2.1 The benefits of family travel

The family is the primary unit through which humans form important intimate affective bonds. Family tourism is beneficial for family members as it provides an opportunity for them to unite, develop bonds, maintain the liveliness of the family, create memories, improveparent-child relations, and enhance family functioning (^{Zabriskie & Kay, 2013}). Parents attach great importance to family engagement, and family tourism, defined here as a family-oriented leisure activity with a destination, is often used to achieve short- and long-term goals (^{Shaw & Dawson, 2001}). Sharing activities or touristic experiential activities in family tourism can improve bonding and attachment between family members; it can also teach children how to share and interact with others and build strong connections with their families (^{Smith, 1997}). ^{Durko and Petrick (2013}) showed that travel is a means to help improve communication within a relationship, reduce the possibility of divorce, strengthen lifelong family bonds, and increase a sense of well-being in adults and children. Recently, ^{Miyakawa and Oguchi (2022}) proposed that a memorable tourism experience and children’s skill development through family tourism were positively associated with changes in parents’ well-being. Family tourism also allows family members to gain a sense of accomplishment and well-being, create meaningful memories, and promote family harmony. Furthermore, scholars have found that family tourism strengthens family bonds, cohesion, communication, and adaptability (^{Kluin & Lehto, 2012}), broadens a child’s view of life, increases their practical tourism experiences, and enhances their interpersonal relations and social skills. Engaging in simple interactions when traveling together provides family members with an opportunity to alleviate negative emotions such as work-related stress, academic stress, and anxiety; it also allows family members to pass their free time without feeling bored (^{Chang et al., 2015}) and increase their satisfaction with family life.

The various benefits of family tourism can also affect the motivation, decision-making, and different considerations of parents or children prior to travel. In particular, collectivist Confucian values regarding family and education (^{Khoo-Lattimore & Yang, 2020}) will affect what "children want to achieve" at different ages during family holidays. In terms of ^{Maslow's hierarchy of needs (1943}), family traveling meets belongingness and love needs, self-esteem needs, and self-actualization needs. Examples include education, cultural experience, and collecting stamps in various spots). In addition, family tourism meets basic physiological needs and safety needs, with some examples being exercise and family reunions.

2.2 Motivations and preferences of family tourism

^{Iso-Ahola and Allen (1982}) described tourism motivation as the driving force that pushes tourists to escape from routine or stressful environments and pursue opportunities for personal psychological rewards such as self-challenge, exploration, learning, and recreation. In other words, such people wish to change their monotonous routines by satisfying their curiosity and changing their lives (^{Mayo & Javis, 1981}). There are many theories on tourism motivations, most of which are based on the push and pull theory posited by Dann (1977) and ^{Crompton (1979}). ^{Thomas (1964}) stated that recreation motivations consist of different dimensions: education and culture, relaxation and entertainment and ethnic traditions.

Preferences refer to an individual’s intrinsic emotions and tendencies and their degree of partiality to a particular set of choices. Preferences differ significantly among individuals. ^{Acker, Wee, and Witlox (2010}) suggested that travel preferences are generated from external environment and intrinsic individual factors, including habits, attitudes, enjoyment, interests, preferences, and feelings. ^{Crawford and Godbey (1987}) defined travel preferences as the product of an individual’s socialization and learning or of the outcomes of the interactions between an individual’s personality traits and society.

^{Lu (2017}) identified four factors behind tourism motivations: intellectual learning, affective interaction, scenic enjoyment and stress relief, and mental and physical health. This study also defined three dimensions of travel preferences: transportation and location, outdoor and natural sceneries, and interior arts and literature guidance. Lu’s (2017) results revealed that all dimensions of tourism motivations and travel preferences were significantly and positively correlated. In another study, ^{Chen (2017}) classified four dimensions of family tourism motivation: intellectual learning, affective interaction, scenic enjoyment and stress relief, and mental and physical health. This research also determined three dimensions of family tourism: transportation and location, outdoor and natural sceneries, and interior arts and literature guidance. Chen’s (2017) study results showed that tourism motivations had partially significant and positive effects on travel preferences.

With regard to key travel considerations, Wu (2011) examined negative family tourism experiences before, during, and after the tourism activities. The results of this research showed that family members’ different needs resulted in different experiences of tangible infrastructure use. Females, for example, emphasized restroom hygiene, while males emphasized parking convenience. Elderly people focused on functioning and conveniently accessible infrastructure, while parents valued the availability of facilities and equipment for infants and children and environmental safety.

