012.22026

200

Socio-Cultural Approaches to Tourism: A Research on the

“Tourist” Notion of Young Turkish People

Ferika Özer Sari

Department of Tourism and Hotel Management, Vocational School, Yaşar University, Izmir, Turkey

Email: [email protected]

Received December 23rd, 2011; revised January 21st, 2012; accepted February 17th, 2012

Significance of tourism sector in Turkey is constantly expanding. Correspondingly the importance of the

economic and socio-cultural impact of tourism also continues to develop. Because tourism draws tourists

get into closer contact with the locals it has positive and negative effects on the destination. In general the

aim of tourists is satisfying their expectations at the maximum degree during their stay. On the other side

locals who live and work in the destination region have a primary role in welcoming them and satisfying

the tourists’ needs and expectation. Turkish society is particularly well known for many generations as

being very hospitable. Current research aims to reveal whether the young Turkish people sustain tradi-

tional “Turkish Hospitality” and to see their thoughts about tourists. The field research has been con-

ducted on students of a foundation university located in Izmir and these young people’s point of view on

tourists has been investigated by face to face interviews. It has been concluded that there is a weakening

trend, nevertheless the notion of hospitality remains.

Keywords: Tourism Sociology; Tourist; Young Turkish; Traditional Turkish Hospitality; Guest

Introduction

Tourism industry has a growing importance for Turkey. The

destination has been the ninth most visited country in terms of

incoming tourists and seventh in terms of tourism revenue

worldwide. The incoming tourist numbers has increased to 28.6

million, tripling when compared with 10 years ago. Revenues

from tourism have reached 20.8 billion dollars, tripling since

2000, when it had been 7.6 billion dollars (Turkish Ministry of

Culture and Tourism, 2011). Tourism, which is of increasing

importance day by day to the national economy, has been gain-

ing importance culturally and socially.

Formerly, some of the tourism researchers such as Butler in

1980, Doxey in 1975, Smith in 1989 and De Kadt in 1979

studied the regional tourism activities and the host-guest rela-

tionship (Cooper et al., 2008: p. 188). De Kadt suggested three

main categories of host-guest contact (Cooper et al., 2008: p.

192): when the guests buy goods and services from the hosts;

when the locals and tourists share a facility such as a cafe, a

restaurant or a concert hall, etc. and when tourists and locals

come together for the main purpose of cultural exchange. The

first two types of these communications are come with the gen-

erality of unfavourable sides of social contact, whereas the third

type of contact is usually thought to be positive (Cooper et al.,

2008: p. 193). The relationship between tourists and locals is

reviewed in this paper.

Review of Literature

Relationship between Tourists and Locals

An important contribution to the studies about the relation-

ship between hosts and guests was made by Doxey in 1975.

This model is also known as “Irridex (Index of Tourist Irrita-

tion)” and propounds that there is an evolutionary change in

local people’s behaviour towards tourists. If we are to measure

the level of sensitivity generated by host-guest contact Doxey

created below Index (Cooper et al., 2008: p. 195):

 The level of euphoria—excitement and enthusiasm in the

beginning stages.

 The level of apathy—what contact is made between locals

and tourists is done on a commercial and official basis.

 The level of irritation—tourism industry gets close to con-

tentedness.

 The level of antagonism—the tourist is now perceived as

the reason of all sufferings.

 The final level—the social impact has been carried out and

the tourists will choose other destinations.

While the tourist-local relationship is a matter of debate,

examining the relations between different groups of hosts and

tourists is relevant to this paper. Locals’ regard and appraisal of

and behaviour towards tourists may vary during any of the three

main categories of host-guest contact described above. Differ-

ent groups within the same community may also have different

manners and perceptions of communication and interaction

with tourists. As there is no possible way to resolve the issues

of perception about tourists (in this paper) or to analyse each

and every group of tourists, a categorisation of hosts and guests

has been determined based on the observations of various other

writers below:

Upper Class Locals—as their lifestyles are similar with those

of tourists and their educational and cultural levels are high,

and most of them can speak the language of tourists. Upper

class locals are those who can most easily interact with the

tourists (Avcıkurt, 2003: p. 59).

Lower Class Locals—as it is easy for upper class locals to

communicate with tourists, so it is hard to do so for this group.

Among the reasons for this may be the difference between their

life styles, a lack of language skills, a lack of information about

F. Ö. SARI

the countries and cultures of tourists, fear from rich tourists,

shyness, belittlement and jealousy (Avcıkurt, 2003: p. 59).

Young People—since younger locals tend to fancy novelty

and adventure, meeting with foreigners and experiencing a new

life style appeals to them, therefore they tend to interact with

and talk to tourists more often. Particularly young local men

and women tourists make friends for sexual reasons (Doğan,

2004: p. 87).

The Opposite Sex—most relationships between younger lo-

cals and tourists are motivated by sexual gratification. These

kinds of relationships are usually between young local men and

female tourists, whereas local women trying to establish a rela-

tionship with male tourists usually have an ulterior motive of

ostensibly a good marriage (Doğan, 2004: p. 87). Though “sex

tourism” has generally been applied to the behaviour of tourists

whose purpose is to engage in commercial sex with local

women in tourist destinations, it can have a wider application.

The term doesn’t essentially imply prostitution and can poten-

tially be used to apply to the behaviour of tourists who expect

sexual interaction with fellow tourists in resorts, or non-com-

mercial sex with locals in Western destinations as a routine part

of their holiday experience (Jeffreys, 2003).

Children—thanks to their curiosity, children are interested in

tourists, and they run after them in an attempt to communicate.

This could be annoying for some tourists, as others enjoy chil-

dren’s interest (Doğan, 2004: p. 87).

Tourism Professionals—this is the group tourists interact

most frequently. Alongside their relations among themselves,

tourists most often interact with hotel employees, waiters, sales

people, guides and others offering tourism services (Doğan,

2004: p. 88).

As tourists spend a limited amount of time in the holiday lo-

cation their interaction with the locals are limited. Especially

the relations of tourists who lodge in the holiday villages and

outside the residential areas are limited to contact with tourism

professionals. The likes of tourism professionals are those di-

rectly connected to the airport, customs officers, police, drivers,

travel agencies, hotel employees, vendors, guides and other

related workers (Avcıkurt, 2003: p. 60).

Hospitalit y a s a Tradition of Tu rki sh Society

Hospitality was a very important value even in the nomadic

Turkish society. Sayings of Mahmud Kashgari “Guests come

with their blessings” and Dada Gorgud (Dede Korkut) “Better

to knock down bad households that receive no guests” are ex-

amples of the Turkish mentality towards hospitality. In the

nomadic culture hospitality is partially related to benevolence,

and benevolence is based on the idea of human’s inability to

spend more than their share. Turkish society still has a custom

of hospitality (Tezcan, 2000). As mentioned in a paper by Şen

(2005), two celebrities, Tom Hanks and Vladimir Putin have

uttered their surprise in the face of the hospitality of our citizens.

Two countries, Thailand and Turkey, have come to the fore

worldwide with their traditions of hospitality which plays an

important role in broadcasting their images to the world. Analy-

sis made on the understanding of hospitality in these two coun-

tries shows that this traditional structure will survive through

the many years into the future (Şen, 2005).

On the other hand, there are many problematic elements in

regard to locals’ relations with tourists (Kozak, 2007). Although it

is possible to experience the taste of traditional hospitality in

non-touristy small villages, particularly in the interior of Tur-

key (Tucker, 2003), there is a sense that this authenticity may

disappear in similar towns of the coastal zones and metropolis-

tan cities (Korzay & Alvarez, 2005). As a consequence of these

observations, this study aims to examine the tourist and hospi-

tality notions of young Turkish people.

Methodology

Qualitative methodology was used in this research. Research

was conducted in the city of Izmir which is both a major tour-

ism destination and one of the major metropolitan cities of

Turkey. Face to face interview techniques was used to collect

data from the students of a foundation university in this city.

Simple random sampling technique was used in order to give

every student of the university an equal chance to be inter-

viewed. With each respondent an unstructured face to face in-

terview was been conducted. Unstructured interviews allow

researchers to focus the respondents’ talk on a particular topic

of interest, and may allow researchers the opportunity to test

out his or her preliminary understanding, while still allowing

ample opportunity for new ways of seeing and understanding to

develop (Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 2011).

Descriptive Statistics of the Sample

In this research interviewers made face to face interviews

with 102 students of aforementioned university. The mean age

of the students was 21 years old (Table 1) which is very appro-

priate for the target of this study. Six of the respondents refused

to give demographic information. The respondents were di-

vided between 56 percent female and 44 percent male. Re-

spondents claiming to speak foreign languages were 92 percent

speaking English as a foreign language, while 6 percent of them

spoke German and 2 percent spoke French, beyond Turkish as a

mother-tongue. Respondents claiming to have travelled outside

of Turkey equalled 45 percent. A total of 58 percent of the re-

spondents claimed work experience in tourism sector and 71

percent claimed an intention to work in tourism sector in the future.

Findings

Evocations of the Term “Tourist”

At the beginning for each interview a simple question was

asked to the respondents: what are the words that come to your

mind when the subject is “tourist”? Table 2 indicates the per-

centage weight of specific words that came to the respondents’

Table 1.

Descriptive statistics of sample.

N Min. Max. Mean Std.

