Using photo-based interviews to reveal the significance of heritage buildings to cultural tourism experiences.

Abstract

This chapter outlines and critically discusses the innovative qualitative research methods to examine tourists' experiences of the heritage buildings in Hawke's Bay, New Zealand. Heritage buildings are buildings that are regarded as representing shared roots and the origins of identities or belongings. Specifically, this chapter examines the use of a hierarchical probing technique based on the laddering theory applied in marketing research, and the use of photograph-based interviews to facilitate deeper personal narratives from tourists and to elicit the layered meanings attached to their experiences. This contributes to a deeper understanding of cultural tourism, as it elicits the significance and added-value nature of cultural tourists' experiences within a destination generally, such as the value that tourists place on their experiences of heritage buildings within a wider townscape. In contrast, much previous research has examined tourists' experiences in specific attraction or environmental settings.

Research frameworks, methodologies, and assessment methods concerning the adaptive reuse of architectural heritage: a review

“…This forms a chain of means and ends, and as a result, the researcher can learn how interviewees are attracted to different attributes in order to understand their preferences. The application of means-end chain theory is also related to the adaptive reuse of architectural heritage within a heritage preservation context in that this theory is often used to examine and investigate tourist perceptions and preferences (Katahenggam 2020;Lin and Fu 2020), visitor meanings and motivations (Wassenberg et al 2015;Ho et al 2015;Jiang et al 2015;Esfandiar and Bapiri 2016), and heritage tourism experiences (Willson and McIntosh 2010;Abascal 2019;Bapiri et al 2020;Tu 2020). Wassenberg, Goldenberg, and Soule employ the MEC method to investigate the links visitors make between sites (such as botanical gardens) in terms of their attributes, consequences, and values by conducting inperson interviews.…”

Building tourism-resilient communities by incorporating residents’ perceptions? A photo-elicitation study of tourism development in Bruges

“…There are several advantages of using photo-elicitation. Definitely, visual material facilitates rapport between respondent and researcher, triggers respondent’s memories and emotions linked to a particular experience, evokes, often tacit, knowledge and helps express ideas better (Willson and McIntosh, 2010; Richard and Lahman, 2015). In short, “talking through photographs increases respondent reflexivity as they are able to verbalise their experiences and knowledges” (Scarles, 2010, p. 191).…”

“…Ideally, as many proponents of photo-elicitation state, respondents should be given the cameras to capture their own experiences (Willson and McIntosh, 2010; Scarles, 2010; Stedman et al , 2004). However, for this research, we used the first way to implement the photo-elicitation method: using the photographs taken by the researcher.…”

Photo elicitation as a tool for expanded participation in community archaeology

“…These four categories generally complement archaeological and anthropological research questions, making photo elicitation an ideal tool for engaging community members in research around archaeological sites about their knowledge and memory of the materiality of the site. Photo elicitation has been used across the social sciences, including in cultural anthropology and heritage studies (See for example, Beilin 2005;Bell 2010;Van Auken, Frisvoll, and Stewart 2010;Willson and Mcintosh 2010). The method has not been equally adopted as a tool in archaeology, although some archaeologists working in community-based or collaborative projects have incorporated varied elicitation methods into their research, including Photovoice (Dedrick 2018;Castañeda 2009;Fitzjohn 2007).…”