Visit KC Survey Preliminary Findings Report

I. Introduction
Our research methods started by utilizing a convenience sampling method to recruit our
participants. Most of our participants were selected based on their relationship with the
researchers. We asked the questions face to face to and distributed paper copies of our
survey to friends and co-workers to get participants that met our criteria (Between 18
and 36 years old). A challenge we faced was trying to get our participants to read each
question completely and taking the time to answer the survey seriously. Instead some of
our participants tried to rush through the survey. A major limitation that we faced was the
lack of variety in our samples. Due to us using a convenience sampling method, most of
our participants were friends of ours. This lead to a sample that is not representative of
the general public, as our participants may have similar views due to being from the
same groups of friends. In order to fix this, using a random sample of all 18-36 year olds
would create a true sample. A more feasible option would be to sample 18-36 year olds
who attend KU.

II. Participants Demographics

In total, 544 participants completed the survey.
For our first demographic variable (Q8.1), we asked our participants Are you from the
Kansas City Metro Area? 197, or 36.2% of participants said they are from Kansas City,
KS or surrounding area. 71, or 13.1% said they are from Kansas City, MO or
surrounding area. In total, 268, or 49.3% said they are from the Kansas City area. 275,
or 50.6% said they are from somewhere else. One participant did not answer
For our second demographic variable (Q8.4), we asked our participants With what
gender do you most identify? 181, or 33.3% of participants, said they are male, while
361, or 66.4% of participants said they are female.
For Q8.5, we asked our participants How old are you? (please enter number only): The
grand mean age was 20.825 and the standard deviation was .093.

For Q8.6, we asked our participants With what racial/ethnic group do you most
identify? The most frequent response was Caucasian or White American, with a
frequency of 458 and a percentage of 84.2%. The next most common responses were
Black or African-American, with a frequency of 34 and a percentage of 6.3%, and
Latino or Hispanic with a frequency of 25 and a percentage of 4.6%. Asian or AsianAmerican had a frequency of 16 and a percentage of 2.9%, Native American and
Other both had a frequency of 5 and a percentage of .9%. One person did not answer.
For question Q8.7, we asked our participants What is the highest level of education you
have completed? The most frequent response was Currently in college, with a
frequency of 441 and a percentage of 81.1%. The next most common responses were
Some college, with a frequency of 42 and a percentage of 7.7%, and Bachelors
Degree with a frequency of 30 and a percentage of 5.5%. High School or GED had a
frequency of 17 with a percentage of 3.1%, Associates Degree had a frequency of 5
with a percentage of .9%, and Masters Degree has a frequency of 4 with a percentage
of .7%. Five people did not answer.
For question Q8.8, we asked our participants What is your current relationship status?
The most frequent response was Single, with a frequency of 349 and a percentage of
64.2%. The next most common responses were Serious Relationship, with a frequency
of 106 and a percentage of 19.5%, and Casual Relationship with a frequency of 59 and
a percentage of 10.8%. Married had a frequency of 11 with a percentage of 2%, and
Engaged and Other had a frequency of 9 with a percentage of 1.7%. One person did
not answer.
For question Q8.9, we asked our participants Do you have any children? The most
frequent response was No, with a frequency of 533 and a percentage of 98%. The
response of Yes, I have ___ had a frequency of 8 and a percentage of 1.5%.
For question Q8.10, we asked our participants What is your annual income? If currently
in school, please select your approximate projected income after graduation. The most
frequent response was Between $40,000 and $60,000, with a frequency of 128 and a
percentage of 23.4%. The next most common responses were Between $60,000 and
$80,000, with a frequency of 122 and a percentage of 22.4%, and Less than $20,000
with a frequency of 121 and a percentage of 22.2%. Between $20,000 and $40,000
had a frequency of 73 with a percentage of 13.4%, Between $80,000 and $100,000
had a frequency of 58 with a percentage of 10.7%, Between $100,000 and $150,000
had a frequency of 19 with a percentage of 3.5%, More than $200,000 had a frequency
of 11 with a percentage of 2%, and Between $150,000 and $200,000 had a frequency
of 9 with a percentage of 1.7%. Three people did not answer.
When examining the responses to these questions, we found that some demographic
variables had much more variance than others. Traits that were evenly split include
where the participants are from (nearly 50/50 on being from the Kansas City area or not)
and their relationship status (64% identifying as single). Our survey participants were
66% female and 33% male, which will skew our results to project opinions from a
females perspective.
Another large majority was education level: With over 80% of our participants saying
they are currently in college, this survey provides a clear analysis of college students
thoughts and preferences. One of the largest differences in our participant demographics

was race. With 84% of our participants identifying as Caucasian or White American, our
surveys results may not be able to project for other races.

