According to Personality Types based on MBTI and Big Five ...
12
The Society of Convergence Knowledge Transactions Vol.8, No.2, pp.21-32, 2020 Research Article, pISSN : 2287-8920 https://doi.org/10.22716/sckt.2020.8.2.011 MBTI와 Big Five 모델에 근거한 성격유형에 따른 토픽맵을 이용한 관광지 추천에 관한 연구 류기환 1 , 윤수현 2 , 문석재 3 1 광운대학교 스마트융합대학원 관광산업전공 교수, 2 광운대학교 스마트융합대학원 관광산업전공, 3 광운대학교 정보과학교육원 정보보호학 교수 A Study on the Recommendation of Tourism using Topic Map According to Personality Types based on MBTI and Big Five Models Ki-Hwan Ryu 1 , Su-Hyun Youn 2 , and Seok-Jae Moon 3 1 Professor, KwangWoon University, Graduate School of Smart Convergence, Institute of Tourism Industry 2 KwangWoon University, Graduate School of Smart Convergence, Institute of Tourism Industry 3 Professor, KwangWoon University, Institute of Information Technology 3 Corresponding author: [email protected] Received May 13, 2020; Revised May 25, 2020; Accepted June 16, 2020 ABSTRACT 본 연구는 여행의 패러다임이 변화로 관광객들은 보다 다양한 관광지를 추구하고 선호하기 때문에 관광객의 심리, 관광동기가 무엇인 지 파악하고 분석한다면 관광객에게 맞춤형 관광지 추천이 가능하다고 보았고, 이에 따라 MBTI와 Big Five 모델을 적용하여 관광객 의 성격유형과 관광동기가 서로 어떠한 영향을 주는지 분석하였다. 또한, 최근 IT 산업 발전에 발맞춰 어플리케이션의 중요성도 커지 고 있어 성격유형과 성향에 따른 토픽맵을 적용하여 키워드 기반의 관광지 추천 웹앱 형식의 어플리케이션으로 제안하였다. 이는 관 광객의 성격과 관광동기의 연관성을 분석, 매핑하여 실질적인 정보를 제공한다. 이는 기존 관광 애플리케이션 획일성에서 벗어나 성 격이라는 요소를 넣어 흥미를 유발시키고 관광객 개인에 맞는 관광지를 추천해줄 수 있다. 본 연구에서 제시한 관광객의 성격유형과 관광동기가 서로 어떠한 영향을 주는지 에 대해서는 5가지로 분석되었다. 첫째, 관광 동기 요인 중 일상탈출과 휴식 요인은 유의미한 차이가 없었다. 이는 관광은 일상탈출과 휴식이 기본적인 요인이라는 것을 의미한다. 둘째, 성격유형 중 합리자형(-NT)은 호기심 요인 에 유의미한 차이를 보였다. 셋째, 성격유형 중 이상가형(-NF)은 경험성 요인에 유의미한 차이를 보였다. 넷째, 성격유형 중 보호자형 (-SJ)은 가족화합 요인에 유의미한 차이를 보였다. 다섯째, 성격유형 중 예술가형(-SP)은 유희성 요인에 유의미한 차이를 보였다. 본 연 구의 결과를 바탕으로 하이브리드 앱 기반의 관광 추천 시스템을 구현하였다. This study found that tourists can recommend customized tourist attractions to tourists if they identify and analyze the tourists' psychology and tourism motivation because the paradigm of travel changes and tourists pursue and prefer more diverse tourist attractions. Accordingly, MBTI and Big Five models were applied to analyze how tourists' personality types and tourism motives affect each other. In addition, as the importance of applications has grown in line with the recent development of the IT industry, the application was proposed as a keyword-based web app type by applying a topic map based on personality type and propensity. This provides practical information by analyzing and mapping the link between the nature of tourists and their motives. This is a departure from the uniformity of existing tourism applications, and can create interest by adding the element of personality and recommend tourist attractions suitable for individual tourists. Five types of tourists presented in this study were analyzed for their characteristics and how tourist motives affect each other. First, there was no significant difference between the factors of daily escape and rest among the factors of tourism motivation. This means that daily escape and relaxation are the basic factors in tourism. Second, rationalization Ⓒ 2020 by The Society of Convergence Knowledge. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Transcript of According to Personality Types based on MBTI and Big Five ...
