Keywords

1 Introduction

The implementation and utilization of digital technologies within tourist destinations is essential to stay competitive. Especially, the role of DMOs is of increasing relevance, as tourism marketing and product improvements rely on a steady input of correct and truthful self-reported data, in order to provide recommendations and information in real time to enrich a tourist’s experience [1]. To achieve this, modern tourism destinations utilize customer data to arrange suggestions based on their interests, needs, and constraints [2]. This, often self-reported, customer information is obtained from websites and supplemented by a range of other channels to reach the visitor [1].

Acknowledging this dependency, researchers have investigated along an individuals’ personal information disclosure behavior in relation to websites in e-commerce [3,4,5], mobile apps [6, 7], and social networking sites [8, 9]. The available literature offers a rich discussion of information privacy concerns and personal disclosure intentions [10], but it also suggested that tourists’ decision making and related issues about privacy of information require further research [11]; especially in the context of an adapting legal environment, like the release of the GDPR in 2018 by the European Union, and an increased public and media awareness towards data privacy policies (and their violations) of businesses, organizations, and institutions.

Interactions between tourists and their destination of choice occur before, during, and after their stay in the destination via a constant exchange of relevant information, mediated through digital interfaces [12]. A balance of personal information demands and needs is vital as a too heavy-handed pursuit by DMOs may disgruntle consumers, which makes it necessary to further explore the underlying individual concerns, interactions, and interests of visitors [13]. Recognizing the need for DMOs to identify and evaluate tourists’ attitudes towards information disclosure interests can therefor help persuade visitors to disclose personal information more willingly. Hence, we aim to answer the following research question: How do tourists evaluate the boundaries of their own willingness to disclose personal information to tourism destinations?

This qualitative study exploratively identifies, how visitors’ perceived benefits within tourism offers can be determined, their concerns about information privacy, and the assessment of their personal data once it has been provided to the destination. This study theoretically complements and extends existing research, going beyond the limitations of previous investigations, where the overly specific focus has been upon a single class or genre of tourism providers, such as hotels [6].

2 Related Work

Recent literature concerning privacy focused on the concept of information privacy, whereas information privacy definitions center upon the resulting ability to control personal data on an individual level [13, 14]. Hence, individual concerns about entering information onto a website is related to the “control over secondary use of information”, as the further usage of such data is beyond their individual control [13].

2.1 Information Demand of DMO Websites and Services

Naturally, online tourism information sources are utilized by travelers to gather specific details for their trip, which include DMO or hotel websites, online travel agencies (OTA), or other digital sources like travel blogs and social media sites [15]. Regarding the relevancy of DMO websites, research lately argues towards an decreasing importance, as travelers utilize other channels like online travel agencies or social media for information [16]. On the other hand, the relevancy of DMO websites as they remain the primary platform for interaction with their visitors [17]. Additionally, these websites enable travelers to access and evaluate specific local offerings within a destination [18] and provide benefits by e.g., receiving information and recommendations or navigation assistance [19].

With the rise of mobile devices, tourists plan their trips more spontaneously or even after they have started their journey [17], therefore, the delivery of customized and/or personalized information is a growing challenge for DMOs [20], even further increasing the need for personalized information, e.g., via tailored location-based services [21].

This personalization implies the understanding of unique needs and preferences of tourists. Consequently, to build such a personalization process and to adjust directed marketing activities, data from web traffic, rating platforms or social media sites is used to congregate digital footprints, left by users voluntarily or involuntarily, to better understand behavioral actions of tourists [22]. Furthermore, personal information is collected by directly asking tourists to share their needs, priorities, and interests [2]. Touristic destinations are therefore increasingly considering the implementation of incentives for their customer to use and generate personalized content [23].

A successful data collection approach for DMOs acknowledges the integration of the tourist’s personal data with clear protection measures and incorporates both into the destination’s communication strategy to build and maintain a trustworthy relationship between visitors and DMOs [24]. However, before this data can be collected it is important to know the premises of tourists’ intention and willingness to disclose their personal information via a destination’s digital interface.