III. Vacation
For Question 2.1, we asked our participants Approximately how many vacation days do
you take in a year? Participants reported taking about 16 vacation days a year.
(M=15.7, SD=.82).
When comparing vacation days based on where the participant is from, participants from
KC reported taking about 14 vacation days (M=14.03, SD=1.10) while participants not
from KC reported taking about 17 days. (M=17.37, SD=1.22). Thus there is a significant
difference in vacation days based on where the participant is from.
When comparing vacation days based on gender, males reported taking about 14
vacation days, (M=14.41, SD=1.35) while females reported taking 17 vacation days
(M=16.99, SD=.94) Thus there is a significant difference between the number of vacation
days men and women take in a year.
When comparing vacation days based on relationship status, those that are single
reported taking about 17 vacation days (M=16.83, SD=.96). while those in a relationship
reported about 15 days (M=14.57, SD=1.34). Thus there is not a significant difference in
vacation days based on whether the participant is single or in a relationship.
For question 2.2, we asked our participants Approximately how many vacations away
from home do you take in a year? Participants reported taking 3 vacations a year.
(M=3.22, SD=1.7).
When comparing the number of vacations away from home based on where the
participant is from, the mean number of vacations away from home of those from KC
was 3.25 with a standard deviation of .23, while the mean number of vacations away
from home of those not from KC was 3.19 with a standard deviation of .26. Thus there is
no significant difference in number of vacations away from home based on where the
participant is from.
When comparing the number of vacations away from home based on gender, the mean
for males was 3.42 with a standard deviation of .28 while the mean for females was 3.02
with a standard deviation of .12. Thus there is no significant difference between the
number of vacations away from home men and women take in a year.
When comparing the number of vacations away from home based on relationship status,
the mean number of vacations away from home of those that are single was 3.15 with a
standard deviation of .2, while the mean number of vacations away from home of those
in a relationship was 3.29 with a standard deviation of .28. Thus there is no significant
difference in number of vacations away from home based on whether the participant is
single or in a relationship.
For question 2.3, we asked our participants Approximately how many days a year do
you spend on vacation days away from home? The grand mean was 12.64 days with a
standard deviation of .5.

When comparing vacation days away from home based on where the participant is from,
the mean vacation days away from home of those from KC was 13.06 with a standard
deviation of .67, while the mean vacation days away from home of those not from KC
was 12.22 with a standard deviation of .74. Thus there is a significant difference in the
number of vacation days away from home based on where the participant is from.
When comparing vacation days away from home based on gender, the mean for males
was 12.19 with a standard deviation of .82 while the mean for females was 13.09 with a
standard deviation of .57. Thus there is a significant difference in the number of vacation
days away from home men and women take in a year.
When comparing vacation days away from home based on relationship status, the mean
vacation days away from home of those that are single was 12.38 with a standard
deviation of .58, while the mean vacation days away from home of those in a relationship
was 12.9 with a standard deviation of .81. Thus there is a significant difference in the
number of vacation days away from home based on whether the participant is single or
in a relationship.
For Question 2.4, we asked our participants On average, how many days do your
vacations away from home last? The grand mean was 5.63 days with a standard
deviation of .17.
When comparing vacation lengths based on where the participant is from, the mean
vacation lengths of those from KC was 5.85 with a standard deviation of .23, while the
mean vacation lengths of those not from KC was 5.42 with a standard deviation of .26.
Thus there is no significant difference in vacation lengths based on where the participant
is from.
When comparing vacation lengths based on gender, the mean for males was 5.39 with a
standard deviation of .28 while the mean for females was 5.88 with a standard deviation
of .2. Thus there is no significant difference in the length of vacations men and women
take in a year.
When comparing vacation lengths based on relationship status, the mean vacation
lengths of those that are single was 5.61 with a standard deviation of .2, while the mean
vacation lengths of those in a relationship was 5.66 with a standard deviation of .28.
Thus there is no significant difference in the length of vacations based on whether the
participant is single or in a relationship.
For Question 2.5, we asked our participants On average, how many people do you
travel with when you take a vacation away from home? The grand mean was 3.53
people with a standard deviation of .15.
When comparing vacation party size based on where the participant is from, the mean
vacation party size of those from KC was 3.54 with a standard deviation of .2, while the
mean vacation party size of those not from KC was 3.52 with a standard deviation of .22.
Thus there is no significant difference in vacation party size based on where the
participant is from.
When comparing vacation party size based on gender, the mean for males was 3.5 with
a standard deviation of .24 while the mean for females was 3.56 with a standard

