Family Vacation Motivations among Families with Children with Autism

Family Vacation Motivations among Families with Children with Autism

Fauzunnasirah Fazil^1*, Noordeyana Tambi², Susheel Joginder Singh³, Sze-Siong Chew¹, Akmal Adanan¹, Kiki Rizki Makiya⁴

^{1 ,2,3}Faculty of Hotel and Tourism Management, University Technology MARA (UiTM), Melaka, Malaysia

⁴Programme of Tourism Study, Sekolah Tinggi Pariwisata Ambarrukmo Yogyakarta, Indonesia

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.908000399

Received: 10 August 2025; Accepted: 18 August 2025; Published: 13 September 2025

ABSTRACT

The increasing prevalence of individuals born with autism or autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has steered research efforts towards gaining a deeper understanding of this unique market. Previous research commonly reports that the presence of a child with ASD in the family often leads to reluctance to travel, causing families to opt out of such activities. Generally, ASD is a neurodevelopmental condition characterized by difficulties in communication and behaviour compared to peers of the same age. Despite the growing number of families raising children with ASD, limited research has explored their motivations for taking family vacations. Therefore, this study aims to determine the motivational factors driving families of children with autism (CWA) to undertake family vacations. A survey was conducted among families who had taken at least one vacation with at least one child with CWA. The findings provide evidence that both push and pull motivational factors serve as key drivers in fostering desire to travel among these families. This study contributes new insights for tourism marketing and promotional strategies for families with children with special needs, particularly those with autism.

Keywords: Tourism, Family travel, Push and pull motivation, Special needs, Inclusive tourism.

INTRODUCTION

The clinical name for autism was introduced as autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in the Fifth Edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) in 2013 by the American Psychiatric Association (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). ASD is a type of developmental condition that affects how an individual communicates, interacts socially, and sensory input. It is called a “spectrum” because it encompasses a wide range of characteristics, abilities, and challenges that vary significantly from individual to individual. Among the key features of ASD are social interaction difficulties, communication challenges, repetitive behaviours and interests, and sensory sensitives. Early signs of ASD can appear as early as six to 12 months of age. At between 18 to 24 months, they may become more noticeable.

The emergence of DSM-5 updated criteria and classifications to diagnose those with autism has contributed to the detection of a higher prevalence of ASD. Globally, ASD incidence happened at 1 in 100 children (WHO, 2023), an increase in the number compared to the previous report at 1 in 160 (WHO, 2021). In the United States of America, the current ASD prevalence has risen from 1 in 44 children to 1 in 36 (CDC, 2024). In Malaysia, the ASD incidence was estimated at 1 in 68 newborns, with an estimation of 9,000 annually born with ASD (NASOM, 2022). However, with the number of live births of 455,761 in 2023 (DOSM, 2024), the prevalence of ASD in newborns in this country possibly reached 6,702 in that year.

The upsurge in the number of ASD people globally demands inclusive tourism products and services that cater to autism’s special needs. Recognizing the increasing annual prevalence of the ASD community in the country and worldwide, Malaysia has proactively provided support to this community. Numerous efforts have been undertaken by the government, NGOs, and private sectors to address the special needs of children with ASD and their families. Additionally, the tourism industry has taken steps to offer inclusive and autism-friendly tourism opportunities (Fazil et al., 2022).

Despite efforts to create a more accommodating environment for this community, families of children with ASD remain hesitant to bring their children into public spaces. This reluctance is often associated with negative stigmas from others when the child is facing difficulties, challenges in managing the child’s ASD-related behaviours, and other related concerns.

However, exposing CWA to public spaces can offer numerous benefits that contribute to their development, social integration, and well-being. Tourism activities during family vacations, for instance, could serve as a platform for self-development, independence skills, and a real-world opportunity for the CWA. Family vacations also contribute to enhancing family bonding, cultivating family values, and creating special family memories among family participating members through communication and togetherness, shared exploration, experiential and learning, and escape and relaxation (Lehto et al., 2017).

