This article was downloaded by: [California Poly Pomona University]

On: 17 November 2014, At: 02:50

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Hospitality Marketing &

Management
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/whmm20

A Multirelational Approach for

Understanding Consumer Experiences
Within Tourism
a a a
Frank Lindberg , Ann Heidi Hansen & Dorthe Eide
a
Bodø Graduate School of Business, University of Nordland, Bodø,
Norway
Accepted author version posted online: 25 Aug 2013.Published
online: 28 Mar 2014.

To cite this article: Frank Lindberg, Ann Heidi Hansen & Dorthe Eide (2014) A Multirelational
Approach for Understanding Consumer Experiences Within Tourism, Journal of Hospitality Marketing &
Management, 23:5, 487-512, DOI: 10.1080/19368623.2013.827609

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2013.827609

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
 Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 23:487–512, 2014
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1936-8623 print/1936-8631 online
DOI: 10.1080/19368623.2013.827609

A Multirelational Approach for Understanding

Consumer Experiences Within Tourism

FRANK LINDBERG, ANN HEIDI HANSEN, and DORTHE EIDE

Bodø Graduate School of Business, University of Nordland, Bodø, Norway
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

This article presents and discusses a conceptual understanding

of consumer experiences as multirelational. Based on consumer
research, tourism research, and the being-in-the-world ontology,
we propose a multirelational approach using four core concepts
wherein consumers are situated ontologically in and across (a)
time, (b) context, (c) body, and (d) interaction. We explore and
propose how this multirelational approach can be applied to
research by discussing the conceptual and practical consequences
of this approach for understanding tourists’ dynamic experiences
and meaning. Consequently, the article presents an alternative
approach that contributes to a broader understanding of con-
sumer experience within tourism. This approach is illustrated with
examples from consumer experiences in the arctic Svalbard.

KEYWORDS multirelational approach, Heidegger, tourist experi-

ence, tourism, consumer experience, experience economy

INTRODUCTION

Today, consumer experiences are regarded as the locus of value creation

within the tourism industry (Volo, 2009). In recent decades, the research
community has focused on understanding and facilitating meaningful con-
sumer experiences (e.g., Hirschman & Holbrook, 1982; Pernecky & Jamal,
2010; Pine & Gilmore, 1999; Thompson, Locander, & Pollio, 1989; Walls,
Okumus, Wang, & Kwun, 2011). However, the multidisciplinary character
of consumer and tourism research has created varying definitions of and

Address correspondence to Ann Heidi Hansen, Bodø Graduate School of Business,

University of Nordland, N-8049 Bodø, Norway. E-mail: ann.heidi.hansen@uin.no

487
 488 F. Lindberg et al.

approaches to consumer experience within the tourism industry (Vespestad

& Lindberg, 2011).
This so-called interpretive turn within marketing and consumer research
has increased the interest in the diversity, subjectivity, context, and nego-
tiation of meaning in the study of consumer experiences (Arnould &
Thompson, 2005; Uriely, 2005). However, much of this research has
investigated how specific components (e.g., physical context or human inter-
action) may influence consumer experiences, and more holistically oriented
approaches are rare (e.g., Carù & Cova, 2003, 2007a; Thompson, 1997; Walls
et al., 2011). An approach that elucidates the interactions and processes
that contribute to consumer experience in a broad sense is thus needed
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

(Moscardo, 2009).
An increasing number of researchers favor a (hermeneutic) phenomeno-
logical approach to the tourist experience (e.g., Curtin, 2006; Henning,
2008; Kim & Jamal, 2007; Pons, 2003; Ryan, 2000; Steiner & Reisinger,
2006; Szarycz, 2008; Wang, 1999). Pernecky and Jamal advocate for applying
Heidegger’s (1927/1996) being-in-the-world ontology because it is relatively
unknown, misunderstood, complex, and demanding (Pernecky & Jamal,
2010). We share the view that Heideggerian-inspired theory creates a deeper
understanding of consumer experiences, and we contribute to this debate.
This article contributes to the aforementioned gaps in research on
consumer experiences within tourism by asking the following question:
How can a multirelational approach contribute to the conceptualization of
consumer experience within tourism? By reviewing relational contributions
within interpretive consumer research, tourism research, and the being-
in-the-world ontology, we present a conceptual model of experience as
situated, multirelational, dynamic, and meaning-based. We argue that every-
day life and consumer experiences are intertwined through a tourist’s lived
experiences and that experiences can be understood and studied through
the intertwined components related to interaction, body, time, and context.

UNDERSTANDING CONSUMER EXPERIENCES AS RELATIONAL

The Experiential Turn in Consumer Research
In recent decades, interest in research on consumer experiences has
increased as a result of the so-called interpretive turn within marketing and
consumer research (Arnould & Thompson, 2005; Schembri & Sandberg, 2011;
Sherry, 1991). Criticizing the behavioral and cognitive focus within consumer
behavior research, researchers focusing on interpretive consumer research
adopt two main perspectives: individual consumer research and cultural-
based consumption studies (Lindberg, 2009; Østergaard & Jantzen, 2000).
Contributing to the individual consumer research stream, Holbrook
and Hirschman (1982) focus on the subjective and emotional dimension of
 A Multirelational Approach 489

experience through fantasies, feelings, and fun. Holbrook and Hirschman

criticize the utilitarian tradition within consumer behavior research and
retained Levy’s (1959) famous axiom that much consumption are based on
the symbols and meanings rendered possible by products (Carù & Cova,
2007b). The individual consumer research stream assumes that the consumer
experience within the tourism context is a subjective and complex whole that
cannot be meaningfully deconstructed into isolated parts (Holbrook, 1995).
Belk (1988) argues that consumers’ relationships with “persons, places and
things to which one feels attached” can extend, expand, and strengthen con-
sumers’ sense of self (p. 141). Experiential relationships are thus never a
two-way interaction but “always three-way” (Belk, 1988, p. 147; i.e., tourist-
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

product-tourist). Thompson (1997) viewed consumer experiences as being

“contextualized within a broader narrative of self-identity,” which itself is
contextualized within a “complex background of historically established cul-
tural meanings and belief systems” (p. 440). In the tourism context, cultural
layers of meaning encircle the three-way relationship between consumers
and the tangible/intangible entities of a product. Additionally, consumer
experiences can be viewed as dynamic self-narrating activities in which cur-
rent consumption acts are strung together with consumers’ past existential
life narratives to create imagined futures (Ahuvia, 2005). One can therefore
argue that relationships can be understood figuratively to occur across time
and between various narrative structures.
As a parallel to the individual focus of consumer research, several
researchers, inspired by cultural theory, focus on the sociocultural mean-
ing of consumption (Sherry, 1990). The cultural consumer research stream
views consumers as members of a tribe (Maffesoli, 1996) who engage in
experiences and whose role “rests largely in their ability to carry and com-
municate cultural meaning” (McCracken, 1986, p. 71). From this perspective,
the consumer experience and its inherent value are created through cultural
meaning and social interaction. Naturalistic research conducted in consump-
tion environments, such as swap meets (Belk, Sherry, & Wallendorf, 1988),
flea markets (Sherry, 1990), art shows, souvenir shops, parades, riverboat
cruises, and county fairs (Belk, 1991), has elucidated how rituals, traditions,
myths, socialization, and status affect consumer experiences. For exam-
ple, McCracken suggests that consumer experiences are determined by the
advertising and fashion industries, which “move meaning from the cultur-
ally constituted world” to the consumption realm, while “consumer rituals
move meaning” from the consumption realm to the consumer (1986, p. 81).
Sociocultural communities thus precondition consumer experiences and indi-
vidual identity projects (McAlexander, Schouten, & Koening, 2002; Muniz &
O’Guinn, 2001), although consumers claim to be doing “their own thing
while doing it with thousands of like-minded others” (Holt, 2002, p. 83).
As such, this stream of research treats every experience as being embedded
in webs of culturally based relations, where meaning no longer relates to
 490 F. Lindberg et al.

the individual but rather involves conformity to or (fake) deviance from

the sociocultural community. The focus on cultural meaning and social
interaction challenges individual perspectives and contribute to a relational
understanding of consumer experiences.
The sociocultural stream of research can be criticized for its cultural
determinism and for undermining individual consumers. This stream of
research, however, allows for a broader understanding of how the meaning
of experience depends on social interactions and cultural practices (Sherry,
1991). Recent research within the consumer culture theory argues that “con-
sumer culture does not determine action as a causal force” (Arnould &
Thompson, 2005, p. 869). Whereas consumer experiences are constrained by
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

norms and rules, consumer culture can be viewed to frame consumers’ hori-
zons of conceivable actions, feelings, and thoughts (Arnould & Thompson,
2005). Consumers’ continuous dialogic interpretation of cultural horizons,
norms, and ideologies is thus important.
Thompson and Hirschman (1995) argued for the role of bodily meaning
and practices in consumer experiences, and suggested that consumer experi-
ences were conditioned by social relationships, normative prescriptions, and
moral aspects, such as self-control and discipline. Joy and Sherry (2003),
studying art experiences, go further, arguing that the “cognitive uncon-
scious” body affects the logic of consumers’ thinking about art (p. 259).
This stream of research attempts to understand consumer experiences by
focusing on how consumers bring their own socioculturally based—and
embodied—understandings to the marketplace.