The Society of Convergence Knowledge Transactions Vol.8, No.2,
pp.21-32, 2020
Research Article, pISSN : 2287-8920
MBTI Big Five
1, 2, 3
1 , 2 , 3
A Study on the Recommendation of Tourism using Topic Map According to Personality Types based on MBTI and Big Five Models
Ki-Hwan Ryu1, Su-Hyun Youn2, and Seok-Jae Moon3
1Professor, KwangWoon University, Graduate School of Smart Convergence, Institute of Tourism Industry 2KwangWoon University, Graduate School of Smart Convergence, Institute of Tourism Industry 3Professor, KwangWoon University, Institute of Information Technology
3 Corresponding author: [email protected]
Received May 13, 2020; Revised May 25, 2020; Accepted June 16, 2020
ABSTRACT
,
, MBTI Big Five
. , IT
.
, .
.
5 . ,
. . , (-NT)
. , (-NF) . ,
(-SJ) . , (-SP) .
.
This study found that tourists can recommend customized tourist attractions to tourists if they identify and analyze the tourists'
psychology and tourism motivation because the paradigm of travel changes and tourists pursue and prefer more diverse tourist
attractions. Accordingly, MBTI and Big Five models were applied to analyze how tourists' personality types and tourism motives
affect each other. In addition, as the importance of applications has grown in line with the recent development of the IT industry, the
application was proposed as a keyword-based web app type by applying a topic map based on personality type and propensity. This
provides practical information by analyzing and mapping the link between the nature of tourists and their motives. This is a departure
from the uniformity of existing tourism applications, and can create interest by adding the element of personality and recommend
tourist attractions suitable for individual tourists. Five types of tourists presented in this study were analyzed for their characteristics
and how tourist motives affect each other. First, there was no significant difference between the factors of daily escape and rest among
the factors of tourism motivation. This means that daily escape and relaxation are the basic factors in tourism. Second, rationalization
2020 by The Society of Convergence Knowledge. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in
any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
22 The Society of Convergence Knowledge Vol.8, No.2, 2020
(-NT) among personality types showed significant differences in curiosity factors. Third, the ideal type (-NF) among personality types
showed significant differences in empirical factors. Fourth, among personality types, the guardian type (-SJ) showed a significant
difference in family harmony factors. Fifth, among personality types, artist-type (-SP) showed significant differences in the factors of
amusement. Based on the results of this study, a hybrid app-based tourism recommendation system was implemented.
Keywords: Korea tourism, Type of personality, Motivation for tourism, Recommendation system, Hybrid Web/App
1.
. 1 1 , ,
. .
, , .
. . ,
.
[1]. ,
, .
[2].
.
,
, MBTI Big Five
. , IT
MBIT + Big Five
. ,
. ,
MBTI Big Five 16 Personalities ,
.
, , .
2 . 3 , 4
. 5 6 .
2.
(Personality traits) ,
. . paul T Robert (1995)
, , [3]. John Naumann Soto (2008)
[4]. .
MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator), 5(Big Five Model),
· · / MBTI Big Five 23
(Enneagram) . MBTI (Index)
[5]. MBTI 4 (1) (Extrovert)
(Introvert), (2) (Sensing) (Intuitive), (3) (Thinking) (Sensing), (4) (Judging) (Perceiving)
[6]. , (Extrovert) (Introvert) .
.
. , (Sensing) (Inutuitive) ( ).
.
[7]. , (Thinking) (Sensing) (, ) .
. ‘’ . , (Judging) (Perceiving)
. .
[8]. , Big Five Model
. Big Five Model 5, OCEAN .
. Allport, Cattell, Guilford, Eysenck
,
[9,10]. Goldberg 1892 Big Five Model [12, 13].
