Experiences of Polish Tourists Traveling for Leisure Purposes during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Abstract

The research presented in this paper examines the experiences of Poles traveling for leisure purposes in the summer season of 2020, taking into account the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The study involved the analysis of source data, including statistical data, and a survey administered via the computer-assisted web interviewing (CAWI) method. The survey questionnaire was created on the Google platform. The link to the questionnaire was provided via social media to participants of travel groups in the period from 30 November 2020 to 15 February 2021. The sampling was purposive (included only travelers) despite efforts to maintain the gender balance; the proportion of women was higher. Therefore, caution must be applied when interpreting the results which may not be transferable. The survey included questions regarding the respondents’ travel behavior and risk perceptions. 433 correctly completed questionnaires were collected. The dataset was analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively. Descriptive statistics measures and correlation coefficients were used in the analysis of the results. The study shows that some respondents decided against traveling because of the pandemic situation, while those who decided to travel adjusted their behavior by avoiding crowded places and resigning from traveling abroad. Compliance with hygiene standards in the area of tourism services varied, and was the highest in the case of accommodation services. Women rated hygiene standards in chain cafes statistically higher than men and younger people rated hygiene on public transport, trains, air transport and in fast food services higher than older people. The higher the tourism expenditure, the lower the assessment of sanitary standards in tour guide services, air transport and chain cafes decreased.

1. Introduction

In recent decades the tourism industry has been exposed to losses and damages caused by natural disasters (e.g., tsunamis, hurricanes and earthquakes), epidemic crises and acts of terrorism [1,2,3,4,5]. However, none of these phenomena led to a long-term decline in global tourism development. The situation has changed dramatically with the COVID-19 pandemic, which has become one of the greatest challenges facing the world in the 21st century. The current situation has severely affected the global economy, mortality, politics and tourism as a social, economic and spatial phenomenon [6,7,8,9].

In reaction to the crisis governments of the affected countries developed strategies aimed at counteracting and limiting the impact of the pandemic on the economy [10,11], including the tourism industry [12,13,14,15]. The crisis in tourism began in March and April 2020. At that time, most countries decided to close their borders and introduced a mandatory quarantine for foreign tourists. The fear and lack of sufficient knowledge about the unknown disease resulted in introducing radical measures [16,17,18]. In Poland, similarly to many countries around the world, severe restrictions limiting the freedom of movement were introduced. It was forbidden to organize mass events, concerts and weddings [19]. For a specified period of time, people were allowed to leave home only to go to work or cater for the necessities of life. Flights and other types of domestic and international travels were suspended. The spring of 2020 was a lost time for domestic and international tourism. The summer season, which is crucial for the tourism industry, was the big unknown [20,21]. Due to the decline in the number of the recorded COVID-19 cases in the summer 2020, the epidemic restrictions were eased, which resulted in an increase in the travel frequency of Poles. The data provided by Statistics Poland (GUS) show that 43.6% (14.1 million) of Poles aged 15 and over travelled for leisure purposes in 2020, which was 32.1% less than in 2019. They were mainly domestic trips (87.1% of trips), and the most active travelers were people aged 25–44 [22].

The impact of restrictions on leisure trips are reflected in the data of the UNWTO World Tourism Barometer which reported a decline in foreign trips by 72% in the period from January to October 2020 compared to the same period in 2019 [23].

The COVID-19 pandemic has also resulted in changes in travel behavior. The changes included the entire resignation from traveling for leisure purposes because of the pandemic [24,25], perception of travel as risky [26] and low consumer confidence [23]. The main source of travel safety concerns is the perceived threat, i.e., a situation characterized by an increased probability of health, material or moral damage [27]. The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic first resulted in an enormous stress resulting from fear for one’s own health and the health of loved ones, as well as fear of material losses. This situation affects consumer behavior in everyday life situations [28] and in the context of travels [29]. The subjective assessment of travel-related risk may ultimately lead to postponement or even cancellation of travel, which negatively affects further prospects for the tourism industry [26,30]. Some tourists, especially from the United States, Hong Kong and Australia, take the risks of traveling very seriously. In countries such as: Greece, Canada or the United Kingdom, risk perception plays a smaller role in travel behavior [31,32].

The COVID-19 pandemic significantly influenced the role of perceived risk in making travel decisions, which was the topic of many scientific studies [25,33,34]. Mitchell et al. [35] and Chiu et al. [36] indicate that the perceived physical risk, financial risk and psychological risk had negative impact on tourists’ travel intentions. Safety concerns affect both domestic and international leisure travel [37]. Perceived risk is the main reason for choosing a destination or resigning from taking a trip [38,39,40].