2.2 Intention and Willingness Towards Sharing Information Online

In relation to the increased demand of DMOs for their tourists’ personal information, an individual’s privacy concerns have been shown to increase [24]. Literature provides various instruments to quantitatively measure the intention of users to share personal information, however, such research lacks the usage of a multilevel framework for information privacy concerns [13]; and at the same time recognizes, that people’s intention to disclose information on the internet is a complex procedure [25]. Still, in our explorative understanding of these intentions we draw upon two conceptual models, the Privacy Calculus and the Antecedents-Privacy-Concerns-Outcome model (APCO) and later contextualize these abstracted behavioral intentions in respect to tourists’ willingness to disclose personal information.

Privacy Calculus.

A fundamental concept for information disclosure behavior, the model is utilized in the context of online information disclosure [9], as well as in a variety of connected settings, such as e-commerce [25], mobile devices [26, 27], social networking sites, Internet-of-Things [28], and hotel applications [6]. The willingness to disclose personal information is dependent on an individuals’ perceived internet privacy risk, internet privacy concerns, internet trust, and personal internet interest, which are in themselves grounded in individual perceived risks (e.g., unauthorized selling, sharing, or access to personal information) and perceived benefits (e.g., extrinsic benefits like monetary savings or intrinsic benefits like altruism and pleasure). The combined outcome of this calculation is noted as a perceived value to information disclosure, described as “the individual's overall assessment of the utility of information disclosure based on perceptions of privacy risks incurred and benefits receive [29].

Antecedents-Privacy-Concerns-Outcome Model (APCO).

The APCO model conceptualizes privacy concerns along five antecedents (Privacy experiences, Privacy awareness, Personality differences, Demographic experiences, and Culture/Climate) and how they influence privacy outcomes [14]. However, a paradoxical situation may occur, when users state privacy concerns when it comes to disclosing information, but then their actual behavior is diverging; a conflict between intentions and actual behavior described as the privacy paradox [30]. In order to better cater for this paradox besides economic and social theory-based explanations, research included cognitive and psychological aspects to deepen explanations of such user behavior [31, 32] and integrated privacy concerns (e.g., beliefs, attitudes, perceptions) as a core construct within APCO. The ‘outcomes’ of privacy concerns are an individuals’ regulation, behavioral reactions (including disclosure), trust, and the calculus of risks/costs, and benefits. The resulting behavioral reaction is the dependent variable since it represents the willingness to reveal personal information.

Concludingly, DMOs should be aware of the complex construct that is the concern for one’s private information, as it influences the intention to share information either online on their website or within a destination. Still, research explores this construct predominantly from a quantitative perspective, and in by doing so abstracting the phenomenon of sharing personal information into multi-dimensional dependency models, supposedly beyond any reasonable practical relevance for the DMO itself. Hence, our study aims to (1) explore tourists’ information disclosure behavior within a destination and (2) complement these quantitative studies via an inductive qualitative approach via a holistic understanding of tourists’ boundaries when they evaluate to disclose their personal information to the visited tourist destination. Notably, research on data privacy concerns does recommend broadening the scope for more diverse samples and contexts, as studies in this field predominately rely on student-based data [13] and is situated in constantly changing legal and technical environment.

3 Methodology

Qualitative semi-structed in-depth interviews were conducted during the winter season 2021 in an alpine touristic destination in Styria/Austria. As the character of the study is explorative, potential interview partners, who did not have their primary residence within the region, were approached at three different locations before or after their skiing endeavors into the region. Over the course of three weeks twelve participants, four female and eight males, agreed to be interviewed face-to-face until data saturation was reached; interviews lasted up to 30 min.

The construction of question for the semi-structured interview guideline was rooted in literature on sharing personal information (Privacy calculus, APCO) and specifically focused on sharing such information within the touristic domain. All questions were open and aimed to encourage the interviewees to explain their feelings and thoughts freely and openly. Thematically, interviews approached the topic from general touristic information search behavior when looking for a touristic trip, to disclosing personal information when registering at booking/destination websites and/or personalized offerings, as well as their trust and expected benefits within the destination in exchange for their personal data.

The analysis followed an approach of circular deconstructionFootnote 1, which is described as an abridged version of Grounded Theory and allows researchers to integrate and organize subjective ideas in the process of interpretation and understanding [33]. This method is shaped by a constant rotation of an intuitive evaluation and consideration of the text, which is circulating and throughout guided by intuition and theory. Through this deconstruction and composition of the text, implicit meanings achieve visibility. Hence, this approach lends itself well for a constant change of the perspective lens, where relevant parts of theory are identified to circle and understand phenomena from a holistic perspective; as a result, new findings can be discovered, and creativity and productivity are proactively implemented in the analysis.

4 Results

Our data analysis manifested four themes with several sub-categories, which constitute the boundaries of tourists’ willingness to disclose personal information in tourism destinations: (1) Blurred, but clear view, (2) positive incentives, (3) subjective well-being, and (4) restraining aspects (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1.
figure 1

Boundary evaluations of tourists’ willingness to disclose personal information

Full size image

4.1 Blurred, But Clear View

The first theme contains three categories, which subsume visitors’ assumptions and concerns when disclosing personal information on tourism related websites. Many visitors stated that they have no clear understanding of how the information will be used by organizations. This blurred view of their data usage is considered a worrying situation. Visitors are unsure, if their personal information is sold to a third party or to how many third parties it is sold. This unclear comprehension of participants confirms that internet users may not understand, how their data is processed or where their data is transferred to [34]. In literature, the uncertainty of data usage is assigned to the perceived risk factor in the privacy calculus [25]; consequently, this factor has a negative impact on the visitor’s willingness to share personal information. The phenomenon is noticeably two-headed, as respondents state on the one hand that they are very cautions when it comes to information disclosure but “on the other hand you agree with every app that you pass on all possible data (P3)”, which points towards the so-called privacy paradox [30]. Also, the fear of receiving unwanted e-mails when disclosing personal information is highlighted, which triggers negative reactions that amount to concerns about the invasion of privacy. This equates to the concept of privacy experiences in the APCO model [14], which may cause privacy concerns and counter reactions (e.g., activating spam filters), but may in turn again reduce privacy concerns [35] due to the subjective feeling of ‘being in control’ (e.g., via the ability to unsubscribe newsletters).

4.2 Positive Incentives

Participants see benefits from tourism destinations to be most useful when they can be experienced directly in the destination or if they facilitate their travel planning. In other words, offering discounts on services in the tourism destination or offering insider tips are ways to increase the willingness to reveal personal information. Participants claimed that discounts were acceptable as a compensation for sharing their personal information (e.g., lower cost of accommodation or the availability of activities in the tourism destination) and emphasized interest in benefits for activities during their stay (e.g., discounts on bike rentals or free access to cable cars). This confirms the relevance of monetary incentives in exchange for personal information connected to the pleasure associated with intrinsic benefits, which as a result contributes to an enjoyable touristic experience [36]. In addition, exclusive offers are stated by participants as incentives to submit personal information more willingly, for example, if they receive services that “… Others do not get (P4)”. Participants refer to their information sharing behavior as cautious when an online platform is unknown, but at a certain level of discount on a vacation they would change their mind (20–50% discounts). If a website has been previously used and requests more personal information, then a 20% discount was stated to increase their intention to accept. Access to advantageous information or convenience are viewed as beneficial in the search for tourism information, as well as free access to information, or assistance in the booking procedure to save time, which confirms literature [36] through the factor of personal internet interest (Privacy calculus).

Overall, participants responded positively to personalization offers that assist their information search process, substantiating literature that such information does not increase individual privacy concerns [37]. However, this type of personalization is perceived negatively in the tourism domain, as tourists’ motives for travelling vary, depending on the partners with whom the holiday is spent. The importance of the right choice and depth of positive incentives is highlighted in this theme. Incentives, which are experienced at the destination or benefits which facilitate the travel planning are relevant for visitors, who in turn tend to show more willingness to disclose personal information to tourist organizations.

