The Lillehammer Scales: Measuring Common Motives for Vacation and Leisure Behavior
MetadataShow full item record
Eight Norwegian leisure and travel motives are identified and partly employed in five different surveys. Four of the motive dimensions (Culture, Friends, Accomplishment and Peace/Quiet) may be viewed as conceptual replications of Beard & Ragheb’s (1983) influential Leisure Motivation Scales. Based mainly on related Norwegian research, four additional dimensions were added: Sun/warmth, Family, Nature and Fitness. Both ‘conventional’ and SEM-based analyses were valuable in assessing the data. All motive dimensions were measured by four-item summed scales, and Cronbach alphas generally suggested fair to good reliability. Neither ceiling nor floor effects were evident. CFA on separate scales also gave encouraging results, but suggested that “Congeneric” measurement models (Pedhazur & Schmelkin, 1991) should be preferred to “Tau-equivalent” and “Parallel measures” versions. Among the eight motive dimensions, Peace/Quiet, Family, Friends and Nature generally appear to be slightly more important than Culture, Fitness, Accomplishment and Sun/Warmth. Data also suggest extensive socio-demographic variation in scale scores, which should receive closer attention in future research. Attempts at assembling the full set of scales into a composite measurement model were less successful. However, useful insights were gained from this modeling. Clearly, some scales are highly correlated, indicating that orthogonal dimensional models are not likely to prove useful. Also, acceptable model fit could often be achieved through small and relatively trivial modifications that did not alter the basic structure of the model. Measurements on most scales were shown to be relatively stable, not changing much from before to after vacation trips. Diverse alterations and modifications of scales and scale items appear not to change results much, suggesting fairly robust procedures. A Norwegian standardization was also undertaken, providing a nationally representative basis for comparing and assessing future research using the scales. Preliminary work on the scales’ validity yielded promising results. Some scale scores were highly correlated with certain leisure behaviors, suggesting simple concurrent validity. Scales also contribute to leisure predictions in larger MIMIC models that include relevant socio-demographic variables. The eight motive dimensions and their measurement scales may accordingly prove useful to future research on vacation and leisure choice in the Norwegian population. Although not put to a formal test, the basic assumptions underlying this research are largely consistent with the results obtained.
Paper I: Tourism Analysis 10(2), Kleiven, J., Measuring Leisure and Travel Motives in Norway: Replicating and Supplementing the Leisure Motivation Scales, pp. 109-122. Copyright 2005 Cognizant Communication Corporation. Reproduced with permission. Published version.Paper II: Kleiven, J., Eight Scales for Leisure Travel Research - Replicating and Revising the Lillehammer Scales, 20 p. Research Report 131/2006. Lillehammer : Lillehammer University College, 2006. Reproduced with permission. Published version.Paper III: Tourism Analysis 10(3), Prebensen, N. K.; Kleiven, J., Stability in Outbound Travel Motivation: A Norwegian Example, pp. 233-245. Copyright 2006 Cognizant Communication Corporation. Reproduced with permission. Published version.Paper IV: Kleiven, J., 2000, Leisure Motives as Predictors of Activities: The Lillehammer Scales in a National Survey, pp. 65-73. In: Ruddy, J.; Flanagan, S. (Eds.), Tourism Destination Marketing: Gaining the Competitive Edge. Copyright 2000 Tourism Research Centre, Dublin Institute of Technology. Reproduced with permission. Published version.Paper V: Journal of Hospitality and Leisure Marketing 14(1), Prebensen, N. K.; Kleiven, J., Determined Sun-Seekers and Others - Travel Motives, Holiday Type, and Holiday Behavior Among Norwegian Charter Tourists, pp. 75-97. Copyright 2006 The Haworth Press, Inc. Full text not available in BORA due to publisher restrictions. The published version is available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J150v14n01_05