deviation of .17. Thus there is no significant difference in the party size that men and
women travel with.
When comparing vacation party size based on relationship status, the mean vacation
party size of those that are single was 3.58 with a standard deviation of .17, while the
mean vacation party size of those in a relationship was 3.48 with a standard deviation
of .24. Thus there is no significant difference in the length of vacations based on whether
the participant is single or in a relationship.
For Question 2.6, we asked our participants On average, how much money do you
spend on travel when taking a vacation away from home? The grand mean was 497.81
dollars with a standard deviation of 35.7.
When comparing money spent on travel based on where the participant is from, the
mean money spent on travel of those from KC was 511.1 with a standard deviation of
47.72, while the mean amount spent on travel of those not from KC was 484.51 with a
standard deviation of 53.12. Thus there is a significant difference in the amount spent on
travel based on where the participant is from.
When comparing the amount spent on travel based on gender, the mean for males was
$429.07 with a standard deviation of 58.62 while the mean for females was $566.55 with
a standard deviation of 40.76. Thus there is a significant difference in the amount spent
on travel based on gender.
When comparing the amount spent on travel based on relationship status, the mean
amount spent on travel of those that are single was 441.09 with a standard deviation of
41.78, while the mean amount spent on travel of those in a relationship was 544.53 with
a standard deviation of 41.78. Thus there is a significant difference in the amount spent
on travel for vacations based on whether the participant is single or in a relationship.
For Question 2.7, we asked our participants On average, and not including
transportation to destination, how much money do you spend when taking a vacation
away from home? The grand mean was 404.14 dollars with a standard deviation of 32.
When comparing money spent on a vacation based on where the participant is from, the
mean money spent a vacation of those from KC was 431.09 with a standard deviation of
42.77, while the mean amount spent on vacation of those not from KC was 377.18 with a
standard deviation of 47.6. Thus there is a significant difference in the amount spent on
a vacation based on where the participant is from.
When comparing the amount spent a vacation based on gender, the mean for males
was 354.13 with a standard deviation of 52.54 while the mean for females was 454.14
with a standard deviation of 36.53. Thus there is a significant difference in the amount
spent on a vacation based on gender.
When comparing the amount spent on a vacation based on relationship status, the mean
amount spent on a vacation of those that are single was 373.14 with a standard
deviation of 37.44, while the mean amount spent on a vacation of those in a relationship
was 435.14 with a standard deviation of 51.9. Thus there is a significant difference in the
amount spent on a vacation based on whether the participant is single or in a
relationship.

Throughout this section of questions, a theme that continued to repeat itself was the
differences in vacation habits of men and women. Women consistently took more
vacation days, more vacation days away from home, and spent more money on travel
and vacations than men did. This implies that women value spending their wages on
vacations and travel more than men. Visit KC can capitalize on this by targeting women
with advertising that promise a vacation experience that is repeatable: promise so much
to do that you need multiple trips to see it all. Visit KC could also use this research to
target men as well. The research suggests that men are looking to get more value out of
their vacations when they do take one. Advertising promoting the low cost of vacationing
in Kansas City could be appealing to men.
Regarding the other demographic variables, we found that those who are from KC
tended to take more vacation days and spend more money on those vacations than
those who dont. This could be attributed to the high number of participants from the
Overland Park area, which has high average incomes. Visit KC should focus on
targeting areas with high disposable incomes to attract vacationers who have money to
put into the Kansas City economy, but still are far enough away from Kansas City that
they result in more heads in beds. Nearby cities such as Lincoln and Omaha offer this
option. Another trait we observed was that those who are in a relationship tended to
spend more money on vacations than those who are single. This observation is fairly
simple, as those in a relationship are more likely to spend money on someone other than
himself or herself. By portraying Kansas City as a city perfect for a romantic evening,
Visit KC can attract more couples to spend a night in town.

IV. Traveling
Q3.1: Which parts of the U.S. would you be most likely to vacation in?
The parts of the U.S. that participants were most likely to visit are listed in descending
order as follows: the West Coast, with a mean of 3.862 and a standard deviation of
0.116, the South with a mean of 3.640 and a standard deviation of 0.115, the East Coast
with a mean of 3.566 and a standard deviation of 0.126, Other with a mean of 3.366 and
a standard deviation of 0.111, the Midwest with a mean 2.938 and a standard deviation
of 0.122, and the North, with a mean of 2.611 and a standard deviation of 0.120.
When accounting for the three demographic variables, From KC, Gender, and
Relationship Status, there were no significant differences between the means or
standard deviations of any demographic.
Q3.2
The grand mean for how many hours participants would be willing to drive to reach their
destination for a holiday weekend vacation was 7.426 and the standard deviation was
0.218. The mean of hours participants from KC were willing to drive for a weekend
vacation was 7.250 and the standard deviation was 0.291. The mean of hours
participants not from KC were willing to drive was 7.605 and the standard deviation was
0.324. The mean of hours that male participants were willing to drive was 7.836 and the
standard deviation was 0.357. The mean of hours that female participants were willing to
drive was 7.016 and the standard deviation was 0.249. The mean of hours that single
participants were willing to drive was 7.284 with a standard deviation of 0.255. The mean
of hours participants that were in a relationship were willing to drive was 7.569 with a
standard deviation of 0.353.

