Field experiments: Overcoming the limitations of survey experiments for actionable behavioural insights

Historically, one-off cross-sectional survey studies have dominated empirical research in tourism and hospitality. The inability to draw causal conclusions from such data has led to an increased uptake of survey experiments, which are easy and affordable to conduct and can identify causal relationships between constructs under controlled conditions. Survey experiments, however, have a severe limitation: they do not provide insights into real behaviour, restricting researchers' ability to generate actionable insights and reliable practical recommendations. This article offers a systematic comparison of three approaches (one-off cross-sectional survey studies, survey experiments, and field experiments) and provides step-by-step guidance on the design and implementation of field experiments and quasi-experimental field studies. • Systematic comparison of cross-sectional surveys, survey experiments, and field experiments • Field experiments measure real behaviour, overcoming limitations of survey-based methods. • Empirical evidence of discrepancies between survey and field study conclusions • Detailed step-by-step guide for conducting field experiments and quasi-experiments • Discussion of unique ethical considerations in tourism field experimentation

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Annals of Tourism Research
Published
2025-11-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2025.104080
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Diverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
12.60
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Field experiments: Overcoming the limitations of survey experiments for actionable behavioural insights

Sara Dolničar, Giampaolo Viglia, Fidan Kurtaliqi
3 citations
Annals of Tourism Research
Diverse Aspects of Tourism Research
12.60
article

Field experiments: Overcoming the limitations of survey experiments for actionable behavioural insights

Sara Dolničar, Giampaolo Viglia, Fidan Kurtaliqi
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Historically, one-off cross-sectional survey studies have dominated empirical research in tourism and hospitality. The inability to draw causal conclusions from such data has led to an increased uptake of survey experiments, which are easy and affordable to conduct and can identify causal relationships between constructs under controlled conditions. Survey experiments, however, have a severe limitation: they do not provide insights into real behaviour, restricting researchers' ability to generate actionable insights and reliable practical recommendations. This article offers a systematic comparison of three approaches (one-off cross-sectional survey studies, survey experiments, and field experiments) and provides step-by-step guidance on the design and implementation of field experiments and quasi-experimental field studies. • Systematic comparison of cross-sectional surveys, survey experiments, and field experiments • Field experiments measure real behaviour, overcoming limitations of survey-based methods. • Empirical evidence of discrepancies between survey and field study conclusions • Detailed step-by-step guide for conducting field experiments and quasi-experiments • Discussion of unique ethical considerations in tourism field experimentation

Annals of Tourism ResearchVol. 116
Audencia Business School (FR), The University of Queensland (AU), Kyung Hee University (KR), University of Portsmouth (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Diverse Aspects of Tourism Research
12.60
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.