KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2024 / Cilt: 24 Sayı: 2

Robot Turist Rehberi ile Gezmek Nasıl Bir Şey? RoBoHoN’a İlişkin Kullanıcı Deneyimi Üzerine Bir Söylem Analizi

What Is It Like to Travel with A Robot Tour Guide? A Discourse Analysis on User Experience with RoBoHoN

Burak Düz

Sayfa
769–796
Yayın Tarihi
2024-06-27
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗

Özet

Teknolojideki gelişmeler turist rehberliği hizmetlerini de dönüştürmektedir. Dönüşümün boyutlarından biri de robot rehberlerdir. Turizm rehberliği alanındaki çalışmalar daha çok robot rehberlerin insan rehberlerin yerine ikame edilmesine ilişkin tartışmalara odaklanmıştır. Ancak, robot rehberlerin geleceğine yönelik projeksiyonların sunulması için kullanıcı deneyimlerinin anlaşılması önem taşımaktadır. Buna rağmen, robot rehber hizmetlerinin hitap ettiği turistlerin deneyimlerini konu alan araştırmaların sayısı oldukça sınırlıdır. Dolayısıyla, bu çalışma araştırma eksikliğinin giderilmesine katkı sağlamak için robot rehberlerden hizmet alan kullanıcıların deneyimlerini ortaya çıkarmayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu kapsamda, YouTube’da yer alan bir video veri kaynağı olarak seçilmiş; Japonya’da hizmet sunan robot rehber RoBoHoN ile Kyoto şehrinde tura katılan sunucu Roger Ditter’in deneyimlerini ortaya çıkarmak amacıyla söylem analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırmanın bulgularına göre RoBoHoN yüksek fiyat, ergonomik olmayan tasarım, kullanıcıyla zayıf iletişim, sınırlı içeriklerle bilgi aktarma ve farklı koşullarda düşük performans gibi kullanıcı deneyimini olumsuz etkileyen özelliklere sahiptir. Dolayısıyla, Roger Ditter bir destinasyonu ilk kez ziyaret edecek kişilere robot rehber RoBoHoN’u önermemektedir ve kullanıcının deneyimine ilişkin söylemi büyük ölçüde olumsuz bileşenlerle inşa edilmektedir. Sonuçta bir tur aracıyla seyahati ve açık alanlarda turistlere eşlik eden bir rehberi içeren konvansiyonel tur konseptinde robot rehberlerin hizmet sunması için zamana ihtiyaç olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Çalışmanın sonunda paydaşlar için öneriler yer almaktadır.

Abstract

Technological progress transforms tour guiding services and robots take their part in the new setting. Tour guiding studies mostly focused on discussions regarding the substitution of robots for human tour guides. However, understanding user experiences is crucial to provide projections for robot tour guides’ future. Nonetheless, the literature provides limited identification of user experiences. To fill the research gap, this study aims to reveal user experiences with robot tour guides, and a YouTube video was selected as the data source. A discourse analysis was conducted to reveal the experiences of Roger Ditter, the presenter who participates in a tour in Kyoto, Japan with the robot tour guide RoBoHoN. The findings reveal that RoBoHoN’s features such as high price, non-ergonomic design, poor communication, limited interpretation content, and low performance in different conditions negatively affect the user’s experience. So, Ditter does not recommend RoBoHoN to first-time visitors in a destination, and his discourse is largely constructed through the negative components. Eventually, there is still time for robots to provide guiding services in the conventional tour concept which includes traveling by a tour vehicle and a guide accompanying tourists in an outdoor setting. The paper concludes with implications for the stakeholders.

Anahtar kelimeler
🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Düz, B. (2024). Robot Turist Rehberi ile Gezmek Nasıl Bir Şey? RoBoHoN’a İlişkin Kullanıcı Deneyimi Üzerine Bir Söylem Analizi. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 24 Sayı: 2, 769–796. https://doi.org/10.18037/ausbd.1452072

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

↗Yeni Sekme

PDF belgesi yükleniyor...

Kaynakça (89)

  1. Almeida, E. P. (2004). A discourse analysis of student perceptions of their communication competence. Communication Education, 53(4), 357-364. doi: 10.1080/0363452032000305968
  2. Altunel, M. C. ve Erkut, B. (2015). Cultural tourism in Istanbul: The mediation effect of tourist experience and satisfaction on the relationship between involvement and recommendation intention. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 4(4), 213-221. doi: 10.1016/j.jdmm.2015.06.003i
  3. Altunel, M. C., Yaşar Altunel, A. G. ve Pala, B. (2023). Mobil rehber uygulamaları üzerine bibliyometrik bir analiz. GSI Journals Serie C: Advancements in Information Sciences and Technologies, 6(2), 31-66. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/3284282
  4. Álvarez, M., Galán, R., Matía, F., Rodríguez-Losada, D. ve Jiménez, A. (2010). An emotional model for a guide robot. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans, 40(5), 982-992. doi: 10.1109/TSMCA.2010.2046734
  5. Alvarez-Santos, V., Iglesias, R., Pardo, X. M., Regueiro, C. V. ve Canedo-Rodriguez, A. (2014). Gesture-based interaction with voice feedback for a tour-guide robot. Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, 25(2), 499-509. doi: 10.1016/j.jvcir.2013.03.017
  6. Ap, J. ve Wong, K. K. (2001). Case study on tour guiding: Professionalism, issues and problems. Tourism Management, 22(5), 551-563. doi: 10.1016/S0261-5177(01)00013-9
  7. Bahar, M., Yüzbaşıoğlu, N. ve Topsakal, Y. (2019). Akıllı turizm ve süper akıllı turist kavramları ışığında geleceğin turizm rehberliğine bakış. Journal of Travel and Tourism Research, (14), 72-93. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/848886
  8. Boboc, R. G., Horaţiu, M. ve Talabă, D. (2014). An educational humanoid laboratory tour guide robot. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 141, 424-430. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.05.074
  9. Bose, D., Mohan, K., CS, M., Yadav, M. ve Saini, D. K. (2023). Review of autonomous campus and tour guiding robots with navigation techniques. Australian Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 21(5), 1580-1590. doi: 10.1080/14484846.2021.2023266
  10. Burgard, W., Cremers, A. B., Fox, D., Hähnel, D., Lakemeyer, G., Schulz, D. … Thrun, S. (1999). The museum tour-guide robot RHINO. In Autonome Mobile Systeme 1998: 14. Fachgespräch Karlsruhe, 30. November–1. Dezember 1998 (s. 245-254) içinde. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Erişim adresi: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-60043-2_29
  11. Chan, A., Hsu, C. H. ve Baum, T. (2015). The impact of tour service performance on tourist satisfaction and behavioral intentions: A study of Chinese tourists in Hong Kong. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 32(1-2), 18-33. doi: 10.1080/10548408.2014.986010
  12. Chang, T. Y., Kung, S. F. ve Luh, D. B. (2012). The innovative service model: A study on tour guide service design in Taiwan by ICT application. Academic Research International, 2(1), 192-198. Erişim adresi: http://www.savap.org.pk/journals/ARInt./Vol.2(1)/2012(2.1-24).pdf
  13. Chen, H. J., Hwang, S. N. ve Lee, C. (2006). Visitors' characteristics of guided interpretation tours. Journal of Business Research, 59(10-11), 1167-1181. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.09.006
  14. Chen, Y. C., Yeh, S. L., Huang, T. R., Chang, Y. L., Goh, J. O. ve Fu, L. C. (2021). Social robots for evaluating attention state in older adults. Sensors, 21(21), 7142. doi: 10.3390/s21217142
  15. Chowdhary, N. ve Prakash, M. (2009). Tour guide training in India: A comparison of approach and content with other programs. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 8(2-3), 161-191. doi: 10.1080/15313220802634141
  16. Cohen, E. H., Ifergan, M. ve Cohen, E. (2002). A new paradigm in guiding: The Madrich as a role model. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(4), 919-932. doi: 10.1016/S0160-7383(01)00082-2
