5 (Csikszentmihalyi Csikszentmihalyi,2006;Seligman 2002).These approaches may be contrasted with earlier but well known Freudian-derived psychoanalytic or personality approaches built on deficit models where individuals are sometimes seen as trapped by their personal past or influenced by evolutionary imperatives.By way of contrast the newer motivation work suggests that individuals seek to maximise their overall state of well-being.This newer emphasis considers not only immediate sensory pleasures(although these remain important)but also includes attempts to achieve desired goals such as respect,status,enhanced relationships,altruism,self- regulation,zest,and several other eudemonic outcomes(Park,Peterson Seligman, 2006).This kind of thinking enriches tourism researchers'attempts to understand why people travel,compared with older notions based on the more limited deficit models of arousal,personality malfunctioning,anxiety or stereotyped applications of Maslow's formulation (Ateljevic,2000;Crompton,1979;Gnoth,1997;Iso Ahola, 1982,Plog,1974). A number of tourism based motivation commentators have specified what is required of theory in this area.The requirements include a treatment of the multi- motive drivers of tourist behaviour,an ability to consider the dynamic and changing nature of an individual's motivation across their tourism experiences and the need for theories and conceptual systems to function as integrative and predictive but also empirically accessible foundations for research(Bowen Clarke 2009;Hsu Huang, 2008;Pearce 1992,2005).A major candidate for developing the study of tourist motivation according to these requirements is the travel career pattern approach reported initially by Pearce Lee(2005)and recently augmented by linking the concepts to core work in affective neuroscience (Panksepp,2005;Pearce 2011).The material on motivation(and emotions)from neuroscience adds to the value of tourism studies by providing contemporary support for the importance of the physiological need for change and social contact.For example,the contribution of affective neuroscience ideas to the travel career model lies in recognising that core affective states such as 'seeking'(e.g.,the need to deal with novelty and change in one's environment)and care'(e.g.,the need to build relationships),directly support the motives that are central to the travel career approach.Other basic affective processes underlie the peripheral motive links. Both in linking to the teleological concerns of positive psychology and by considering the applicability of neuroscience findings the potential exists for tourism researchers to build more complete and solidly based motivation research.In summary,new views of tourist motivation will be oriented more towards a view of tourists as actors who are self-determining,creative,forward looking opportunists who benefit from their own learning and previous experience without being trapped by their personal past.Some of their motivation and experience will be linked to deep and basic emotions but this view is not incompatible with the suggestion that there are key culturally relevant values which may shape the directions of individual ambition. An interesting connection can be noted between this psychology-derived literature and other assessment and category systems which address the roots of tourist travel style and experience.For example,a hybrid blend of motives,interests and travel types underlies Cohen's well known division of tourists into recreational,diversionary, experimental,experiential and existential categories (Cohen,1979).Much of the attention using this scheme has been on whether or not special sub-groups such as backpackers are best described by the existential category or by the other labels (Maoz,2005;Noy,2004).The category scheme devised by Cohen has been and remains influential.It can be seen as an intuitive sorting of sets of motives which are5 (Csikszentmihalyi & Csikszentmihalyi, 2006; Seligman 2002). These approaches may be contrasted with earlier but well known Freudian-derived psychoanalytic or personality approaches built on deficit models where individuals are sometimes seen as trapped by their personal past or influenced by evolutionary imperatives. By way of contrast the newer motivation work suggests that individuals seek to maximise their overall state of well-being. This newer emphasis considers not only immediate sensory pleasures (although these remain important) but also includes attempts to achieve desired goals such as respect, status, enhanced relationships, altruism, self￾regulation, zest, and several other eudemonic outcomes (Park, Peterson & Seligman, 2006). This kind of thinking enriches tourism researchers’ attempts to understand why people travel, compared with older notions based on the more limited deficit models of arousal, personality malfunctioning, anxiety or stereotyped applications of Maslow’s formulation (Ateljevic, 2000; Crompton, 1979; Gnoth, 1997; Iso Ahola, 1982; Plog, 1974). A number of tourism based motivation commentators have specified what is required of theory in this area. The requirements include a treatment of the multi￾motive drivers of tourist behaviour, an ability to consider the dynamic and changing nature of an individual’s motivation across their tourism experiences and the need for theories and conceptual systems to function as integrative and predictive but also empirically accessible foundations for research (Bowen & Clarke 2009; Hsu & Huang, 2008; Pearce 1992, 2005). A major candidate for developing the study of tourist motivation according to these requirements is the travel career pattern approach reported initially by Pearce & Lee (2005) and recently augmented by linking the concepts to core work in affective neuroscience (Panksepp, 2005; Pearce 2011). The material on motivation (and emotions) from neuroscience adds to the value of tourism studies by providing contemporary support for the importance of the physiological need for change and social contact. For example, the contribution of affective neuroscience ideas to the travel career model lies in recognising that core affective states such as ‘seeking’ (e.g., the need to deal with novelty and change in one’s environment) and ‘care’ (e.g., the need to build relationships), directly support the motives that are central to the travel career approach. Other basic affective processes underlie the peripheral motive links. Both in linking to the teleological concerns of positive psychology and by considering the applicability of neuroscience findings the potential exists for tourism researchers to build more complete and solidly based motivation research. In summary, new views of tourist motivation will be oriented more towards a view of tourists as actors who are self-determining, creative, forward looking opportunists who benefit from their own learning and previous experience without being trapped by their personal past. Some of their motivation and experience will be linked to deep and basic emotions but this view is not incompatible with the suggestion that there are key culturally relevant values which may shape the directions of individual ambition. An interesting connection can be noted between this psychology-derived literature and other assessment and category systems which address the roots of tourist travel style and experience. For example, a hybrid blend of motives, interests and travel types underlies Cohen’s well known division of tourists into recreational, diversionary, experimental, experiential and existential categories (Cohen, 1979). Much of the attention using this scheme has been on whether or not special sub-groups such as backpackers are best described by the existential category or by the other labels (Maoz, 2005; Noy, 2004). The category scheme devised by Cohen has been and remains influential. It can be seen as an intuitive sorting of sets of motives which are