Extraordinary Consumer Experiences

Tourism organizations often attempt to provide consumers with something
extraordinary (Morgan & Watson, 2009). In the wake of the experience
economy (Pine & Gilmore, 1999; Schmitt, 1999) and consumer research
(Arnould & Price, 1993; Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982), research has focused
on extraordinary products that are experienced as something extra or sur-
prising (Mossberg, 2007b). The focus is the co-creative role of consumers
in the production of memorable experiences (Carù & Cova, 2003; Prahalad
& Ramaswamy, 2004). In organizing extraordinary experiences, businesses
mobilize operand resources (e.g., tangible aspects of experiencescapes)
and operant resources (e.g., intangible aspects, such as themes and sto-
ries) to offer value propositions to consumers (Mossberg, 2007a; Vargo &
Lusch, 2004). The experience is completed when consumers bring their
own resources and co-create a staged act (Deighton, 1992), so the consumer
receives “more intense, framed and stylish practices” that stand out as special
and memorable moments (Abrahams, 1986, p. 50).
Inspired by the discipline of psychology (Csíkszentmihályi, 1997;
Maslow, 1964; Privette, 1983), recent contributions to the consumer
 A Multirelational Approach 491

experience literature have focused on immersion, transcendence, and

mindfulness during consumer experiences (Carù & Cova, 2003; Moscardo,
2009; Schouten, McAlexander, & Koenig, 2007). Schouten et al. (2007,
p. 358) define transcendent consumer experiences as “flow and/or peak
experiences that take place in consumption contexts.” A transcendent con-
sumer experience can be characterized by total involvement in an activity
and can be distinguished as either an extreme focus on a particular task (flow
based on an optimal combination of challenge and skills; Csikszentmihalyi,
1997) or an effortless moment of intense joy (peak experiences, such as
an epiphany/sacred/intense happiness; Maslow, 1964). In the context of
tourism, immersion during experiences implies a focus on the embodied
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

aspect of experiences (Carù & Cova, 2003). Immersion can be viewed to

be either total and immediate or partial and progressive, as well as to result
from the consumer’s skills and appropriation process (Carù & Cova, 2007a).
A similar view is explicated by Moscardo (2009), who argues that mind-
fulness, i.e., being “actively engaged in the present” (p. 101), depends on
understanding experiences as interactions between the “the tourist, the place,
the management and communication systems, the focus of the experience,
the cognitive state, the theme or narrative, and the outcome” (p. 107).
People are assumed to seek to participate in extraordinary and transfor-
mative experiences because everyday life tends to exclude mystery, magic,
passion, and soul (Firat & Venkatesh, 1995). Studying river rafting, Arnould
and Price (1993) reported that “communion with nature, communitas or
connecting with others [. . .] and renewal of self” are essential experiential
traits (p. 31). They show how experiences can provide absorption and inte-
gration and how romantic cultural scripts contribute to the transformation
of consumers so that they may return to an everyday world as renewed
individuals. Studying primarily skydiving experiences, Celsi et al. (1993)
proposed a holistic “extended dramatic model” that combines “macroen-
vironmental influences,” “inter- and intrapersonal motives,” and a “dramatic
world view” to understand high-risk experiences (p. 3). Rather than view-
ing experiences as static with a focus on single and isolated constructs,
Celsi et al. argued that experiences should be viewed more holistically,
as an interdependence between constructs. Kozinets’ (2002) study on the
antimarket festival “Burning Man” showed how consumers may actively co-
create meaning based on the communal critique of everyday consumption.
Kozinets argued that an experience could take the form of an inversion ritual
“against the orderly, planned, preprogrammed, boring, and imitative aspects”
of everyday existence (Kozinets, 2002, p. 36). In studying the climbing of Mt.
Everest, Tumbat and Belk (2011) argued that experiences might not be as
romantic and communitarian as previous research on extraordinary expe-
rience suggests. Their key finding is that tension may exist during various
relationships in uncertain contexts and that consumers negotiate between
various dualities of the everyday mundane and the extraordinary enchanting.
 492 F. Lindberg et al.

However, one can argue that research on extraordinary experiences draws

attention to the relational aspects of the dynamic experience and meaning
creation processes.

Tourist Experiences
Uriely (2005) argues for a distinction between a modern view that postu-
lates that tourist experiences are opposite of everyday life and a postmodern
view that postulates that everyday life cannot be separated from tourist
experiences. Seminal research on tourist experiences has focused on the
sacred search for authenticity (MacCannel, 1976), the search for novelty and
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

strangeness (Cohen, 1972), the search for pseudo-events (Boorstin, 1964), the
role of posttourists (Lash & Urry, 1994; Urry, 1990), the postmodern tourist
(Cohen, 1995), and experiential modes that vary in type and form (Cohen,
1974, 1979).
The modernist view of authenticity reveals a tourist who is driven by
the sacred quest of visiting places, people, and cultures. The relationship to
the authentic place thus becomes important for understanding what a tourist
experience is, although most tourists will not be able to experience or see
the authentic (MacCannel, 1976). A tourist experience can be conceptualized
in terms of its relation to the strangeness of the “other” (e.g., foreign culture)
and to the tourist’s zone of novelty (Cohen, 1972). Later, Cohen claimed that
the view of tourist experiences depends on “the place and significance of
tourist experience in the total world-view of tourists” (Cohen, 1979, p. 179).
Cohen (1988) thus proposed a socially constructed version of authenticity.
A phenomenological experience is contextual and situational, depending
on humans’ “adherence to, or quest for a ‘spiritual’ centre” (Cohen, 1979,
p. 193). This perspective embraces various experiential roles (i.e., the famil-
iar and social mass tourist who can gaze at the other from the safety of a
bus or the explorer or drifter who looks for novelty and change in a for-
eign culture). The sociocultural layer of the place, with its moral virtues, and
thus the “lifeworld” of the tourist, is conducive to the experiential modes in
question because of the dynamism of familiarity and/or strangerhood. The
phenomenological view of Cohen was reconsidered by Lengkeek (2001)
and extended by the addition of role theory (Wickens, 2002), with contri-
butions by Borrie and Roggenbuck (2001; dynamic wilderness experiences),
Uriely et al. (2002; heterogeneous backpacking), Ryan (2000; phenomeno-
graphic analysis), and others. Hence, certain streams within tourism research
have argued in favor of relational aspects by focusing on the pluralizing
and dynamic nature of experiences when consumer lifeworlds meet places
within cultures.
The postmodernist or late modern (Wang, 2000) view of tourism consid-
ers tourism to be play (e.g., Urry, 1990). Not unlike the hedonic consumer
of Hirschman and Holbrook (1982), from a cultural perspective, pleasure
 A Multirelational Approach 493

seeking and romantic gazing are regarded as the main aspect of tourist
experiences, which may occur in any place and at any time (Lash & Urry,
1994). There is no singular gaze. Instead, the gaze depends on the culture,
social group, context, and time. Uriely (2005) concluded that four significant
trends can be identified: differentiation to de-differentiation of everyday life
and tourist experiences, generalizing to pluralizing portrayals, focusing on
the toured object to focusing on the role of subjectivity within culture, and
providing contradictory and decisive statements to providing relative and
complementary interpretations.
In the wake of late modern trends, we find research taking a rela-
tional perspective through a focus on paradoxes of consumer independence
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

(Caruana, Crane, & Fitchett, 2008), the role of hermeneutics in heritage

experiences (Ablett & Dyer, 2009), the meaning-based constructions of bud-
get travelers (Obenour, 2004), the dynamic experiences of long distance
walking (Breejen, 2007), the construction of authentic experiences (Chronis
& Hampton, 2008), the multi-dimensional nature of experiences (Walls,
Okumus, Wang, & Kwun, 2011), and experiences as interactions (White &
White, 2008). In line with developments within consumer research, these
contributions take into account the complex dynamism of experiences by
focusing on relational factors. For example, Walls et al. (2011) examine
emotions/cognition and the extraordinary/ordinary in human interactions,
relationships toward physical elements, situational factors, and individual
past experiences.

