A Scoping Review Protocol on Senior Tourists’ Accommodation Preferences

<ns5:p>Background The global demographic shift to an ageing population has placed individuals aged 60 and above as a crucial tourism market segment due to several factors. The senior tourism market, a growing segment, has distinct preferences and needs. Motivation for tourism, tourism-related needs, concerns for accessibility, travel companions, and past experiences determine the preferences of senior tourists. Comprehending these preferences is vital for the tourism industry to cater to this market segment effectively and sustainably. While researchers have extensively examined preferences, there is a lack of research on senior tourists’ accommodation preferences. This scoping review aims to map research trends and provide a future research scope on senior tourists’ accommodation preferences. Methods The updated Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodological guidelines were adopted for this scoping review protocol. The proposed scoping review will be aligned with the methodological framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley, the Population, Concept, Context (PCC) framework, to develop the research questions, and the Theory, Context, Characteristics, and Methodology (TCCM) framework for synthesising, summarising and reporting. Studies indexed in Scopus and Web of Science (WoS) databases published in English from their origin to 2025, irrespective of study location are included. The articles will be screened independently by two reviewers for eligibility. The extracted data will be presented graphically and descriptively. Discussion This scoping review maps the existing literature on senior tourists’ accommodation choices by adopting the TCCM framework. This study will provide future research directions associated with senior tourists’ accommodation preferences. Registration This scoping review protocol was registered with the Open Science Framework (OSF). DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/B64TM Ethics and Dissemination There is no direct involvement of human participants in this study on secondary data; therefore, ethical clearance is not required. The results of this review will be disseminated through journal publications and conference presentations in the future.</ns5:p>