Q3.3
The grand mean for how many hours participants would be willing to drive to reach their
destination for a week-long vacation was 13.95 and the standard deviation was 0.284.
The mean of hours participants from KC were willing to drive for a week-long vacation
was 13.222 and the standard deviation was 0.380. The mean of hours participants not
from KC were willing to drive was 13.169 and the standard deviation was 0.422. The
mean of hours that male participants were willing to drive was 13.475 and the standard
deviation was 0.466. The mean of hours that female participants were willing to drive
was 12.916 and the standard deviation was 0.324. The mean of hours that single
participants were willing to drive was 13.204 with a standard deviation of 0.332. The
mean of hours participants that were in a relationship were willing to drive was 13.186
with a standard deviation of 0.460.
Q3.4:
The seasons participants were most likely to travel during are listed in descending order
as follows: Summer, with a mean of 4.610 and standard deviation of 0.042, Spring, with
a mean of 3.850 and a standard deviation of 0.058, Winter, with a mean of 3.373 and a
standard deviation of 0.070, and Fall, with a mean of 2.865 and a standard deviation of
0.067.
When accounting for the three demographic variables, From KC, Gender, and
Relationship Status, there were no significant differences between the means or
standard deviations of any demographic.
Relevance of Results
The results from Q3.1 show that the West Coast is the most popular location for
Millennials to visit in the U.S., followed closely by the South, the East Coast, and Other
locations. The Midwest and the North finish last in terms of likelihood of Millennials
visiting them for vacation. The order of these results did not differentiate when taking
each demographic variable into account, indicating this order is consistent through each
demographic.
The results from Q3.2 and Q3.3 indicate that on average, Millennials are willing to drive
7.426 hours for a holiday weekend vacation and 13.475 hours for a week-long vacation.
The only demographic variable that affected these results was gender. On average,
male participants were willing to drive 7.863 hours for a weekend trip whereas females
were only willing to drive 7.016 hours. Male participants were also willing to drive an
average of 13.475 hours for a week-long trip and females were willing to drive 12.916
hours. This indicates that in general, Millennial men from our sample were willing to drive
longer for vacations than Millennial women.
Q3.4 revealed that Summer, with a mean of 4.610, was the most likely time for
Millennials to travel. Spring was the next most popular with a mean of 3.850. Winter was
also a likely time for travel with a mean of 3.373. Fall was the least likely time for
Millennials to travel with a mean of 2.865.

V. Planning
Q4.1:

Participants were asked to rank the importance of each factor in planning a vacation on
scales of 1-5. Here are the top 5 most important factors based on their results.
Participants reported that the most important factor is cost of stay (M=4.22, SD=.09).
Participants reported that the 2nd most important factor is cost of travel (M=4.13,
SD=.10). Participants reported that the 3rd most important factor is that their destination
has outdoor activities (M=4.02, SD=.10). Participants reported that the 4th most
important factor is that their destination has nightlife/entertainment (M=3.83, SD=.11).
Participants reported that the 5th most important factor is that their destination have
sporting events (M=3.68, SD=.12). No differences were found based on a participants
gender, hometown or relationship status.
Q4.2:
Participants reported planning about 8 weeks in advance (M=7.83, SD=.36) Participants
from KC plan more weeks in advance (M=8.09, SD=.49) than participants not from KC
(M=7.57, SD=.54) Female participants plan more weeks in advance (M=9.44, SD=.42)
than male participants (M=6.23, SD=.60) However, there was no difference in how many
weeks participants in a relationship plan ahead (M=7.96, SD=.59) versus participants not
in a relationship (M=7.70, SD=.43).
Qs 4.3
Participants were asked to rank how important it is to them to have a set plan for their
vacation activities on a scale of 1-5. Overall, our participants reported that they mostly
find it important to have a set plan (M=3.51, SD=.06). No differences were found based
on participants gender, hometown or relationship status.
Qs 4.4
Participants were asked to rank the importance of knowing as much as they can about a
city before visiting it on a scale of 1-5. Overall, our participants reported that they mostly
find it important to know as much as they can about a city before visiting it (M=3.29,
SD=.06). No differences were found based on participants gender, hometown or
relationship status.
Qs 4.5
Participants were asked how much they agree that planning a vacation is stressful on a
scale of 1-5. Overall, our participants agree that planning a vacation is stressful (M=2.97,
SD=.06). No differences were found based on participants gender, hometown or
relationship status.
Q4.6:
Participants were asked to rank sources based on how likely they are to use that source
for travel advice on a scale of 1-5. Participants reported that they are most likely to seek
travel advice from their friends (M=4.20, SD=.10). Participants reported that they are 2nd
most likely to seek travel advice from their family members (M=4.08, SD=.11).
Participants reported that they are 3rd most likely to seek travel advice from their parents
(M=4.05, SD=.11). Participants reported that they are 4th most likely to seek travel
advice from their significant others (M=3.84, SD=.14). Participants reported last that they
are 5th most likely to seek travel advice from online reviews (M=3.81, SD=.12). People
in relationships seek more travel advice from significant others than those who are not in
relationships. However, there were no differences between people from KC and people
who are not from KC, or between males and females.

Q4.7:
Participants were asked to rank midwestern cities based on how appealing they are on a
scale of 1-5. Participants reported that the most appealing midwestern city is Chicago
(M=4.16, SD=.05). Participants reported that the 2nd most appealing midwestern city is
Denver (M=4.12, SD=.05). Participants reported that the 3rd most appealing midwestern
city is Kansas City (M=3.15, SD=.06). Participants reported that the 4th most appealing
midwestern city is St. Louis (M=2.32, SD=.06). Lastly, participants reported that the 5th
most appealing midwestern city is Indianapolis (M=2.34, SD=.08). Overall, no
differences were found based on participants gender, hometown or relationship status.
Planning Conclusion:
As a whole, these results are relevant because Visit KC can use them to improve KC
marketing with millennials as its target audience. Visit KC may choose to emphasize the
top 5 most important factors of planning a vacation in its marketing tactics in order to
make Kansas City seem more appealing to millennials. Because participants reported
that Chicago is the midwestern city that they find most appealing and KC is only number
3, Visit KC could look more into how Chicago markets their city and try to morph its
advertising into something similar or even better. Since females plan more weeks ahead
than men do, Visit KC could market their planning resources more toward women.
Having a set plan is important to both males and females, according to our results, so
Visit KC could even advertise their planning resources more in general. Our participants
also reported that they want to know a lot about their destination before visiting there,
but that planning is stressful. Visit KC could plan ways to make KC planning less
stressful and market it that way too. Word of mouth through friends and family members
also seems to be important to our participants, so increased marketing could also benefit
Visit KC. All of these results about planning for a vacation are extremely important in
order for Visit KC to increase the number of millennials who visit Kansas City.

