INFORMATION CONVERGENCE IN THE LONG TAIL. THE CASE OF TOURISM DESTINATION INFORMATION Alessandro Inversini webatelier.net University of Lugano, Switzerland [email_address] Dimitrios Buhalis ICTHR, Bournemouth University, England [email_address]

SJABLOON VOOR PROSPECTUS GEBRUIKEN Agenda Tourism and Long Tail: objectives of the study Quality of the information Methodology Results (website classification) Results (information quality) Discussion & conclusions

Agenda

Tourism and Long Tail: objectives of the study

Quality of the information

Methodology

Results (website classification)

Results (information quality)

Discussion & conclusions

SJABLOON VOOR PROSPECTUS GEBRUIKEN Tourism and Long Tail: Objectives of the study (e)Tourism is traditionally an information intensive domain (Gretzel, et al., 2000; Buhalis, 2003) Long Tail and Read&Write web are influencing the domain ( Anderson, 2006; Nicholas et al., 2007) Information Overload and Information Entropy (Rogers and Agarwala-Rogers, 1975; Jones et al., 2004; Hiltz and Turoff, 1985) Objectives of the study are to: analyze the information market around a given destination website, starting from the most relevant keywords which the end user inputs in the search engine to reach the destination official web site; study the information sources and providers, as well as content quality with focusing on the unofficial information providers.

Tourism and Long Tail: Objectives of the study

(e)Tourism is traditionally an information intensive domain

(Gretzel, et al., 2000; Buhalis, 2003)

Long Tail and Read&Write web are influencing the domain

( Anderson, 2006; Nicholas et al., 2007)

Information Overload and Information Entropy

(Rogers and Agarwala-Rogers, 1975; Jones et al., 2004; Hiltz and Turoff, 1985)

Objectives of the study are to:

analyze the information market around a given destination website, starting from the most relevant keywords which the end user inputs in the search engine to reach the destination official web site;

study the information sources and providers, as well as content quality with focusing on the unofficial information providers.

SJABLOON VOOR PROSPECTUS GEBRUIKEN Quality of Information The role of the search engine in the information seeking Relationship between user satisfaction and search engine results (Rumpraidt and Donnel, 1999) Information, content and quality have been the main concerns of the knowledge society (Cantoni and Tardini, 2006) Quality of the contents: Accuracy (what? and how?); Authority (who?); Objectivity (why?); Currency (when?); Coverage (what? and for whom?). ( Alexander and Tate 1999)

Quality of Information

The role of the search engine in the information seeking

Relationship between user satisfaction and search engine results

(Rumpraidt and Donnel, 1999)

Information, content and quality have been the main concerns of the knowledge society

(Cantoni and Tardini, 2006)

Quality of the contents:

Accuracy (what? and how?);

Authority (who?);

Objectivity (why?);

Currency (when?);

Coverage (what? and for whom?).

( Alexander and Tate 1999)

SJABLOON VOOR PROSPECTUS GEBRUIKEN M ethodology – Visitlondon.com An usability driven approach: MiLE+ Framework. (Triacca et al., 2005) Search engine (Google) queries on 9 given keywords ( Google Keywords). Classification: official (institutional) websites; unofficial (not institutional) websites. Heuristic driven content quality

M ethodology – Visitlondon.com

An usability driven approach: MiLE+ Framework.

(Triacca et al., 2005)

Search engine (Google) queries on 9 given keywords ( Google Keywords).

Classification:

official (institutional) websites;

unofficial (not institutional) websites.

Heuristic driven content quality

SJABLOON VOOR PROSPECTUS GEBRUIKEN Queries R esults Search results classification Relevant keywords (competition)

Queries R esults

Search results classification

Relevant keywords (competition)

SJABLOON VOOR PROSPECTUS GEBRUIKEN Information Quality Heuristic driven approach (MiLE+) accuracy, authority, objectivity, currency, coverage 1-5 scale Official websites: strong authority (average value 4.8), very good accuracy and objectivity (average value 4.2) good currency (average value 3.8). Unofficial websites: good accuracy and currency (average respectively 3.6 and 3.5) sufficient coverage and conciseness (average respectively 3.8 and 3.9). insufficient objectivity and authority (average values 2.6 and 2.5).

Information Quality

Heuristic driven approach (MiLE+)

accuracy, authority, objectivity, currency, coverage

1-5 scale

Official websites:

strong authority (average value 4.8),

very good accuracy and objectivity (average value 4.2)

good currency (average value 3.8).

Unofficial websites:

good accuracy and currency (average respectively 3.6 and 3.5)

sufficient coverage and conciseness (average respectively 3.8 and 3.9).

insufficient objectivity and authority (average values 2.6 and 2.5).

SJABLOON VOOR PROSPECTUS GEBRUIKEN Information Quality (2) Web2.0 websites? Currency? Objectivity? Authority?

Information Quality (2)

Web2.0 websites?

Currency?

Objectivity?

Authority?

SJABLOON VOOR PROSPECTUS GEBRUIKEN Discussion and Conclusions Prospective travellers are offered a wide range of information providers and a plethora of websites. DMO are integrating Web2.0 and unofficial information Providers (VisitLonon.com). Future work: harvest and organize high quality information Strategy (folksonomies ???)

Discussion and Conclusions

Prospective travellers are offered a wide range of information providers and a plethora of websites.

DMO are integrating Web2.0 and unofficial information Providers (VisitLonon.com).

Future work: harvest and organize high quality information

Strategy (folksonomies ???)

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION PARTNER SPONSOR