It is worth noting that the COVID-19 pandemic has undermined what used to be one of the crucial aspects of traveling—benefits for physical and mental health. Nowadays, travel in general, and particularly travel abroad, is perceived by many people as potentially stressful due to the pandemic and its manifestations. In order to minimize this stress, some people give up leisure travels abroad in favor of domestic trips, which is encouraged by governments of many countries, including Poland. Additionally, the COVID-19 hygiene protocols, including the need to keep a distance, wear face masks and disinfect hands contributed to the public safety and alleviated travel anxiety.

The main purpose of this study was to examine Poles’ travel experiences in the summer season of 2020. The specific objectives were to determine to what extent the COVID-19 pandemic impacted Poles’ travel behavior and how compliance with the hygiene standards by tourism service providers was assessed depending on differentiating variables (age, sex, tourist activity, amount of tourism expenditure).

The following research questions were addressed by this study:

• Did the respondents decide against traveling in the summer 2020 and what was the main reason for this decision?
• How different were leisure travels in 2020 compared to previous years?
• How important were safety concerns in choosing a tourist destination and did their role differ depending on age, gender, place of residence and other differentiating variables?
• Which tourism services were used most often and how the compliance with hygiene standards by various tourism service providers was assessed?
• Did gender, age, travel frequency and tourism expenditure differentiate the assessment of compliance with hygiene standards by individual service providers?
• In retrospect, did the respondents perceive their decision to travel as good and what were their plans for the summer season 2021?

The studies conducted so far indicate that COVID-19 significantly influences the vacation travel plans [41]. The study by Nazneen et al. [42] shows that the risk of infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus has negatively influenced Chinese travel decisions, in particular the number of holidays and visits to large cities. Another study [43] found that the Chinese also did not want to travel to rural areas because of COVID-19 due to the perceived health hazard. Furthermore, in European countries such as Germany, Austria or Switzerland, the COVID-19 pandemic had significant impact on travel risk perception and the willingness to change or cancel travel plans [44,45]. On the other hand, Orindaru et al. [46] showed that the pandemic and the decline in foreign travels had a positive effect on domestic tourism, including the use of rural tourism facilities.

The current study seeks to verify following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1 (H1).

The pandemic resulted in the abandonment of collective tourism establishments in favor of independent tourism accommodation.

Hypothesis 2 (H2).

The safety concerns were of greater importance in choosing a destination for women than for men.

Hypothesis 3 (H3).

The compliance with hygiene standards in accommodation establishments received a higher rating than other types of tourism services.

2. Materials and Methods

The research process stages are presented in the diagram below:

This research involved the analysis of source data, including scientific articles, reports (e.g., published by Statistics Poland-GUS) and OECD data and publications (Figure 1). Due to the pandemic and the inability to conduct empirical research in direct contact with the respondent, the computer-assisted web interviewing (CAWI) was used. It is a method approved for social sciences, and the presented research fits in this field. The survey questionnaire was created on the Google platform. In order to test the validity of the questionnaire, a pilot study was conducted on 1–15 October 2020. The link to the survey was posted to members of one of the travel groups on social media (Facebook). The collected material and the respondents’ comments enabled the improvement of the research tool. The next stage was the survey. The link to the survey was provided via social media to participants of other travel groups from 30 November 2020 to 15 February 2021.

The questionnaire included questions about respondents’ travel experiences in the summer season of 2020 and travel-related risk perceptions. As the survey was administered online, the questionnaire included an alternative question, which made it possible to redirect respondents to different set of questions depending on their declared travel frequency (either no travels or at least one leisure trip in the summer of 2020). Single-choice and multiple-choice questions were also used, as well as rating questions with a five-point Likert scale. The rating question was used to rate the compliance with the rules of the hygiene standards in various tourism service contexts. Due to the fact that the sector significantly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic is transport [47,48,49,50,51,52,53], its various forms, used by tourists, were included in the questionnaire. The survey questionnaire consisted of 17 questions and a personal data table. We collected 419 correctly completed questionnaires. An important stage in the analysis of empirical data is the selection of methods for their analysis. The authors considered, inter alia, factor analysis, SFA (Stochastic Frontier Analysis) [54], CB-SEM, PLS-SEM which was successfully applied by Aman et al. [27]. However, taking into account the characteristics of the obtained data and the adopted hypotheses, it was considered the most appropriate approach would be to apply the descriptive statistics measures (M, Mo, Me, SD) as well as the correlation coefficient (r) and the Mann-Whitney Z test.