To date, very limited studies have described family vacation experience and mainly focus on the United Kingdom (UK) such as in Amet (2013) and Sedgley et al. (2017). As for now, no studies have found the motivation to travel among families of CWA. Thus, this study aims to ascertain the factors that motivate families of CWA to travel. The objectives of the study are:

• To identify the characteristics of families who are taking vacations with their children with autism spectrum disorder.
• To determine travel motivational factors of families with children with autism spectrum disorder.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Travelling can be a meaningful experience for families, offering opportunities to strengthen bonds, create memories, and explore diverse environments. For families of CWA, the decision to travel is often influenced by a unique set of motivations that goes beyond leisure and recreation. These families may view travel as a means of fostering social skills, exposing their children to new sensory experiences, or breaking free from the routines of daily life.

The families who have CWA travelling together often face unique challenges and limitations. Autism is characterized by differences in social interactions, communication and sensory processing, which can make navigating unfamiliar environments and adapting to new routines particularly daunting. Despite these challenges, many families embrace travel as a way to enhance the quality of life for their children. This section aims to shed light on uncovering the underlying factors of diverse motivations driving families of CWA to travel.

Families of Children with Autism on Travels

Families travelling with children are shaping the current and future of global tourism as one of the largest, most constant, and predicted to grow faster than other forms of tourism (Schänzel & Yeoman, 2014). Travel activities could benefit in terms of physical, psychological, cognitive, affective, and spiritual experiences through new exploration, development, and growth (Kay Smith & Diekmann, 2017). Apart from that, families go for travels as a part of family rituals and family cultures. In Chinese society, for instance, the filial piety concept demands Chinese families to travel to enhance generational relationships (Jihyun Yang et al., 2020). Meanwhile, families in Western countries (e.g., American families) hold ideology and tradition as “a journey of family identify in the making” (Fu et al., 2014).

Not to be left behind, individuals with autism also enjoy the opportunity to improve their mental health through travel activities, which could impact and improve their quality of life, such as the sense of freedom, pleasure, and intellectual transformation (Stacey et al., 2018). Parents of CWA shoulder greater responsibilities to safeguard the children’s future development. CWAs are commonly found to receive formal occupation therapies as early intervention programs (EIP). However, such formal intervention programs commonly demand high commitments from the parents to perform routinised treatments and engagement activities for their CWA. As a result, some parents often postpone, cancelled, or even missed the appointment (Carr & Lord, 2016).

Therefore, alternatively the parents could take their families to travel as an informal therapy for their CWA. According to Bumin et al. (2015) activities undertaken during travels are one of the domains in autism occupational therapy for positive impacts and mental health that ably reduce behavioural and emotional disorders, encourage social interactions, widen the area of interest in children, and increase the life satisfaction of families. Moreover, when parents bring their CWA to travel, they are opening rooms for the learning process and giving a chance for them to broaden their experiences (Sedgley et al., 2017). In addition, activities participated together during family travels with children with special needs improve communication among typical and atypical siblings and reduce sibling conflicts (Pomfret & Varley, 2019).

Family Travel Motivations

Travel motivation is defined as “a meaningful state of mind which adequately disposes an actor or a group of actors to travel” (Dann, 1981). Numerous studies on travel motivation begin with the ground principles, such as Dann’s theory of push and pull motivations (Hsu & Huang, 2008). Dann (1977) classified push factors as the predispositions of a tourist to go on travel and what makes tourists go to travel. The push motivation factor is described as an antecedent to the ‘pull’ motivation factor. Pull is the external, situational, or cognitive aspects that pull tourists to vacation destinations. The pull factor includes these dimensions as destination attributes in the form of brand image and perceived destination experience, which inferred tourists to visit the destinations (Kassean & Gassita, 2013).

Push Motivations: For families, travel is a part of the rhythm of family life that is vital to reconciling work-life balance. Carr (2006) asserted that parents took travel to get away from responsibilities, relax, be with friends and see new things. Meanwhile, a netnography research on 97 family travel blogs had found vacation motivation themes emerged among families spending quality time with children, making family memories, learning and development, self-rewarding, and reward for the children (Li et al., 2017).