VI. Staying in a city

Q5.1:
The top five methods of transportation participants were most likely to use while on
vacation are listed in descending order as follows: Personal Car, with a mean of 4.142
and standard deviation of 0.123, Walking, with a mean of 3.831 and a standard deviation
of 0.128, Rental Car, with a mean of 3.764 and a standard deviation of 0.137, Uber and
similar services, with a mean of 3.456 and a standard deviation of 0.132, Taxi, with a
mean of 3.285 and a standard deviation of 0.132.
When accounting for the three demographics, whether or not the participants were from
KC had no significant bearing on the results. There was also not a significant difference
between men and women. However, there were differences in the means of two
methods of transportation when taking relationship status into account. When
determining the likelihood for using a personal car, the mean for those who were single
was 3.876 and the mean for those in a relationship was 4.408. When determining the
likelihood for using a taxi, the mean for those who were single was 3.001 and the mean
for those in a relationship was 3.568.
Q5.2:

Of the eight options, the top three most likely places to stay while on vacation are listed
in descending order as follows: Hotel/Motel with a mean of 4.552 and a .098 standard
deviation, With Family, with a mean of 4.215 and a .131 standard deviation, and With
Friends with a mean of 4.206 and .130 standard deviation.
When accounting for whether or not the participants were from KC, there were no
significant differences. However, when taking gender into account, men were more likely
to go camping. Camping had a mean of 2.967 for men and women had a mean of 2.007.
Relationship status had an effect on the mean of staying With Family. The mean of
single participants who stayed with their family was 3.934 and the mean of participants
in a relationship who stayed with their family was 4.478.
Relevance of Results
The results of Q5.1 are relevant because they indicate the top five methods of
transportation Millennials are likely to use. Using a personal car is the most common
mode of transportation used by our survey sample, followed by Walking, Rental Car,
Uber and similar services, and Taxi. When accounting for the three demographic
variables, the results largely remained the same. However, relationship status affected
the results of two modes of transportation. Single participants were less likely to use a
personal car while on vacation than participants that were in a relationship. Single
participants were also generally less likely to use a taxi while on vacation than
participants that were in a relationship.
The results of Q5.2 show us the top three places Millennials from our sample are likely
to stay while on vacation. Staying in a hotel or motel was the most popular option,
followed by staying with family and staying with friends. When accounting for the three
demographic variables, it is apparent that men are more likely to spend vacation
camping than women. It is also apparent that participants that were in a relationship
were more likely to stay with their family while vacationing than single participants were.

VII. Perceptions of KC
Q6.1:
Of the 544 total participants, 462 had traveled to Kansas City, leaving 82 that
have not. Therefore, 84.9 percent of our participants have been to Kansas City.
Q6.2
The generalized grand mean for the number of day trips to Kansas City the
participants take per month is 3.05 day trips. However, the mean for those who
are single is slightly lower than those in a relationship, at 2.97 to 3.12. The
standard deviation for those is 0.247 and 0.336 respectively. As far as the role
the gender demographic plays in day trips to Kansas City, there seems to be little
to no deviation as males travel an average of 3.06 times and females travel an
average of 3.03 times. The standard deviations for those are 0.34 and 0.24
respectively. The mean for those from KC is much higher than that for those who
arent, as it is 4.03 to 2.07. the standard deviations are 0.276 and 0.313
respectively.
Q6.3

The grand mean for the amount of money spent on average among all variables is
$55.98. However, using relationship status as a variable, we see that those who are in a
relationship typically spend $61.00 as opposed to the $50.95 single participants spend.
The trend among males and females is much less noticeable, as males typically spend
around $54.99 and females average $56.98. Again, individuals from KC spend an
average of $54.08 as opposed to the $57.88 those who do not reside in KC spend.

Q6.4:
Of the seven options, the top five choices for companions on day trips to KC in
descending order were as follows: Friends with a 4.44 average and a .11
standard deviation, Parents with a 4.21 average and a .11 standard deviation,
Family members with a 4.16 average and .12 standard deviation, Significant
Others with a 3.86 average and a .15 standard deviation, and On my own with a
3.08 average and a .16 standard deviation.
There appeared to be no difference among any of the companions using whether
or not the participant is from KC as a dependent variable. The results were
similar among the other two demographic variables. However, single participants
were far less likely to travel to KC with a significant other, as their mean was only
a 2.96 as opposed to the 4.75 average of those in relationships.
Q6.5:
Of the 19 choices for the participants favorite locations in KC, the Country Club Plaza,
Power and Light District, and Kauffman Stadium were most frequently selected within
the top 5 choices among participants. 301 or 55.3% of participants listed the plaza in
their top 5, 284 or 52.2% of participants listed Power and Light District within their top 5,
and 273 or 50.2% of participants elected Kauffman stadium.

Q6.6:
The generalized grand mean for participants considering Kansas City as a
vacation destination was a 2.78 and a standard deviation of .06. There was no
difference among the three demographic variables.
Q6.7:
The generalized grand mean for participants recommending Kansas City as a
vacation destination was a 3.37 and a standard deviation of .07. There was no
difference among the three demographic variables.
Q6.8:
The generalized grand mean for participants who were satisfied with their most
recent trip to Kansas City was a 4.19 and a standard deviation of .04. There was
no difference among the three demographic variables.
Q6.9:
The generalized grand mean for participants considering their likelihood to return
to Kansas City was a 4.65 and a standard deviation of .03. There was no
difference among the three demographic variables.

Q6.10:
Of the 19 possible locations, the top 5 the participants felt visitors to Kansas City
would be most likely to enjoy were as follows in descending order: Kauffman
Stadium with a grand mean of 4.36 and a standard deviation of .10, Power and
Light District with a grand mean of 4.32 and a standard deviation of .11, Country
Club Plaza with a grand mean of 4.29 and a standard deviation of .11, Arrowhead
Stadium with a grand mean of 4.28 and a standard deviation of .12, and finally
Boulevard Brewing Company with a grand mean of 4.16 and a standard
deviation .11.
When evaluating differences among the top five locations and taking into account
the three demographic variables, there appeared to be no difference regarding
residents of Kansas City and those who are not. When analyzing based on
gender, males seem to enjoy the plaza significantly less than females, as the
mean for males was 3.98 compared to the 4.6 females received. Aside from this,
the other locations showed no differences when based on gender. Similarly, there
were no differences among results when basing the relationship status of the
participants as the dependent variable.
Q6.12:
The generalized grand mean for the participants opinion on Kansas City being
an up and coming city was a 4.17 with a standard deviation of .044. There were
no differences among the means when taking into account the three
demographic variables.
Q6.13:
The grand mean for participants perception of KC when given a scale of boring to
exciting was 3.75 with a standard deviation of .048. When using the scale of
pleasant to unpleasant, the mean was a 2.09 with a standard deviation of .055.
When using the scale of small to big, the mean and standard deviation were 3.29
and .047. The scale of rural to urban produced a mean of 3.61 and a standard
deviation of .05 and the scale of culturally diverse to lacking culture produced the
mean of 2.72 and standard deviation of .049. The three demographic factors play
no role in differing the results when being used as a metric of evaluation.
Perceptions Of KC ConclusionThe three demographic factors used as dependent variables and as a metric to
further break down the analysis of the data seemed to play a very minor role
when determining differences in the participants perceptions of KC. One noted
difference is the fact that single individuals were far less likely to travel to Kansas
City with a significant other, as opposed to participants in a relationship.
VIII. Communication
Q7.1:

Of the six options, the top three methods participants were likely to use when deciding
on a city to travel to are listed in descending order as follows: Other with a mean of
3.136 and a .126 standard deviation, Follow the city on social media with a mean of
2.904 and a .125 standard deviation, and Follow local businesses on social media with a
mean of 2.822 and 0.119 standard deviation.
When accounting for the three demographic variables, whether or not the participant
was from KC or not had no significant bearing on the results. However, accounting for
gender affected the mean of those who said they would use a method other than those
listed in the survey when determining a city to visit. The mean of Other was 3.558 for
men and 2.684 for women. The relationship status also caused differences in means in
two categories. The mean of Follow city on social media was 2.574 for single
participants and 3.233 for participants in a relationship. The mean of Follow local
businesses on social was 2.477 for single participants and 3.167 for participants in a
relationship.
Q7.2:
The grand mean of how important promotional videos and pictures of a city were to the
participants when deciding where to vacation was 3.461 and the standard deviation was
0.059. When accounting for the three demographic variables, From KC, Gender, and
Relationship Status, there were no significant differences between the means or
standard deviations of any demographic.
Q7.3:
Of the seven options, the top three outlets participants were most likely to use when
searching information about a vacation destination are listed in descending order as
follows: Instagram with a mean of 3.288 and a 0.134 standard deviation, Other, with a
mean of 3.223 and a 0.124 standard deviation, and Facebook with a mean of 3.138 and
0.137 standard deviation.
When accounting for the three demographic variables, whether or not the participant
was from KC made no significant difference. Accounting for relationship status also had
no bearing on the results. However, accounting for gender made a difference in the
means of the Other category. The mean of men that chose for Other was 3.577 and the
mean of women was 2.869.
Q7.4:
Of the seven options, the top five outlets participants were most likely to use when
visiting vacation destination are listed in descending order as follows: Instagram with a
mean of 3.778 and a 0.132 standard deviation, Facebook, with a mean of 3.624 and a
0.132 standard deviation, and Snapchat with a mean of 3.420 and 0.142 standard
deviation, Twitter with a mean of 3.324 and a standard deviation of 0.140, and Other with
a mean of 2.875 and a standard deviation of 0.126.
When accounting for the three demographic variables, whether or not the participants
were from KC did not make a difference on the results. However, when accounting for
gender, there was a difference in means in the Other category. The mean for Other

