The recreational trip behavior pattern at destinations correlates with the “distance” from the departure point of the trip. This is regarded as an empirical model of spatial behavior in the literature on tourism (Mercer, 1970; Plog, 1973; Miossec, 1977; Pearce, 1981). According to Plog (1973), tourist behavior at nearer destinations is qualified as “psychocentric, ” and behavior at more distant destinations as “allocentric.” This model certainly represents the average and general tendency of tourist behavior, especially in Japan (Takinami, 1994). If the model is perfect, there should be no exceptions. But in real situations, we observe many exceptional behaviors inconsistent with the model. What elements are related to these unexpected behaviors or behaviors that deviate from the model? Pred (1967) and Miossec (1977) insisted that the deviation can be explained by the actor's insufficient information level and his/her low ability to use information. This paper seeks to examine this interesting hypothesis. The data to be analyzed are trip matrix data collected by the author in an elementary school in Yokohama. The matrix has 338 trips in the row, and 7 tourist/11 behavior categories in the column. First, I quantified every behavior category by putting them on the axis of “distance” (Takinami, 1994). This quantification was executed in order to maintain the prevalent feature of the tourist behavior model: the behavior correlates with the trip “distance.” Second, the coordinate system has the two axes of the ordered destination “distance” and the quantified composite behavior pattern. The lattar variable was prepared by compounding all possible quantified behavior categories responding to a particular trip. In this coordinate system, all trips are plotted, and the model of tourist behavior is shown by the regression line related to all there trips (Fig. 1). Third, based on the measurement of the differences between the regression line and several trip groups (one trip group shows those trips responding to one tourist/behavior category in the figure), the following results were obtained. Proximity to the model or regression line is provided by categories such as ‹higher frequency of travel›, ‹more information about tourism regions›, ‹higher information use ability› and ‹higher economic ability to travel›. Deviation from the model is given by categories such as complete dependence on tourist agency>, ‹sightseeing› and ‹fashion-oriented tourists›. In conclusion, it is noted that the difference between the model pattern and the deviation pattern is sufficiently explained by the elements associated with tourism information: the information level, information use ability and use of a tourist agency, suggesting lower planning ability. Such findings exemplify, to some extent, the validity of Pred's original behavioral matrix.