  17. Drygajlo, A., Prodanov, P. J., Ramel, G., Meisser, M. ve Siegwart, R. (2003). On developing a voice-enabled interface for interactive tour-guide robots. Advanced Robotics, 17(7), 599-616. doi: 10.1163/156855303769156974
  18. Düz, B. (2023). What might they ask? Tourists’ questions directed to tour guides due to their information-giver role. Journal of Tourism Leisure and Hospitality, 5(1), 42-52. https://doi.org/10.48119/toleho.1292447
  19. Düzgün, E. (2022). Turist rehberlerinin dijital turizmdeki gelişmelere bakışı. Turizm Akademik Dergisi, 9(1), 193-208. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/2215137
  20. Fairclough, N. (1996). Language and power. Essex: Longman.
  21. García-González, J. M., Gutiérrez Gómez-Calcerrada, S., Solera Hernández, E. ve Ríos-Aguilar, S. (2021). Barriers in higher education: perceptions and discourse analysis of students with disabilities in Spain. Disability & Society, 36(4), 579-595. doi: 10.1080/09687599.2020.1749565
  22. Gee, J. P. (2001). An introduction to discourse analysis. London: Routledge.
  23. Glesne, C. (2014). Nitel araştırmaya giriş. (Çev: E. Günel). (dördüncü baskı). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  24. Global.sharp, (2024). Erişim adresi: https://global.sharp/corporate/news/160414.html
  25. Gyrard, A., Tabeau, K., Fiorini, L., Kung, A., Senges, E., De Mul, M. … Tsukamoto, M. (2023). Knowledge engineering framework for IOT robotics applied to smart healthcare and emotional well-being. International Journal of Social Robotics, 15, 445-472. doi: 10.1007/s12369-021-00821-6
  26. Hallett, C. E., Austin, L., Caress, A. ve Luker, K. A. (2000). Community nurses’ perceptions of patient ‘compliance’in wound care: A discourse analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 32(1), 115-123. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.01407.x
  27. Hannam, K. ve Knox, D. (2005). Discourse analysis in tourism research a critical perspective. Tourism Recreation Research, 30(2), 23-30. doi: 10.1080/02508281.2005.11081470
  28. Holloway, J. C. (1981). The guided tour: A sociological approach. Annals of Tourism Research, 8(3), 377–402. doi: 10.1016/0160-7383(81)90005-0
  29. Hu, W. ve Wall, G. (2012). Interpretative guiding and sustainable development: A framework. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 80-85. doi: 10.1016/j.tmp.2012.05.003
  30. Io, M. U. ve Hallo, L. (2012). A comparative study of tour guides' interpretation: The case of Macao. Tourism Analysis, 17(2), 153-165. doi: 10.3727/108354212X13388995267788
  31. Kalyoncu, M. ve Yuksek, G. (2017). The Effect of impression management techniques which tourist guides use in package tours on personal interaction quality. Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Management, 5(1), 15-25. doi: 10.15640/jthm.v5n1a2
  32. Kara, D., Kurt Yılmaz, B. ve Güler, M. E. (2022). Turist rehberlerinin teknoloji kullanımına yönelik algıların belirlenmesi üzerine nitel bir araştırma. Yaşar Üniversitesi E-Dergisi, 17(66), 517-537. doi: 10.19168/jyasar.1066215
  33. Karreman, D. E., Ludden, G. ve Evers, V. (2015a). Visiting cultural heritage with a tour guide robot: A user evaluation study in-the-wild. A. Tapus ve diğerleri (Ed.), Social Robotics: 7th International Conference, ICSR 2015, Paris, France, October 26-30, 2015, Proceedings 7 (s. 317-326) içinde. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-25554-5_32
  34. Karreman, D. E., Ludden, G., van Dijk, B. ve Evers, V. (2015b). How can a tour guide robot's orientation influence visitors’ orientation and formations?. M. Salem, ve diğerleri (Ed), Proceeding of 4th International Symposium on New Frontiers in Human-Robot Interaction. Canterbury, UK, April 21-22, 2015 (s. 317-326) içinde.. AISB. Erişim adresi: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2951385
  35. Karreman, D. E., van Dijk, E. M. ve Evers, V. (2012). Using the visitor experiences for mapping the possibilities of implementing a robotic guide in outdoor sites. 2012 IEEE RO-MAN: The 21st IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Paris, France, September 9-13, 2012 (s. 1059-1065) içinde. Red Hook, NY: The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers doi: 10.1109/ROMAN.2012.6343889