4.3 Subjective Well-Being

With the feeling that personal data is secure, trust is increased. In literature, such principles for fair information practices reduce users’ privacy concerns [38]. Hence, participants stated to have more trust when they perceive that their tourism provider is taking active steps to secure the customers’ data. Previous experiences with the tourism provider and regular interactions with a website positively link to their trust perception. If the service and transaction fulfilled the visitor’s expectations, trust in the tourism provider is increased. This linkage, according to which past experiences help the user to assess “the other party’s credibility” [39] connects with the time spent in the tourism destination, which in turn affects the visitor’s evaluation of trust. One night in the destination or only driving through is not seen as a ‘contact’ with the tourism provider. Instead, regular visits to destinations are positively emphasized as maintaining contact and hence visitors’ interest in information disclosure increases. As the literature indicates, relationships grow as interaction occur and therefor result in increased perceived trust [39], which impacts behavioral reactions as described through APCO. Hence, visitors are more likely to share personal information with the tourism provider.

In general, interviewees state that they feel more comfortable when searching and booking on well-known websites or with familiar organizations. This is in line with literature, that famous or well-known organizations reduces some of the customers’ uncertainties in an online environment [40]. In contrast, the preference of websites from smaller tourism providers was also mentioned, leaving a blurred impression.

An important aspect stated is maintaining a certain direct personal contact with the tourism provider or host as vital for visitors and relevant for visitors’ intentions to interact with tourism websites. When no direct contact exists, uncertainties arise when personal information is requested. They describe the lack of personal contact as “having no face (P5)” or the contact person as “not touchable (P7)”. This vocalized absence or lack of personal contact is described in literature, since it increases some of the uncertainties in the online environment [40]. As tourism is strongly connected to individual experiences and well-being, personal contact and trust are consistently stated as important aspects in this domain.

4.4 Restraining Aspects

A common aspect noted by interviewees is that privacy notices are actively utilized to gain more knowledge about the consequences for revealing personal data. The significance of knowing what the privacy notices contain and what consequences the disclosure of personal information entails is emphasized, highlighting that the exchange process needs to be fair. Therefore, some of the visitors read the privacy statements very carefully or restrain their behavior. As literature shows, privacy notices in themselves reduce people’s concerns [37]; users’ knowledge and understanding of privacy statements to reduce privacy concerns is identified as the conceptual dimension of awareness [41]. Interestingly, participants are perceiving a lack of ‘charm’ in the display and content of privacy notices or in the various ways that are utilized to personalize offerings. This suggests that tourism organizations need to adopt more engaging approaches to positively influence tourists’ interest to reveal personal information.

Additionally, the need for retaining anonymity while searching for touristic information online is salient, which is in line with previous research illustrating that users seek anonymity while conducting searches on the internet [42]. This suggests that tourism organizations should clearly provide adequate and truthful privacy statements in their online environment when requesting personal information from their visitors.

Participants also indicate a moderate concern about their personal contact information. As the perceived risk increases, so is the sensitivity towards sharing personal information [43]. Hence, the disclosure of personal location information corresponds to a form of external restriction upon visitors’ freedom. For example, participants do not want to be tracked while spending time in the tourism destination, e.g., they “do not wish others to know which hiking tracks they chose to walk on (P8)”. Disclosing such location-based data gives rise to concerns of identification [44]. Although these concerns are salient, they are not solid. Participants are in turn willing to share their location information, if the service assists them in their individual orientation and navigation within the destination. If the latter is functional and useful when undertaking an activity, these concerns are reduced and “then it does not bother me (P7)”.

When on an information search for touristic offers, a wide mix of various websites and platforms was mentioned by participants, like destination websites, hotel websites, blogs, social media sites, and online agencies – often intermixing offline and online sources. The perceived importance of a destination’s website was stated twofold. Either described as a relevant utility for organizing their holiday and a primary source to gain information about local activities in the destination; in line with literature, as a source for potential visitors to evaluate offerings in a tourism destination [18]. Nevertheless, visitors argued that the importance of destination websites is overall decreasing and “… no longer one of the most important (P6)”, which is also echoed in literature [16] and left us mildly confused, but on a higher level.