The sample of respondents was dominated by women, accounting for 71.5%. The over-representativeness of women is unfortunately typical of a survey [55]. Due to the purposive sampling and the predominance of women, the obtained results are typical only for the sample may not be transferable to general population. Most of the respondents declared secondary education (63.6%), higher education (31.9%), and primary and basic vocational education (4.5%). The place of residence of the respondents was quite varied. The most numerous group were residents of cities with more than 500,000 inhabitants (37.1%), followed by residents of cities with population up to 50,000 (25.1%). The remaining part included residents of rural areas (22.1%), cities with population of 50,000 to 100,000 (8.5%) and cities with 100,000 to 500,000 residents (7.3%). The research methodology (online survey) influenced the age structure of the sample. 52.4% of the respondents were in the age group under 24; 18.9% were aged 25–34, 15.7%—aged 35–44 and 12.9% were 45 and over. Another differentiating variable used in the analysis was the acceptable level of tourism expenditure for a seven-day leisure domestic trip per person. The respondents most often declared PLN 1000–1500 (EUR 219–328)—42.7%, up to PLN 1000 (EUR 219)—31.5%, between PLN 1500 and PLN 2000 (EUR 329–438)—18.5% and over PLN 2000 (EUR 438)—7.3%.

3. Results and Discussion

The alternative question in the questionnaire made it possible to verify the respondents’ travel frequency. Over one third (35.9%) indicated that they had taken one leisure trip, 26.2%—two trips, 18.1%—at least three trips, and 19.4%—declared that they had not travelled for leisure purposes. It was verified whether the reason for cancelling travel plans was the COVID-19 pandemic (Figure 2).

Three quarters of the respondents confirmed that the perceived risks related to the pandemic discouraged them from taking leisure trips (Figure 2). These concerns were also pointed out by Lopes et al. [40] and Bratic et al. [25]. Their research shows that tourists did not feel safe, particularly in public spaces (on the streets, at the airport) and they had safety concerns due to lack of information on the procedures to be followed after landing at the airport. The need to improve communication during a pandemic was also pointed out by Su et al. [56]. The “closed borders” listed in Figure 1 are one of the consequences of the pandemic. This applies to land crossings also in countries from the Schengen area (e.g., between Poland and Germany, Poland and the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia), where the possibility of crossing borders has been limited to a minimum, as well as airports and the suspension of almost all scheduled and charter flights. A nationwide survey conducted by the Statistics Poland (GUS) also confirmed that the main reason for cancelling leisure travels in 2020 was COVID-19 (36.9%), while the financial reason indicated most often in the period before the pandemic, in 2020 took the second position (21.7%) [22].

The respondents who declared that they had travelled at least once in the summer season of 2020 (335 people) mostly opted for domestic trips (76.1%). Only 23.9% of them indicated that they travelled abroad. The preference for domestic trips during the pandemic has been shown by other researchers. This is related not only to the perceived increased risk contracting the virus infection abroad, but also to the risk of regulations being changed during the trip, closed borders and the need to stay in quarantine upon return. Domestic trips also involved restrictions, mainly due to the need to comply with the new hygiene standards, and a smaller number of available places in accommodation establishments and foodservice facilities. Due to the lack of places in the most popular tourist destinations, tourists had to look for other areas to travel. This aspect was also indicated by the respondents in our survey. One in four respondents chose a place that they would not have chosen had it not been for the pandemic. This forced relocation of the tourism flow alleviated the negative environmental effects of mass tourism and inspired rethinking of the environmental impact of tourism and its role in sustainable development [57]. This is undoubtedly an interesting direction of research undertaken e.g., by Mamirkulova et al. [58] who explored the impact of sustainable development of tourism infrastructure on the quality of life of local residents.

The organization of travels and accommodation by Polish travelers were verified. If the respondents travelled more than once, they were asked to take the last trip into account. The vast majority of respondents, i.e., 69.6%, organized the trip on their own, but this share was typical for Poles also before the pandemic [59,60,61,62]. 23.7% of the respondents had the trip organized by family and friends and 4.8% by a travel agency. Other respondents indicated the workplace or other organization they were members of.

To address the first hypothesis (H1), it was verified whether the respondents preferred independent tourism accommodation to collective tourism establishments. The type of accommodation preferred by the respondents included apartments or houses for rent (42.2%) and hotels (23.8%). Others indicated: houses or flats rented free of charge from family members (7.5%), staying with family or friends (7.5%), camping site (5.6%), hostel (5.3%) and others, including agritourism farms, own summer house, guesthouse, campervan. While houses and apartments offer the possibility of isolation from other tourism flow participants, hotels are collective accommodation establishments. Their relatively high popularity (almost every fourth respondent stayed in a hotel) may result from the fact that they are included in the register held by the Voivodship Marshal Office and are under special supervision of public services responsible for epidemic safety. Therefore, trust placed in hotel services may be higher compared to other types of accommodation. Greater confidence in hotels is also confirmed by research carried out by Lopes et al. [36]. The data regarding the choice of accommodation is demonstrated in Figure 3, which shows the main differences noticed by respondents between leisure trips taken during the pandemic and the trips taken before that period.

The most often indicated change was the avoidance of overcrowded places (Figure 3), which, as emphasized by Santos et al. [63] is typical post-COVID lockdown behavior. Regardless of gender and age, such behavior (avoiding popular tourist crowded places) was also indicated by Madani et al. [64], Bratic et al. [25] Such preference, however, was not confirmed in the studies carried out in May and December 2020 in Romania [46].

Another change indicated by the respondents was the preference for domestic trips over travels abroad. This preference is consistent with the results of other studies and should benefit small towns and rural areas that were not popular tourist destinations before the pandemic [65,66]. Lopes et al. [37] directly indicate that rural tourism has gained in popularity during the COVID-19 pandemic, while city-breaks have suffered the most. Resignation from travels abroad is also associated with the fear of possible complications with returning to the country, the risk of flight suspension, compulsory quarantine, etc. [65]. Domestic tourism also helps to save jobs [67]. Most likely, the trend to take domestic leisure trips will continue also after the pandemic [47]. This is another direction for future research, especially since taking a vacation in the country may (but does not have to) result in avoiding very popular usually overcrowded places. A more even distribution of tourism flow would be beneficial both for economic and environmental reasons and should contribute to more sustainable development.

To address the adopted research questions, we verified the importance of safety concerns in the selection of a tourist destination. The safety concerns were “decisive” for only 5.5% (5 on the Likert scale), but “very important” for as many as 24.9% (4). For 36% the risk factor was “moderately important” (3), for 19.1% it was “rather unimportant” (2) and for 14.5% it was “definitely unimportant” (1). Perceived risk was mentioned as the most important factor in the studies by Bratic et al. [25] (on the five-point Likert scale it gained the highest position with a score of 4.19). The role of risk perception in choosing a destination was also analyzed by Orîndaru et al. [46]. Their research shows, however, that this factor had moderate impact (M = 2.62 on a scale of 1–5 in studies carried out in May 2020 and M = 2.81 in studies carried out in December 2020). However, the highest rating was assigned to holiday destination situated in the vicinity of the place of residence (M = 3.57 in May, M = 3.87 in December).

Furthermore, the relationship between the role of perceived risk and the differentiating variables was searched for. There was no statistically significant correlation between the safety concerns and travel frequency (r = −0.0401), place of residence (−0.0134), age (r = 0.0971) and the declared amount of tourism expenditure (r = −0, 0256). However, the role of risk factor was significantly more important for women than for men, the value of the Mann-Whitney Z test of 2.48943 at p = 0.0128, which positively verified hypothesis H2.

The respondents were also asked whether, due to the pandemic, they had chosen a destination that they would not have chosen otherwise. Almost every fourth respondent (23.5%) answered “yes”, and almost half (46.6%)—“no”. The others had no opinion.

The use of particular tourism services by the respondents varied (

Table 1. Assessment of compliance with the hygiene standards in tourism services (five-point Likert scale, N = 335).

Services	Users [%]	M	Me	Mo	SD
Railway transport	66.6	3.34	3	4	1.27
Air transport	46.7	3.48	4	5	1.44
City public transport	72.0	3.12	3	3	1.22
Other forms of transport	62.9	3.39	4	4	1.27
Accommodation	87.8	3.65	4	5	1.34
Fast food outlets	87.8	3.36	3.5	4	1.21
Restaurans	92.7	3.53	4	4	1.21
Chain cafeterias	79.04	3.48	4	4	1.19
Other foodservice facilities	74.5	3.30	3	4	1.19
Tour guide services	54.7	3.22	3	4	1.27

Source: own empirical research. Note: M—mean, Me—median, Mo—mode, SD—standard deviation.

). Most respondents used foodservice facilities (especially restaurants) and accommodation services. The least used services included air transport and tour guide services. It should be emphasized that these services were also less popular before the pandemic (car transport was the most popular) and were used primarily in the case of trips organized by travel agencies [68]. Statistics show that “The number of international tourist arrivals increased from 1.4 billion arrivals in 2018 to 1.46 billion in 2019; more than half of tourists chose to reach their destination by air transportation” [69]. In April 2020, there were 88% fewer flights in the EU than in the same month a year earlier. Moreover, the number of passengers transported in a given month in the EU fell from 70 million in January and February 2020 to only 1 million in April—a decrease of 99% compared to April 2019. [70]. The popularity of air transport depends largely on the location of the tourist destination and is greater in island countries than in continental countries [71] Nevertheless, in a situation of increased risk, the operation of air transport is limited [72,73].

In the question with the five-point Likert scale, the respondents who used a given type of tourism services were asked to assess their compliance with the rules of the hygiene standards, which allowed for the verification of hypothesis 3 (Table 1).

Compliance with the hygiene standards in accommodation services obtained the highest values of the adopted measures of descriptive statistics, which confirmed hypothesis H3. Air transport ranked second, while city public transport received the lowest rating (Table 1). However, the differences in assessments of individual services were insignificant.

The hygiene standards in tourism services are decisive for travel risk perception, which is confirmed by the research of Hussain et al. [74], Radic et al. [75], Chan et al. [76], Taylor [77], Yost and Cheng [78], Al-Marzouqi and Yahia [79], Zhang et al. [80], Zhong et al. [81], Davahli et al. [82], Aydin et al. [83] and Abbas et al. [84]. These researchers, representing various scientific disciplines, from the perspective of their own experience, knowledge, research methods used in a given discipline, pointed to various aspects of consumer expectations towards service providers and the physical environment in which a service takes place. The common conclusion is the need to ensure customer safety by assigning social distancing and hygiene standards a higher position in the area of service quality. In Wyman’s estimation [65], compliance with health and hygiene standards will continue to increase in importance, even after the pandemic has ended. This is also confirmed by Kourgiantakis et al. [85] and Jiang and Wen [86]. On the other hand, M. Sigala [87] emphasizes that “The new operating environment enforced by COVID-19 measures require firms to adopt new technologies and applications to ensure management of crowds and number of people gathered in public spaces (e.g., airports, shopping malls, museums, restaurants, hotels), human disinfectors and hand sanitiser equipment (…)”.

In order to further address the adopted research questions, it was verified whether there is a difference in the assessment of compliance with the hygiene standards depending on gender, age, travel frequency and tourism expenditure (

Table 2. Assessment of compliance with the hygiene standards in tourism services by gender.

Services	Mean Rank Women	Mean Rank Men	Mann-Whitney Z	p
Railway transport	101.42	87.58	1.546	0.121
Air transport	51.67	42.41	1.465	0.144
City public transport	111.92	110.28	0.165	0.865
Other forms of transport	87.97	72.82	1.852	0.064
Accommodation	143.47	132.08	1.032	0.303
Fast food outlets	147.95	135.83	1.114	0.267
Restaurans	160.26	140.19	1.737	0.082
Chain cafeterias	130.47	108.38	2.152	0.032
Other foodservice facilities	118.71	103.22	1.577	0.114
Tour guide services	66.86	60.29	0.958	0.337

Source: own empirical research.

).

A statistically significant difference occurred only in the case of catering services provided in chain cafeterias (Table 2. The rating given by women was significantly higher than that of men. No statistically significant difference was revealed with regards to transport. Transport is a key economic sector, crucial for tourism as well as other industries. The OECD report [81] emphasized that public transport was used more often by women than men, therefore subsequent studies should take into account more means of transport and verify more variables affecting the risk perception.

Comparing the assessment of compliance with hygiene standards in the case of individual tourism services by respondents of different age, it was noticed that the older the respondents the lower they rated the hygiene standards of city public transport (r = −0.2449), rail transport (r = −0.2254), (r = −0.1460) and fast-food services (r = −0.1770), although this relationship was weak. It is consistent with the findings of Taylor [78] showing that older clients pay more attention to compliance with the hygiene standards and can be more critical about it than the younger ones.

With regards to most tourism services no correlation was found between travel frequency and the assessment of compliance with hygiene standards. The only revealed relationship regarded air transport, although it was weak (Figure 4). More such relationships, although also rather weak, were noted with regards to tourism expenditure (Figure 5).

Along with the increase in tourism expenditure, the assessment of compliance with hygiene standards by providers of tour guide services, air transport, forms of transport defined as “other” and chain cafeterias decreased. In this case, the relationship was also weak. Airports are places where safety procedures should be followed with particular diligence, and thus it is clearly visible for visitors. Still, 83.1% of the respondents did not use air transport, which was the result of the chosen destinations. As highlighted in the OECD report [88] “COVID-19 contingency measures and post-crisis consumer spending patterns are likely to severely dampen demand for air travel for an extended period”.

Transport services are being widely analyzed, especially with regards to sustainable development. Magdolen et al. [89] made a typology of mobility styles distinguishing an environment-oriented style, i.e., the one with the greatest potential for acceptance and use of sustainable mobility.

The respondents were also asked to assess their own behavior in terms of compliance with the hygiene standards. They rated it quite high, although it should be remembered that it was their subjective self-assessment. As many as 80.3% of respondents declared wearing face masks and frequent hand disinfection, of which only 34.3% indicated that they had always done it, and their motives included the regulations in force in a given place and the fear of being fined for failure to wear a face mask. 20.3% of respondents who admitted that they did not comply with the rules’ hygiene standards indicated as reasons: no such requirements (15.1%), feeling that it was safe (1.9%), discomfort of wearing face masks (1.5%) and other (1.2%). The respondents who used air transport reported that at airports: their temperature was measured (38 people), a negative test result was required or a test for COVID-19 infection was administered (36 people). However, 14 respondents declared that they had not experienced any additional procedures.

The respondents were then asked to evaluate the safety of their leisure trip during the summer 2020 holiday season in retrospect. Only 5.6% believed that the trip was not safe, almost one in four (23.3%) had no opinion, and as many as 71.7% considered it safe. The respondents’ plans for the next holiday season were quite optimistic. Most respondents indicated that even if the pandemic persists, they intended to travel the next season (52.2%). Only 7.8% declared they had no plans to travel, and the others did not have an opinion.

The analysis of the studies of other researchers and our own research results allowed for the formulation of the following theoretical and practical implications:

I.

Theoretical

• The period of the COVID-19 pandemic created new directions of research on tourism, both in the area of conditions for further development of tourism, forms of spending leisure time and the impact of future tourism development.
• The thesis that the compulsory relocation of tourism flows (movement of tourists to previously less popular regions and destinations) is in tune with the sustainable development of tourism, because both environmental burdens and economic benefits are more evenly distributed, is not supported by sufficient research. Research in this field should be interdisciplinary and international.
• There is a need to develop research methodology applicable in situations when reaching respondents, is significantly impeded so that it could also include the elderly and people living in smaller towns.

II.

Practical

• The enhanced tourism offer in the future should take into account the customer safety concerns and the special role of health and safety standards.
• Leisure travels to rural areas (agritourism, rural tourism, ecotourism), as indicated by Orindaru et al. [45], are becoming increasingly attractive. Thus far, the attractiveness of this form of recreation has been based on qualities such as peace and quiet, contact with nature and relatively low prices [90,91]. During the pandemic, it gained an additional advantage, i.e., safety based on social distancing. Moreover, not only rural tourism facilities located in typical tourist regions (in the mountains, by lakes, by the sea) may be appealing, but also in regions previously considered less attractive (e.g., central Poland), especially that according to the research results of Orîndaru et al. [46] when choosing a holiday destination, the location in vicinity of the place of residence is preferred.

4. Conclusions and Limitations

Many authors cited in this article emphasize that the COVID-19 pandemic has not only changed tourism itself as an economic and social phenomenon, most probably permanently [88], but also influenced further research in this field. The research results presented in this paper contribute to the discussion undertaken by many researchers in various research centers. We also included elements that other researchers did not take into account, such as tourists’ perception of compliance with hygiene standards by various tourism service providers, which broadens the knowledge in this field. This research also contributes to the scientists’ effort to recognize and describe the changes in travel behavior in crisis. The objectives assumed at the beginning of the research were achieved, the research questions were answered, and the hypotheses were verified.

Despite the efforts put in the current study, it has limitations that should be eliminated in future research:

• Overrepresentation of women in the research sample, which is typical for survey studies.
• Overrepresentation of young people in the research sample, which is a consequence of the necessity to conduct the survey via the Internet, statistically more often used by young people. The future studies should employ the “snowball” method, i.e., encourage younger people to help their parents and grandparents fill in the questionnaire.