In modern society, families are occupied with daily demands and routines. Each family member has their own routine. For instance, parents are occupied with office workload where most of the time working husband and wife are spent on work, while housewives are occupied with housekeeping and family affairs (children and husband). For the children, most of their time is spent on school activities (Ingkadijaya, 2018). However, the father, who was usually busy at work and had no time to play with his child, would consider family vacation as a good way to build closer relationships with their children. For a mother, family vacations are the opportunity for a great family bonding time where they can walk and talk together about anything and everything that comes to mind (Li et al., 2017). Therefore, spending quality time with family members is a crucial motivational factor for family vacations (Li et al. 2017; Jamal et al. 2019).

Pull Motivations: Tourist attractions, such as beaches, landscapes and scenery, accommodation services, local culture and cuisine, sport activities, entertainment, and shopping opportunities, are the pull factors that motivate people to travel (Kassean & Gassita, 2013). Besides, the availability of family-friendly facilities, such as children-oriented clubs, entertainment areas, baby-sitting and child care services, also draws families to visit (Habibah et al., 2015).

Another destination characteristics that motivate tourists are related to the hospitality of the locals in terms of their generosity in receiving guests, creating a pleasant and friendly atmosphere as well as satisfying guest needs (Chon & Maier, 2021). Apart from that, travel cost is also a part of families’ concern that motivates them to go somewhere that does not cost too much money (Schänzel et al., 2022). Last but not least, the availability of fitness and wellness opportunities at the destination is also classified as an external motivation to travel (Oh et al., 1995) as travel addresses as one of the health and wellness mediums (Kay Smith & Diekmann, 2017).

To sum up, motivation plays a significant role in influencing travel decisions (Ramazannejad et al., 2021) where the push factors are related to tourists’ intention to travel, whereas the pull factors refer to tourists’ decisions related to specific alternatives (e.g., travel to destination A or destination B) (Mehmetoglu, 2011). Pull factors that inspire and attract families to go to the tourism destination in response to push motivation  (Dann, 1981; Kassean & Gassita, 2013) include the attributes of the popularity of the destination image, hospitality of the locals, affordability of the destination, the availability of family-friendly or family-oriented facilities, and health and well-being opportunities.

METHODS

The study was conducted in Malaysia, focusing on families who have travelled with CWA. The respondents consisted of families with at least one child living with ASD, aged three to 18, who had been clinically diagnosed and confirmed by medical practitioners living with ASD. Unfortunately, the local epidemiological study on the number of children with ASD in Malaysia is unavailable, rendering the sample size of the population to be impossible to deem.

Data collection involved survey questionnaires. The instrument was validated by a panel of six experts through a content validity index (CVI) using four-point Likert scale of 1 = not relevant, 2 = slightly relevant, 3 = relevant, and 4 = highly relevant. The experts’ score of 1 or 2 was recorded as 0 = not relevant, while a score of 3 or 4 was recorded as 1 = relevant. The CVI score of this instrument was 1.00, surpassing the range of at least 0.83, as suggested by Lynn (1986).

For sampling, a cross-sectional time horizon and the judgment sampling technique of purposive sampling were employed. These techniques allow the researchers to identify and select appropriate recruitment sources. The respondents were recruited from local autism care organizations across Malaysia, which are from 13 states and three Federal Territories, mainly focused on The National Autism Society of Malaysia (NASOM) and others. As a result, 124 families participated in this study.

This study received ethical approval from the Research Ethics Committee of Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, reference number of UKM PPI/111/8/JEP-2022-351.

RESULTS

The data screening process addressed empirical data collection issues. Out of 124 data sets collected, two samples were removed from analysis due to straight-lining response issue. Thus, only 122 data sets proceeded with the data analysis process. The data was analysed using the IBM SPSS 26 software version to produce descriptive statistics. To recap, the first research objective of this study is to identify the characteristics of families who travelled with their CWA. Meanwhile, the second research objective is to determine the travel motivations of these families.

Demographic profiles of the respondents

As shown in Table 1, most respondents who are parents of CWA are mothers (73.8%), with only 26.2% being fathers. Mothers usually play an active role in caregiving and advocacy, thus contributing to higher participation in surveys compared to fathers. Mothers are typically primary caregivers, more involved in child-related activities, and feel responsible for responding to topics about their children.

Characteristics of the Families

Characteristics of the families travelled with their CWA are measured based on socioeconomic background of the respondents to gain insight into their work sectors, occupational status, gross monthly income, and income levels. Regarding the employment sector, most respondents work in the government sector (35.2%), indicating stable employment. Other respondents are employed in the private sector (27.9%) or are self-employed (13.1%), while 22.1% are not employed. In terms of employment status, nearly three-quarters of respondents are employed full-time (73%), with 22.1% not working and only 4.9% working part-time.

In Malaysia, income groups are categorized based on household income distribution into three main tiers of Bottom 40% (B40) with an income below RM4,850, the Middle 40% (M40) with an income between RM4,851 and RM10,970, and the Top 20% (T20) with an income above RM10,971. These categories help the government and policymakers in designing targeted programs and policies to address socio-economic needs. In this study, the income distribution shows an almost equal representation of families from the M40 (45.9%) and B40 (41%) income groups, while 13.1% belong to the T20 group.

In families with CWA, traditional gender roles regarding breadwinning are often challenged, leading to more flexible or dual-income arrangements. In this study, the findings indicate the prevalence of dual-income families and the shift in traditional roles. As 55.7% of the families are found to have dual incomes, this finding suggests that the traditional single-breadwinner model is increasingly giving way to shared financial responsibilities. This change can be attributed to the high costs associated with raising CWA, which often include therapies, medical expenses, and specialized education. This study also reveals that in 39.3% of the families, the father remains the primary breadwinner, supporting the notion that traditional gender roles in employment are still prevalent in many families with CWA, whereas a minority (4.9%) have the wife as the main income earner.

Table 1. Profiles and characteristics of families.

Motivation of families to travel with children with autism

The presented results highlight two categories of motivational factors influencing tourism choices, namely push and pull factors. These motivational factors were measured using a Likert scale that ranges from 1 strongly demotivated to 5 strongly motivated. The results offer valuable insight into the motivations behind vacation planning, especially for families with CWA. Table 2 summarizes the findings by mean scores, standard deviations and corresponding motivational levels.

Push Motivational Factors: Push motivational factors to travel refer to the intrinsic reasons or personal desires that encourage families to embark on vacation. This study reveals that the motivation to travel among families with CWA represented by push factors received mean scores between 3.52 and 4.80, with the average mean score for pushing motivational factors being 4.20, indicating a generally high level of agreement with the listed motivational items. In detail, the item of To escape from daily routines (mean = 4.09, SD = 1.037) indicates that this item possesses a high level of motivation, with families agreeing that vacations provide a necessary escape from their everyday routines. The item of To relax (mean = 4.58, SD = 0.714) emerges as one of the strongest motivators with a high mean score and low standard deviation, reflecting consistency in responses and a shared perception of the importance of relaxation during family vacations. These findings also indicate that exploration is another significant push factor for the families of CWA to take a vacation. The item of To explore new places that have never been visited before receives a high mean score of 4.30 and a low standard deviation of 0.735, proving that the families value the opportunity to experience new destinations.

Next, the item To spend quality time with family members (mean = 4.80, SD = 0.524) suggests spending time with family members is the highest inner drive that pushes families to travel. The low standard deviation suggests a strong consensus on this being a crucial motivator. The item To create memories (mean = 4.69, SD = 0.576) also ranks highly, reinforcing the idea that emotional bonding through shared experiences is a key reason for family vacations. Another item, To celebrate a special occasion, shows high motivation but with slightly more variability in responses, with a mean score of 3.91 and a standard deviation of 1.044, indicating some divergence in opinion. Visiting friends or relatives is commonly associated with push factors that motivate tourists to travel (Zátori et al., 2019). However, in families with CWA, visiting friends or relatives only has a mean score of 3.52, ranking lower in the push factors, with a medium level of motivation. The standard deviation of 1.187 indicates variability in responses, suggesting that this is not as universally motivating as other factors. Last but not least, Being able to talk about the visited places after returning home (mean = 3.68, SD = 1.180) was found to have a high level of motivation, though not as strong as others. This study revealed that sharing travel experiences upon returning home is moderately important for these families.

Pull Motivational Factors: Pull motivational factors are the external features or attributes of a destination that attract families to visit. The mean scores of pull factors suggested in this study range from 3.63 to 4.54, with an average mean score of 4.02, reflecting a generally high level of travel motivation driven by destination-specific offerings. It was found that popular attractions are a significant pull factor, with a mean of 3.89 for the item The availability of popular tourist attractions for families and a standard deviation score of 1.022, which suggests some variability in how families perceive the importance of these attractions in motivating them to take a family vacation with CWA. Next, the item of The availability of family-friendly facilities (mean = 4.06, SD = 1.086) has a high mean score, reflecting the importance families place on the presence of amenities such as playgrounds, childcare centres, and kids clubs. These facilities are crucial for enhancing the vacation experience. Besides, item of Warm hospitality of the locals (mean = 3.99, SD = 0.949) are highly valued by families with CWA. Apart from that, this study suggests that families consider cost a crucial element when selecting a vacation destination, with the item of Affordability of the vacation destination (mean = 4.54, SD = 0.670) indicating a high mean and low standard deviation. Although the item of The availability of rehabilitation services for CWA at a vacation destination (mean = 3.63, SD = 1.261) ranks lower, it still holds moderate importance for families with children who have special needs. The relatively high standard deviation suggests that opinions on this factor vary widely, likely depending on the specific needs of the children.

Overall, the motivation to travel among families with CWA represented by push factor received mean scores between 3.52 and 4.80, with the midpoint of 4.20, which is a high level of inner driver in families to travel with ASD. Seven out of eight of the indicators represent the push motivational factor received a high mean score level. To be detailed, motivation To spend quality time with family members received the highest mean score (mean = 4.80), followed by To create memories (mean = 4.69) and To relax (mean = 4.58). Only one of the indicators received a medium mean score level (mean = 3.52) that is, To visit friends or relatives.

Meanwhile, the pull motivational factor received mean scores ranging from 3.63 to 4.54. All indicators that represent the pull motivational factors received high mean score levels, except for The availability of rehabilitation services for the child with autism at vacation destination at the medium level (mean = 3.63). The indicators that received high mean scores were Affordability of the vacation destination (mean = 4.54), followed by The availability of family-friendly facilities at the vacation destination (e.g., children’s playground, childcare centre, kids club, etc.) (mean = 4.06), Warm hospitality of the locals at vacation destination (mean = 3.99), and The availability of popular tourist attractions for families at a vacation destination (mean = 3.89). The average mean scores of the pull factor were at 4.02, indicating the external factors that attracted families with CWA to go to travel was at a high level.

Table 2. Mean scores of travel motivations.

Note: Likert scale ranges from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree; n = 122; Mean levels: 1.00-2.33 = low, 2.34-3.67 = medium, 3.68-5.00 = high.

Based on the results of this study, it was revealed that motivation to travel in families of CWA includes both factors, push and pull factors. Thus, the finding of this study suggests that Dann’s (1977) theory of push and pull motivations was vital in determining how the family vacation concept relates to what motivates family tourists to take a trip. When comparing push and pull motivation factors, families of CWA were found to be motivated to take a family travel by push factors, which are the inner drivers, rather than pull factors.

However, it is critical to note that motivation to visit friends or relatives moderately pulled families of CWA to travel. The travel and tourism environment may trigger unpredictable behaviour and overwhelm CWA, leading to endless episodes of social isolation for their families (Zulkanain & Mydin, 2019).

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the key motivations that drive families who have CWA to travel, emphasizing the push and pull motivational factors. While travel can be challenging due to difficulties in terms of sensory concerns and special needs posed by their CWA, this study uncovered that the families remain motivated by both travel motivational factors—push and pull factors. However, the push motivation was found to be slightly over the pull motivation.

Understanding travel motivations among family tourists is critical to explain family tourists’ behaviour, as such knowledge serves as a vital market segmentation criterion and a powerful tool in effective planning marketing strategies (Wang et al., 2018). Besides, it is also crucial for tourism stakeholders to develop autism-friendly facilities and services that enhance travel experiences.

While this study provides valuable insights into the motivations of families travelling with CWA, several limitations should be acknowledged. First, the sample size was limited, which may affect the generalization of the findings to a broader population. Future studies should include a larger sample to capture varied perspectives to represent the voices of families of CWA. Next, this study used a survey questionnaire for data collection which may affect the depth of the findings. Thus, incorporating observational methods or longitudinal studies could provide deeper insights into their motivations to travel with CWA.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors would like to thank all parents of children with autism that participated in this study. Most of them from The National Autism Society of Malaysia (NASOM), the Labuan Autism Association, the Kelantan Autism Association, and Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Learning Laboratory. The Main Author received a sponsor from the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia (MOHE) through the Bumiputera Academic Training Scheme (SLAB) scholarship to conduct this study.

REFERENCES

1. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). DSM-5 and diagnoses for children. http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/pdf/dsm-5-diagnoses-for-children-2.pdf
2. Amet, L. (2013). Holiday, what holiday? Vacation experiences of children with autism and their families. Autism-Open Access, 3(3). https://doi.org/10.4172/2165-7890.1000123
3. Bumin, G., Huri, M., Salar, S., & Kayihan, H. (2015). Occupational therapy in autism. Autism Spectrum Disorder – Recent Advances, 161–203. https://doi.org/10.5772/59168
4. Carr, N. (2006). A Comparison of adolescents’ and parents’ holiday motivations and desires. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 6(2), 129–142. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.thr.6040051
5. Carr, T., & Lord, C. (2016). A pilot study promoting participation of families with limited resources in early autism intervention. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 25, 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2016.02.003
6. (2024). Data and statistics on autism spectrum disorder. Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). https://www.cdc.gov/autism/data-research/index.html?utm_source
7. Chon, K. S., & Maier, T. A. (2021). Welcome to hospitality: An Asian perspective. Cengage Learning Asia Pte Limited.
8. Dann, G. M. S. (1977). Anomie, ego-enhancement and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 4(4), 184–194.
9. Dann, G. M. S. (1981). Tourist motivation: An appraisal. Annals of Tourism Research, 8(2), 187–219.
10. (2024). Vital statistics 2024. https://www.dosm.gov.my/portal-main/release-content/vital-statistics-2024
11. Fazil, F., Choy, E. A., Singh, S. J., & Tambi, N. (2022). Malaysia’s efforts in accommodating people with autism through family tourism. EBangi: Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 19(3), 224–243.
12. Fu, X., Lehto, X., & Park, O. (2014). What does vacation do to our family? Contrasting the perspectives of parents and children. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 31(4), 461–475. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2014.883350
13. Habibah, A., Hamzah, J., Er, A. C., Buang, A., & Selvadurai, S. (2015). Appraisal of family-friendly tourism in Malaysia. Tourismos, 10(1), 37–62.
14. Hsu, C. H. C., & Huang, S. (Sam). (2008). Travel motivation: A critical review of the concept’s development. In Woodside, A. & Martin, D. (Eds.), Tourism Management: Analysis, Behaviour and Strategy (pp. 14–27). CABI International.
15. Ingkadijaya, R. (2018). Family tourist – is different motive, different choice of tourist activity? E-Journal of Tourism, 5(2), 72. https://doi.org/10.24922/eot.v5i2.41704
16. Jamal, S. A., Aminudin, N., & Kausar, D. R. (2019). Family adventure tourism motives and decision-making: A case of whitewater rafting. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 25(November 2018), 10–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2018.11.005
17. Jihyun Yang, M., Khoo-Lattimore, C., & Yang, E. C. L. (2020). Three generations on a holiday: Exploring the influence of Neo-Confucian values on Korean Multigenerational Family vacation decision making. Tourism Management, 78, 104076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104076
18. Kassean, H., & Gassita, R. (2013). Exploring tourists’ “push and pull” motivations to visit mauritius as a holiday destination. Tourismos, 8(2), 39–56.
19. Kay Smith, M., & Diekmann, A. (2017). Tourism and wellbeing. Annals of Tourism Research, 66, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2017.05.006
20. Lehto, X. Y., Fu, X., Li, H., & Zhou, L. (2017). Vacation benefits and activities: Understanding Chinese family travelers. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 41(3), 301–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348013515921
21. Li, M., Wang, D., Xu, W., & Mao, Z. (2017). Motivation for family vacations with young children: anecdotes from the Internet. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 34(8), 1047–1057. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2016.1276007
22. Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35(6), 382–386. http://ijoh.tums.ac.ir/index.php/ijoh/article/view/26
23. Mehmetoglu, M. (2011). Examining the relationship between push and pull factors through partial least-squares path modeling. Advances in Hospitality and Leisure, 7, 153–171.
24. (2022). Autism. The National Autism Society of Malaysia (NASOM). https://www.nasom.org.my/autism/
25. Oh, H. C., Uysal, M., & Weaver, P. A. (1995). Product bundles and market segments based on travel motivations: a canonical correlation approach. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 14(2), 123–137.
26. Pomfret, G., & Varley, P. (2019). Families at leisure outdoors: Well-being through adventure. Leisure Studies, 38(4), 494–508. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2019.1600574
27. Ramazannejad, Y., Zarghamfard, M., Hajisharifi, A., & Azar, S. (2021). Factors behind tourists’ travel motivation: The case of the Gilan Region, Iran. Quaestiones Geographicae, 40(4), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.2478/quageo-2021-0032
28. Schänzel, H. A., & Yeoman, I. (2014). The future of family tourism. Tourism Recreation Research, 39(3), 343–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2014.11087005
29. Schänzel, H., Urie, G., & Lynch, P. (2022). Slow hospitality: Family perspectives of holiday experiences at beach fale in Samoa. Hospitality and Society, 12(1), 95–116. https://doi.org/10.1386/hosp_00051_1
30. Sedgley, D., Pritchard, A., Morgan, N., & Hanna, P. (2017). Tourism and autism: Journeys of mixed emotions. Annals of Tourism Research, 66, 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2017.05.009
31. Stacey, T. L., Froude, E. H., Trollor, J., & Foley, K. R. (2018). Leisure participation and satisfaction in autistic adults and neurotypical adults. Autism, 23(4), 993–1004. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361318791275
32. Wang, W., Yi, L., Wu, M. Y., Pearce, P. L., & Huang, S. (Sam). (2018). Examining Chinese adult children’s motivations for traveling with their parents. Tourism Management, 69, 422–433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.06.024
33. (2021). Autism Spectrum Disorders. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/autism-spectrum-disorders
34. (2023). Autism. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/autism-spectrum-disorders
35. Zátori, A., Michalkó, G., Nagy, J. T., Kulcsár, N., & Balizs, D. (2019). The tourist experience of domestic VFR travellers: The case of Hungary. Current Issues in Tourism, 22(12), 1437–1459. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2017.1371117
36. Zulkanain, M. I., & Mydin, A. M. O. (2019). Autism friendly classroom to stimulate learning setting. Analele Universitatii’Eftimie Murgu’, 26(1), 245–252.