5 Conclusion

The aim of this explorative study was to identify boundaries of tourists’ willingness to disclose personal information to tourism destination websites and applications. While many aspects substantiate literature, we draw attention to possible approaches that would potentially increase the tourists’ willingness to disclose personal information to DMOs. Importantly, drawing assumptions on the disclosure behavior of tourists across the vocalization of their intentions does not automatically reflect the actual behavior of tourists. However, our results do colorize and offer new insights into the willingness of visitors to share personal information with a tourism destination.

5.1 Theoretical Implications

As an exploratory study, our results substantiate and extend current understandings of privacy and sharing intentions of personal information. Participants hinted to increase their interest to disclose more personal data when certain factors are established: (1) trust in the tourism provider is gained when personal contact exist, (2) subjective positive incentives or benefits that can be experienced at the tourism destination enhance tourists’ engagement when personal information is inquired by a DMO, and (3) privacy practices presented in a clear, understandable, and pleasant manner help reduce privacy concerns. Furthermore, previous studies in the domain of personal information sharing have largely focused on quantitative approaches (Privacy calculus, APCO). Our study utilized a qualitative approach to gain a holistic understanding of visitors’ willingness to disclose personal information when they approach tourist destinations over the internet and echoes findings from literature, also in the domain of tourism information search. Carrying out in-depth interviews with visitors within a specific tourism destination, contrary to more artificial settings outside a destination, proved helpful in complementing and extending previous research in this field, that placed a heavy reliance on student-based and US-centric approaches, which lack the exposure and awareness of respondents towards recent changes in regulations of data privacy (e.g., GDPR).

5.2 Practical Implications

Our findings suggest several vantage points for DMOs and tourism providers. When requesting personal data from visitors, privacy notices in an appropriate length and clarity, bundled in a polite and winning approach should be presented to increase visitors’ trust in the intentions of the organization and increase transparency. Also, tourist destinations should consider offering ‘compensation’ to visitors in the form of experiences and activities, for the exchange of personal information, as visitors indicate a willingness to share more personal - and truthful - information in exchange for benefits they receive from tourism providers under the prospect of increased pleasure that tourists can obtain. Such compensation could be compensatory discounts or free access to activities or public transportation facilities. Additionally, visitors show an increased interest in disclosing their personal information when personal contact, and consequently trust, can be established with the tourism provider. This could be stimulated by combining DMOs mobile/web applications or functional systems with those of local tourism providers. Especially accommodations and tourist attractions have great potential to increase the visitor’s willingness to disclose personal information, as they have direct personal contact with them. Finally, DMOs who utilize mobile applications to support the customers’ use of location devices should be aware of the sensitivity of the collected data and tourists’ awareness of the power of such an exchange. Although visitors are willing to share personal information with tourism providers to some extent, the performance, usefulness, and utility of such touristic products and services is an essential factor that influences the visitors’ willingness to disclose information – it is part of a deal. Hence, tourism service providers should constantly evaluate their performance and service quality to guarantee that it fulfills visitors’ expectations.

5.3 Limitations and Further Research

Naturally, this qualitative study comes with several limitations and recommendations for further research. First, we highlight the limited transferability of results linked to the locus of study and sample size. Still, although reaching data saturation in interview responses and in combination with the explorative semi-structured approach, the manifested thematic boundary evaluations can complement and do thematically substantiate existing research in the domain of tourism and personal information disclosure. Second, this study only examined intentions in relation to self-reflected privacy disclosure behavior. Previous research highlights that actual behavior might not be the same as expressed intentions [13]. Therefore, further research should investigate both the declared willingness of visitors to disclose personal data and their subsequent actual behavior, along the lines of the privacy paradox, which did inherently manifest within the first theme of our findings but was also revealing itself between the lines of positive incentives and restraining aspects. Third, our study was conducted in a specific tourism destination in Austria, which implicates a closed sphere of cultural norms that may form or influence these boundary evaluations. Finally, inquiring on the visitor’s privacy disclosure behavior is a socially sensitive topic. It is possible that what is known as social desirability bias affected participants’ answers, as this could influence respondents’ truthfulness in our interviews. Participants may hide their true feelings and provide responses that they subjectively perceive as fitting, but may stand in contrast to their own attitudes, ideals, intentions, or decisions in specific situations [45].