古城旅游地官方投射形象与游客感知形象错位识别及优化策略——以忻州古城为例
白瑞芸 , 王金平 , 邬超 , 邵秀英
南京师大学报(自然科学版) ›› 2026, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (3) : 41 -49.
古城旅游地官方投射形象与游客感知形象错位识别及优化策略——以忻州古城为例
Identification of Dislocation Between Official Projected Images and Tourists' Perceived Images of Ancient City Tourism Destinations and Optimization Strategies: a Case Study of Xinzhou Ancient City
开放式古城是文旅消费的重要载体,而官方投射形象与游客感知形象错位成为制约其可持续发展的关键问题. 以忻州古城为研究对象,基于官方宣传文本与游客网络评论数据,运用 ROST-CM6 内容分析、扎根理论法等对比官方投射形象与游客感知形象. 研究发现:官方以“历史文化+空间景观”为核心叙事,积极情感占比 58.3%,侧重正向品牌传播;游客聚焦设施服务、消费价值等实际体验,积极情感占比 48.4%,消极情感占比达 22.2%,二者存在显著的认知与情感错位. 四大形象错位类型分别是旅游服务供需-适配型错位、旅游设施功能-体验型错位、景区保护实践-宣传型错位、开发运营-内核型错位. 同时提出针对性优化策略,为开放式古城旅游地的形象协同优化提供实证参考.
Open ancient cities are important carriers of cultural and tourism consumption, while the dislocation between official projected images and tourists' perceived images has become a key constraint on their sustainable development. Taking Xinzhou Ancient City as the research case, this paper compares the official projected images with tourists' perceived images, based on official publicity texts and tourists' online review data, with the methods of ROST-CM6 content analysis and grounded theory. The results show that: the official takes "history and culture + spatial landscape" as the core narrative, with positive emotions accounting for 58.3%, focusing on positive brand communication; while tourists focus on on-site experiences such as facility services and consumption value, with positive emotions accounting for 48.4% and negative emotions reaching 22.2%. There is a significant cognitive and emotional dislocation between the two sides. The four types of image dislocation are tourism service supply demand-adaptation dislocation, tourism facility function-experience dislocation, scenic spot protection practice-propaganda dislocation, development and operation-kernel dislocation. Meanwhile, this paper puts forward targeted optimization strategies, which can provide empirical reference for the collaborative image optimization of open ancient city tourism destinations.
| [1] |
普荣,白海霞,段芳芳, |
| [2] |
龚滢,江牧. 人文经济视域下古城整体性保护与协同更新[J].苏州大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2025, 46 (6): 10–20. |
| [3] |
邬超,邵秀英. 基于 UGC 和问卷调查数据的古村落旅游形象感知研究:以碛口古镇为例[J].干旱区资源与环境,2020, 34 (12): 195–200. |
| [4] |
梁淑惠,李佳妮,黄梦蝶, |
| [5] |
廖倩倩,程叶青,费雪艳, |
| [6] |
奚雨晴,桑广书,姜海宁, |
| [7] |
张珍珍,李君轶. 旅游形象研究中问卷调查和网络文本数据的对比:以西安旅游形象感知研究为例[J].旅游科学,2014, 28 (6): 73–81. |
| [8] |
龙凌,刘德军,刘小敏. 影视形象对旅游目的地吸引力的影响研究:以舟山市东极岛为例[J].湖南师范大学自然科学学报,2022, 45 (4): 86–92. |
| [9] |
范梦余,张辉,陈怡宁. 内蒙古视觉旅游形象的时空感知研究:基于 DeepSentiBank 的地理标记照片分析[J].干旱区资源与环境,2020, 34 (10): 194–200. |
| [10] |
钱镜帆,陈茜,王涛. 中国国家公园体制试点区“投射—感知”形象差异及优化路径研究[J].热带地理,2024, 44 (11): 2078–2090. |
| [11] |
Lalicic L, Marine-Roig E, Ferrer-Rosell B, et al. Destination image analytics for tourism design: an approach through Airbnb reviews [J]. Annals of Tourism Research, 2021, 86: 103100. |
| [12] |
董引引,曲颖. 滨海目的地“投射形象网络机制”对比研究:差异化竞争定位的契机[J].旅游科学,2021, 35 (5): 43–61. |
| [13] |
Li Y, He Z Y, Li Y P, et al. Keep it real: assessing destination image congruence and its impact on tourist experience evaluations [J]. Tourism Management, 2023, 97: 104736. |
| [14] |
张毓峰,段昊岑,吕兴洋. 基于网络文本的旅游目的地形象动态演化特征研究:以峨眉山市为例[J].旅游导刊,2025, 9 (2): 35–59. |
| [15] |
张书颖,崔家胜,王灵恩, |
| [16] |
李雪丽,胡涛,耿松涛. 基于霍尔文化传播理论的国家公园形象表征研究[J].旅游科学,2025, 39 (4): 17–40. |
| [17] |
徐敏,肖云蕾,张郴. 盐城黄海湿地申遗成功前后旅游形象感知对比与优化研究:基于数据挖掘的视角[J].南京师大学报(自然科学版),2025, 48 (1): 38–46. |
| [18] |
彭夏岁. 全域旅游目的地形象“投射—感知” 比较实证分析:以厦门市为例[J].西南师范大学学报(自然科学版),2020, 45 (9): 78–87. |
| [19] |
颜敏,赵媛. 基于网络文本和 ASEB 栅格分析的运河遗产旅游开发研究:以无锡清名桥景区为例[J].南京师大学报(自然科学版),2016, 39 (3): 124–129. |
| [20] |
詹一虹,何叶紫,赖文睿. 新农人短视频对乡村旅游目的地形象感知的影响机制研究[J].华中师范大学学报(自然科学版),2025, 59 (3): 382–390. |
| [21] |
王钰宁,孙九霞. 旅游跨文化学习中的主客互动:阳朔太极拳的教与学[J].人文地理,2022, 37 (4): 175–181. |
国家社科基金冷门绝学研究专项(23VJXG030)
国家社会科学基金项目(18FGL018)
山西省政府决策研究重大专项(ZLKTZD25010)
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |