Interest in cross-cultural research has recently intensified. This is because of several current trends: the increasingly global interconnectedness of social, political, and economic life; increased recognition of cultural and ethnic diversity within and among societies; and broad philosophical and methodological trends, such as postmodernism and phenomenology in social sciences. Cross-cultural research helps to expose bias in social science caused by the blinders and filters of culture. As Hofstede puts it: If we begin to realize that our own ideas are culturally limited . . . we can never be self-sufficient again. Only others with different mental programs can help us find the limitations of our own. Fittingly, then, cross-cultural research on motives and motivation of tourists from different cultures may challenge current research, now mainly focusing on the content of research objectives rather than the cultural context in which studies of international motivation are embedded. Cultural relativism is not a popular subject in tourism research. Possibly one reason why it has been resisted, Hall writes, is that it throws doubt on many established beliefs. After all, there is great potential for variability among cultures in terms of tourist motivation.

Hofstede (1980) found that people from different societies varied in terms of four subjective cultural aspects, including power distance, masculinity-femininity, individualism-collectivism, and uncertainty avoidance. Power distance refers to the degree to which cultures encourage or maintain power or status differences between interactants (i.e., hosts and guests). Masculinity-femininity refers to the relative emphasis on achievement and interpersonal harmony which characterizes gender distinctions in some national cultures.

Individualism-collectivism has to do with whether ones identity is defined by personal choices and achievement or by the character of the collective groups to which one is more or less permanently attached. Uncertainty avoidance has to do with the degree to which societies and cultures develop ways to deal with the anxiety and stress of uncertainty. Cultural contrasts on uncertainty avoidance may be directly related to concrete differences in tourist behaviors. In a survey of IBM employees in 40 countries, Hofstede (1980) found that the United States exhibited cultural characteristics of low power distance, high individualism, high masculinity, and low uncertainty avoidance, while residents of some Asian and Latin American countries exhibited characteristics of high power distance, high collectivism, and high uncertainty avoidance. As this illustrates, many aspects of subjective culture go together in forming patterns of beliefs, attitudes, norms, values, and social behaviors. Current tourism research on motivation has mainly focused on individualism and rationalism as important values that Western researchers use without conscious awareness. These values of individualism and rationalism result in underestimating the influence of groups, norms, culture, and emotion or impulse on tourist behavior.

The popular theorists in the North American literature on motivation are Vroom (1964),McClelland (1961), and Maslow (1943), who have provided motivation theories, such as expectancy theories, achievement motive, and hierarchy of human needs. In the tourism literature, Gnoth (1997) has studied motivation in terms of expectation and anticipation, seeing people as pulled by the expectancy of outcomes, mostly consciously. The expectancy theory of motivation has been refined and expanded by Deci (1985). Motivation, according to Deci, is formed by autonomous initiation or self-determination of behavior and is expected to lead to personally satisfying experiences. Consistent with this theory, Iso-Ahola (1982) suggests that seeking and escaping are the basic motivational dimensions of leisure behavior. Cohen (1972) suggests that all tourist roles can be based on a typology of several distinct novelty-seeking experience levels. Further, the importance of novelty to the tourism experience has been well documented.Novelty has something to do with the cultural dimension of low uncertainty avoidance, combined with fairly high masculinity, which corresponds with the US patten. This explains the popularity of expectancy theories of motivation. It is assumed that people from cultures that exhibit high uncertainty avoidance will express different motivation. According to Hofstede (1980),uncertainty avoidance involves situations where the outcome is uncertain. Cultures that exhibit high collectivism often have very clear norms for proper behavior in social situations and avoid new situations with no clear norms. Philipp found that there is a racial difference between black and white Americans in seeking novelty in their tourism preferences. Whites are more likely than blacks to agree with the statement When I travel I like to be on streets I dont know and When I travel I like to stay at motels and hotels which I have never heard about. Although Philipp considers the main reason to be a preconception of the possibility of prejudice and discrimination in unfamiliar settings, it is evident that there are differences of cultural characteristics in their preferences.

McClelland (1961) need for achievement also stands for the value pattern of the masculine risk taker, which corresponds with the US pattern. The combination of high individualism, low uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity in the United States also explains the theory of Maslow (1943) hierarchy of human needs. His highest category, self-actualization, is a highly individualistic. Pearce and Caltabiano (1983) have studied motivation from travelers experiences in terms of Maslows hierarchy of needs. In addition, Dann (1977) proposed anomie and ego-enhancement as tourism motives. Anomie, according to Dann, represents the desire to transcend the feeling of isolation inherent in everyday life and to simply get away from it all. Ego-enhancement, on the other hand, derives from the need for recognition, which is obtained through the status given by travel. Markus and Kitayama (1991) maintain that the self-enhancement value is primarily a Western phenomenon. In a collectivistic society, Other-enhancement is more desirable than self-enhancement, because the latter risks isolating the individual from the network of reciprocal relationships. Markus and Kitayama argue that individualistic formulations of self-values, such as achievement motivation, self-actualization as well as self-emotions (e.g., shame, guilt, pride) need modification when considered in the context of the interdependent self-paradigm (collectivism).

The understanding of cultural differences in motivation across cultures may enhance both efficiency and effectiveness in international tourism management. Furthermore, within the United States, tourism managers understandings about different cultures may encourage more participation for diverse cultural groups in their facilities. Management practices dealing with tourism resources should embrace a wider range of users and their cultural values, preferences, and behavior, looking beyond Western cultural boundaries. Crompton and Lamb argue that people within one target market may vary in their predisposition to use service offerings. An old aphorism among research chemists quoted by the authors, Those who understand the barriers will make the breakthrough, is equally applicable to utilization of tourism services by certain cultural groups. An understanding of groups cultural orientations (i.e., level of power distance, collectivism/individualism, and level of uncertainty avoidance) may facilitate this new perspective.