Deviation

Age 96 18 27 21.221.848

Sex (1 = Female; 2 = Male) 1021 2 1.44 .499

Travelled abroad

(1 = Yes; 2 = No)96 1 2 1.55 .500

Experience in tourism

sector

(

1 = Yes; No

)

96 1 2 1.42 .496

Intention to work in tourism

sector (1 = Yes; 2 = No) 94 1 2 1.29 .455

Valid N (listwise) 94

F. Ö. SARI

Table 2.

Evocations of the term “tourist”.

Words Percent

Money (to be gained by the local people) 43%

Entertai nment (opportunity for the respondent to share with)41%

Foreigner (different culture) 21%

Culture (opportunity to learn about) 20%

Hotel 15%

Guest 14%

Sex 5%

minds when subject was “tourist”. Respondents claiming that

the word “tourist” evokes money as the earnings of local people

equalled 43 percent. Following closely, 41 percent of respon-

dents have said that the evocation of word “tourist” is enter-

tainment which means they might get the opportunity to share

it with tourists. A total of 21 percent of the respondents claimed

that the word “tourist” associates with foreigner who comes

from a different country and culture, while 20 percent claimed

culture which contains the hope of learning about those cul-

tures. A total of 15 percent of the respondents have stated that

word “tourist” evokes hotel, while 14 percent claimed guest

and 5 percent claimed sex. These numbers point out that the

majority of current research participants perceive tourists as the

source of economical and social benefits more than they see the

tourists as guests.

Feelings and T houghts about “Tourists”

Another open ended question of this research was related to

the respondents’ feelings and thoughts about tourists. Findings

expose that most of these young Turkish people have positive

feelings and attitudes towards tourists, as can be gained from

selected sentences from the interviews (below).

Interviewer: “Can you express any of your ‘inner thoughts’

of how you feel about foreign tourists here?”

20 year old, male, Computer Programming student: “I am

proud of that the tourists wonder about my country and they

visit it.”

22 year old, male, Industrial Engineering student: “I be-

lieve that it is necessary to respect tourists a little more in our

country. There are a lot of tourists feeling harassed outside their

hotels, so they choose to stay in the borders of accommodation

facilities.”

20 year old, female, Public Relations student: “In the era

that tourism sector keeps growing, it is important to respect

tourists. Every single tourist that we interact culturally adds

something to us.”

20 year old, female, Computer Engineering student: “Tour-

ists are special guests in our country. We should introduce our

history, culture, food and all the other unique characteristics to

them. People should try to understand tourists and not misbe-

have.”

As it was specified in preceding paragraphs, hospitality is

one of the cornerstones of Turkish culture. Majority of Turkish

people feel bound to honor guests in the best possible manner

and try strongly to communicate that (enjoyturkey.com, 2011).

Hazel Tucker stated that the people of Goreme, a central Ana-

tolian town in the region of Cappadocia, take pride in present-

ing a culture of warm hospitality. The concepts of hospitality to

encourage guests are central to the villagers’ discourses re-

garding themselves, their lives and tourism. Traditional hospi-

tality concept is associated with pride which is another signifi-

cant characteristic of Turkish people and guests to any Turkish

village must be treated with the utmost respect and generosity

(Tucker, 2003: p. 122).

20 year old, female, Tourism Management student: “Tour-

ists are people who would like to be distant from the place they

live for a certain period of time, and would simply like to have

a good time, to relax or to rest. Because they pay in return for

the services provided, they always expect more and more…

Unfortunately, some tourists behave as if they had purchased

the personnel of the accommodation, catering, entertainment or

other facilities, as well. Such an approach can really make you

lose your patience.”

“Pride” having vital importance is another inherent feature of

Turkish society. They are sensitive to the concept of “Respect”

as the respondents stated above. When they realize that par-

ticular tourists misbehave or behave disrespectfully, their reac-

tion could be stiff because such attitudes would be perceived as

undignified. The tourists’ position as guests in relation to lo-

cals’ hospitality can be confusing for both players. Situations

often arise in which tourists feel confused about offers of gen-

erosity and friendship in the tourism realm, or where they feel

trapped and restricted by the obligatory ties created by their

hosts. Similarly, the locals increasingly feel that their hospital-

ity is abused and eroded by tourists (Tucker, 2003: p. 135).

22 year old, mal e, Busine ss Ad ministratio n studen t: “When

tourist and tourism is the discussion subject, I directly think

about their contribution to the national economy. In order to

increase their contribution, tourists’ needs and wants should be

satisfied in the best possible way. Besides, our people should be

trained and public awareness of tourism and the tourist must be

raised.”

Conclusion

Tourism industry is established on a web of interactions be-

tween locals, providers, tourism services, the tourist, and the

natural environment (Kozak, 2006). This kind of interaction-

web is usually denser between younger locals and tourists, so it

becomes obvious that their attitude toward the word “tourist”

has a vital importance. This study seeks an insight whether

young Turkish people sustain the notion of traditional “Turkish

Hospitality” by seeking inputs based on their perceptions of

tourists.

Although the Turkish university students participated in this

research considered tourists as a source of income, they also

regarded tourists as fun-loving people coming from foreign

countries and different cultures, recognising they stay in hotels

as valuable, paying guests for a period of time. The occurrence

of the word “Guest” was less frequent than expected: in the

light of traditional Turkish Hospitality and family structure it

was anticipated that respondents would see tourists as guests in

the first place. However, it is pleasing to observe that “Hospi-

tality” and “Guest” notions haven’t been entirely faded away.

The issue of hospitality has long been important to the Turk-

ish psyche and sense of identity: it has been deeply rooted in

Turkish culture and has survived throughout history. Turkey, as

a macro tourism destination, should take all the precautions

necessary in order to turn this inestimable quality of Turkish

202

F. Ö. SARI

culture into an advantage for local tourism—while at the same

time preserving the innate and spontaneous character of this

intensely local hospitality. Local people at the destinations,

employees of all the businesses connected with tourism sector

and tourism students should be educated/trained so as not to

ignore this aspect of Turkish culture. This level of apparently

natural warmth-of-hospitality is not so common in other places

around the world, and it could be argued that the Turkish com-

munity could cherish and empower such hospitality for later

generations.

Limitations of the Study and Suggestions for Future

Research

The generalised character of current research findings has

been necessary because of the limited qualitative nature of re-

lated research. Even so, it can be claimed that some distinctive

findings were obtained. Researchers should enlarge the sample

size for future studies. The qualitative nature of current study

might be seen as another limitation of the research. Use of

quantitative methods could be suggested for future research.

Another issue that could be addressed in future research is the

relation between “commercial provision of services in tourism

realm” and “pride” concept which is one of the significant

characteristics of Turkish society.

REFERENCES

Avcikurt, C. (2003). Turizm Sosyolojisi turist—Yerel Halk Etkileşimi.

Ankara: Detay Yayıncilik.

Butler, R. W. (1980). The concept of a tourist area cycle of evolution:

implications for management of resources. Canadian Geographer,

24, 5-12. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0064.1980.tb00970.x

Cohen, E. (1984). The sociology of tourism: Approaches, issues and

findings. Annual Review of Sociology, 10, 373-392.

doi:10.1146/annurev.so.10.080184.002105

Cooper, C., Fletcher, J., Fyall, A., Gilbert, D., & Wanhill, S. (2008). Tour-

ism Principles and Practice (4th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education

Limited.

De Kadt, E. (Ed.) (1979). Tourism: Passport to development? New York:

Oxford University Press.

Doğan, H. Z. (2004). Turizmin sosyo-kültürel temelleri. Ankara: Detay

Anatolia Akademik Yayincılik.

Doxey, G. V. (1975). When enough’s enough: The natives are restless

in Old Niagara. Heritage Canada, 2, 26-27.

Enjoy Turkey. (2011). People, folklore, culture: People and mentality.

URL (last checked 23 November 2011).

http://www.enjoyturkey.com/info/culture/people_folklore.htm

Jeffreys, S. (2003). Sex tourism: do women do it too? Leisure Studies,

22, 223-238. doi:10.1080/026143603200075452

Korzay, M., & Alvarez, M. (2005). Satisfaction and dissatisfaction of

Japanese tourists in Turkey. Anatolia, 16, 176-193.

doi:10.1080/13032917.2005.9687176

Kozak, M. (2007). Tourist harrassment: A marketing perspective, An-

nals of Tourism Research, 34, 384-399.

Kozak, N. (2006). Turizmin Toplumsal Yönleri, Turizm Gazetesi. URL

(last checked 1 March 2011). http://www.turizmgazetesi.com

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. (2011). Qualitative Research Guide-

lines Project, Unstructured Interviews. URL (last checked 28 Novem-

ber 2011). http://www.qualres.org/HomeUnst-3630.html

Şen, N. (2005). Rekabet Avantajlarimiz, Turizm Gazetesi. URL (last

checked 25 October 2011).

http://www.turizmgazetesi.com/articles/article.aspx?id=19720

TC. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı (2011). Turizm Verileri. URL (last

checked 28 September 2011).

http://www.kultur.gov.tr/TR/dosya/1-279999/h/turizmverileri.pdf

Tezcan, M. (2000). Türk Ailesi Antropolojisi. Baski, Ankara: Imge Ki-

tabevi Yayınlari.

Tucker, H. (2003). Living with tourism: Negotiating identities in a

Turkish village. London: Routlage Taylor & Francis Group.