The Being-in-the-World Ontology

Several researchers have sought inspiration in the philosophy of Martin
Heidegger (1927/1996) and his successors to understand experiences and
meaning creation. Pernecky and Jamal argued that experiential issues
related to being-in-the-world remain largely unexplored, that the paucity
of discussion “has been ambiguous at best,” and that many publications
avoid discussing the original theory (Pernecky & Jamal, 2010, p. 1057).
According to Ritchie and Hudson (2009, p. 117), researched within tourism
uses phenomenology mainly as “methodologies for understanding the
consumer/tourist experience” from the perspective of the tourist. Thus,
consumer research can be strengthened by focusing on its philosophi-
cal underpinnings (Szarycz, 2009), such as its ontology. While Heidegger’s
philosophical legacy has been given many labels, we refer to the being-in-
the-world ontology, which is a major component of his theory (Dreyfus &
Wrathall, 2005; Luft & Overgaard, 2012; Sköldberg, 1998) and has a relational
focus.
Heidegger (1927/1996) introduced existential and hermeneutical ele-
ments into phenomenology (Luft & Overgaard, 2012). Heidegger was one of
the first 20th-century philosophers to radically question the person-world and
 494 F. Lindberg et al.

mind-body dualisms, and he replaced Husserl’s emphasis on consciousness

with a focus on the structure of our everyday being-in-the-world (Wrathall
& Dreyfus, 2006). Unlike individual consumer research (e.g., Holbrook
& Hirschman, 1982) and descriptive phenomenology within tourism (e.g.,
Andriotis, 2009; Curtin, 2006), being-in-the-world experiences are not sub-
jective understandings of a situation. Rather, such experiences are relational.
Heidegger and scholars inspired by this line of thinking strive to replace the
Cartesian dualism and the mental constructs of earlier thinkers with a focus
on inter-subjectivity and the relationship between “subjects” and “objects”
(things in the world; Pernecky & Jamal, 2010, p. 1058). The being-in-the-
world ontology thus represents an interpretive turn through a conceptual
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

focus on relationships, situatedness, historicity, temporality, understanding,

and meaning (Dreyfus & Wrathall, 2005).
Consumer experiences are formed through ongoing interpretations
within the world that are bound to the concrete situation of the consumer
(Pernecky & Jamal, 2010). Normally, the experience of everyday human life
and the transformations between activities are familiar and a tacit aspect of
being-in-the-world. How people understand, interpret, and create meaning
would consequently also often be familiar and tacit (Alvesson & Sköldberg,
2009). In situations in which the familiar becomes unfamiliar and perhaps
challenging (which can occur within extraordinary tourism contexts; Tumbat
& Belk, 2011), one’s belonging in the world tends to become thematized and
take the form of reflection on action.
Turner and Mannings (1988) criticized research that neglects Heidegger’s
focus on worldliness and the role of bodily being and emotions. Pons (2003)
argued that humans are involved in the world as bodily beings through
lived experiences. Thus, consumer experiences cannot be understood apart
from the objects of tourism (Wang, 1999) or the social and political context
within which the experience may belong (Belhassen, Caton, & Stewart,
2008). From this point of view, consumers can be considered to project a
certain understanding and perspective composed of all of the interconnected
elements that are brought to light in various tourism contexts (Obenour,
2004; Steiner & Reisinger, 2006). For example, the experience of visiting
Disney World would differ depending on whether it involved a family trip in
which children were present or two lovers. The contrasting understandings
in these two different situations would make apparent different aspects of
the location, people, logics, symbols, and attractions. Furthermore, meetings
in tourism contexts enable tourists to learn about their worlds, themselves,
and other people because these contexts often “force” a different horizon
of understanding on the tourist through transformative experiences and the
tourist moment (Cary, 2004).
Kim and Jamal applied the ideas of phenomenology to experiences at a
Renaissance festival to show how meaning is co-constructed through a vari-
ety of relational practices and rites (Kim & Jamal, 2007). The tourists’ changes
 A Multirelational Approach 495

are dramatic and “total” in the sense that the thematic context allows tourists
to become different people with different understandings, perspectives, and
practices. Kim and Jamal’s research shows how relational spheres, such as
the altered body (costumes), the festival context, Renaissance time, and role
interactions create lasting friendships within a normative community that
become part of the tourists’ lives.
The temporal structures of past, present, and future permeate lived
experiences in Being and Time (Heidegger, 1927/1996). Consumers are
embedded in contexts and situations with specific logics, languages, and
meanings from the past. However, experiences are also distinguished by the
future through upcoming projects. The future embraces humans’ continued
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

existence and involves thinking and acting “for the future” (Fløistad, 1993,
p. 133). Every interpretation of the future implies actions and relations aimed
at something or someone in the present, and the process mostly depends
on how one was embedded in the past. As has been emphasized within
consumer culture theory, consumer experiences are primarily distinguished
by the “socio-cultural, symbolic and ideological aspects of consumption”
(Arnould & Thompson, 2005, p. 868). Nevertheless, research on extraor-
dinary consumer experiences argues that consumers often meet unfamiliar
tourism contexts that demand a certain renewal of the self (Arnould & Price,
1993). The dynamics of the future and the past during tourist experiences
are argued to be more complex than mundane experiences.
According to the being-in-the-world ontology (Heidegger, 1927/1996;
Taylor, 1985), emotions and attunements are primordial. These emotions run
deeply through human existence, and they cannot be “stepped in and out
of.” Merleau-Ponty (1945/1962) argued that pre-reflexive bodily emotions
imprint experiences as a form of pre-reflexive understanding. Thus, implicit
emotions, in addition to implicit knowledge, must be regarded as basic to all
human knowing (Polanyi, 1958).
The being-in-the-world theory views experiences as interpretive endeav-
ors that are deeply rooted in relationships during consumption. Consumer
experiences are dynamically structured through temporality, and con-
sumption is embodied, situated, and emotional when people co-construct
understanding and meaning in commercial places in familiar or unfamiliar
cultures. Because of experiences and meaning constructions are dynamic
and continuous, being-in-the-world is a continuous process of becoming-in-
the-world. That is, the being-in-the-world theory suggests both a relational
and a processual understanding of consumer experiences.

A Multirelational Approach
Based primarily on interpretive consumer research, tourism research, and the
being-in-the-world ontology, we have learned that consumer experiences are
always “interactions-with” and in relation to bodies, contexts, and time and
 496 F. Lindberg et al.

that these dynamic components define experiences and meaning construc-

tions. Human becoming and change during consumption are particularly
interesting and a process that is never finished, fully determined or fully
free/isolated. The being-in-the-world ontology shares the view that human
beings are whole persons, encompassing and intertwining all of the primary
domains of cognition, emotion, and action. We propose that the follow-
ing conceptual framework (see Figure 1) be used to understand consumer
experiences and meaning as situated, multirelational, and dynamic.
Based on the multirelational approaches identified in this article, we
propose a conceptual framework that consists of four co-existing core com-
ponents that consumers always are situated within and across throughout
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

experiences and meaning constructions: in context, in time, in interaction,

and in body. These four components were chosen for their potential utility
as a theoretical tool and to provide a broader understanding of consumer
experiences and meaning construction.
One can argue that Heidegger (1927/1996) specifically elaborated on
three of these core components (or structures): time, interactions, and con-
text. However, in their reading of Heidegger, Dreyfus, and Dreyfus (1999,
p. 41) concluded that “dasein is not necessarily embodied.” We have thus
referred to Merleau-Ponty’s (1945/1962) body phenomenology. Merleau-
Ponty’s work has been elaborated on by scholars such as Bourdieu (1977),
Dreyfus and Dreyfus (1999), and Polanyi and Prosch (1975), depicting
bodily and tacit being, relating, and knowing. In this discussion, such an
understanding is intertwined with the other main relational structures.
For analytical purposes, we have separated the four aspects from each
other and from the center of the framework shown in Figure 1. However,
a multirelational approach to tourist experiences must include all of the
dimensions simultaneously.