was 3.159 for men and 2.592 for women. Accounting for relationship status, the mean
for Twitter was 3.058 for single participants and 3.590 for participants in a relationship.
Relevance of Results
Results from this section indicate that gender and relationships caused differences when
determining how Millennials use various forms of communication. Single participants
were less likely than participants in relationships to follow a city on social media when
deciding if they should visit that city or not. They were also less likely to follow local
business on social media for the same purpose. Single participants were also less likely
to use Twitter while traveling.
When accounting for gender, men were more likely to use method other than the ones
listed to learn more about a city. Men were also more likely to use a social media
platform other than the ones listed than women, both for searching information and
during vacation.

IX. Open-ended question

In addition to the close-ended questions analyzed above, participants who had been to
Kansas City were asked to share their thoughts about their favorite activities in Kansas
City. The following table lays out what the most common responses were in relation to
one another.

Codes

Quotes

Enjoying shopping in KC

137

Enjoying sports in KC

111

Enjoying all KC has to offer

43

Enjoying eating out in KC

39

Enjoying KC nightlife

39

Enjoying music in KC

18

Enjoying spending time with friends and family

17

Enjoying Worlds of Fun

13

Enjoying exploring new places and the outdoors

Categorize and organize participants favorite activities and, for each category, explain
why participants enjoy these activities.

Code 1: Enjoying shopping in KC (Katie)

This code compiles quotes that express the survey participants enjoyment of
shopping in Kansas City. Some of the reasons that the participants gave us as to

why they enjoyed shopping in KC include the atmosphere, the variety of the
shops as well at the convenience of the shopping centers. One survey
participants said, Shopping at the Plaza and Westport because of the unique
products and different atmosphere. Another participants expanded saying, I
enjoy shopping in the Plaza because it's relaxing. The atmosphere is enjoyable,
and the architecture is beautiful.

Code 2: Enjoying sports in KC (Katie)

This code compiles quotes that express the survey participants enjoyment of
Kansas City sports. Some of the reasons that the participants gave us as to why
they enjoy KC sports are watching the royals play at Kauffman Stadium,
watching the Chiefs play at Arrowhead and watching Sporting KC play at
Children's Mercy Park. One survey participants said, Attending sporting events
because KC has good sports teams. Another participants said, Kansas City
sports atmosphere is like no other. Yet another person responded, I enjoy
sports so I like going to Arrowhead Stadium and Kauffman Stadium.

Code 3: Enjoying all KC has to offer (Katie)

This code compiles quotes that express the survey respondents enjoyment of
Kansas City as a whole. The main reason that the respondents gave us as to
why they enjoy KC as a whole are because they couldnt limit it to just a couple of
things, because they enjoy it all. One respondent said, Going downtown just
because there is so much to do. You can walk around and see a show or get
food somewhere. Another person responded, KC has a ton of good places to
eat and hangout, especially downtown and on the plaza.

Code 4: Enjoying eating out in KC (Katie)

This code compiles quotes that express the survey participants enjoyment of
eating out in KC. Some of the reasons that the participants gave us as to why
they enjoy eating out in Kansas City are because of the variety of food options
and the atmosphere. One participant said, Restaurant hoping - I enjoy trying
new restaurants and the city vibe. Another person responded, Eating on the
Plaza because it is always lively and they have good restaurants.

Code 5: Enjoying KC nightlife (Katie)

This code compiles quotes that express the survey participants enjoyment of
nightlife in KC. Some of the reasons that the participants gave us as to why they
enjoy KCs nightlife are the college age friendly venues, the city atmosphere and
a way to hang out with friends. One of the participants said, Power and Light drinking with friends at multiple bars is very fun. Another participant said, Going
to bars because I like socializing with my friends. Yet another person responded,
I like going to the bars in westport, because the scene is very relaxes, or power
and light because it's a bit nicer.

Code 6: Enjoying music in KC (Katie)

This code compiles quotes that express the survey participants enjoyment of
music in KC. Some of the reasons that the participants gave us as to why they
enjoy the music scene are the venues, the local talent as well as big name
artists. A survey participant said, "Going to concerts because big artists always
go to KC. Another participant said, I love going to concerts at Sprint Center and
other KC Venues.

Code 7: Enjoying spending time with friends and family (Katie)

This code compiles quotes that express the survey participants enjoyment of
spending time with friends and family in KC. Some of the reasons that the
participants gave us as to why they enjoy spending time with friends and family in
KC are because family lives there or because they enjoy going to Kansas City
with their family and/or friends. A participant said, I enjoy going to the plaza and
getting dinner/shopping. It's a nice way to spend time with friends and family.
Another person surveyed said, I just like spending time with friends and family.
KC has a ton of good places to eat and hangout, especially downtown and on the
plaza.

Code 8: Enjoying Worlds of Fun (Katie)

This code compiles quotes that express the survey participants enjoyment of
visiting Worlds of Fun. Some of the reasons that the participants gave us as to
why they enjoy Worlds of Fun are the roller coasters, the time spent with their
family and friends and of course because its worlds of fun. One participant said,
I love going to worlds of fun because rollercoasters are my favorite i get such a
thrill. Another person responded, I love going to Worlds of Fun. It's a great place
to have fun with friends. Still another participant said, Worlds of fun because its
a great day trip.

Code 9: Enjoying exploring new places and the outdoors (Katie)

This code compiles quotes that express the survey participants enjoyment of
exploring new places and the outdoors. Some of the reasons that the participants
gave us as to why they enjoy exploring new places and the outdoors is because
of excitement to try new things, as well as enjoying ice skating outside. One
participant said, I'm not from Kansas City so exploring something new every
time I go. Another person surveyed said, Exploring the new stores and
restaurants because all are unique. Still another survey participant said, My
favorite thing to do in KC is go to Crown Center during the winter and go ice
skating.

X. Conclusion
After analyzing the survey results we were able to identify differences in responses
between three key identifying characteristics. The characteristics that we used to
examine the data more deeply was where the participants are from (from Kansas City or
not from Kansas City), gender (female or male) and the participants relationship status
(in a relationship or single). The following is a summary of what items have a difference
in each category, as well as our recommendations for Visit KC.

Where the Participants are from

In this category, we examined what survey items had a difference between participants
who were from Kansas City and those who are not.
Based on being from KC or not the participants were divided on the number of vacation
days away from home they took. Those from KC took more vacation days away from
home of those not from KC. When comparing money spent on travel those from KC
spent more than those not from KC. When comparing money spent on a vacation based
on where the participant is from, those from KC spent more on vacation than those not
from KC. Finally, when comparing how many weeks in advance a person plans for
vacation, we found that people from KC plan further ahead than those who are not from
KC.
Gender
In this category, we examined what survey items had a difference between participants
who identify as a man and those who identify as a woman.
When comparing vacation days based on gender, we found that women take more
vacation days off of work than men. When comparing vacation days away from home
based on gender, we found that more women take vacation days away from home than
men. When comparing the amount spent a vacation based on gender, we found that
women spend significantly more than men. When comparing the amount spent on travel
based on gender, we found that women are more likely to spend more money on the
travel expenses than men. When comparing how many hours participants would be
willing to drive to reach their destination for a holiday weekend vacation, we found that
men were willing to spend more time driving than women for a weekend getaway. When
comparing how many hours participants would be willing to drive to reach their
destination for a week-long vacation, we found that men were willing to spend more time
driving for a week long vacation than women. We discovered that men are more likely to
go camping while on vacation than women. When analyzing based on gender, males
seem to enjoy the Plaza significantly less than females.
Relationship status
In this category, we examined what survey items had difference between participants
who were single and those who are in a relationship.
When comparing age based on relationship status, those who are single are younger
than those who are in a relationship. When comparing vacation days based on
relationship status, the mean vacation days of those that are single was higher than
those in a relationship. When comparing vacation days away from home based on
relationship status, those that are single take less vacation days away from home than
those in a relationship. When comparing the amount spent on travel based on
relationship status, those in a relationship spent significantly more than those in a
relationship. When comparing the amount spent on a vacation based on relationship
status, those in a relationship spend more on vacation than those who are single. When
determining the likelihood for using a personal car or a taxi to get around while
vacationing, those in a relationship are more likely to use a car or taxi than a single

person. People in a relationship are more likely to stay with family while traveling than
single people.
Single participants are far less likely to travel to KC with a significant other. Participants
who are in a relationship are more likely to follow the city they visit on social media as
well as follow local businesses on social media. Participants who are in a relationship
were most likely to use Twitter when visiting vacation destination than those who are
single.
Our Recommendations
In order to attract millennials from outside Kansas City, to Kansas City we recommend
that Visit KC promotes the activities that millennials who have been to Kansas City like.
Since the top 5 places participants felt visitors to Kansas City would be most likely to
enjoy were Kauffman Stadium, Power and Light District, Country Club Plaza, Arrowhead
Stadium and Boulevard Brewing Company, we feel that by promoting these to out of
state millennials will draw in the largest numbers. Additionally we found that summer is
the most likely time for millennials to travel, and that the average number of weeks
people plan in advance is roughly seven to eight weeks. By promoting these activities
about seven to eight weeks before they happen, Visit KC might have more people
visiting.
In order to encourage more millennials in the area to spend time in Kansas City based
on the survey responses we believe promoting deals and events related to shopping,
eating out, sporting events and concerts would be a wise thing to do. Most people enjoy
doing those things in their free time, and many reported those things as activities and
things they enjoy doing in Kansas City. So, based on this survey, it is fair to assume that
millennials that fit the characteristic of our participants are likely to also be drawn to the
same things.
Since we determined from our survey results that people from Kansas City take more
vacation days and spend more on vacations than those who are not from Kansas City,
we recommend Visit KC target them harder than people outside of Kansas City. We
recommend promoting to them the idea of a stay-cation, so that the time and money
they clearly spend elsewhere can potentially profit KC.