, Cost McCrae 5 Costa McCrae (1985) , , NEO-PI
(NEO-Personality Inventory) , 1992 NEO-PI-R (Neo-Personality Inventory Revised)
5 [14]. , ,
[15]. ,
. , ,
.
.
, .
3.
3.1 /
.
.
.
. ,
.
. 6 , , , , ,
16 Personalities (https://www.16personalities.com/ko)
. . 18
24 The Society of Convergence Knowledge Vol.8, No.2, 2020
, 12 . ‘
’ 1 ‘ ’ 5 5 . MBTI
‘’ INTJ, INTP, ENTJ, ENTP –T –A (NT) , INFJ, INFP,
ENFJ, ENFP –T –A (NF) . ISTJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ESFJ –T –A
(SJ) , ISTP, ISFP, ESTP, ESFP –T –A (SP) .
. , 209
. 2020 2 1 2 10, ,
. Table 1 .
Table 1. Sample Setting and Investigation Method
209
2020 2 1~ 2020 2 10
3.2 :
Table 2 . 135(64.6%) 74(35.4%) ,
20~29 123(61.7%) , 30~39 40(19.1%). 40~49. 50~59 13(6.2%), 20
10(4.8%), 60 2(1.0%) . 180(86.1%) 29(13.9%).
200~300 91(43.5%) , 100~200 68(32.5%), 100 34(16.3%),
300~400 15(7.2%), 400 1(0.5%) . 100(47.8%) ,
/ 43(20.6%) / 19(9.1%). 4(1.9%)
. () 83(39.7%) . 61(29.2%), 41(19.6%), 19
(9.1%), 5(2.4%) .
() (%)
74 35.4
20 10 4.8
20~29 129 61.7
30~39 40 19.1
40~49 15 7.2
50~59 13 6.2
60 2 1.0
· · / MBTI Big Five 25
Table 2. Demographic characteristics of those surveyed (Continue)
() (%)
29 13.9
400 1 0.5
Table 3 . 16 Personalities (https://www.16personalities.com/ko)
209 71 (NF), 51 (SP), 46 (SJ), 42 (NT),
. (NF) INFP-A 20(9.6%) . (NF) ENFP-A
(SP) ISFP-A 15(7.2%) , (SP) ISTP-T 13(6.2%). (NF) ENFJ-A 11
(5.3%) . 10 .
Table 3. Types of personality of the person under investigation
() (%)
26 The Society of Convergence Knowledge Vol.8, No.2, 2020
Table 3. Types of personality of the person under investigation (Continue)
() (%)
4.
.
, , , , .
. (Scheffe’s post-hoc analysis) ,
(13.32) (13.52) .
(12.40) , (13.29) .
(14.93) . .
. Table 4
(NT), (NF), (SJ), (SP) .
.
· · / MBTI Big Five 27
Table 4. Differences in Daily Escape by Personality
F p
46 14.52 1.03
45 14.69 0.85
Table 5 . (NT)>(NF)>(SP)>(SJ)
(NT) . (NT) ,
.
Table 5. Differences in curiosity according to character
F p
46 7.04 3.13
45 7.89 3.21
Table 6 (SJ)>(NT)>(NF)>(SP) (SJ)
. (SJ) .
.
Table 6. Differences in Family Harmony by Personality
F p
46 13.52 2.83
45 6.76 2.86
Table 7 (NT) .
(NT) .
.
Table 7. differences in rest according to character
F p
46 14.39 1.13
45 14.58 0.97
28 The Society of Convergence Knowledge Vol.8, No.2, 2020
Table 8 (NF)>(NT)>(SP)>(SJ) (NF)
. (NF) .
.
46 6.30 2.44
45 6.69 2.67
Table 9 (SP)>(NT)>(NF)>(SJ) . (SP)
. .
Table 9. Differences in Family Harmony by Personality
F p
46 7.76 2.68
45 13.29 2.59
5.1
Fig. 1 MBIT + Big Five .
,
.
- : MBTI + BIG FIVE 32 4 (
, , , ) .
- : SNS 6(, , , , , ) .
- :
, .
- : PC
.
- Data-Storage: , ,
.
· · / MBTI Big Five 29
Fig. 1. Construction of a tourism recommendation system using a hybrid web app-based topic map
.
.
Fig. 2
. ,
. , Data-Storage .
Data-Storage ,
. ,
. , ,
. . ,
Data-Storage .
Fig. 2. System-wide flow chart
30 The Society of Convergence Knowledge Vol.8, No.2, 2020
5.2
,
. , , (implicit)
, , ,
.
.
•, , , , .
•, , .
• .
, ,
. 2019 2 1
2019 2 10 42,389 .
3,971
. Fig. 4 (a) . 1( ) INTJ, INTP, ENTJ, ENTP, INFJ,
INFP, ENFJ, ENFP, ISTJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ESFJ, ISTP, ISFP, ESTP, ESFP . 2( ) ,
, , , , . 3( ) , , ,
.
Fig. 3 (b) . INTP
, , , , , , , ,
, , . Fig. 4 .
(a) Result of topic map for tourism recommendation (b) Relationship between topics based on tourism keywords
Fig. 3. Topic map composition for tourist recommendation
· · / MBTI Big Five 31
Fig. 4. Personality tourism type web app interface based on hybrid web app
6.
MBTI Big Five Model .
. , ,
.
, .
. , (-NT)
. (-NT)
. , (-SJ) . (-SJ)
. ,
(-NF) . (-NF)
. , (-SP) . (-SP)
. (-NT), (-NF), (-SJ),
(-SP) .
, IT
. ,
.
.
Acknowledgement
References
1. H.-J. Lee, Y.-H. Lee, “Vision and Tasks of Inter-Korean Social and Cultural Cooperation”, Hyundai Research Institute, No. 3, pp.
1-15, 2018.
32 The Society of Convergence Knowledge Vol.8, No.2, 2020
2. S.-J. Hong, “The direction of inter-Korean tourism cooperation”, Korea Tourism Policy, Vol. 71, pp. 60-64, 2014.
3. https://www.unwto.org/
4. D.-J. Lee, J.-U. Won, Y.-J. Kwon, M.-R. Kim, “A Study on the Customer Satisfaction of Delivery Companies Based on Social
Network Big Data”, Journal of Electronic Trade Association of Korea, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 55-67, 2016.
5. https://terms.naver.com/entry.nhn?docId=1526243&cid=42171&categoryId=42180
6. https://terms.naver.com/entry.nhn?docId=1821142&cid=46629&categoryId=46629
7. H.-T. Kim, “Strategies for the Promotion of Peace and Physical Exchange and Cooperation between South and North Korea”,
North Korea Research Society, 2018.
8. D.-J. Jeong, S.-J. Kim, H.-J. Kim, Y.-W. Na, I.-C. Moon, Y.-H. Song, K.-B. Choi, K.-H. Lim, J.-O. Lee, 2018 Unification
Ceremony Survey, Institute of Unification and Peace at Saul University, Unification Studies, 2019.
9. B.-H. Lee, H.-J. Lee, Y.-H. Lee, The Meaning and Challenges of the 19th Anniversary of the Mt. Kumgang Tour - According to a
survey conducted by experts on inter-Korean relations, Hyundai Research Institute, 2018.
10. https://www.unikorea.go.kr/unikorea/
11. K.-S. Ko, A Study on the Evaluation of Attractiveness by the Type of Tourist Destination, Ph.D. thesis at Cheju National
University, 2006.
12. S.-Y. Han, J.-Y. Yoon, J.-Y. Lee, “The impact of the attractiveness of overseas travel on perceived benefits, attitudes and
behavior”, Tourism Leisure Research, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 125-145, 2011.
13. S. Y. Cho, K. S. Ko, “A Analysis of Demographic Difference of North Korea Tourism Destination”, Knowledge industry research,
Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 35-54, 2019.
14. H.-K. Noh, Y.-G. Chae, “The study of perception about unofoed tourism of Korean peninsula through qualitative research”,
Jorunal of Hospitality & Tourism Studies, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 16-28, 2019.
15. Ramalho, José Carlos, Giovani Rubert Librelotto, and Pedro Rangel Henriques. “Metamorphosis–a topic maps based environment
to handle heterogeneous information resources”, International Conference on Topic Map Research and Applications. Springer,
Berlin, Heidelberg, 2005.
Research Article, pISSN : 2287-8920
MBTI Big Five
1, 2, 3
1 , 2 , 3
A Study on the Recommendation of Tourism using Topic Map According to Personality Types based on MBTI and Big Five Models
Ki-Hwan Ryu1, Su-Hyun Youn2, and Seok-Jae Moon3
1Professor, KwangWoon University, Graduate School of Smart Convergence, Institute of Tourism Industry 2KwangWoon University, Graduate School of Smart Convergence, Institute of Tourism Industry 3Professor, KwangWoon University, Institute of Information Technology
3 Corresponding author: [email protected]
Received May 13, 2020; Revised May 25, 2020; Accepted June 16, 2020
ABSTRACT
,
, MBTI Big Five
. , IT
.
, .
.
5 . ,
. . , (-NT)
. , (-NF) . ,
(-SJ) . , (-SP) .
.
This study found that tourists can recommend customized tourist attractions to tourists if they identify and analyze the tourists'
psychology and tourism motivation because the paradigm of travel changes and tourists pursue and prefer more diverse tourist
attractions. Accordingly, MBTI and Big Five models were applied to analyze how tourists' personality types and tourism motives
affect each other. In addition, as the importance of applications has grown in line with the recent development of the IT industry, the
application was proposed as a keyword-based web app type by applying a topic map based on personality type and propensity. This
provides practical information by analyzing and mapping the link between the nature of tourists and their motives. This is a departure
from the uniformity of existing tourism applications, and can create interest by adding the element of personality and recommend
tourist attractions suitable for individual tourists. Five types of tourists presented in this study were analyzed for their characteristics
and how tourist motives affect each other. First, there was no significant difference between the factors of daily escape and rest among
the factors of tourism motivation. This means that daily escape and relaxation are the basic factors in tourism. Second, rationalization
2020 by The Society of Convergence Knowledge. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in
any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
22 The Society of Convergence Knowledge Vol.8, No.2, 2020
(-NT) among personality types showed significant differences in curiosity factors. Third, the ideal type (-NF) among personality types
showed significant differences in empirical factors. Fourth, among personality types, the guardian type (-SJ) showed a significant
difference in family harmony factors. Fifth, among personality types, artist-type (-SP) showed significant differences in the factors of
amusement. Based on the results of this study, a hybrid app-based tourism recommendation system was implemented.
Keywords: Korea tourism, Type of personality, Motivation for tourism, Recommendation system, Hybrid Web/App
1.
. 1 1 , ,
. .
, , .
. . ,
.
[1]. ,
, .
[2].
.
,
, MBTI Big Five
. , IT
MBIT + Big Five
. ,
. ,
MBTI Big Five 16 Personalities ,
.
, , .
2 . 3 , 4
. 5 6 .
2.
(Personality traits) ,
. . paul T Robert (1995)
, , [3]. John Naumann Soto (2008)
[4]. .
MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator), 5(Big Five Model),
· · / MBTI Big Five 23
(Enneagram) . MBTI (Index)
[5]. MBTI 4 (1) (Extrovert)
(Introvert), (2) (Sensing) (Intuitive), (3) (Thinking) (Sensing), (4) (Judging) (Perceiving)
[6]. , (Extrovert) (Introvert) .
.
. , (Sensing) (Inutuitive) ( ).
.
[7]. , (Thinking) (Sensing) (, ) .
. ‘’ . , (Judging) (Perceiving)
. .
[8]. , Big Five Model
. Big Five Model 5, OCEAN .
. Allport, Cattell, Guilford, Eysenck
,
[9,10]. Goldberg 1892 Big Five Model [12, 13].
, Cost McCrae 5 Costa McCrae (1985) , , NEO-PI
(NEO-Personality Inventory) , 1992 NEO-PI-R (Neo-Personality Inventory Revised)
5 [14]. , ,
[15]. ,
. , ,
.
.
, .
3.
3.1 /
.
.
.
. ,
.
. 6 , , , , ,
16 Personalities (https://www.16personalities.com/ko)
. . 18
24 The Society of Convergence Knowledge Vol.8, No.2, 2020
, 12 . ‘
’ 1 ‘ ’ 5 5 . MBTI
‘’ INTJ, INTP, ENTJ, ENTP –T –A (NT) , INFJ, INFP,
ENFJ, ENFP –T –A (NF) . ISTJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ESFJ –T –A
(SJ) , ISTP, ISFP, ESTP, ESFP –T –A (SP) .
. , 209
. 2020 2 1 2 10, ,
. Table 1 .
Table 1. Sample Setting and Investigation Method
209
2020 2 1~ 2020 2 10
3.2 :
Table 2 . 135(64.6%) 74(35.4%) ,
20~29 123(61.7%) , 30~39 40(19.1%). 40~49. 50~59 13(6.2%), 20
10(4.8%), 60 2(1.0%) . 180(86.1%) 29(13.9%).
200~300 91(43.5%) , 100~200 68(32.5%), 100 34(16.3%),
300~400 15(7.2%), 400 1(0.5%) . 100(47.8%) ,
/ 43(20.6%) / 19(9.1%). 4(1.9%)
. () 83(39.7%) . 61(29.2%), 41(19.6%), 19
(9.1%), 5(2.4%) .
() (%)
74 35.4
20 10 4.8
20~29 129 61.7
30~39 40 19.1
40~49 15 7.2
50~59 13 6.2
60 2 1.0
· · / MBTI Big Five 25
Table 2. Demographic characteristics of those surveyed (Continue)
() (%)
29 13.9
400 1 0.5
Table 3 . 16 Personalities (https://www.16personalities.com/ko)
209 71 (NF), 51 (SP), 46 (SJ), 42 (NT),
. (NF) INFP-A 20(9.6%) . (NF) ENFP-A
(SP) ISFP-A 15(7.2%) , (SP) ISTP-T 13(6.2%). (NF) ENFJ-A 11
(5.3%) . 10 .
Table 3. Types of personality of the person under investigation
() (%)
26 The Society of Convergence Knowledge Vol.8, No.2, 2020
Table 3. Types of personality of the person under investigation (Continue)
() (%)
4.
.
, , , , .
. (Scheffe’s post-hoc analysis) ,
(13.32) (13.52) .
(12.40) , (13.29) .
(14.93) . .
. Table 4
(NT), (NF), (SJ), (SP) .
.
· · / MBTI Big Five 27
Table 4. Differences in Daily Escape by Personality
F p
46 14.52 1.03
45 14.69 0.85
Table 5 . (NT)>(NF)>(SP)>(SJ)
(NT) . (NT) ,
.
Table 5. Differences in curiosity according to character
F p
46 7.04 3.13
45 7.89 3.21
Table 6 (SJ)>(NT)>(NF)>(SP) (SJ)
. (SJ) .
.
Table 6. Differences in Family Harmony by Personality
F p
46 13.52 2.83
45 6.76 2.86
Table 7 (NT) .
(NT) .
.
Table 7. differences in rest according to character
F p
46 14.39 1.13
45 14.58 0.97
28 The Society of Convergence Knowledge Vol.8, No.2, 2020
Table 8 (NF)>(NT)>(SP)>(SJ) (NF)
. (NF) .
.
46 6.30 2.44
45 6.69 2.67
Table 9 (SP)>(NT)>(NF)>(SJ) . (SP)
. .
Table 9. Differences in Family Harmony by Personality
F p
46 7.76 2.68
45 13.29 2.59
5.1
Fig. 1 MBIT + Big Five .
,
.
- : MBTI + BIG FIVE 32 4 (
, , , ) .
- : SNS 6(, , , , , ) .
- :
, .
- : PC
.
- Data-Storage: , ,
.
· · / MBTI Big Five 29
Fig. 1. Construction of a tourism recommendation system using a hybrid web app-based topic map
.
.
Fig. 2
. ,
. , Data-Storage .
Data-Storage ,
. ,
. , ,
. . ,
Data-Storage .
Fig. 2. System-wide flow chart
30 The Society of Convergence Knowledge Vol.8, No.2, 2020
5.2
,
. , , (implicit)
, , ,
.
.
•, , , , .
•, , .
• .
, ,
. 2019 2 1
2019 2 10 42,389 .
3,971
. Fig. 4 (a) . 1( ) INTJ, INTP, ENTJ, ENTP, INFJ,
INFP, ENFJ, ENFP, ISTJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ESFJ, ISTP, ISFP, ESTP, ESFP . 2( ) ,
, , , , . 3( ) , , ,
.
Fig. 3 (b) . INTP
, , , , , , , ,
, , . Fig. 4 .
(a) Result of topic map for tourism recommendation (b) Relationship between topics based on tourism keywords
Fig. 3. Topic map composition for tourist recommendation
· · / MBTI Big Five 31
Fig. 4. Personality tourism type web app interface based on hybrid web app
6.
MBTI Big Five Model .
. , ,
.
, .
. , (-NT)
. (-NT)
. , (-SJ) . (-SJ)
. ,
(-NF) . (-NF)
. , (-SP) . (-SP)
. (-NT), (-NF), (-SJ),
(-SP) .
, IT
. ,
.
.
Acknowledgement
References
1. H.-J. Lee, Y.-H. Lee, “Vision and Tasks of Inter-Korean Social and Cultural Cooperation”, Hyundai Research Institute, No. 3, pp.
1-15, 2018.
32 The Society of Convergence Knowledge Vol.8, No.2, 2020
2. S.-J. Hong, “The direction of inter-Korean tourism cooperation”, Korea Tourism Policy, Vol. 71, pp. 60-64, 2014.
3. https://www.unwto.org/
4. D.-J. Lee, J.-U. Won, Y.-J. Kwon, M.-R. Kim, “A Study on the Customer Satisfaction of Delivery Companies Based on Social
Network Big Data”, Journal of Electronic Trade Association of Korea, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 55-67, 2016.
5. https://terms.naver.com/entry.nhn?docId=1526243&cid=42171&categoryId=42180
6. https://terms.naver.com/entry.nhn?docId=1821142&cid=46629&categoryId=46629
7. H.-T. Kim, “Strategies for the Promotion of Peace and Physical Exchange and Cooperation between South and North Korea”,
North Korea Research Society, 2018.
8. D.-J. Jeong, S.-J. Kim, H.-J. Kim, Y.-W. Na, I.-C. Moon, Y.-H. Song, K.-B. Choi, K.-H. Lim, J.-O. Lee, 2018 Unification
Ceremony Survey, Institute of Unification and Peace at Saul University, Unification Studies, 2019.
9. B.-H. Lee, H.-J. Lee, Y.-H. Lee, The Meaning and Challenges of the 19th Anniversary of the Mt. Kumgang Tour - According to a
survey conducted by experts on inter-Korean relations, Hyundai Research Institute, 2018.
10. https://www.unikorea.go.kr/unikorea/
11. K.-S. Ko, A Study on the Evaluation of Attractiveness by the Type of Tourist Destination, Ph.D. thesis at Cheju National
University, 2006.
12. S.-Y. Han, J.-Y. Yoon, J.-Y. Lee, “The impact of the attractiveness of overseas travel on perceived benefits, attitudes and
behavior”, Tourism Leisure Research, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 125-145, 2011.
13. S. Y. Cho, K. S. Ko, “A Analysis of Demographic Difference of North Korea Tourism Destination”, Knowledge industry research,
Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 35-54, 2019.
14. H.-K. Noh, Y.-G. Chae, “The study of perception about unofoed tourism of Korean peninsula through qualitative research”,
Jorunal of Hospitality & Tourism Studies, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 16-28, 2019.
15. Ramalho, José Carlos, Giovani Rubert Librelotto, and Pedro Rangel Henriques. “Metamorphosis–a topic maps based environment
to handle heterogeneous information resources”, International Conference on Topic Map Research and Applications. Springer,
Berlin, Heidelberg, 2005.