In Body In Interaction

Dynamic
Experience
and Meaning
(DEM)

In Time In Context

FIGURE 1 Situated, multirelational, and dynamic experiences and meaning (color figure
available online).
 A Multirelational Approach 497

In Time
Time is often not thematized during experiences because of its omnipresent
character. Because the world, directly or indirectly, is the origin of mean-
ing (McCracken, 1986), the timing of things/others and the various logics
relating to time (e.g., clock time) that consumers encounter influence con-
sumer experiences (Curtin, 2006; Van Manen, 1990). Cotte, Ratneshwar, and
Mick (2004) focus on consumers’ timestyles, defined as “the customary ways
in which people perceive and use time” during experiences (Cotte, et al.,
2004, p. 333). Bergadaà (1990) finds that present-oriented consumers prefer
relaxing and non-organized holidays, while future-oriented consumers prefer
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

personally organized and enriching holidays.

First, time can be understood as a dynamic experiential phenomenon
that continually influences the experience and meaning before, during, and
after the tourist activity. Former or similar experiences, associations, expec-
tations, media, and marketing influence the perceived images of products.
However, tourists may not be aware of this process. Because of the dynamic
aspect of time, consumers often incorporate both the past and the future into
their experiences (Cotte, et al., 2004). Tourists might compare present expe-
riences with former experiences. Thinking about future activities may also
affect the present moment (e.g., being anxious about dog sledding down a
steep hill the next day). Likewise, tourists continue to relate to and make
sense of the experience after the event has taken place. This ongoing pro-
cess is an important part of nurturing consumers’ memory and identity and
points toward the social and relational dimensions of sense making (Weick,
1995), as well as the narrative and bodily dimensions of experience.
Second, tourism cultures and contexts influence the temporal
belonging of consumers, previously conceptualized as environment time
(Bergadaà, 1990). Change in environment time can be experienced when
entering/engaging in tourism contexts and when moving between expe-
riencescapes (Mossberg, 2007a). For example, when consumers are dog
sledding in the Arctic Svalbard, they must change from an urban temporal-
ity in which clock time is emphasized to a wilderness temporality in which
nature time rules. Sometimes, the search for a different temporal experience
may be a consumer’s primary tourist motivation (Bergadaà, 1990). Tourists
may choose a quiet destination when they want to escape stress.
The change from one state of being to another may prove challenging
for consumers when they face a destination. For transformation and valuable
meaning to occur, tourists must switch temporalities and become immersed
in the present moment (Carù & Cova, 2006). However, several challenges
may occur during such processes because the past and the future may dom-
inate consumer experiences. For example, new technology, such as social
media, enables tourists to keep in touch with their everyday lives while they
are on vacation (White & White, 2008). Instead of becoming immersed in
 498 F. Lindberg et al.

their consumer experience, tourists would, for example, focus on their work
relationships. Tourism firms should therefore try to facilitate transformations
that are likely to enhance valuable meaning creation.

In Context
Understanding tourists’ context is imperative in understanding the consumer
experience. The combination of a tourist’s physical, cultural, and social
contexts is integral to understanding his or her context as a whole. The char-
acteristics of contexts may vary between permanent experiencescapes (e.g.,
museums), nonpermanent scapes (e.g., festivals), and larger experience areas
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

(see Mossberg, 2007b).

First, tourists are always situated in relation to a physical space or
context. Space and place have been debated in tourism research (see Griffin
& Hayllar, 2009; Stewart, Hayward, Devlin, & Koirby, 1998; Suvantola,
2002). Otto and Ritchie (1996, p. 168) argued that elements of the physical
environment “have strong potential to elicit emotional and subjective
reactions.” The physical context includes both natural surroundings (e.g.,
landscape, weather) and the man-made environment (e.g., design, symbols).
Although our relationship to the physical context in which we find ourselves
is often tacit, it influences the way that we feel, e.g., feeling small and
humble when dog sledding in the immense Arctic wilderness. Shifting
from an urban to a rural space could be experienced as intimidating or
liberating, depending on the tourist’s background. Dog sledding could be
a peak experience for a tourist who feels affectionate toward dogs and
who enjoys this quiet mode of moving through the landscape, whereas a
tourist lacking this interest might find dog sledding boring. Because tourists
interpret their physical context differently, the physical context could be
argued to be partly constructed (or designed) throughout experiences (Ek,
Larsen, Hornskov, & Mansfeldt, 2008).
Second, the tourist cannot avoid viewing phenomena through a cultural
“lens” that provides initial meaning (McCracken, 1986). Therefore, culture as
context influences a tourist’s experience because tourists are always embed-
ded in culture. For example, the history and stories of the polar explorers
Shackleton and Scott can play an important role in attracting attention to
and creating the initial image of the Polar Regions, and the stories may con-
tinue to influence tourists (particularly British tourists) throughout their polar
experiences. Our pre-understanding and, consequently, the way in which
we are embedded within the cultural context tend to be tacit. Tourists may
become aware of their embeddedness and experience cultural confusion (see
Suvantola, 2002) if they do not make sense of activities in strange cultures.
Third, the tourist setting might create a special social context (White &
White, 2008). Many experiences involve sharing and communicating with
others who are having the same consumption experiences (Wang, 1999).
 A Multirelational Approach 499

We concurrently belong to different social tribes and communities (Celsi,

et al., 1993; Schouten & McAlexander, 1995), and how we relate to and
within them affects who we are during the experience. Being a tourist
sometimes involves engaging in activities and social norms different from
those observed in everyday life (e.g., adopting an “explorer role” of being
tough and not complaining about being tired or hungry while dog sledding).
Additionally, tourist communities enable new friendships to form (Kim &
Jamal, 2007). However, tourists can also relate to a social context without
any direct social interaction. The observation of other tourists’ (strangers)
engagement, actions, and responses may influence one’s own experiences
(Lehn, 2006). The “social makeup” and pressure, as well as a tourist’s need
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

to belong, can also force tourists into group behavior. Thus, the presence
of other people in a social context can either undermine or enhance the
consumer experience, even when the focal person does not directly interact
with other people.

In Body
Our prepositioned body is engaged in various situations and functions as
our primary connection to the world and the major locus of our senses
and emotions (Merleau-Ponty, 1945/1962). The body is not an outer shell
that contains the “real me” (Nyeng, 2005). Instead, the body, emotions, and
consciousness are regarded as integrated parts of one experiential being.
Our bodies are involved in experiences through our senses, attunement,
approaches, attention, and movement. Recent studies have emphasized the
embodied and multi-sensory aspects of experience (e.g., Joy & Sherry, 2003;
Lehn, 2006). Instead of considering only sensory information, we argue that
our different bodily relations influence our experiences and how we value
those experiences.
A consumer experience can be understood as a bodily relation-toward
process (see Küpers, 2000) within certain contexts. The body often knows
how to act, and this knowledge constitutes a normal state of being in which
tourists do not reflect on the existence of their body in the world. However,
tourists become aware of their bodies if they experience negative or positive
divergence or fail to cope during consumption. A tourist who is unfamil-
iar with dog sledding or canoeing may struggle during these experiences
instead of enjoying nature or being social. A skilled tourist is able to turn the
activity into a tacit bodily endeavor more easily. This ability is what Polanyi
(1966/1983) called from-to attention in tacit knowing.
Because we relate to the world through our bodies, active and pas-
sive activities influence our experiences differently. Watching dolphins or
swimming with them (Curtin, 2006) are examples of passive versus active
bodily relations. Many adventure tourists are positively triggered by bod-
ily challenges during activities such as kayaking, horseback riding, and
 500 F. Lindberg et al.

mountaineering. Tourists may choose such activities because they want to

challenge their comfort zones and transform into other ways of being. Hence,
they seek to learn and cope within challenging contexts. The bodily experi-
ence of wellbeing and realization of the self act as rewards for the struggle.