Previous studies have also indicated that interviewees enjoyed using the facilities and equipment provided at attractions to pursue physical health, sports, and relaxation (Jonathan & Grace, 1987). Furthermore, it has been shown that families with small children tend to emphasize their children’s intellectual growth (^{Lin & Ho, 2013}). Parents will help their children develop a passion for learning and experiencing different cultures and customs by engaging in educational experiential activities during family travel (^{Lu, 2017}). Traveling helps children learn and practice the concepts and skills taught in the classroom; it also broadens their global perspective-hence, traveling has positive educational implications (^{Byrnes, 2001}). In other words, family tourism has both educational and entertainment benefits, increases cohesion and intimacy between family members, and creates many happy memories (^{Neumann, 2006}). Keeping in mind that families with children of different ages have different considerations, this study proposes Hypothesis 1 as follows:

H1: Differences exist in travel motivations among families with children of different ages.

2.3 Family travel decision making

A tourist’s destination choice is shaped by their travel intentions and preferences, driven by their individual needs, and influenced by the destination’s features (^{Nuraenia, Arrub, & Novanic, 2015}). Tourists will generally choose to travel to the destination that best benefits them, while parents must also consider environmental factors and the needs of family members when selecting the most suitable destination. Meanwhile, travel preferences significantly predict intentions to revisit a location.

Zhang and Zhang (2009) indicated that children act as the catalyst for family tourism. Because parents attach great importance to the satisfaction of their children, they are likely to exclude places their children would be less willing to visit. Previous studies have shown that family tourism activities differ according to key considerations that depend on the various stages of the family life cycle. Families with small children stress the intellectual growth of the children (^{Lin, 2013}); and family leisure not only entails visits to amusement parks, but also integration of educational concepts into the travel itinerary that will enable children to learn new things, acquire information, and broaden their perspectives through recreational activities or leisurely settings (^{Ritchie, Carr, & Cooper, 2003}). Furthermore, family tourism increases a child’s geography knowledge (^{Jen et al., 2010}). Based on the characteristics above, this study proposes Hypothesis 2 as follows:

H2: Differences exist in travel preferences among families with children of different ages.

2.4 Family travel experience and key considerations

Research has demonstrated that parents who travel with their children base their choices on six major dimensions of tourism consumption: dining, accommodation, transportation, sightseeing, purchasing, and entertainment (^{Xu, 2016}). Furthermore, Wu (2011) interviewed families about their negative travel experiences and found that parents emphasized child safety above all other considerations. Concerning tangible infrastructure, parents with infants preferred to visit attractions that provide breastfeeding rooms, diaper changing tables, accessible infrastructure (pathways, restrooms, and elevators), drinking fountains, and clean restrooms. They also feel that it is important that their choice of accommodation provides amenities for infants and children. To examine whether the key travel considerations of parents change according to their children’s ages, this study proposes Hypothesis 3 as follows:

H3: Differences exist in key travel considerations among families with children of different ages.

Early tourism-related studies often considered the “man of the house” to be the primary decision-maker because the husband’s education level, income, and occupational level was perceived to be higher than those of the wife (^{Jenkins, 1978}). Over time, gender equality in marriages has become much more valued, and spouses nowadays seldom make decisions without considering each other’s opinions; in today’s society, joint decision-making by both spouses is the most common mode of decision-making in family tourism (^{Fodness, 1992}). Children’s preferences also account for a significant part of the decision-making process in family tourism-parents’ decisions are primarily influenced by their children, and the children’s opinions and ideas are considered. Research has demonstrated that children’s preferences ultimately affect a family’s final decision (^{Thornton, Shaw, & Williams, 1997}) and will have direct and indirect effects on a family’s consumption choices (^{Ahuja & Stinson, 1993}; ^{Nickerson & Jurowski, 2001}; ^{Kaur & Singh, 2006}; ^{Kozak, 2010}; ^{Blichfeldt et al., 2011}). Based on the arguments above, this study proposes Hypothesis 4 as follows:

H4: Differences exist in travel characteristics (i.e., the mode of decision-making in family tourism, travel frequency, travel length, choice of dining outlet, choice of accommodation, and modes of transportation) among families with children of different ages.

3.1 Participants and sampling

Taiwan’s Protection of Children and Youths Welfare and Rights Act defines children as individuals below the age of 12. Children can further be categorized based on their educational ages, either as infants (0 to 2 years old), preschoolers (3 to 6 years old), and school-age children (7 to 12 years old). In this study, we used the above information to classify children according to their age range, which takes into account a child’s speech and cognitive abilities as well as their emotional and psychological needs.

Between April and June 2019, we administered a web-based questionnaire to participants recruited via convenience sampling. The participants were parents with children aged 12 and under who had previously engaged in family vacations. The study participants came from various regions of Taiwan and were willing to complete the questionnaire.

3.2 Measurement tools

4.1 Descriptive statistics of the sample

630 respondents completed the questionnaire in this study, and we received 608 valid responses. With regard to age, 44.41% of the respondents were aged 39 years and under, while 49.34% were between 40 and 49 years of age. Most of the respondents were female (77.30%), while males accounted for 22.70%. A majority of the respondents were married (94.74%), while single parents, divorcees, and widows/widowers accounted for 5.26% of the sample. In terms of region of residence, most of the respondents (47.70%) lived in northern Taiwan, followed by the central region (27.96%), the southern region (10.03%), the eastern region (5.26%), and the outlying islands (0.82%). The distribution of respondents is similar to the actual regional population distribution in 2022, which comprised 43% in the North, 23% in the Central region, 27% in the South, 4% in the East, and 1% in outlying islands (Department of Household Registration, ^{M. O. I., Taiwan, 2023}). In addition, among Taiwanese aged 25-55, the average divorce and widow rate is 6.62%, which is not much different from the 5.26% of single-parent respondents.

Hollingshead’s (1957) two-factor index of social position served as an index in this study. We found that the percentages of respondents with low, middle, or high socioeconomic status was 1.48%, 16.94%, and 81.58%, respectively, which reveals that most of the respondents had a high socioeconomic status. In terms of the age range of the children in the family, 11.84% of the respondents had 0- to 2-year-olds, 33.22% had 3- to 6-year-olds, and 54.94% had 7- to 12-year-olds. In terms of mean annual household income, the most respondents are in the middle range (53.29% earn from US$20,000 to no more than US$40,000 per year).

4.2 Exploratory factor analysis

To reduce and classify the items of travel motivation, travel preferences, and main travel considerations, we use exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to extract the concepts of travel motivation, travel preferences, and main travel considerations.

4.3 Differences among families with children of different ages

4.4. Differences in travel characteristics among families with children of different ages

5.1 Discussion

Our study results revealed that there were no differences among families with children of different ages in the “cultivating affection” and “compensation or rewards” travel motivations-related factors. This demonstrates that all the families went on family vacations to create memories or reward family members. This finding aligns with several works (^{Schänzel & Yeoman; 2015}; ^{Kluin & Lehto, 2012}), who found that family tourism entails large amounts of affective investments. Moreover, family tourism is not merely limited to family members’ participation in leisure activities, but also has the benefit of creating collective memories as a family (^{Neumann 2006}; ^{Carr, 2011}; Lehto et al., 2009; ^{Shaw et al., 2008}). Our findings also revealed that families with 7- to 12-year-olds attached greater importance to learning and experiences than families with younger children. Parents tend to hope their children can learn from educational and experiential tourism activities, enlightening them and enhancing their imagination and creativity. Similar to ^{Byrnes’ (2001}) arguments, tourism can enable children to learn and put into practice the concepts and skills they have acquired in the classroom and broaden their global perspective. Therefore, tourism has positive educational implications (^{Falk, Ballantyne, Packer, & Benckendorf, 2012}). Families with 3- to 12-year-olds attached greater importance to stress relief or sports than families with younger children. Children in this age range tend to have higher activity levels, and engaging in leisure activities allows them to relieve stress, improve their physical fitness, strengthen interpersonal relations, and elevate their learning efficiency.

Families with 0- to 2-year-olds included more shopping and dining activities in their travel itineraries than families with older children, likely because children in this age have longer nap times, and the naps can be taken in strollers. Furthermore, parents must buy more items to care for younger children. Our findings also showed that families with 3- to 6-year-olds and 7- to 12-year-olds gravitated toward festive and culture-oriented educational tourism. These parents reported that they would sometimes take their children to cultural heritage sites and buildings, participate in festive activities and rural experiential activities, or visit zoos and science museums. These findings reflect the revelations of previous studies, which showed that families with children attach greater importance to intellectual growth and experiential learning (^{Lin & Ho, 2013}; ^{Falk, Ballantyne, Packer, & Benckendorff, 2012}).

Recreational activities or leisurely settings that allow children to connect with their surroundings can pique their interest in learning new things, acquiring information, and broadening their perspectives (^{Ritchie et al., 2003}). Family tourism can also enhance a child’s knowledge of geography and sense of place (^{Jen et al., 2010}) and promote environmental protection behavior (^{Tseng, Shen, & Chen, 2018}). These results are similar to ^{Chang et al.’s (2015}) findings that families with children enjoy natural and scenic tourism regardless of age. Mostly, families prefer attractions with safe and secure environments and good recreational facilities that enhance interactions between humans and nature. ^{Lin and Ho (2013}) agreed that most families prefer to visit scenic tourist attractions when engaging in ecotourism and that enjoying natural or humanistic sceneries is one of their primary tourism motivations. As 3- to 12-year-olds’ families all prefer to participate in dynamic tourism activities, parents generally seek to include amusement parks, water parks, and cycling activities in their travel itineraries. Tourism activities for this age should entail a wide range of entertaining, sports-based, or interactive dynamic experiences. This finding reflects the work of Zhang and Zhang (2009), which suggested that tourism activities for families with 5-year-olds and above should include suitable levels of excitement and entertainment. ^{Schänzel and Yeoman (2015}) also mentioned that families increasingly seek adventure travel experiences. There is a trend families trying to be active together and having more authentic experiences when traveling.

Safety and hygiene, which refers to an attraction's safety, cleanliness, and hygiene, was an issue with which families with 0- to 2-year-olds were significantly concerned. In addition, as this stage of growth is important for developing children’s immune systems, parents often emphasize environmental hygiene. However, 7- to 12-year-olds typically have basic safe-care skills, so parents are more likely to allow them more freedom. Our results indicated that parents emphasize safety more when traveling with children-especially younger children; this finding supports Zhang and Zhang’s (2009) findings. Parents will often avoid taking routes with complex terrains and underlying safety concerns; they will also tend to eschew scenic areas that are undeveloped or hazardous. Families with 0- to 2-year-olds stressed the importance of amenities for children and child-friendly spaces. These parents often considered several factors, including the convenience of changing diapers and breastfeeding at a particular attraction, the availability of strollers for rent, how accessible the activity or attraction is for strollers, the availability of high chairs at dining outlets, and the availability of cribs and baby bathtubs at accommodations. These results are in line with general perceptions and expectations.

Family tourism decisions are mostly made jointly by both spouses. Parents give children more authority to participate in the decision-making process as they age to express their opinions and ideas regarding dining, accommodation, transportation, sightseeing, purchasing, and entertainment. This finding reflects the results found by ^{Fodness (1992}); joint decisions made by both spouses remain the most common mode of decision-making in today’s society, though children also play an influential role in the decision-making process. ^{Thornton et al. (1997}) agreed that children’s preferences play an important role in and account for a considerable portion of a family’s tourism decision-making process. Therefore, children do possess a degree of power to influence their parents in the context of the family’s tourism decisions.

Families with 0- to 6-year-olds traveled more often than those with 7- to 12-year-olds, possibly because younger children have more free time, making it easier for parents to schedule family vacations. On the other hand, older children are often busy with schoolwork or attending after-school programs, which may make it more difficult for parents to schedule family vacations. Regarding travel length, most families preferred day trips, followed by two-day trips, while trips that lasted four days or longer were the least preferred. However, there were no significant differences in travel length among families with children of different ages. This finding is in line with that of the Survey of Travel by Taiwanese Citizens of the Tourism Bureau, MOTC (2019).

We also found that regardless of their region of residence, Taiwanese citizens preferred to visit attractions located within their region of residence. In terms of dining outlets, all of the families reported that they preferred to taste local delicacies, followed by dining at family-friendly restaurants. Parents with 0- to 6-year-olds likely preferred to dine at family-friendly restaurants because children have poorer control of their emotions at these ages, and family-friendly restaurants have staff with stronger empathy and higher tolerance levels. Furthermore, younger children are often happy to meet playmates at these restaurants, which double as leisure spaces. This finding is similar to the results of ^{Tsai’s (2017}) study. A variety of family-friendly restaurants have opened in recent years, and many of these incorporate child-friendly elements, colors, or cartoon designs into their interiors and have child-friendly themes or layouts. These restaurants provide high chairs, play areas, breastfeeding rooms, and family restrooms, and they serve children’s meals. Some even organize family activities and courses to promote parent-child interaction.

Finally, our results indicated that families with 0- to 2-year-olds preferred day trips to overnight trips, and camping did not seem to be an option for them. Meanwhile, families with 3- to 6-year-olds preferred to stay in hotels or go camping; families with 7- to 12-year-olds preferred staying in hotels or going camping more than families with 3- to 6-year-olds. These results support the findings of Zhang and Zhang’s (2009) study, which found that families with children who were 3 years old or younger gravitate toward family vacations that are nearer and shorter due to the children’s physiological characteristics. Our findings are also in agreement with ^{Lin’s (2016}) study, as we found that camping is more appealing to families with school-age children and adolescents, whereas families with infants do not find camping appealing. This is not surprising, as 7- to 12-year-olds also have higher activity levels, a desire to explore, and more developed self-care skills.

With regard to mode of transportation, we found that families prefer to drive or ride in their own vehicles, followed by taking public transportation. This is in line with the findings of ^{Yen’s (2010}) study, which showed that families mainly engage in domestic family tourism by driving their vehicles.

5.2. Recommendations