  36. Kavak, M. ve Oktay, E. (2023). Turist rehberliği alanındaki ön lisans, lisans ve lisansüstü programların müfredatının teknoloji ve dijitalleşme açısından incelenmesi. Journal of Tourism & Gastronomy Studies, 11(4), 3055-3076. doi: 10.21325/jotags.2023.1331
  37. Kaya A. ve Yetgin, D. (2021). Seyahatnamelerde turist rehberleri. Turizm Akademik Dergisi, 8(2), 37-55. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/1749429
  38. Kırıcı Tekeli, E. (2022). Development of studies on tourism guidance and technology from past to present: a bibliometric analysis with visual mapping technique. Journal of Tourism & Gastronomy Studies, 10(4), 2843-2861. doi: 10.21325/jotags.2022.1119
  39. Kırıcı Tekeli, E., Kemer, E. ve Kasap, G. (2021). Turist rehberleri robot rehberler hakkında ne düşünüyor? Fenomenolojik bir araştırma. Turist Rehberliği Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi (TURNAD), 2(2), 107-129.
  40. Kobayashi, T., Yonaga, N., Imai, T. ve Arai, K. (2019). Bilingual SNS agency robot for person with disability. 2019 IEEE 8th Global Conference on Consumer Electronics (GCCE), Osaka, Japan, (s. 74-75) içinde. Erişim adresi: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=9015297
  41. Komatsu, M., Takeuchi, M., Unoki, T. ve Shikida, M. (2022). The evaluation of ınterviewer's presentation styles for interview practice with a communicative robot. 2022 17th International Joint Symposium on Artificial Intelligence and Natural Language Processing (iSAI-NLP), Chiang Mai, Thailand (s. 1-6) içinde. doi: 10.1109/iSAI-NLP56921.2022.9960273
  42. Kuo, N. T., Chang, K. C., Cheng, Y. S. ve Lin, J. C. (2015). Effects of tour guide interpretation and tourist satisfaction on destination loyalty in Taiwan’s Kinmen Battlefield Tourism: Perceived playfulness and perceived flow as moderators. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 33(sup1), 103-122. doi: 10.1080/10548408.2015.1008670
  43. Lin, Y., Jo, W., Ali, A., Robert, L. ve Tilbury, D. (2024). Toward personalized tour-guide robot: adaptive content planner based on visitor’s engagement. Companion of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI ’24 Companion), March 11–14, 2024, Boulder, CO, USA. doi: 10.1145/3610978.3640731
  44. Maalouly, E., Hirano, T., Yamazaki, R., Nishio, S. ve Ishiguro, H. (2023). Encouraging prosocial behavior from older adults through robot teleoperation: A feasibility study. Frontiers in Computer Science, 5, 1157925. doi: 10.3389/fcomp.2023.1157925
  45. Macaluso, I., Ardizzone, E., Chella, A., Cossentino, M., Gentile, A., Gradino, R. … Scardino, G. (2005). Experiences with CiceRobot, a museum guide cognitive robot. S. Bandini ve S. Manzoni (Ed.), AI* IA 2005: Advances in Artificial Intelligence: 9th Congress of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence, Milan, Italy, September 21-32, 2005. Proceedings 9 (s. 474-482) içinde. Berlin: Springer. doi: 10.1007/11558590_48
  46. MacDougall, J. ve Tewolde, G. S. (2013). Tour guide robot using wireless based localization. IEEE International Conference on Electro-Information Technology, EIT 2013, USA, (s. 1-6) içinde. doi: 10.1109/EIT.2013.6632690
  47. Matsui, D., Minato, T., MacDorman, K. F. ve Ishiguro, H. (2005). Generating natural motion in an android by mapping human motion. 2005 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Alberta, Canada, (s. 3301-3308 içinde). Erişim adresi: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=1545125
  48. Matsumoto, K., Yamada, H., Imai, M., Kawamura, A., Kawauchi, Y., Nakamura, T. ve Kurazume, R. (2021). Development of a tour guide and co-experience robot system using the quasi-zenith satellite system and the 5th-generation mobile communication system at a Theme Park. ROBOMECH Journal, 8, 1-14. doi: 10.1186/s40648-021-00192-7
  49. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
  50. Mhyre, J. M. (2010). Assessing quality with qualitative research. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, 57(5), 402-407. doi: 10.1007/s12630-010-9290-8
