Next Article in Journal
Risk and Resilience in Tourism: How Political Instability and Social Conditions Influence Destination Choices
Previous Article in Journal
Destination Buzzers: Netnographying Digital Nomads
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Generation Z and Travel Motivations: The Impact of Age, Gender, and Residence

1
REMIT—Research on Economics, Management and Information Technologies, Portucalense University, 4200-072 Porto, Portugal
2
CEGOT—Centre of Studies in Geography and Spatial Planning, Humanities Faculty, University of Coimbra, 3004-530 Coimbra, Portugal
3
ISCET—Instituto Superior de Ciências Empresariais e do Turismo, Rua de Cedofeita, 285, 4050-180 Porto, Portugal
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Tour. Hosp. 2025, 6(2), 82; https://doi.org/10.3390/tourhosp6020082
Submission received: 17 March 2025 / Revised: 29 April 2025 / Accepted: 8 May 2025 / Published: 13 May 2025

Abstract

:
This study investigates the relationship between demographic factors and travel motivations among Generation Z leisure tourists through the lens of the Travel Career Pattern (TCP) theory. More specifically, the research focuses on how gender, age, and area of residence influence the travel motivations of Generation Z. Using a quantitative approach, data were collected from 303 respondents aged 18 to 28 through an online survey. The questionnaire assessed 14 motivational factors and analyzed them in relation to the participants’ demographic characteristics using linear regression models. Results indicate that gender and age significantly influence travel motivations, with women showing higher interest in personal development and social relationships, while men prioritize nature and adventure. Furthermore, rural residents exhibit greater motivation for autonomy, self-development and self-realization, while urban residents lean towards novelty and social interactions. The findings offer valuable insights for tourism marketers, emphasizing the importance of creating segmented marketing campaigns based on demographic factors. It also contributed to overcoming the lack of studies that specifically cover this interrelation between the motivational factors of Generation Z and the demographic factors of age, gender and area of residence. Nevertheless, this study also has limitations, such as the use of a non-representative sample and the focus on quantitative methods, suggesting that future research should adopt qualitative approaches and examine additional demographic variables to gain deeper insights into youth travel motivations.

1. Introduction

Understanding travel motivations is crucial in predicting travel behavior, developing tourism strategies, and enhancing the overall tourist experience. As an intrinsic part of human behavior, motivations are complex, evolving, and influenced by multiple factors, including psychological, social, and demographic elements (Crompton, 1979; Dann, 1981). Several theoretical models, including Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (Maslow, 1970) and Pearce and Lee’s Travel Career Pattern (TCP) theory (Pearce & Lee, 2005), provide frameworks for analyzing these motivations. However, the research that has been carried out in this field is not sufficient and it is important to develop more studies that also cover more specific target audiences (Lam & Hsu, 2006; I. Egger et al., 2020).
Travel motivation is commonly acknowledged as a crucial concept to most tourism professionals and theorists (Lam & Hsu, 2006) and has been known as a driving force behind understanding traveler’s behavior (Venkatesh, 2006). However, the concept of travel motivation is not new (Pearce & Caltabiano, 1983). Researchers around the globe have applied travel motivation to determine individuals’ satisfaction levels (Snepenger et al., 2006; Lemmetyinen et al., 2016; Çelik & Dedeoğlu, 2019; Preko et al., 2019), predict leisure participation levels (Yan & Halpenny, 2019), identify travel patterns (Cavagnaro & Staffieri, 2015), understand tourists’ travel decisions and consumption behavior (Chang et al., 2015) as well as to develop more effective strategies and policies to increase demand for tourism (Heung et al., 2001; Papatheodorou, 2006). The complex nature of this concept has pushed many researchers to come up with different travel motives, and the central themes behind it revolved around push and pull factors, that have been extensively employed to assess tourists’ travel motivations (Kanagaraj & Bindu, 2013; Michael et al., 2017; Wijaya et al., 2018). Another context that has been frequently associated with tourist behavior and travel motivations is sociodemographic characteristics (Kara & Mkwizu, 2020). The role of demographic factors on tourists’ destination choice has been proven of significant importance and research shows that there is a link between demographic factors and visitors’ participation in tourism activities (Woodside & Lysonski, 1989; Um & Crompton, 1990; Moscardo et al., 1996; Begashe et al., 2024). Factors such as age, gender, family structure, social background, among others, have an impact on the decision of an individual to participate in leisure activities (Mieczkowski, 1990; Collins & Tisdell, 2002; Foot, 2004).
Currently, there are four identifiable generations whose age permits them to engage in travel activities (Hysa et al., 2021). Those are Baby Boomers (born between 1940 and 1959), Generation X (born between 1960 and 1979), Generation Y (born between 1980 and 1994), and Generation Z (born after 1995) (Francis & Hoefel, 2018; Pricope Vancia et al., 2023). Members of those generations exhibit specific behaviors and consumption patterns due to the context in which they were born and lived most of their lives. In this context, it becomes important to address these demographic issues and the influence they may have on leisure travel choice patterns, especially among younger generations, i.e., Generation Z. This generation is unique in that it is the first truly digital generation, heavily influenced by global connectivity, rapid technological advancements, and socio-economic challenges, such as the 2008 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic (Pinho & Gomes, 2023). These experiences have shaped their consumption habits, social behaviors, and travel preferences. Unlike their predecessors, Generation Z values personalized, immersive experiences, and their travel decisions are significantly shaped by online reviews, social media influencers, and digital platforms (Richards, 2015). Therefore, understanding the travel behavior of Generation Z is increasingly relevant as this cohort emerges as a key driver of global tourism. Representing over 30% of the global population, around 27% of the workforce and 40% of global consumers (OECD, 2021), Gen Z is not only shaping current travel trends but is also poised to become the core consumer group in the tourism sector. Their preferences for authenticity, digital experiences, and social engagement influence local economies and destination strategies, especially in urban and culturally dynamic areas. Moreover, their travel spending contributes significantly to accommodation, food services, and creative tourism industries, particularly in youth-centric destinations (Pricope Vancia et al., 2023). As such, exploring their motivations and, more specifically, the influence of specific demographic factors, is essential to designing tourism products aligned with their values and maximizing their socioeconomic impact.
Thus, this study seeks to fill this gap by examining how gender, age, and area of residence influence the travel motivations of Generation Z travelers. Using the TCP theory as a conceptual framework, the study explores how different individual characteristics relate to travel preferences among young tourists. Specifically, the research aims to determine how living in urban versus rural areas affects motivation to travel. By providing a detailed analysis of these relationships, this study offers practical insights into tourism marketing and destination management.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Travel Motivation and the Travel Career Pattern (TCP) Theory

Travel motivations have long been a central theme in tourism research, given their role in explaining why people travel and what they seek from their travel experiences. Motivation can be understood as an internal psychological drive that compels individuals to act in specific ways (Iso-Ahola, 1982). In tourism, motivations are typically categorized into push factors, which are the internal desires that drive a person to travel, and pull factors, which are the external attributes of a destination that attract tourists (Crompton, 1979; Dann, 1981). Push factors might include the need for relaxation, adventure, or socialization, while pull factors could include a destination’s cultural richness, scenic beauty, or entertainment options (S. Kim & Lehto, 2013).
Over the years, this topic has been studied by several authors. Hills (1965) addressed tourists’ motives as a response to psychosomatic exhaustion, while Crompton (1979) defined motivations as just one of many contributing factors that inspire individuals to travel to different places and experience new things (Um & Crompton, 1990). Crompton (1979) and Todorović and Jovičić (2016), argued that the main motivation for going on vacation is the search for a break from the usual schedule and settings that allow them to relax and reduce mental fatigue. Dann (1981) confirmed that tourists’ state of mind influences them to travel and visit new places. Li and Cai (2013) and Simková and Holzner (2014) explored individuals’ travel patterns that are closely related to psychological patterns, and which can be analyzed to predict the factors that motivate people to travel. More recently, Yousaf et al. (2018) carried out a comprehensive literature review related to the motivations of tourists, with a focus on young people, analyzing existing motivational theories. Thus, the constant development and changes in travel and tourism continue to drive the need to identify tourists’ motivations for traveling. Understanding the motivational forces behind tourists’ behaviors can help destination managers adjust their offerings to become more attractive and attract their target audience. In this context, Yousaf et al. (2018) identified the main motivational theories widely accepted in tourism. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs served as the basis and study for other theories, such as Dann’s Theory of push and pull motivations, the Travel Career Ladder (TLC) and the theory of Travel Career Patterns (TCP). The TCP model emphasizes that travel motivations evolve as individuals move through different stages of their lives, reflecting changing goals and desires. For instance, younger travelers may be motivated by novelty and excitement, while older individuals may prioritize self-actualization and personal growth (Pearce & Lee, 2005). This theory is particularly useful in studying youth tourism, as it recognizes that motivations are not static but change with the individual’s personal development (Oktadiana & Agarwal, 2022). The TCP is centered on 14 motivational factors: novelty; escape/relax; relationship (strengthen); autonomy; nature; self-development (host-site involvement); stimulation; self-development (personal development); relationship (security); self-actualize; isolation; nostalgia; romance; and recognition. These factors play an extremely important role in determining the motivations that lead individuals to travel to distant places and influence travelers’ decision-making processes (Pearce & Lee, 2005).

2.2. Youth Travel and Generation Z

People’s expectations, requirements, or preferences regarding the purpose, place, and time of their trips vary depending on their individual characteristics and, consequently, their age (Hysa et al., 2021). Therefore, the tourism industry has evolved with each generation, adding new dynamics (D. Y. Kim & Park, 2019). Understanding how generational changes affect tourist behavior can help predict and adapt to future tourism trends more effectively (Gardiner et al., 2014).
The youngest generation, Generation Z (born between 1996 and 2010), present different behaviors and expectations in tourism, influenced by globalization, technological advances and the increasing digitalization of society (Urry & Larsen, 2012). This generation actively uses Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), promotes the personalization of tourist experiences and contributes to the growth of the collaborative economy (Hamari et al., 2016). Often referred to as “digital natives” (Prensky, 2001), this generation grew up in a highly connected environment and relied almost exclusively on the internet to plan and share tourism experiences (Monaco, 2018; R. Egger et al., 2016). Thus, in this context, the travel industry acknowledges the importance of understanding travel motivations of young travelers (Pricope Vancia et al., 2023).
According to UNWTO (2008), travel for young people, or youth travel, includes all independent travel for periods of less than one year by people aged between 16 and 29 motivated, in part or entirely, by the desire to get to know other cultures, build life experience and/or benefit from formal and informal learning opportunities outside the usual environment. Youth travel has become one of the fastest growing segments representing 23% of global international arrivals in 2019 (WYSE Travel Confederation, 2023). The advances in technology have facilitated physical mobility and created more widespread social relationships, which has further strengthened the trend towards mobility (Richards, 2015).
Within this segment of youth tourism, Generation Z stands out for its distinct travel behaviors and preferences. As digital natives, Generation Z is more likely to plan and organize trips online, using social media and review platforms like TripAdvisor or Booking.com to gather information and make decisions (Monaco, 2018). Their travel motivations are influenced by a strong desire for personalized and unique experiences, cultural immersion, and sustainability (Buffa, 2015; Richards, 2015). Unlike previous generations, Generation Z places a high value on authenticity and social responsibility in their travel choices. They are more likely to engage in sustainable tourism practices and seek out destinations that align with their ethical values, such as supporting local communities or protecting the environment (Han, 2021). Furthermore, the advent of the sharing economy, with platforms like Airbnb, has facilitated Generation Z’s preference for more personalized and budget-friendly travel options (Hamari et al., 2016).
Recent studies have deepened our understanding of Generation Z’s distinct behaviors and expectations as tourists. Lee and Lee (2024) examined urban nightlife and found that immersive, socially engaging experiences appeal strongly to Gen Z travelers, reinforcing the importance of designing nightlife experiences that balance novelty and social connectedness. Similarly, Weerasekera and Assella (2025) demonstrated that immersive travel experiences can increase travel intention by enhancing feelings of happiness, suggesting that emotional resonance is a critical motivator for this cohort. In parallel, research by Zhang et al. (2022) explored how Gen Z’s familiarity with digital tools and expectations for innovation—shaped by the COVID-19 pandemic—affect their behavior toward technology use in hospitality contexts. This reinforces the notion that Gen Z seeks efficiency, personalization, and interactivity in both the planning and consumption stages of travel.
Moreover, Robinson and Schänzel (2019) introduced the idea of a “tourism influx”, describing how Gen Z travel experiences are increasingly shaped by digital mobility and flexible social structures. These tourists construct highly individualized and socially curated travel narratives, often prioritizing authenticity and ethical consumption. Complementing this perspective, Dale and Ritchie (2020) investigated the motivations and constraints influencing Gen Z in structured travel settings, such as school excursions, revealing that even institutional travel contexts must now account for this generation’s desire for autonomy, self-expression, and experiential richness. Together, these findings underscore that Gen Z’s travel motivations are multidimensional, shaped by both psychological and technological factors, and that their expectations are redefining the nature of youth tourism globally. Therefore, it can be argued that Generation Z currently plays a crucial role in shaping the future of the tourism industry and seems very important to understand better which more specific demographic factors can influence different travel behaviors among this segment.

2.3. Demographic Factors and Travel Motivations

Demographic factors are essential in understanding travel motivations, offering insights into how different populations prioritize and engage with travel experiences. Analyzing demographics such as age, gender, and area of residence is crucial because these factors can shape travelers’ motivations, preferences, and behaviors in unique ways. Studies have consistently shown that demographic factors influence travel motivations, as illustrated by variations in travel motives across diverse nationalities (You et al., 2000; S. Kim & Prideaux, 2005), age groups (Luo & Deng, 2008; Irimias et al., 2016), and even specific tourism forms (Gu et al., 2015). However, although most existing studies on travel motivations emphasize demographic elements such as age, gender, and income (Yung-Kun et al., 2015; Marques et al., 2018), little attention has been addressed to the area of residence. When residence area is mentioned, it is often grouped alongside other sociodemographic factors without isolating its distinct influence.
Studies like those by Kozak (2002) and Fan et al. (2015) show that motivations can differ across international travelers and various destination types. However, they lack emphasis on how motivations might vary based on a traveler’s local area of residence within these regions. Even when motivation differences are noted across large geographical contexts, the localized impacts of living in urban vs. rural settings are largely unexplored. Some researchers, such as Wade et al. (2001) and Mkwizu (2018), focus on regional tourism patterns, often examining motivations specific to nature or history-based tourism in certain countries. Still, these studies frequently treat area of residence as secondary to other sociodemographic factors, overlooking the potential distinctions between motivations of travelers from different local contexts within the same region.
Therefore, this research seeks to study the influence of age, gender, and more specifically the area of residence as particularly influential yet underexplored dimension, contributing to a more nuanced understanding of travel motivations within youth tourism and offering a valuable perspective to tourism practitioners and policymakers.
The importance of age as a demographic factor is reflected in contrasting motivations between younger and older travelers. Previous research reveals that younger tourists often seek novelty and adventure, while older travelers might prioritize relaxation or cultural learning (Ma et al., 2018; Kara & Mkwizu, 2020). However, there are inconsistencies, such as seen in the findings of Luo and Deng (2008) where age was seen to negatively impact travel motivation, suggesting younger tourists are more motivated by novelty. These differing findings underscore the need to further explore age’s role in shaping travel motivation.
Gender, too, affects travel preferences, with studies identifying differing motivations between male and female tourists across various settings (Yung-Kun et al., 2015). Gender-specific motives may involve distinct preferences for adventure or relaxation, and understanding these nuances allows for more tailored marketing and service approaches within the tourism sector. As women are often more motivated by social and cultural experiences, men may be more drawn to adventure and outdoor activities (Collins & Tisdell, 2002).
The area of residence adds another layer, as travel motivation and travel behavior may differ between urban and rural residents due to variations in lifestyle, access to travel information, and exposure to travel opportunities (Djeri et al., 2014). Urban residents might exhibit higher motivations for nature-based escapes or adventure tourism, whereas rural residents may seek cultural or urban experiences when traveling. While area of residence remains a less-studied aspect of travel motivations, its consideration can highlight broader behavioral patterns that are critical for targeted marketing and product development (Djeri et al., 2014). The area of residence, particularly regarding the distinction between urban and rural living environments, has received scarce attention in tourism literature. Urban residents may have greater access to diverse cultural experiences and are often more motivated by novelty and social interactions, while rural residents might prioritize nature, autonomy, and escape from daily routines.
Since the present study focuses primarily on psychological motivations as outlined in the TCP framework, it is important to recognize that external factors—such as destination characteristics (e.g., natural vs. built environments, urban vs. rural zones) and socioeconomic conditions (e.g., income, employment, education level)—also play a crucial role in shaping travel behavior. For instance, travelers’ choices may be influenced by accessibility, local infrastructure, or perceived safety (Fan et al., 2015). Moreover, income disparities can impact not only the frequency of travel but also the type of experience sought (Djeri et al., 2014). Although these destination-level variables fall outside the scope of this study, they remain relevant to understanding the full complexity of travel motivations and warrant future inclusion in multi-layered analyses.
Thus, this study intends to answer the following research questions:
Research Question 1 (RQ1):
How does gender influence travel motivation among Generation Z travelers?
Research Question 2 (RQ2):
How do age differences within Generation Z influence travel motivation?
Research Question 3 (RQ3):
How does the area of residence impact travel motivation among Generation Z travelers?

3. Methods

3.1. Sample and Data Collection

The sample for this study was collected through a questionnaire, based on the TCP proposed by Pearce and Lee (2005) and adapted to investigate the main motivational factors that can influence the leisure travel options of Generation Z. It was made available online through social networks (LinkedIn and Facebook) and the authors’ contact networks between 1 July and 31 December 2024. In this way, it is a non-probabilistic sample collected for convenience. The target audience is young Portuguese people over the age of 18 and under 28 years old. Participation in the study was anonymous and voluntary, and informed consent was obtained from all participants. A questionnaire pre-test was carried out with 10 participants with different sociodemographic characteristics to assess their understanding of the questions and the average response time. The pre-test results revealed that participants had no difficulty understanding the questions, and the average response time was 5 min. The final sample has 303 participants.

3.2. Measures

The questionnaire, which was adapted from Pearce and Lee (2005), consisted of the following two sections: (i) questions relating to the sociodemographic characterization of the participants and (ii) motivational factors for travel consisting of 48 items divided into 14 factors (novelty, with four items; escape/relax, with four items; relationship (strengthen), with three items; autonomy, with three items; nature, with two items; self-development (host-site involvement), with five items; stimulation, with four items; self-development (personal development), with four items; relationship (security), with four items; self-actualize, with four items; isolation, with three items; nostalgia, with two items; romance, with two items, and recognition, with four items). All items were measured on a 5-point Likert scale, with 1 being not at all important and 5 being very important.

3.3. Data Analysis

Firstly, a statistical analysis of the items measuring each construct was conducted using SPSS software (v.25) to ensure data quality and descriptive consistency. Subsequently, linear regressions were performed using the Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) estimation method to explore the relationships between participants’ sociodemographic characteristics and their motivational factors for taking a trip. The use of OLS regression offers several advantages: it provides unbiased and efficient parameter estimates under standard assumptions, is straightforward to interpret, and allows for quantifying the individual contribution of each predictor variable. This approach is particularly useful for identifying significant demographic predictors of travel motivation in a clear and statistically robust manner.
The estimated simple regression was specified by the following equation:
Yi = β0 + β1Xi + εi
where
  • Yi = dependent variable (gender, age and residence);
  • Xi = independent variable (motivational factors to travel);
  • Β = intercept;
  • εi = error term (the difference between the observed and predicted value for observation).

4. Results

4.1. Sociodemographic Description of Participants

The study sample consists of 303 participants. Regarding sociodemographic characterization (Table 1), 58.2% are female, 38% male and 3.6% other. Regarding age, 48.5% of participants are between 18 and 20 years old, 28.4% are between 21 and 23 years old, 13.2% are between 24 and 26 years old, and 9.9% are between 27 and 28 years old. 67.7% are students, 22.8% are employees, 4.6% are self-employed and 5% are unemployed. Regarding residence, 67% live in an urban area, 19.8% in a rural area, 9.2% in a beach area, 1% in a mountain area and 3% on an island.

4.2. Descriptive Statistics of Items

Table 2 shows the mean and standard deviation of the items that measure the 14 motivational factors.
On average, the motivational factor most valued by participants was novelty (M = 4.27), followed by escape/relaxation (M = 4.19), self-development (personal development) (M = 4.11), nature (M = 4.06) and stimulation (M = 4.06). The motivational factor least valued by participants was recognition (M = 2.92). Figure 1 shows the average response values to the items by motivational factors.

4.3. Relationship Between Motivational Factors and Sociodemographic Characteristics of Participants

The results of the estimations of the simple linear regressions between gender, age and area of residence of the participants are found in Table 3. Given the objective of the study, the dependent variables were the sociodemographic characteristics (gender, age and residence) and the independent variables were the motivational factors.
Regarding gender (1—male; 2—female), the results reveal that men are more willing to travel motivated by Nature. All other factors, except autonomy and self-development (personal development), which are not statistically significant, are motivational factors for women to travel. Within the motivational factors, being a woman has a greater impact on the motivational factors of self-development (personal development) (β = 0.236), stimulation (β = 0.216) and novelty (β = 0.201).
In terms of age (1—18 to 20 years; 2—21 to 23 years; 3—24 to 26 years; and 4—27 and 28 years), the youngest participants within the sample’s target audience have the greatest impact on motivational factors. Age was not statistically significant in affecting motivations regarding stimulation, relationship (security), isolation, nostalgia and recognition. The fact that the participants are younger has a more positive impact on the motivational factors of romance (β = −0.193), escape/relax (β = −0.158) and nature (β = −0.150).
In terms of residence (1—urban area; 2—rural area, beach, mountain or islands), the fact that participants live in a rural area, beach, mountain or islands positively affects the motivational factors of autonomy (β = 0.041), self-development (host-site involvement) (β = 0.100), and self-actualize (β = 0.052). The participants’ residence in an urban area positively affects the remaining motivational factors.

5. Discussion of Findings

This study underscores the diversity of travel motivations within Generation Z, influenced by demographic factors such as gender, age, and, with particular attention, area of residence. Each of these factors shapes travel preferences in unique ways, providing important insights into tourism marketing strategies.
Gender has a strong influence on several motivational factors. while women place higher importance on self-development (personal development), stimulation and novelty, men, on the other hand, were more motivated by nature. Therefore, considering the research question “(RQ1): How does gender influence travel motivations among Generation Z travelers?”, the findings indicate that gender influences travel motivations (Cheng et al., 2024), with women more likely to seek social interactions and personal development opportunities, while men are drawn to nature and outdoor activities (Maiurro & Brandão, 2024). These findings are consistent with previous studies, suggesting that women tend to seek travel experiences that provide personal enrichment and social connections (Collins & Tisdell, 2002). Women’s interest in novelty may reflect a broader desire for exploration and self-discovery through travel. Tourism marketers can use these insights to tailor campaigns more specifically according to gender of Generation Z travelers (Meng & Uysal, 2008). Promoting experiences like wellness retreats, cultural immersion programs, and social travel experiences may resonate more for women. For men, focusing on nature-based adventure travel, such as hiking trips, eco-tours, and outdoor activities, could prove more effective. Understanding these gender-based differences allows for more precise and effective marketing strategies that cater to the unique motivations of each group.
Considering age, younger participants are more likely to prioritize romance, escape/relax and nature as found by Mitsuhashi and Wada (2025). As a tourist group, these individuals are seeking a break from their daily routines, often driven by the desire to escape the pressures of early adulthood, school, or family responsibilities. Therefore, considering the research question “(RQ2) How do age differences within Generation Z influence travel motivation?”, the results indicate that Generation Z reflects a natural progression from the desire for relaxation and escape among younger travelers to a focus on personal growth and self-actualization for older members of the generation (Mavrin et al., 2024). The findings also align with the Travel Career Pattern theory, which suggests that travel motivations evolve with age and reflect changing life goals and personal development stages (Pearce & Lee, 2005). Younger individuals are more likely to be motivated by short-term desires for fun, relaxation, and escape, while older individuals may view travel as an opportunity for personal and professional growth. For tourism providers, this suggests that marketing communication should vary according to age within Generation Z (Yamagishi et al., 2024). For younger travelers, promotions that emphasize excitement, adventure, and the opportunity to escape from the stress of daily life will likely resonate. For older Generation Z travelers, messaging should focus on the personal and professional development opportunities that travel can offer, such as educational tours, volunteering programs, or transformative travel experiences.
The area of residence also significantly impacted travel motivation (Qiao et al., 2024). While rural residents were more motivated by autonomy, self-development and self-realization, urban residents were more motivated by all other motivational factors. These findings suggest that the environment in which individuals live shapes their travel preferences, with urban residents seeking new and diverse experiences, while rural residents are drawn to the tranquility and solitude of nature. Thus, considering the research question “(RQ3): How does the area of residence impact travel motivation among Generation Z travelers?”, results indicate that the environment in which Generation Z travelers live shapes their travel preferences. Urban residents, surrounded by social and cultural diversity in their daily lives, may seek even greater novelty and social engagement when they travel. Meanwhile, rural residents, accustomed to more tranquil surroundings, are motivated by a desire for autonomy and a deep connection to nature, reflecting a preference for experiences that offer relaxation and solitude. These findings also are consistent with research suggesting that the area of residence influences leisure preferences and travel motivations (Djeri et al., 2014). Urban residents, accustomed to the fast-paced, multicultural life of cities, may seek novelty and opportunities to meet new people, as their everyday lives are already rich in social stimuli. Conversely, rural residents, who may experience less daily social interaction and cultural diversity, are drawn to nature and autonomy, seeking travel experiences that offer a break from routine and greater personal freedom (Zhuang & Wang, 2024).
However, it is also important to distinguish between generational characteristics and those associated with life stage. While many travel behaviors observed among Gen Z—such as a desire for novelty, escape, or personal development—are typical of young adults more broadly, Gen Z’s motivations are also shaped by their specific historical and cultural context. As digital natives who have come of age during global crises such as the 2008 financial downturn and the COVID-19 pandemic, Gen Z exhibits heightened sensitivity to sustainability, ethics, and social connectedness (Han, 2021; Hysa et al., 2021). Therefore, their travel behavior reflects both generational identity and the transitional life stage they occupy. A hybrid perspective that acknowledges both factors provides a more accurate lens for interpreting their motivations (Gardiner et al., 2014).
For tourism businesses and marketers, this analysis highlights the importance of tailoring travel experiences to different living environments. Urban residents may respond well to offerings that emphasize unique cultural or social experiences, such as festivals, city tours, or international travel. Conversely, rural residents may prefer adventure tourism, eco-tourism, or destinations that offer opportunities for solitude and self-guided exploration.

6. Conclusions

This study brings some important implications for tourism marketers and destination managers. The differences in travel motivations based on gender, age, and area of residence highlight the need for more targeted and segmented marketing strategies and show the complexity of travel motivations within this Generation Z. Each of these demographic factors contributes to a distinct set of travel motivations, underscoring the need for tailored marketing strategies in the tourism sector. In terms of gender, the data reinforces the importance of personal growth and social interaction for women, while men are more inclined toward adventure and nature. The age within Generation Z shows a clear progression from a desire for relaxation and escape among younger individuals to a focus on self-actualization and personal development as they grow older. Finally, the area of residence results reveal that urban and rural residents have different travel needs, with urbanites seeking novelty and rural residents valuing autonomy and natural environments. The interest in this study proved to be particularly relevant in the analysis of the demographic factor related to the area of residence, as the literature currently available on this point is clearly insufficient.
Thus, this study contributes to the growing body of literature on youth tourism and contributes to more personalized and effective marketing campaigns among Generation Z travelers. Tailoring travel experiences and messages to the specific motivations of different demographic groups within Generation Z can enhance engagement, increase customer satisfaction, and ultimately drive tourism demand.

7. Limitations and Suggestions for Further Studies

During this study it was possible to identify limitations. The non-probabilistic nature of the sample limits the generalizability of the findings, and the use of a purely quantitative approach may have overlooked more nuanced motivational factors. Future research should consider employing qualitative methods, such as interviews or focus groups, to gain deeper insight into the motivations of Generation Z. Additionally, further studies should explore other demographic factors, such as income and level and area of the education and examine how these variables interact with travel motivations.
By continuing to investigate the complexities of youth tourism, researchers can contribute to a more holistic understanding of this emerging market segment, helping to shape the future of tourism and better meet the needs of young travelers. It is also important to conduct longitudinal studies to examine how the travel motivations of Generation Z evolve over time.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.M.; methodology, S.G.; software SPSS, S.G.; validation, J.M. and S.G.; formal analysis, J.M. and S.G.; investigation, J.M., M.F., M.R. and H.M.; resources J.M., M.F., M.R. and H.M.; data curation, S.G.; writing—original draft preparation, J.M.; writing—review and editing, J.M., S.G., M.F., M.R. and H.M.; visualization, J.M.; supervision, J.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work is funded by national funds through FCT—Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, I.P., under the support UID/05105: REMIT—Investigação em Economia, Gestão e Tecnologias da Informação.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Ethics Committee of Portucalense University (protocol code CES/01/06/24 from 1 June 2024).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Begashe, B. A., Mgonja, J. T., & Matotola, S. (2024). Tanzania’s repeat tourists: Unraveling choice of attractions patterns through demographic perspectives. Tourism Critiques: Practice and Theory, 5(1), 120–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Buffa, F. (2015). Young Tourists and Sustainability. Profiles, Attitudes, and Implications for Destination Strategies. Sustainability, 7, 14042–14062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Cavagnaro, E., & Staffieri, S. (2015). A study of students’ travellers values and needs in order to establish futures patterns and insights. Journal of Tourism Futures, 1(2), 94–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Chang, E., Lee, A., Byeon, E., & Lee, S. M. (2015). Role of motivation in the relation between perfectionism and academic burnout in Korean students. Personality and Individual Differences, 82, 221–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Cheng, W., Tian, R., & Chiu, D. K. (2024). Travel vlogs influencing tourist decisions: Information preferences and gender differences. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 76(1), 86–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Collins, D., & Tisdell, C. (2002). Gender and differences in travel life cycles. Journal of Travel Research, 41(2), 133–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Crompton, J. L. (1979). Motivations for pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research, 6(1), 408–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Çelik, S., & Dedeoğlu, B. B. (2019). Psychological factors affecting the behavioral intention of the tourist visiting Southeastern Anatolia. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, 2(4), 425–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Dale, C., & Ritchie, B. W. (2020). Understanding travel behavior: A study of school excursion motivations, constraints and behavior. Journal of Travel Research, 59(7), 1228–1242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Dann, G. M. S. (1981). Tourist Motivation: An Appraisal. Annals of Tourism Research, 8(2), 187–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Djeri, L., Armenski, T., Tesanovic, D., Bradić, M., & Vukosav, S. (2014). Consumer behaviour: Influence of place of residence on the decision-making process when choosing a tourist destination. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 27(1), 267–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Egger, I., Lei, S. I., & Wassler, P. (2020). Digital free tourism—An exploratory study of tourist motivations. Tourism Management, 79, 104098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Egger, R., Gula, I., & Walcher, D. (2016). Open tourism: Open innovation, crowdsourcing and co-creation challenging the tourist industry. Springer. [Google Scholar]
  14. Fan, X., Qiu, H., Hsu, C., & Liu, Z. (2015). Comparing motivations and intentions of potential cruise passengers from different demographic groups: The case of China. Journal of China Tourism Research, 11(4), 461–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Foot, D. (2004). Leisure futures: A change in demography? In K. Weiermair, & C. Mathies (Eds.), The tourism and leisure industry: Shaping the future (pp. 21–33). The Haworth Hospitality Press. [Google Scholar]
  16. Francis, T., & Hoefel, F. (2018). True Gen’: Generation Z and its implications for companies (p. 12). McKinsey & Company. [Google Scholar]
  17. Gardiner, S., Grace, D., & King, C. (2014). The generation effect: The future of domestic tourism in Australia. Journal of Travel Research, 53(6), 705–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Gu, X., Lewis, B., Li, Y., Wang, Z., Sheng-nan, W., & Li-Min, D. (2015). Travel motivations of domestic tourists to Changbai Mountain biosphere reserve in Northerneastern China: A comparative study. Journal of Mountain Science, 12(6), 1582–1597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Hamari, J., Sjöklint, M., & Ukkonen, A. (2016). The sharing economy: Why people participate in collaborative consumption. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(9), 2047–2059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Han, H. (2021). Consumer behavior and environmental sustainability in tourism and hospitality: A review of theories, concepts, and latest research. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29(7), 1021–1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Heung, V. C. S., Qu, H., & Chu, R. (2001). The relationship between vacation factors and socio-demographic and travelling characteristics: The case of Japanese leisure travellers. Tourism Management, 22(3), 259–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hills, J. M. M. (1965). The holiday: A study of social and psychological aspects with special reference to Ireland. The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations. [Google Scholar]
  23. Hysa, B., Karasek, A., & Zdonek, I. (2021). Social media usage by different generations as a tool for sustainable tourism marketing in society 5.0 idea. Sustainability, 13(3), 1018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Irimias, A., Mitev, A., & Michalko, G. (2016). Demographic characteristics influencing religious tourism behaviour: Evidence form a Central-Eastern European country. International Journal of Religious Tourism and Pilgrimage, 4(4), 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1982). Toward a social psychological theory of tourism motivation: A rejoinder. Annals of Tourism Research, 9(2), 256–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Kanagaraj, C., & Bindu, T. (2013). An analysis of push and pull travel motivations of domestic tourists to Kerala. International Journal of Management and Business Studies, 3, 112–118. [Google Scholar]
  27. Kara, N. S., & Mkwizu, K. H. (2020). Demographic factors and travel motivation among leisure tourists in Tanzania. International Hospitality Review, 34(1), 81–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Kim, D. Y., & Park, S. (2019). Rethinking millennials: How are they shaping the tourism industry? Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 25(1), 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Kim, S., & Lehto, X. (2013). Projected and perceived destination brand personalities: The case of South Korea. Journal of Travel Research, 52, 117–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Kim, S., & Prideaux, B. (2005). Marketing Implications arising from a comparative study of international pleasure tourist motivations and other travel related characteristics of visitors to Korea. Tourism Management, 26(3), 347–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kozak, M. (2002). Comparative analysis of tourist motivations by nationality and destinations. Tourism Management, 23(3), 221–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Lam, T., & Hsu, C. H. C. (2006). Predicting behavioral intention of choosing a travel destination. Tourism Management, 27, 589–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Lee, C., & Lee, E. H. (2024). Evaluation of urban nightlife attractiveness for Millennials and Generation Z. Journal of Tourism and Leisure Studies, 30(2), 105–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Lemmetyinen, A., Dimitrovski, D., Nieminen, L., & Pohjola, T. (2016). Cruise destination brand awareness as a moderator in motivation-satisfaction relation. Tourism Review, 71(4), 245–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Li, M., & Cai, A. L. (2013). A sub cultural analysis of tourism motivations. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 40(1), 85–113. [Google Scholar]
  36. Luo, Y., & Deng, J. (2008). The new environmental paradigm and nature-based tourism motivation. Journal of Travel Research, 46, 392–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Ma, A., Chow, A., Cheung, L., Lee, K., & Liu, S. (2018). Impacts of tourists’ socio demographic characteristics on the travel motivation and satisfaction: The case of protected areas in South China. Sustainability, 10(10), 3388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Maiurro, M., & Brandão, F. (2024). Motivations, needs, and perceived risks of middle-aged and senior solo travelling women: A study of brazilian female travellers. Journal of Population Ageing, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Marques, C., Mohsin, A., & Lengler, J. (2018). A multinational comparative study highlighting students’ travel motivations and touristic trends. Journal of Destination Marketing and Management, 10, 87–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality. Harper & Row. [Google Scholar]
  41. Mavrin, I., Turșie, C., & Lupșa Matichescu, M. (2024). Exploring sustainable tourism through virtual travel: Generation Z’s perspectives. Sustainability, 16(24), 10858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Meng, F., & Uysal, M. (2008). Effects of gender differences on perceptions of destination attributes, motivations, and travel values: An examination of a nature-based resort destination. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16(4), 445–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Michael, N., Wien, C., & Reisinger, Y. (2017). Push and pull escape travel motivations of Emirati nationals to Australia. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 11(3), 274–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Mieczkowski, Z. (1990). The world trends in tourism and recreation. Peter Lang. [Google Scholar]
  45. Mitsuhashi, Y., & Wada, Y. (2025). Effects of past tourism experience on the current travel motivations of Japanese travellers. International Journal of Tourism Research, 27(2), e2802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Mkwizu, K. H. (2018). Analysis of sources of information and income of domestic tourists to national parks in Tanzania. ATLAS Tourism and Leisure Review, 2018(2), 28–43. [Google Scholar]
  47. Monaco, S. (2018). Tourism and the new generations: Emerging trends and social implications in Italy. Journal of Tourism Futures, 4(1), 7–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Moscardo, G., Morrison, A., Pearce, P., Lang, C., & O’Leary, J. (1996). Understanding vacation destination choice through travel motivation and activities. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 2(2), 109–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. OECD. (2021, March 26). Chart: How gen Z employment levels compare in OECD countries. World Economic Forum. Available online: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/03/gen-z-unemployment-chart-global-comparisons/ (accessed on 23 April 2025).
  50. Oktadiana, H., & Agarwal, M. (2022). Travel career pattern theory of motivation. In D. Gursoy, & S. Çelik (Eds.), Routledge handbook of social psychology of tourism (pp. 76–86). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Papatheodorou, A. (2006). Managing tourism destinations. Edward Elgar Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  52. Pearce, P. L., & Caltabiano, M. L. (1983). Inferring travel motivation from travelers’ experiences. Journal of Travel Research, 22(2), 16–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Pearce, P. L., & Lee, U. L. (2005). Developing the travel career approach to tourism motivation. Journal of Travel Research, 43(3), 226–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Pinho, M., & Gomes, S. (2023). Generation Z as a critical question mark for sustainable tourism—An exploratory study in Portugal. Journal of Tourism Futures, 10(3), 486–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Preko, A., Doe, F., & Dadzie, S. A. (2019). The future of youth tourism in Ghana: Motives, satisfaction and behaviour intentions. Journal of Tourism Futures, 5(1), 5–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  57. Pricope Vancia, A. P., Băltescu, C. A., Brătucu, G., Tecău, A. S., Chitu, I. B., & Duguleană, L. (2023). Examining the disruptive potential of Generation Z tourists on the travel industry in the digital age. Sustainability, 15, 8756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Qiao, G., Huang, S., & Vorobjovas-Pinta, O. (2024). Seeking tourism in a social context: An examination of Chinese rural migrant workers’ travel motivations and constraints. Leisure Studies, 43(4), 608–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Richards, G. (2015). The new global nomads: Youth travel in a globalizing world. Tourism Recreation Research, 40(3), 340–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Robinson, K., & Schänzel, H. A. (2019). A tourism influx: Generation Z travel experiences. Journal of Tourism Futures, 5(3), 247–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Simková, E., & Holzner, J. (2014). Motivation of Tourism Participants. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 159, 660–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Snepenger, D., King, J., Marshall, E., & Uysal, M. (2006). Modeling Iso-Ahola’s motivation theory in the tourism context. Journal of Travel Research, 45(2), 140–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Todorović, N., & Jovičić, D. (2016). Motivational factors of youth tourists visiting Belgrade. Journal of the Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvijic”, 66(2), 273–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Um, S., & Crompton, J. (1990). Attitude determinants in tourism destination choice. Annals of Tourism Research, 17, 432–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Urry, J., & Larsen, J. (2012). The tourist gaze 3.0. Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
  66. Venkatesh, U. (2006). Leisure—Meaning and Impact on Leisure Travel Behavior. Journal of Services Research, 6. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1615363 (accessed on 24 February 2025).
  67. Wade, D. J., Mwasaga, B. C., & Eagles, P. F. J. (2001). A history and market analysis of tourism in Tanzania. Tourism Management, 22(1), 93–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Weerasekera, D., & Assella, A. P. N. (2025). How does immersion affect the travel intention of Gen Z tourists? The mediating role of happiness. Tourism Psychology Review, 11(1), 45–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Wijaya, S., Wahyudi, W., Kusuma, C., & Sugiano, E. (2018). Travel motivation of Indonesian seniors in choosing destination overseas. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Review, 12(2), 185–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Woodside, A., & Lysonski, S. (1989). A general model of traveller destination choice. Journal of Travel Research, 27(4), 8–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO). (2008). Youth travel matters-understanding the global phenomenon of youth travel. Available online: https://www.e-unwto.org/doi/book/10.18111/9789284412396 (accessed on 23 April 2025).
  72. WYSE Travel Confederation. ((2023,, March 8)). International youth travel poised for continued stability and growth in volume and expenditure. WYSE News. Available online: https://www.wysetc.org/2023/03/international-youth-travel-poised-for-continued-stability-and-growth-in-volume-and-expenditure/ (accessed on 23 April 2025).
  73. Yamagishi, K., Canayong, D., Domingo, M., Maneja, K. N., Montolo, A., & Siton, A. (2024). User-generated content on Gen Z tourist visit intention: A stimulus-organism-response approach. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, 7(4), 1949–1973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Yan, N., & Halpenny, E. (2019). The role of cultural difference and travel motivation in event participation: A cross-cultural perspective. International Journal of Event and Festival Management, 10(2), 155–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. You, X., O’leary, J., Morrison, A., & Hong, G. (2000). A cross-cultural comparison of travel push and pull factors: United Kingdom vs. Japan. International Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Administration, 1(2), 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Yousaf, A., Amin, I., & Santos, J. C. (2018). Tourists’ motivations to travel: A theoretical perspective on the existing literature. Tourism and Hospitality Management, 24, 197–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Yung-Kun, S., Kuo-Chien, C., & Yuan-Feng, S. (2015). Market segmentation of international tourists based on motivation to travel: A case study of Taiwan. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 21(8), 862–882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Zhang, L., Ouyang, Y., & Tavitiyaman, P. (2022). Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on Generation Z employees’ perception and behavioral intention toward advanced information technologies in hotels. Tourism and Hospitality, 3(2), 362–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Zhuang, X., & Wang, Y. (2024). Social support and travel: Enhancing relationships, communication, and understanding for travel companions. International Journal of Tourism Research, 26(4), e2712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Average of items by motivational factor.
Figure 1. Average of items by motivational factor.
Tourismhosp 06 00082 g001
Table 1. Profile of sample participants.
Table 1. Profile of sample participants.
NPercentage (%)
Gender
Female17658.2%
Male11538.2%
Other113.6%
Age
18–20 years14748.5%
21–23 years8628.4%
24–26 years4013.2%
27–28 years309.9%
Occupation
Student20567.7%
Employee6922.8%
Self-Employed154.6%
Unemployed155%
Residence
Urban area20367%
Rural area6019.8%
Beach area289.2%
Mountain area31%
Island93%
Table 2. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation).
Table 2. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation).
ItemsMean (M)Std. Deviation
Novelty4.270.995
NOV14.450.998
NOV24.230.982
NOV34.031.042
NOV44.370.957
Escape/relax4.191.030
ES14.171.039
ES24.151.063
ES34.091.053
ES44.350.964
Relationship (strengthen)3.941.126
REL13.891.088
REL23.871.222
REL34.061.067
Autonomy3.811.111
AUT13.811.107
AUT23.881.120
AUT33.751.105
Nature4.061.040
NAT14.220.989
NAT23.891.091
Self-development (host-site involvement)4.001.035
SD14.081.028
SD24.190.999
SD33.961.074
SD44.110.988
SD53.671.088
Stimulation4.061.066
ST13.981.059
ST24.221.009
ST34.041.084
ST43.991.113
Self-development (personal development)4.111.042
PD14.180.988
PD24.131.062
PD34.081.040
PD44.051.079
Relationship (security)3.961.098
RELS14.201.036
RELS24.101.095
RELS33.821.128
RELS43.701.131
Self-actualize3.901.138
SA13.981.087
SA24.001.119
SA33.801.138
SA43.801.207
Isolation3.851.103
ISOL14.091.051
ISOL23.911.043
ISOL33.541.214
Nostalgia3.331.222
NOS13.181.236
NOS23.481.207
Romance3.041.364
ROM13.161.362
ROM22.911.365
Recognition2.921.306
REC13.581.201
REC22.811.362
REC32.691.331
REC42.601.328
Table 3. Relationship between motivational factors and sociodemographic characteristics of participants.
Table 3. Relationship between motivational factors and sociodemographic characteristics of participants.
GenderAgeResidence
Coefficientp-ValueCoefficientp-ValueCoefficientp-Value
Novelty0.2010.000−0.1250.037−0.0980.008
Escape/relax0.1630.008−0.1580.009−0.1860.009
Relationship (strengthen)0.1800.002−0.1140.002−0.2050.007
Autonomy0.1180.291−0.0960.0010.0410.007
Nature−0.1160.002−0.1500.006−0.0650.007
Self-development (host-site involvement)0.1140.381−0.1250.0030.1000.003
Stimulation0.2160.001−0.1230.140−0.1550.009
Self-development (personal development)0.2360.000−0.1210.003−0.1310.008
Relationship (security)0.1210.003−0.1380.350−0.0920.006
Self-actualize0.1220.008−0.1060.0760.0520.008
Isolation0.1310.034−0.0960.243−0.0550.007
Nostalgia0.1540.008−0.1240.180−0.1090.009
Romance0.1530.013−0.1930.001−0.1060.003
Recognition0.1850.001−0.1200.114−0.0880.005
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Marques, J.; Gomes, S.; Ferreira, M.; Rebuá, M.; Marques, H. Generation Z and Travel Motivations: The Impact of Age, Gender, and Residence. Tour. Hosp. 2025, 6, 82. https://doi.org/10.3390/tourhosp6020082

AMA Style

Marques J, Gomes S, Ferreira M, Rebuá M, Marques H. Generation Z and Travel Motivations: The Impact of Age, Gender, and Residence. Tourism and Hospitality. 2025; 6(2):82. https://doi.org/10.3390/tourhosp6020082

Chicago/Turabian Style

Marques, Jorge, Sofia Gomes, Mónica Ferreira, Marina Rebuá, and Hugo Marques. 2025. "Generation Z and Travel Motivations: The Impact of Age, Gender, and Residence" Tourism and Hospitality 6, no. 2: 82. https://doi.org/10.3390/tourhosp6020082

APA Style

Marques, J., Gomes, S., Ferreira, M., Rebuá, M., & Marques, H. (2025). Generation Z and Travel Motivations: The Impact of Age, Gender, and Residence. Tourism and Hospitality, 6(2), 82. https://doi.org/10.3390/tourhosp6020082

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop