IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i2p391-d1561594.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparison of Tourists’ Spatial–Temporal Behaviors Between Location-Based Service Data and Onsite GPS Tracks

Author

Listed:
  • Colby Parkinson

    (Department of Park, Recreation, and Tourism Management, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA)

  • Bing Pan

    (Department of Park, Recreation, and Tourism Management, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA)

  • Sophie A. Morris

    (Department of Society and Conservation, University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59801, USA)

  • William L. Rice

    (Department of Society and Conservation, University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59801, USA)

  • B. Derrick Taff

    (Department of Park, Recreation, and Tourism Management, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA)

  • Guangqing Chi

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, Sociology, and Education, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA)

  • Peter Newman

    (Department of Park, Recreation, and Tourism Management, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA)

Abstract

Tourism and recreation managers rely on spatial-temporal data to measure visitors’ behavior for gauging carrying capacity and sustainable management. Location-based service (LBS) data, which passively record location data based on mobile devices, may enable managers to measure behaviors while overcoming constraints in labor, logistics, and cost associated with in-person data collection. However, further validation of LBS data at more refined spatial and temporal scales within tourism attractions is needed. We compared observations of salient spatial–temporal measures from a stratified sample of onsite visitors’ GPS traces in a popular U.S. National Park during peak season over two years with a sample of visitors’ traces collected during the same period by a third-party LBS data provider. We described trip characteristics and behaviors within 34 points of interest (POIs) and then pre-processed both datasets into weighted, directed networks that treated POIs as nodes and flow between POIs as edges. Both datasets reported similar proportions of day-use visitors (~79%) and had moderate-to-strong correlations across networks depicting visitor flow ( r = 0.72–0.85, p < 0.001). However, relative to the onsite data, LBS data underestimated the number of POIs the visitors stopped by and differed in its rank of popular POIs, underestimating the length of time visitors spent in POIs (z = 1, p ≤ 0.001) and overestimating visitation to the most popular POIs (z = 180, p = 0.044). Our findings suggest that LBS data may be helpful for identifying trends or tracking tourist movement in aggregate and at crude spatial and temporal scales, but they are too sparse and noisy to reliably measure exact movement patterns, visitation rates, and stay time within attractions.

Suggested Citation

  • Colby Parkinson & Bing Pan & Sophie A. Morris & William L. Rice & B. Derrick Taff & Guangqing Chi & Peter Newman, 2025. "A Comparison of Tourists’ Spatial–Temporal Behaviors Between Location-Based Service Data and Onsite GPS Tracks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-22, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:2:p:391-:d:1561594
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/2/391/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/2/391/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:2:p:391-:d:1561594. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.