In Interaction
Consumer interactions can range from more externally oriented (e.g., with
others or objects) to more internally oriented (e.g., self-reflection). Within
the limitations of this article, we have chosen to focus on four main types
of interactions: (a) with the self, (b) with others, (c) with animals, and
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

(d) with objects. The nature of interaction is, however, dynamic and co-
existing, so the distinction is made for theoretical purposes. During consumer
experiences, interactions with the self, others, animals, and objects may
occur simultaneously, and the interactions may change rapidly as the tourist
engages in various activities.
First, interaction with the self can be considered a process of self-
discovery resulting from our relationship to the world. Interactions with the
self include reflection, awareness of needs and desires, attention to feel-
ings and thoughts, and reflexive awareness. Interaction with the self often
takes place as sense making of what is happening (Galani-Moutafi, 2000).
This process explains how self-reflection during an experience can weave
current experiences together, both through selective memories from former
experiences and through dreams and expectations. Dog sledding through a
barren Arctic landscape can, for example, trigger reflections about a tourist’s
hectic and materialistic urban lifestyle. These reflections can open people
up to changes in their lives when they return home. Consumer experiences
often involve participating in new activities and visiting new places and may
therefore promote self-reflection. Tourists “can be considered observers who
gaze into the elsewhere and the other, while looking for their own reflec-
tion” (Galani-Moutafi, 2000, p. 220). Experiences can also become significant
when tourists reflect on and make memories of them after a trip (Curtin,
2006). Thus, reflexive awareness and interaction with the self are important
elements of the consumer experience.
Second, social interaction can be argued to be one of the most fun-
damental and important element in how tourists examine, experience, and
make sense of the experiencescape (Lehn, 2006; White & White, 2008). Some
tourists use vacations to strengthen social/family bonds and their sense of
belonging. Even if they engage with people who they know from every-
day life, the tourist context tends to change the nature of the interaction.
Experiences differ depending on whether they are shared with friends, a
romantic partner, or a teenage child. Extended interaction can lead to cama-
raderie and new friendships (Arnould & Price, 1993; Celsi et al., 1993).
Factors such as group dynamics, the amount of time that the group spends
 A Multirelational Approach 501

together, and how they cooperate during the experience are all examples of
what might affect the experience. The role of the guide can be viewed as
both narrator (Henning, 2008) and facilitator of interaction, involvement, and
transformation. The roles of other consumers or local inhabitants can affect
the experience both positively and negatively (Mossberg, 2007b). Sometimes,
tourists may want the “mere presence” and comfort of other tourists to obtain
a sense of reassurance and security (White & White, 2008).
Third, human–animal encounters are the core of many tourist products
and represent a relationship that differs from social interactions between
human beings. Such interactions can take place at various levels and with
varying intensity. Although the interaction is less verbal and more embodied,
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

the connectedness and emotional relationship can still be profound. Some

tourists form emotional relationships with wild animals (e.g., whales) when
observing them in their natural habitats. Certain animals, such as dolphins,
are even assigned symbolic and anthropomorphic qualities that clearly have
an effect on how tourists interpret and experiences with them (Curtin, 2006).
Other experiences may involve close interactions with domestic/tamed ani-
mals, such as dog sledding, horseback riding, or farm visits. Research shows
that animals can function as “social lubricants” and that animals encourage
conversations and stimulate social interactions (Hunt, Hart, & Gomulkiewicz,
1992). How tourists relate to and interact with animals depends on several
factors, such as the behavior of the animal; the tourist’s skills, interests, and
former experience; cultural meaning; and the information and instruction
provided by guides.
Fourth, we propose that interactions with objects influence a tourist’s
experience and the meaning created. Examples include the relationship
with a canoe during canoeing, with a bicycle during a bicycling holiday,
or with an audiovisual guide in a museum. The degree of awareness of the
object depends on how familiar tourists are with those objects and whether
the interaction occurs smoothly. Interactions with objects are often more
or less embodied. For example, experienced bikers would focus not on
riding the bike but on the landscape and other interactions. Experienced
bikers know how to bike and are one with the bike (Dreyfus, 1991; Polanyi,
1958, 1966/1983), similar to Polanyi’s famous example of the blind man who
becomes one with the stick. However, if the tourist lacks practical knowledge
of biking, or if the bike breaks down, focus and attention are replaced with
a struggle with the bike and hence a change of focus, identity, and activity,
which influences the meaning and value of the consumer experience.

Dynamic Experience and Meaning

The multirelational approach would imply that consumer experiences are
considered dynamic phenomena in which meaning is continually negoti-
ated as consumers move between embedded, value-laden activities in time
 502 F. Lindberg et al.

and as bodily beings. Time dynamically affects experiences (see center of

Figure 1) because activities are embedded in time and humans dwell in
time. When tourists move between places, they may face different concep-
tions of time, such as when they move from a city into nature. Additionally,
tourists narrate movements from one activity, one type of interaction, and
one context and time orientation to another. These stories signify changes
in experiences, bodily being, understanding, and meaning. According to
the being-in-the-world theory, experiences are normally marked by the
sociocultural-historical past. Research on extraordinary experiences shows
how consumption can be intense and a renewal of the self (Arnould &
Price, 1993), as well as represent a dramatic world view (Celsi et al., 1993).
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

Tourism capacitates extreme experiences. However, the context and the

body, with their culturally embedded and embodied meanings, and social
interaction, with its social meanings, dominate tourist activities. Therefore,
the process of sense making and the negotiation of meaning are dynamic
because they are not the same for all tourists. Certain events will stand
out in the foreground to different consumers, while other events recede
into the background (Thompson et al., 1989). We argue that understanding
such dynamics is important in understanding what it means to be a tourist
throughout experiencescapes.
Including and combining diverse relational structures when making
sense of experiences may be complex. Therefore, we present Figure 2 to
illustrate the notion of dynamic experiences. We must emphasize that this
is just an illustration and does not approximate the lived experience (see
arrows). We use an example of a 3-day commercial dog sledding adventure
in the Arctic Svalbard in which the tourists operate their own sleds pulled
by six Alaskan huskies. The example focuses on the first day, on which the
tourists depart for the dog yard (which is designed as a replica of a trapper
station). The tourists learn how to assemble their own dog teams and drive
to a remote cabin at the opposite end of the island.
Figure 2 shows various activities that illustrate different experi-
encescapes. The first part of the trip can be divided into six experi-
encescapes: (a) briefing at the hotel, (b) acquiring warm clothes at the

FIGURE 2 The dynamic experience of dog sledding at Svalbard.

 A Multirelational Approach 503

storehouse, (c) riding a minibus to the dog yard, (d) taking a guided tour of
the trapping station, (e) harnessing the dogs, and (f) leaving the dog yard
on the sleds (see Figure 2). The illustration of experiencescapes in the fig-
ure is based on the assumption that all of the main ontological structures
suggested in this article coexist. Depending on the characteristics of the
experiencescapes, a variety of relationships may be in the foreground or the
background of the tourist’s experience (illustrated by the size of the circles).
For example, the in-body experience (Circle 1) may be salient when equip-
ment, including the sled, become an extension of the body during the trip.
The in-context experience (Circle 4), including both physical and sociocul-
tural aspects, is strengthened when the tourist moves from civilization (e.g.,
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

hotel reception) to the isolated dog yard outside town. Interaction (Circle
3) can be a predominant feature in all experiencescapes, but the focus of
the interaction will vary from relationships with other tourists (e.g., during
the initial briefing) to interaction with the dogs in the dog yard. If a tourist is
afraid of dogs, the interaction with the dogs may turn the experience para-
doxical and challenging. If a person is coping well, the interaction with the
dogs may turn embodied and the experiential focus may turn towards nature.
Time is illustrated by three elements in Figure 2: (a) a chronological
timeline for the various activities, (b) arrows representing the transition
between the different experiencescapes, and (c) the tourist’s relationship
in time within each experiencescape (Circle 2). This illustration shows that
dynamic experiences can occur both within the activity and across activi-
ties. The chronological timeline represents the progress of the experience as
such. The tourists’ relationship to time is expected to vary between expe-
riencescapes. The wilderness time, perhaps in contrast to the urban clock
time, is likely to “force” tourists to become immersed in their tourism expe-
riences during one or several experiencescapes. For example, because of
the intense interactions with the dogs and the Arctic (in context) when the
tourists depart from the dog yard, most tourists are likely to focus on the
activities before them. The transformation between experiencescapes may
help tourists change their belonging and meaning as beings-in-the-world
(i.e., transform from an urban identity to an Arctic dog sledding identity).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

This article suggested, elaborated, and briefly illustrated what we have enti-
tled “a multirelational approach.” Inspired by contributions within the litera-
ture on consumer research, tourism, and the being-in-the-world ontology, we
have proposed a multirelational model with four main ontological concepts
that shape consumer experiences, becoming, and meaning constructions (see
Figure 1). These four main concepts point to relationships that occur in and
across experiences in time, context, interaction, and bodily being.
 504 F. Lindberg et al.

