Expectation of Travel Experiences with Wearable Computing Devices

  • Iis TussyadiahEmail author
Conference paper


Based on a content analysis of textual data containing people’s ideas to use wearable computing devices, this paper identified five patterns of personal motivations to use wearable devices for travel and tourism experiences. They are exploration, adventure tourism, travel documentation, travel reporting, and positive transformation. These patterns suggest a potential transformation in tourists’ behaviour due to perceived new ways of interactions with technology and with the near surroundings. The different features and functionalities that are unique to wearable technology trigger changes in three areas: the shift from tourists to explorers, an explosion of first-person visual travel narratives, and more social travel supported by real-time connectivity. Further, the findings also suggest a potential shift in terms of how personal technology is situated in human experience, from mediation to embodiment.


Wearable computing Tourism experience Mediation Embodiment 


  1. Dickey, M. R. (2013, March). How Google Glass will Revolutionize 9 Industries. Retrieved from
  2. Ehn, P. & Linde, P. (2004). Embodied interaction: Designing beyond the physical-digital divide. In Futureground, Design Research Society International Conference. 2004. Melbourne: Monash University.Google Scholar
  3. Farber, D. (2013, March). Google Glass and the Third Half of Your Brain. Retrieved from
  4. Grunert, K. G., Beckmann, S. C., & Sørensen, E. (2001). Means-end chains and laddering: An inventory of problems and an agenda for research. In T. C. Reynolds & J. C. Olson (Eds.), Understanding consumer decision-making: The means-end approach to marketing and advertising strategy (pp. 63–90). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  5. Gutman, J. (1982). A means-end chain model based on consumer categorization processes. Journal of Marketing, 46(2), 60–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in educational settings. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  7. Ihde, D. (1990). Technology and the lifeworld: From garden to earth. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Kassarjian, H. H. (1977). Content analysis in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 4(1), 8–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Neuhofer, B., Buhalis, D., & Ladkin, A. (2012). Conceptualising technology enhanced destination experiences. Journal of Destination Marketing and Management, 1(1–2), 36–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Perkins, W. S., & Reynolds, T. J. (1988). The explanatory power of values in judgements: Validation of the means-end perspective. Advances in Consumer Research, 15, 122–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Prabu, K. (2012, April). How Google’s Project Glass is going to Revolutionize Travellers and Travel Companies. Retrieved from
  12. Reynolds, T. J., & Perkins, W. S. (1987). Cognitive differentiation analysis: a new methodology for assessing the validity of means-end hierarchies. Advances in Consumer Research, 14, 109–113.Google Scholar
  13. Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Tate (2012, May). Google Glasses (Project Glass): The Future of HumanComputer Interactions? Retrieved from
  15. Tussyadiah, I. P. (2012). A concept of location-based social network marketing. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 29(3), 205–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tussyadiah, I. (2013). When Cell Phones Become Travel Buddies: Social Attribution to Mobile Phones in Travel. In L. Cantoni & Z. Xiang (Eds.), Information and communication technologies in tourism 2013. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  17. Tussyadiah, I. P., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2008). Marketing places through first-person stories—an analysis of Pennsylvania roadtripper blog. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 25(3–4), 299–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Tussyadiah, I. P., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2009). Mediating tourists’ experiences—access to places via shared videos. Annals of Tourism Research, 36(1), 24–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Tussyadiah, I. P., Fesenmaier, D. R., & Yoo, Y. (2008). Designing interactions in tourism mediascape: Identification of patterns for Mobile 2.0 platform. In P. O’Connor, W. Hopken & U. Gretzel (Eds.), Information and communication technologies in tourism. Vienna, New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  20. Tussyadiah, I. P., Park, S., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2011). Assessing the effectiveness of consumer narratives for destination marketing. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 35(1), 64–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Tussyadiah, I. P., & Zach, F. (2012). The role of geo-based technology in place experiences. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(2), 780–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Wang, D., Park, S., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2012). The role of smartphones in mediating the touristic experience. Journal of Travel Research, 51(4), 371–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hospitality Business Management, College of BusinessWashington State UniversityVancouverUSA

Personalised recommendations