  51. Moscardo, G. (1996). Mindful visitors: Heritage and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 23(2), 376-397. doi: 10.1016/0160-7383(95)00068-2
  52. Nakayama, M., Tamai, T., Ishigame, A. ve Majima, Y. (2018). Brain wave ınfluence on ınteraction with a communication robot. 2018 7th International Congress on Advanced Applied Informatics (IIAI-AAI), Yonago, Japan, (s. 950-951) içinde. doi: 10.1109/IIAI-AAI.2018.00196
  53. Nettekoven, L. (1979). Mechanism of cultural interaction. E. De Kadt (Ed.), Tourism: Passport to development (s.135-145) içinde. New York: Oxford University Press.
  54. Nieuwenhuisen, M. ve Behnke, S. (2013). Human-like interaction skills for the mobile communication robot robotinho. International Journal of Social Robotics, 5, 549-561. doi: 10.1007/s12369-013-0206-y
  55. Noguchi, H., Koyano, Y., Mori, H., Komiyama, C., Sanada, H. ve Mori, T. (2019). Exploration of communication robot use for older patients in an acute hospital based on case trials. Journal of Nursing Science and Engineering, 6(2), 70-82. doi: 10.24462/jnse.6.2_70
  56. Nourbakhsh, I. R., Bobenage, J., Grange, S., Lutz, R., Meyer, R. ve Soto, A. (1999). An affective mobile robot educator with a full-time job. Artificial Intelligence, 114(1-2), 95-124. doi: 10.1016/S0004-3702(99)00027-2
  57. Ohya, S. ve Kawanami, T. (2019). Multi-user available information providing system for tourism by pointing gesture. Journal of Global Tourism Research, 4(1), 61-66. doi: 10.37020/jgtr.4.1_61
  58. Okada, Y., Kimoto, M., Iio, T., Shimohara, K., Nittono, H. ve Shiomi, M. (2020). Can a robot's touches express the feeling of kawaii toward an object?. In 2020 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Nevada, U.S.A., (s. 11276-11283) içinde. doi: 10.1109/IROS45743.2020.9340874
  59. Özalkan, S., Özkurt, Ş. ve Yazıcı Ayyıldız. (2022). Turist rehberleri bakış açısıyla dijitalleşme ve robot rehberler. Journal of Tourism and Gastronomy Studies, 10(2), 1415-1435. doi: 10.21325/jotags.2022.1050
  60. Palmer Molina, A., Palinkas, L. A., Monro, W. ve Mennen, F. E. (2020). Mothers’ perceptions of help-seeking for depression in head start: A Thematic, discourse analysis by language group. Community Mental Health Journal, 56, 478-488. doi: 10.1007/s10597-019-00504-7
  61. Reisinger, Y. ve Steiner, C. (2006). Reconceptualising interpretation: The role of tour guides in authentic tourism. Current Issues in Tourism, 9(6), 481-498. doi: 10.2167/cit280.0
  62. Robohon.com, (2024). Robohon. Erişim adresi: https://robohon.com/global/, Erişim Tarihi: 04.03.2024.
  63. Rodriguez, I., Zabala, U., Marín-Reyes, P. A., Jauregi, E., Lorenzo-Navarro, J., Lazkano, E. ve Castrillón-Santana, M. (2020). Personal guides: heterogeneous robots sharing personal tours in multi-floor environments. Sensors, 20(9), 2480. doi: 10.3390/s20092480
  64. Rosa, S., Randazzo, M., Landini, E., Bernagozzi, S., Sacco, G., Piccinino, M. ve Natale, L. (2024). Tour guide robot: a 5G-enabled robot museum guide. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 10, 1-18. doi: 10.3389/frobt.2023.1323675
  65. Santos, C. A., Belhassen, Y. ve Caton, K. (2008). Reimagining Chinatown: An analysis of tourism discourse. Tourism Management, 29(5), 1002-1012. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2008.01.002
  66. Schmidt, C. J. (1979). The guided tour: Insulated adventure. Urban life, 7(4), 441-467. doi: 10.1177/089124167900700402
  67. Scior, K. (2003). Using discourse analysis to study the experiences of women with learning disabilities. Disability & Society, 18(6), 779-795. doi: 10.1080/0968759032000119514
  68. Sezgin, E. ve Düz, B. (2018). Testing the proposed “GuidePerf” scale for tourism: Performances of tour guides in relation to various tour guiding diplomas. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 23(2), 170-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2017.1410196
  69. Sotohy, H. T. (2020). New trends in tour guiding, the guide faces technology ‘applied study to selected sites in Egypt’. Journal of Association of Arab Universities for Tourism and Hospitality, 19(3), 35-47. doi: 10.21608/jaauth.2021.53018.1099
