and support for tourism is likely to continue and result in the maintenance of positive perceptions of tourism. Support for tourism, despite specific negative impacts, has been demonstrated in a number of research studies (Belisle and Hoy 1980; Bystrzanowski 1989a; Milman and Pizam 1988; Rothman 1978; Thomason, Crompton and Kamp 1979; Tyrell and Spaulding 1984; Var, Kendall and Tarakcioglu 1985). On the other hand, given minimal benefits, the actor is likely to reduce exchange behavior or discontinue the exchange relationship. When perceived benefits appear to reach an unacceptable level, negative perceptions of tourism are likely to emerge. According to Mathieson and Wall,
there is a threshold of tolerance of tourists by hosts which varies both spatially and temporally. As long as the numbers of tourists and their
cumulative impacts remain below this critical level, and economic impacts continue to be positive, the presence of tourists in destinations is usually accepted and welcomed by the majority of the host population. Once the threshold has been exceeded, numerous negative symptoms of discontent make their appearance, ranging from mild apathy and irritation to extreme xenophobia, and from grudging courtesy to open exploitation (1982:141).
The preceding discussion suggests that:
A resident actor will assign a positive value or attitude towards tourism if the benefits meet an acceptable level of satisfaction determined by the actor (Proposition 2a).
A resident actor will assign a negative value or attitude towards tourism if the benefits do not meet an acceptable level of satisfaction determined by the actor
(Proposition 2b).
The concept of reciprocity is probably regarded as most central to social exchange theory. It is defined by Gouldner as "a mutually gratifying pattern of exchanging goods and services," with the understanding that "(a) in the long run the mutual exchange of goods and services will balance out; or (b) if people do not aid those who help them certain penalties will be imposed upon them; or (c) those whom they have helped can be expected to help; or (d) some or all of these" (Gouldner 1960:170). Reciprocity suggests that the resources exchanged should be roughly equivalent. When the nature of resources exchanged differs determining equivalence becomes problematic.
Reciprocity in exchange means that each actor will provide benefits to the other equitably and with units of exchange that are important to the actors. Reciprocity is interpreted and used differently by exchange theorists. For Emerson (1962, 1972), the reciprocity of social relations is expressed as a power-dependence relation: the power of actor A over actor B is equal to and based upon the dependence of actor B upon actor A. These transactions are described as "reciprocally reinforcing events which can be initiated from either end of the relation" (Emerson 1972:45).
and support for tourism is likely to continue and result in the maintenance of positive perceptions of tourism. Support for tourism, despite specific negative impacts, has been demonstrated in a number of research studies (Belisle and Hoy 1980; Bystrzanowski 1989a; Milman and Pizam 1988; Rothman 1978; Thomason, Crompton and Kamp 1979; Tyrell and Spaulding 1984; Var, Kendall and Tarakcioglu 1985). On the other hand, given minimal benefits, the actor is likely to reduce exchange behavior or discontinue the exchange relationship. When perceived benefits appear to reach an unacceptable level, negative perceptions of tourism are likely to emerge. According to Mathieson and Wall,
there is a threshold of tolerance of tourists by hosts which varies both spatially and temporally. As long as the numbers of tourists and their
cumulative impacts remain below this critical level, and economic impacts continue to be positive, the presence of tourists in destinations is usually accepted and welcomed by the majority of the host population. Once the threshold has been exceeded, numerous negative symptoms of discontent make their appearance, ranging from mild apathy and irritation to extreme xenophobia, and from grudging courtesy to open exploitation (1982:141).
The preceding discussion suggests that:
A resident actor will assign a positive value or attitude towards tourism if the benefits meet an acceptable level of satisfaction determined by the actor (Proposition 2a).
A resident actor will assign a negative value or attitude towards tourism if the benefits do not meet an acceptable level of satisfaction determined by the actor
(Proposition 2b).
The concept of reciprocity is probably regarded as most central to social exchange theory. It is defined by Gouldner as "a mutually gratifying pattern of exchanging goods and services," with the understanding that "(a) in the long run the mutual exchange of goods and services will balance out; or (b) if people do not aid those who help them certain penalties will be imposed upon them; or (c) those whom they have helped can be expected to help; or (d) some or all of these" (Gouldner 1960:170). Reciprocity suggests that the resources exchanged should be roughly equivalent. When the nature of resources exchanged differs determining equivalence becomes problematic.
Reciprocity in exchange means that each actor will provide benefits to the other equitably and with units of exchange that are important to the actors. Reciprocity is interpreted and used differently by exchange theorists. For Emerson (1962, 1972), the reciprocity of social relations is expressed as a power-dependence relation: the power of actor A over actor B is equal to and based upon the dependence of actor B upon actor A. These transactions are described as "reciprocally reinforcing events which can be initiated from either end of the relation" (Emerson 1972:45).
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