We propose the following three claims based on this article: First, the
multirelational approach contributes to an understanding of consumer expe-
riences as largely sociocultural-historical. Thus, consumers always reside
in networks of meaning when they face tourism contexts. This approach
changes the character of the experience from tourist as subject (e.g.,
Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982) to one that is more relational and shared.
Some researchers argue that tourists conform to cultural meaning as they
are supposed to (McCracken, 1986; Urry, 1990). However, according to the
core aspects of the being-in-the-world ontology (Luft & Overgaard, 2012),
such a view is culturally deterministic. Second, the multirelational approach
contributes to a dynamic understanding of consumer experiences and mean-
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

ing. Tourists move across places, interactions, and time. They bring with
them their past and their future, as well as their understanding, which affect
experiences in the same manner that sociocultural factors do. Experiences
are therefore transient and cannot be considered events that are determined
only by (tacit) bodily belonging (Steiner & Reisinger, 2006). Third, by focus-
ing on relationships in and across experiences in time, interactions, contexts,
and bodily being, we can learn more about the dynamic experiences and
interpretive meanings of tourism. We suggest that encounters within tourist
contexts enable the consumer to learn about one’s world, oneself, and
others throughout transformative experiences. Such transformative learning
processes are particularly interesting because they bring deeper insight to
significant consumer experiences, as well as to how activities can hamper
or facilitate valuable experiences. The multirelational approach suggests that
we can develop a deeper understanding of activities and experiences in and
across these tourist relationships, including where the tourists come from
and where they are going (Sköldberg, 1998).
This article adopts a contemporary experiential view within interpretive
research (Arnould & Thompson, 2005; Carù & Cova, 2003; Thompson,
Locander, & Pollio, 1989) in which consumption is defined as activity that
involves the experience of meanings and symbols, rather than a utilitarian
view of the consumer as an information seeking and multi-attribute process-
ing subject (Carù & Cova, 2007b). The multirelational approach contributes
to a broader and more holistic orientation (which is regarded as rare within
marketing research; Carù & Cova, 2003). While co-creation between provider
and consumer has been argued to be the main driver of consumer value
(Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2004), the multirelational approach questions and
expands this line of thinking by highlighting the complexity of co-creation.
Few scholars have explored how the consumer adds value to his or her
final experience (Prebensen & Foss, 2011). In contrast, we provide a
multirelational understanding that addresses how consumers may become
involved in, and value, tourist situations. Consequently, and unlike what
is theorized within the experience economy (e.g., Pine & Gilmore, 1999),
meaning and value creation may take place outside the control of tourism
providers.
 A Multirelational Approach 505

The multirelational approach signifies that consumption is situated,

intertwined, and dynamic. Everyday experiences and consumer experiences
must be considered a whole, i.e., as lived experiences, with similarities and
differences (Nunkoo, Gursoy & Ramkissoon, 2013). Thus, both researchers
and the tourism industry must understand what takes place before and after
the consumer experience, rather than only during consumption. While much
tourism research focuses on a pluralist portrayal and de-differentiation of
experience (Uriely, 2005), meaning, or lack thereof, may, according to the
multirelational approach, originate in everyday life just as it may originate
in tourism consumption. The approach thus contributes to a view of the
consumer experience as complex and enduring and augments the under-
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

standing of how value creation may occur during consumer experiences.

Furthermore, interactions and relationships are not just dedicated to the
physical relationships between humans or between humans and objects
(which is theorized within the service and experience marketing literature;
Bitner, 1992; Mossberg, 2007a). Symbolic relationships may be just as impor-
tant for tourist experiences in that the past and the potential future may
influence meaning creation during consumption.
Within the tourism literature, an increasing number of scholars have
adopted a (hermeneutic) phenomenological approach to understand lived
experiences (Kim & Jamal, 2007; Pernecky & Jamal, 2010; Ryan, 2000; Steiner
& Reisinger, 2006; Szarycz, 2009; Wang, 1999). While several of these authors
contribute the understanding of tourism from a being-in-the-world perspec-
tive (e.g., Wang, 1999), we contribute to this stream of literature by using the
being-in-the-world perspective as an ontology that distinguishes the nature
of consumer experiences within tourism. Thus, all four abovementioned
concepts are present, to various degrees, during consumption.
We have proposed a broader conception of consumer experiences and
are aware of other holistic alternatives (Ek, et al., 2008; Jafari, 1987; Knutson
& Beck, 2003; Quan & Wang, 2004; Walls et al., 2011). Jafari refers to “the
springboard metaphor,” in which six transformations from everyday life to
tourist life and back are regarded as important for understanding tourist
experiences (1987, p. 151). Such process models are common in outdoor
recreation (Borrie & Roggenbuck, 2001), and one must be aware of the
essentialist problem when assuming what transformations tourists undergo.
Thus, the lived experiences define the limits of consumer experiences, not
the limitations of a theory. In their recent review of experiential research,
Walls et al. (2011) aim to develop a holistic conceptual model based on a
distinction between the external (physical, interaction, individual, and sit-
uational) and the internal (cognitive, emotive, extraordinary, and ordinary)
elements of the experience. This model attempts to broaden the understand-
ing of how consumers respond to external elements during experiences.
However, the model suffers from a dualist ontology that makes it difficult to
interpret how (“external”) sociocultural-historical interpretations affect lived
 506 F. Lindberg et al.

experiences. Although models of consumer experience within tourism can-

not overcome dualisms, the multirelational approach attempts to reduce the
focus on the internal and external by emphasizing in-use activities in which
cultural and social meaning are present from the outset.

FUNDING

This research was sponsored by The Research Council of Norway through

the project Northern Insights.
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

REFERENCES

Ablett, P. G., & Dyer, P. K. (2009). Heritage and hermeneutics: Towards a broader
interpretation of interpretation. Current Issues in Tourism, 12(3), 209–233.
Abrahams, R. D. (1986). Ordinary and extraordinary experience. In V. W. Turner &
E. M. Bruner (Eds.), The Anthropology of Experience (pp. 45–73). Urbana, IL:
University of Illinois Press.
Ahuvia, A. C. (2005). Beyond the extended self: Loved objects and consumers’
identity narratives. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(1), 171–184.
Alvesson, M., & Sköldberg, K. (2009). Reflexive methodology. New vistas for
qualitative research (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage.
Andriotis, K. (2009). Sacred site experience: A phenomenological study. Annals of
Tourism Research, 36(1), 64–84.
Arnould, E. J., & Price, L. L. (1993). River magic: Extraordinary experiences and the
extended service encounter. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(1), 24–45.
Arnould, E. J., & Thompson, C. J. (2005). Consumer Culture Theory (CCT): Twenty
Years of Research. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 868–882.
Belhassen, Y., Caton, K., & Stewart, W. P. (2008). The search for authenticity in the
pilgrim experience. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(3), 668–689.
Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research,
15(2), 139–168.
Belk, R. W. (1991). Highways and buyways: Naturalistic research from the consumer
behavior odyssey. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.
Belk, R. W., Sherry, J. F., & Wallendorf, M. (1988). A naturalistic inquiry into buyer
and seller behavior at a swap meet. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(4), 449.
Bergadaà, M. M. (1990). The Role of Time in the Action of the Consumer. Journal of
Consumer Research, 17(3), 289–302.
Bitner, M. J. (1992). Servicescapes: The impact of physical surroundings on
customers and employees. The Journal of Marketing, 56(2), 57–71.
Boorstin, D. J. (1964). The image. A guide to pseudo-events in America. New York,
NY: Atheneum.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.
 A Multirelational Approach 507

Borrie, W. T., & Roggenbuck, J. W. (2001). The dynamic, emergent, and multi-phasic
nature of on-site wilderness experiences. Journal of Leisure Research, 33(2),
202–228.
Breejen, L. D. (2007). The experiences of long distance walking: A case study of the
West Highland Way in Scotland. Tourism Management, 28, 1417–1427.
Carù, A., & Cova, B. (2003). Revisiting consumption experience: A more humble but
complete view of the concept. Marketing Theory, 3(2), 267.
Carù, A., & Cova, B. (2006). How to facilitate immersion in a consumption expe-
rience: Appropriation operations and service elements. Journal of Consumer
Behavior, 5(1), 4–16.
Carù, A., & Cova, B. (2007a). Consumer immersion in an experiential context. In A.
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

Carù & B. Cova (Eds.), Consuming experience (pp. 34–47). London, England:
Routledge.
Carù, A., & Cova, B. (2007b). Consuming experiences. In A. Carù & B. Cova (Eds.),
Consuming Experience (pp. 34–47). London, England: Routledge.
Caruana, R., Crane, A., & Fitchett, J. A. (2008). Paradoxes of consumer independence:
A critical discourse analysis of the independent traveller. Marketing Theory, 8(3),
253–272.
Cary, S. H. (2004). The tourist moment. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(1), 61–77.
Celsi, R. L., Rose, R. L., & Leigh, T. W. (1993). An exploration of high-risk leisure
consumption through skydiving. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(1), 1–23.
Chronis, A., & Hampton, R. D. (2008, March/April). Consuming the authentic
Gettysburg: How a tourist landscape becomes an authentic experience. Journal
of Consumer Behaviour, 7, 111–126.
Cohen, E. (1972). Towards a sociology of international tourism. Social Research,
39(1), 164–182.
Cohen, E. (1974). Who is a tourist. A conceptual clarification. Sociological Review,
22(4), 527–553.
Cohen, E. (1979). A phenomenology of tourist experiences. Sociology, 13(2),
179–201.
Cohen, E. (1988). Authenticity and commoditization in tourism. Annals of Tourism
Research, 15, 371–386.
Cohen, E. (1995). Contemporary tourism—trends and challenges. Sustainable
authenticity or contrived post-modernity? In R. W. Butler & D. Pearce (Eds.),
Changes in tourism. people, places, processes. London, England: Routledge.
Cotte, J., Ratneshwar, S., & Mick, D. G. (2004). The times of their lives:
Phenomenological and metaphorical characteristics of consumer timestyles.
Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 333–345.
Csíkszentmihályi, M. (1997). Finding flow. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Curtin, S. (2006). Swimming with dolphins: A phenomenological exploration of
tourist recollections. International Journal of Tourism Research, 8, 301–315.
Deighton, J. (1992). The consumption of performance. Journal of Consumer
Research, 19(3), 362–372.
Dreyfus, H. L. (1991). Being-in-the-world: A commentary on Heidegger’s being and
time, division I . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Dreyfus, H. L., & Dreyfus, S. (1999). Mesterlære og eksperters læring [Apprenticeship
and expert learning]. In K. Nielsen & S. Kvale (Eds.), Mesterlære: Læring
 508 F. Lindberg et al.

som social praksis [Apprenticeship, learning from social practices] (pp. 54–75).
Copenhagen, Denmark: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Dreyfus, H. L., & Wrathall, M. A. (2005). Martin Heidegger: An introduction to his
thought, work, and life. In H. Dreyfus & M. Wrathall (Eds.), A Companion to
Heidegger (pp. 1–15). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Ek, R., Larsen, J., Hornskov, S. B., & Mansfeldt, O. K. (2008). A dynamic framework of
tourist experiences: Space-time and performances in the experience economy.
Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 8(2), 122–140.
Firat, A. F., & Venkatesh, A. (1995). Liberatory postmodernism and the reenchantment
of consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(3), 239–267.
Fløistad, G. (1993). Heidegger: En innføring i hans filosofi [Heidegger: An introduc-
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

tion to his philosophy]. Oslo, Norway: Pax.

Galani-Moutafi, V. (2000). The self and the other: Traveler, ethnographer, tourist.
Annals of Tourism Research, 27(1), 203–224.
Griffin, T., & Hayllar, B. (2009). Urban tourism precincts and the experience of place.
Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 18(2/3), 127–153.
Heidegger, M. (1927/1996). Being and time. Albany, NY: State University of New
York Press.
Henning, G. K. (2008). The guided hike in Banff National Park: A hermeneutical
performance. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16(2), 182–196.
Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: Emerging
concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 92–101.
Holbrook, M. B. (1995). Consumer research: Introspective essays on the study of
consumption. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Holbrook, M. B., & Hirschman, E. C. (1982). The experiential aspects of consump-
tion: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2),
132–140.
Holt, D. B. (2002). Why do brands cause trouble? A dialectical theory of consumer
culture and branding. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(1), 70–90.
Hunt, S. J., Hart, L. A., & Gomulkiewicz, R. (1992). Role of small animals in
social interactions between strangers. The Journal of Social Psychology, 132(2),
245–256.
Jafari, J. (1987). Tourism models: The sociocultural aspects. Tourism Management,
8(2), 151–159.
Joy, A., & Sherry, J. F. (2003). Speaking of art as embodied imagination: A multi-
sensory approach to understanding aesthetic experience. Journal of Consumer
Research, 30(2), 259–282.
Kim, H., & Jamal, T. (2007). Touristic quest for existential authenticity. Annals of
Tourism Research, 34(1), 181–201.
Knutson, B. J., & Beck, J. A. (2003). Identifying the dimensions of the experience
construct: Development of the model. In J. A. Williams & M. Uysal (Eds.),
Current issues and development in hospitality and tourism satisfaction (pp.
23–35). New York, NY: The Haworth Hospitality Press.
Kozinets, R. V. (2002). Can consumers escape the market? Emancipatory illumina-
tions from burning man. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(1), 20–38.
Küpers, W. (2000). Embodied emotional and symbolic “pro-sumption”:
Phenomenological perspectives for an interpretative consumer research. In S. C.
 A Multirelational Approach 509

Beckmann & R. H. Elliott (Eds.), Interpretive Consumer Research (pp. 293–317).

Copenhagen, Denmark: Copenhagen Business School Press.
Lash, S., & Urry, J. (1994). Economies of signs and space. London, England: Sage.
Lehn, D. V. (2006). Embodying experience. A video-based examination of visi-
tors’ conduct and interaction in museums. European Journal of Marketing,
40(11/12), 1340–1359.
Lengkeek, J. (2001). Leisure experience and imagination: Rethinking Cohen’s modes
of tourist experience. International Sociology, 16(2), 173–184.
Levy, S. J. (1959, July/August). Symbols for Sale. Harvard Business Review, 37,
117–124.
Lindberg, F. (2009). Ontological consumer research. An existential-phenomenological
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

endeavor into concepts, methodology and tourist experiences in Norway.

Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller.
Luft, S., & Overgaard, S. (2012). Introduction. In S. Luft & S. Overgaard (Eds.),
The Routledge Companion to Phenomenology (pp. 1–15). London, England:
Routledge.
MacCannel, D. (1976). The tourist. A theory of the leisure class. London, England:
MacMillan Press.
Maffesoli, M. (1996). The time of the tribes: The decline of individualism in mass
society. London, England: Sage.
Maslow, A. (1964). Religions, values and peak-experience. Columbus, OH: Ohio State
University Press.
McAlexander, J. H., Schouten, J. W., & Koening, H. F. (2002). Building brand
community. Journal of Marketing, 66(1), 38–54.
McCracken, G. (1986). Culture and consumption: A theoretical account of the struc-
ture and movement of the cultural meaning of consumer goods. Journal of
Consumer Research, 13(1), 71–84.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1945/1962). Phenomenology of perception. London, England:
Routledge.
Morgan, M., & Watson, P. (2009). Unlocking the shared experience. In M. Kozak &
A. DeCrop (Eds.), Handbook of tourist behavior (pp. 116–130). New York, NY:
Routledge.
Moscardo, G. (2009). Understanding tourist experience through mindfulness the-
ory. In M. Kozak & A. DeCrop (Eds.), Handbook of tourist behavior. Theory &
practice (pp. 99–115). London, England: Routledge.
Mossberg, L. (2007a). A marketing approach to the tourist experience. Scandinavian
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 7(1), 59–74.
Mossberg, L. (2007b). Å skape opplevelser. Fra OK til WOW! [To create experiences.
From OK to WOW!]. Bergen, Norway: Fagbok forlaget.
Muniz, A. M. J., & O’Guinn, T. C. (2001). Brand community. Journal of Consumer
Research, 27(4), 412–432.
Nyeng, F. (2005). Mennesket som emosjonelt vesen—om kroppslighet, sosialitet,
sårbarhet og eksistensiell oppvåkning [The human being as an emotional
being—on embodiment, sociality and existential awakening]. In F. Nyeng & G.
Wennes (Eds.), Kan organisasjoner føle? [Can organizations feel?] (pp. 17–35).
Oslo, Norway: J. W. Cappelens Forlag as.
 510 F. Lindberg et al.

Nunkoo, R., Gursoy, D., & Ramkissoon, H. (2013). Developments in hospitality mar-
keting and management: Social network analysis and research themes. Journal
of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 22(3), 269–288.
Obenour, W. L. (2004). Understanding the meaning of the ‘journey’ to budget
travellers. International Journal of Tourism Research, 6, 1–15.
Østergaard, P., & Jantzen, C. (2000). Shifting perspectives in consumer research: From
buyer behaviour to consumption studies. In S. C. Beckmann & R. H. Elliott
(Eds.), Interpretive consumer research (pp. 9–23). Copenhagen, Denmark:
Copenhagen Business School.
Otto, J. E., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (1996). The service experience in tourism. Tourism
Management, 17(3), 165–174.
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

Pernecky, T., & Jamal, T. (2010). (Hermeneutic) Phenomenology in tourism studies.

Annals of Tourism Research, 37(4), 1055–1075.
Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1999). The experience economy: Work is theatre & every
business a stage. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal knowledge. London, England: Routledge and Kegan
Paul.
Polanyi, M. (1966/1983). The tacit dimension. Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith.
Polanyi, M., & Prosch, H. (1975). Meaning. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Pons, P. O. (2003). Being-on-holiday: Tourist dwelling, bodies and place. Tourist
Studies, 3(1), 47–66.
Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice
in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(3), 5–14.
Prebensen, N. K., & Foss, L. (2011). Coping and co-creating in tourist experiences.
International Journal of Tourism Research, 13(1), 54–67.
Privette, G. (1983). Peak experience, peak performance, and flow: A compara-
tive analysis of positive human experiences. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 45(6), 1361–1368.
Quan, S., & Wang, N. (2004). Towards an structural model of the tourist experience:
An illustration from food experiences in tourism. Tourism Management, 25(3),
297–305.
Ritchie, J. R. B., & Hudson, S. (2009). Understanding and meeting the challenges
of consumer/tourist experience research. International Journal of Tourism
Research, 11(2), 111–126.
Ryan, C. (2000, March/April). Tourist experiences, phenomenographic analysis, post-
postivism and neural network software. The International Journal of Tourism
Research, 2, 119–131.
Schembri, S., & Sandberg, J. (2011). The experiential meaning of service quality.
Marketing Theory, 11(2), 165–186.
Schmitt, B. H. (1999). Experiential marketing: How to get customers to sense, feel,
think, act, and relate to your company and brands. New York, NY: Free Press.
Schouten, J. W., & McAlexander, J. H. (1995). Subcultures of consumption: An
ethnography of the new bikers. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(1), 43–61.
Schouten, J. W., McAlexander, J. H., & Koenig, H. F. (2007). Transcendent cus-
tomer experience and brand community. Journal of the Acamemic of Marketing
Science, 35, 357–368.
 A Multirelational Approach 511

Sherry, J. F. (1990). A sociocultural analysis of a Midwestern American flea market.

Journal of Consumer Research, 17(1), 13–30.
Sherry, J. F. (1991). Postmodern alternatives: The interpretive turn in consumer
research. In T. S. Robertson & H. H. Kassarjian (Eds.), Handbook of consumer
research (pp. 548–591). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Sköldberg, K. (1998). Heidegger and organization: Notes towards a new research
programme. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 14(1/2), 77–102.
Steiner, C. J., & Reisinger, Y. (2006). Understanding existential authenticity. Annals
of Tourism Research, 33(2), 299–318.
Stewart, E. J., Hayward, B. M., Devlin, P. J., & Koirby, V. G. (1998). The “place”
of interpretation: A new approach to the evaluation of interpretation. Tourism
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

Management, 19(3), 257–266.

Suvantola, J. (2002). Tourist’s experience of place. Aldershot, England: Ashgate
Publishing Limited.
Szarycz, G. S. (2008). Cruising, freighter-style: A phenomenological exploration of
tourist recollections of a passenger freighter travel experience. The International
Journal of Tourism Research, 10(3), 259.
Szarycz, G. S. (2009). Some issues in tourism research phenomenology: a commen-
tary. Current Issues in Tourism, 12(1), 47–58.
Taylor, C. (1985). Human agency and language (Vol. 1). Cambridge, England:
Cambridge University Press.
Thompson, C. J. (1997). Interpreting consumers: A hermeneutical framework for
deriving marketing insights from the text of consumers’ consumption stories.
Journal of Marketing Research, 34(4), 438–455.
Thompson, C. J., & Hirschman, E. C. (1995, September). Understanding the socialized
body: A poststructuralist analysis of consumer’s self-conceptions, body images,
and self-care practices. Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 139–153.
Thompson, C. J., Locander, W. B., & Pollio, H. R. (1989). Putting consumer
experience back into consumer research: The philosophy and method of
existential-phenomenology. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(2), 133–146.
Tumbat, G., & Belk, R. W. (2011). Marketplace tensions in extraordinary experiences.
Journal of Consumer Research, 38(1), 42–61.
Turner, C., & Manning, P. (1988). Placing authenticity—on being a tourist: A reply to
Pearce and Moscardo. Journal of Sociology, 24(1), 136–139.
Uriely, N. (2005). The tourist experience: Conceptual developments. Annals of
Tourism Research, 32(1), 199–216.
Uriely, N., Yonay, Y., & Simchai, D. (2002). Backpacking experiences, a type and
form analysis. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(2), 520–538.
Urry, J. (1990). The tourist gase. Leisure and travel in contemporary societies. London,
England: Sage.
Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action
sensitive pedagogy. New York, NY: State University of New York Press.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing.
Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1–17.
Vespestad, M. K., & Lindberg, F. (2011). Understanding nature-based tourist
experiences: An ontological analysis. Current Issues in Tourism, 14(6), 563–580.
 512 F. Lindberg et al.

Volo, S. (2009). Conceptualizing experience: A tourist based approach. Journal of

Hospitality Marketing & Management, 18(2/3), 111–126.
Walls, A. R., Okumus, F., Wang, Y., & Kwun, D. J.-W. (2011). An epistemological view
of consumer experiences. International Journal of Hospitality Management,
30(1), 10–21.
Wang, N. (1999). Rethinking authenticity in tourism experience. Annals of Tourism
Research, 26(2), 349–370.
Wang, N. (2000). Tourism and modernity: A sociological analysis. Amsterdam,
Netherlands: Pergamon.
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
White, N. R., & White, P. B. (2008). Travel as interaction: Encountering place and
Downloaded by [California Poly Pomona University] at 02:50 17 November 2014

others. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 15, 42–48.

Wickens, E. (2002). The sacred and the profane, a tourist typology. Annals of
Tourism Research, 29(3), 834–851.
Wrathall, M. A., & Dreyfus, H. L. (2006). A Companion to phenomenology and
existentialism. Malden, MA: Blackwell.