  70. Şen Demir, Ş. ve Demir, M. (2022). Evaluation of digital tour guide technology and applications by professional tourist guides. Scientific Collection «InterConf», (135), 51-61. Erişim adresi: https://archive.interconf.center/index.php/conference-proceeding/article/view/1819/1849
  71. Tamai, T., Majima, Y., Suga, H., Inoue, S. ve Murashima, K. (2018). Design of Health Advice System for Elderly People by Communication Robot. Healthinf, 5, 486-491. doi: 10.5220/0006637904860491
  72. Taşkın, G. A. (2020). The need for a tour guide while the cities get smarter. Journal of Tourism Intelligence and Smartness, 3(1), 72-84. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/1166299
  73. Thrun, S., Bennewitz, M., Burgard, W., Cremers, A. B., Dellaert, F., Fox, D. … Schulz, D. (1999). MINERVA: A tour-guide robot that learns. KI-99: Advances in Artificial Intelligence: 23rd Annual German Conference on Artificial Intelligence Bonn, Germany, Proceedings 23 (s. 14-26) içinde. Berlin: Springer. Erişim adresi: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/3-540-48238-5_2
  74. Toker, A. (2022). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel veri analizi için bir kılavuz. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (51), 319-345. doi: 10.30794/pausbed.1112493
  75. Tsaur, S. H. ve Teng, H. Y. (2017). Exploring tour guiding styles: The perspective of tour leader roles. Tourism Management, 59, 438-448. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2016.09.005
  76. Van Dijk, T. A. (1997). The study of discourse. T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as structure and process (s. 1–35) içinde. London: Sage.
  77. Vásquez, B. P. E. A. ve Matía, F. (2020). A tour-guide robot: Moving towards interaction with humans. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 88, 103356. doi: 10.1016/j.engappai.2019.103356
  78. Velentza, A. M., Heinke, D. ve Wyatt, J. (2019). Human interaction and improving knowledge through collaborative tour guide robots. 2019 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), Delhi, India, (s. 1-7) içinde. Erişim adresi: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=8956372
  79. Velentza, A. M., Heinke, D. ve Wyatt, J. (2020). Museum robot guides or conventional audio guides? An experimental study. Advanced Robotics, 34(24), 1571-1580. doi: 10.1080/01691864.2020.1854113
  80. Weiler, B. (2016). The contribution of Australia-based researchers to tour guiding. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 26, 100-109. doi: 10.1016/j.jhtm.2016.01.002
  81. Weiler, B. ve Walker, K. (2014). Enhancing the visitor experience: Reconceptualising the tour guide's communicative role. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 21, 90-99. doi: 10.1016/j.jhtm.2014.08.001
  82. Wight, A. C. (2018). Putting Foucault to work in tourism research. International Journal of Tourism Research, 21(1), 122-133. doi: 10.1002/jtr.2246
  83. Yanwei, J. ve Hassan, H. (2022). A multimodal discourse analysis of the tourism promotional video “Xi’an China.”. Baltic Journal of Law & Politics, 15(7), 142-157. doi: 10.2478/bjlp-2022-007013
  84. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  85. Yıldız, S. (2018). Profesyonel turist rehberlerinin teknolojik rehber algısını belirlemeye yönelik bir araştırma: İstanbul örneği. Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences Research, 5(31), 4686-4697. doi: 10.26450/jshsr.930
  86. Yıldız, S. (2019). Turist rehberliği mesleğinde robot rehberlerin yükselişi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi, 10(23), 164-177. doi: 10.21076/vizyoner.481225
  87. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (Third Edition). London: Sage.
  88. Yin, R. K. (2016). Qualitative research from start to finish (Second Edition). New York: The Guilford Press.
  89. Zhang, H. Q. ve Chow, I. (2004). Application of importance-performance model in tour guides’ performance: Evidence from mainland Chinese outbound visitors in Hong Kong. Tourism Management, 25(1), 81-91. doi: 10.1016/S0261-5177(03)00064-5