ARTICLE IN PRESS
Tourism Management 25 (2004) 623–636
Tourists’ characteristics and the perceived image of tourist destinations: a quantitative analysis—a case study of Lanzarote, Spain ! Beerli*, Josefa D. Mart!ın Asuncion Facultad de Empresariales, Campus Universitario de Tafira, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, C-1.06, 35017 Las Palmas, Spain Received 3 March 2003; accepted 27 June 2003
Abstract This paper is set in the context of tourism marketing, more specifically in the process of tourist destination image formation. By means of empirical research applied to a representative sample of tourists visiting the island of Lanzarote (Canary Islands, Spain), the influence of tourists’ internal characteristics or personal factors on the different components of perceived image have been analyzed. More precisely the relationships between the perceived image and the tourists’ motivations, their accumulated experience of vacation travel and the socio-demographic characteristics referring to their gender, age, level of education, social class and country of residence are assessed. The results indicate that: (1) motivations influence the affective component of image; (2) the experience of vacation travel has a significant relationship with cognitive and affective images, and (3) the socio-demographic characteristics influence the cognitive and affective assessment of image. r 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Tourism marketing; Destination image; Formation of destination image
1. Introduction Changes in the tourism sector, competition among products and tourist destinations and changes in tourists’ expectations and habits, all means tourist destinations must be conceived as brands that have to be managed from a strategic point of view. From that perspective, brand image plays a fundamental role in the success of tourist destinations, since image, seen as a mental picture formed by a set of attributes that define the destination in its various dimensions, exercises a strong influence on consumer behavior in the tourism sector. First, and based on the fact that tourists usually have a limited knowledge of tourists destinations they have not previously visited, image fulfils an important function insofar as destinations with strong, positive, discriminatory and recognizable images have more probability of being chosen by the tourists (Hunt, *Corresponding author. Tel.: +34-928-451781; fax: +34-928451829. E-mail addresses: abeerli@dede.ul.pgc.es (A. Beerli), jmartin@dede.ulpgc.es (J.D. Mart!ın). 0261-5177/$ - see front matter r 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2003.06.004
1975; Goodrich, 1978a; Pearce, 1982; Woodside and Lysonski, 1989; Ross, 1993). Second, the destination image perceived post-visit also influences tourist satisfaction and intention to repeat the visit in the future, depending on the destination’s capacity to provide experiences that correspond with their needs and fits the image they had of the destination (Chon, 1990; Court & Lupton, 1997; Bigne! , Sa! nchez, & Sa! nchez, 2001; Joppe, Martin, & Waalen, 2001). Furthermore, and insofar as tourist destinations, as settings comprising economic, cultural and social activities, have come to be understood as a product on offer, the public institutions responsible for those destinations see themselves obliged to develop a set of marketing actions that ensure the best possible positioning in a highly competitive market when it comes to attracting tourists. In that context, the definition of a brand image that is strong, coherent, differentiating and recognizable that creates a favorable opinion of the destination is one of the foundations on which to base marketing actions included in any strategic plan (Beerli, 1998). As Kotler, Haider and Rein (1993) suggest that, in order to be competitive, places in general, and tourist
ARTICLE IN PRESS 624
A. Beerli, J.D. Mart!ın / Tourism Management 25 (2004) 623–636
destinations in particular, must be managed from a strategic perspective, with brand image playing a key role in the positioning process (Calantone, Di Benetton, Hakam, & Bojanic, 1989). However, despite the interest aroused by this topic, some authors (MacKay & Fesenmaier, 1997; Baloglu & McCleary, 1999a) contend that thee has been little research about how visitors formulate distinction image. In this paper the extent of the relationship between the perceived image of a tourist destination, tourists’ motivations, the accumulated experience of vacation travel, and the socio-demographic characteristics related to gender, age, level of education, social class and country of residence are examined.
2. Tourist destination image: concept and measure In the tourism marketing literature, various authors point out that tourist destination image is a concept widely used in the empirical context, but is loosely defined and lacking a solid conceptual structure (Mazanec & Schweiger, 1981; Fakeye & Crompton, 1991). Some (Moutinho, 1987; Gartner, 1993; Baloglu & Brinberg, 1997; Walmsley & Young, 1998; Baloglu & McCleary, 1999a, b) tend to consider image being formed by the reasoned and the emotional interpretation of the consumer and as the consequence of two closely interrelated components: (1) the perceptive/ cognitive evaluations, which refer to the individual’s own knowledge and beliefs about the object and (2) affective appraisals, which refer to the individual’s feelings towards the object. From a cognitive point of view, tourist destination image is assessed on a set of attributes that correspond to the resources or attractions that a tourist destination has at its disposal (Stabler, 1995). In the tourism context, and in line with Lew (1987), those attractions are the elements of a destination that attract tourists, such as scenery to be seen, activities to take part in, and experiences to remember. To be precise, the attractions provide the motivations and the magnetism necessary to persuade an individual to visit a determined place (Alhemoud & Armstrong, 1996). From a theoretical point of view, the literature shows consensus about the cognitive component being an antecedent of the affective component and about the evaluative responses of the consumers stemming from their knowledge of the objects (Holbrook, 1978; Russel & Pratt, 1980; Anand, Holbrook, & Stephens, 1988; Stern & Krakover, 1993). In addition, the combination of these two components of image give rise to an overall, or compound, image that refers to the positive, or negative, evaluation of the product or brand. In the context of tourism, Baloglu and McCleary (1999a, b) and Stern and Krakover (1993) show empirically that
the perceptual/cognitive and affective evaluations have a direct influence on the overall image, and also that the former, through the latter, have an indirect influence on that image. The lack of agreement about the conceptualization of perceived destination image has given rise to great heterogeneity in its measurement. As Gartner (1989) points out, there has been much literature about tourist destination image, however, the research has been fragmented and has lacked a theoretical base. A variety of methodologies used to assess image can be identified and, differ (1) in the format of collecting information (multi-dimensional scales, semantic differential or Likert items, free proposal of adjectives and repertory-grid technique) and (2) in the attributes used to assess destination image. Many of these scales are the result of exploratory qualitative studies which identified the important attributes and determinants of the tourist destination image perceived by individuals. These qualitative studies, based on unstructured interviews and focus group, have focused both on the general public and professionals from the tourism sector. Additionally, a review of a promotional material from the tourist destination being studied was, on many occasions, carried out before identifying the relevant attributes. An analysis of scales of perceived tourist destination image (Hunt, 1975; Goodrich, 1977, 1978a, b; Crompton, 1979a, b; Phelps, 1986; Gartner & Hunt, 1987; Calantone et al., 1989; Gartner, 1993; Ahmed, 1991; Chon, Weaver, & Kim, 1991; Fakeye & Crompton, 1991; Gartner & Shen, 1992; Echtner & Ritchie, 1993; Hu & Ritchie, 1993; Walmsley & Jenkins, 1993; Baloglu & McCleary, 1999a, b; Chaudhary, 2000) reveal a lack of homogeneity among the attributes defining individuals’ perceptions. At the same time, it can be observed that in several instances the validity and reliability of the scales were not established, casting doubt on their psychometric properties. Thus of the reviewed studies listed only those of Echtner and Ritchie (1993) and Baloglu and McCleary (1999a, b) had determined the reliability of the scales used. The absence of a universally accepted valid and reliable scale led to the proposition of a incorporating all possible aspects of a destination that are susceptible to use in an instrument to measure the perceived image of a place. To that end, and after a review of the tourist destination attractions and attributes included in the different scales developed in the literature, a number of elements were identified. Those elements, shown in Table 1, have been classified into nine dimensions: natural resources; general infrastructure; tourism infrastructure, tourism leisure and recreation; culture, history and art; political and economic factors, natural environment; social environment; and the atmosphere of the place. The choice of the different attributes used in designing an instrument to measure perceived tourist
ARTICLE IN PRESS A. Beerli, J.D. Mart!ın / Tourism Management 25 (2004) 623–636
625
Table 1 Dimensions and attributes determining the perceived tourist destination image Natural resources
General infrastructure
Tourist infrastructure
Weather Temperature Rainfall Humidity Hours of sunshine Beaches Quality of seawater Sandy or rocky beaches Length of the beaches Overcrowding of beaches Richness of the scenery Protected nature reserves Lakes, mountains, deserts, etc. Variety and uniqueness of flora and fauna
Development and quality of roads, airports and ports Private and public transport facilities Development of health services Development of telecommunications Development of commercial infrastructures Extent of building development
Hotel and self-catering accommodation Number of beds Categories Quality Restaurants Number Categories Quality Bars, discotheques and clubs Ease of access to destination Excursions at the destination Tourist centers Network of tourist information
Tourist leisure and recreation
Culture, history and art
Political and economic factors
Theme parks Entertainment and sports activities Golf, fishing, hunting, skiing, scuba, etc. Water parks Zoos Trekking Adventure activities Casinos Night life Shopping
Museums, historical buildings, monuments, etc. Festival, concerts, etc. Handicraft Gastronomy Folklore Religion Customs and ways of life
Political stability Political tendencies Economic development Safety Crime rate Terrorist attacks Prices
Natural environment
Social environment
Atmosphere of the place
Beauty of the scenery Beauty of the cities and towns Cleanliness Overcrowding Air and noise pollution Traffic congestion
Hospitality and friendliness of the local residents Underprivileged and poverty Quality of life Language barriers
Luxurious place Fashionable place Place with fame and reputation Place oriented toward families Exotic place Mystic place Relaxing place Stressful place Happy, enjoyable place Pleasant place Boring placed Attractive or interesting place
destination image will depend on the attractions that a place has at its disposal, on its positioning as a tourist destination and on the objectives of the assessment of perceived image, which will also determine whether specific or more general attributes are selected.
3. Personal factors influencing the formation of tourist destination image Tourists form an image of a tourist destination after undergoing a process which, according to Gunn (1988), consists of the following stages: (1) accumulating mental images of the destination, thus forming an organic image; (2) modifying the initial image after more information, thus forming an induced image; (3) deciding
to visit the destination; (4) visiting the destination; (5) sharing the destination; (6) returning home, and (7) modifying the image on the experience in the destination. Based on that, the author distinguishes two types of image, organic and induced. The organic image is based on non-commercial sources of information, such as news about the destination in the mass media, information received and opinions of friends and relatives. The induced image is based on commercial sources of information, such as different forms of advertising and information from travel agents and tour operators. Following the model proposed by Stern and Krakover (1993), the formation of destination image is influenced not only by the information obtained from different sources, but also by the characteristics of the
ARTICLE IN PRESS 626
A. Beerli, J.D. Mart!ın / Tourism Management 25 (2004) 623–636
individual. According to that model, the characteristics of both the information and the individual affect the interrelationships between the perceived stimuli of the environment, giving rise to a compound image. This system reflects the cognitive organization that filters the perception. This work analyzes the influence that personal characteristics or internal factors have on the formation of tourist destination image, since, as Um and Crompton (1990) state, beliefs about the attributes of a destination are formed by individuals being exposed to external stimuli, but the nature of those beliefs will vary depending on the internal factors of the individuals. Therefore, the perceived image of a destination will be formed through the image projected by the destination and the individuals’ own needs, motivations, prior knowledge, preferences and other personal characteristics. In that way, the individuals build their own mental picture of the tourist destination which gives rise to their own, personal perceived images (Ashworth & Voogd, 1990; Gartner, 1993; Bramwell & Rawding, 1996). From the perspective of consumer behavior, personal factors refer to socio-demographic characteristics of the individuals (gender, age, level of education, family life cycle, social class, place of residence, etc.) as well as those of a psychological nature (motivations, values, personality, life style, etc.). Those personal factors affect the individual’s cognitive organization or evaluations of stimuli and therefore also influence the perceptions of the environment and the resulting image. Following the model proposed by Um and Crompton (1992), the internal factors include the tourists’ motivations, taken to be the benefits and advantages sought by individuals when they decide to make a vacation trip. 3.1. Motivations From a general point of view, motivation refers to a need that drives an individual to act in a certain way to achieve to the desired satisfaction. When individuals take the decision to travel for leisure, they do so for different reasons or motives, understood as forces that reduce the state of tension. Fodness (1994) argues that motivation theory describes a dynamic process of internal psychological factors (needs, wishes and objectives) that generate an uncomfortable level of tension in the mind and body of a person. Those internal needs and the resulting tension lead individuals to act to reduce the tension and thus satisfy their needs. Gartner (1993), Dann (1996) and Baloglu (1997) suggest that motivations exercise a direct influence on the affective component of the image. Insofar as affective images refer to the feelings aroused by a place, people with different motives may assess a tourist destination in
similar ways if they perceive that the destination provides them with the sought after benefits. Baloglu and McCleary (1999a) attempted to empirically check the relationship between tourists’ sociopsychological motivations, the affective, and overall destination image, and found a moderate relationship, since only one of the five factors explaining tourists’ motivations was directly and significantly related to the affective image of the destination. However, they point out that their findings should be assessed with caution, due to the fact that their sample displayed homogeneous characteristics. 3.2. Experience of vacation travel Past travel experience may also influence the post-visit perceived image of the destination, since, as Schreyer, Lime and Willams (1984) suggest, present situations are interpreted in comparison with past experiences, due to the connection between information coming from past experiences and the subjective interpretation of a leisure trip. In the tourism context, past experience may be more important than information obtained from external sources (Mazursky, 1989), since individuals tend to place more weight on their past experience than on information from external sources. This is because, when there is past experience, the need to receive information from external sources becomes weaker. 3.3. Socio-demographic characteristics Many models of the decision process in the choice of tourist destination (e.g. Woodside & Lysonski, 1989; Um & Crompton, 1990; Stabler, 1995) show that the individuals’ personal characteristics, such as gender, age, occupation, education and social class, are internal inputs that influence the perceptions of places. Perception, understood as the process through which an individual selects, organizes and interprets incoming information in order to create an image not only depends on a specific stimuli, but also on stimuli more generally related to the environment and the individual’s own characteristics and circumstances. Consequently, perceptive processes related to selective attention, distortion and retention vary from person to person (Kotler, Ca! mara, Grande, & Cruz, 2000). Individuals perceive stimuli through the senses, which have a practically identical capacity except in the case of sensorial deficiencies, but the attention, organization and interpretation of the information captured by the senses is completely personal and subjective (Azpiazu Cuenca, 1997). When Walmsley and Jenkins (1993) studied the perceived image of different tourist resorts in Australia, they found that the image of some places differed depending on the visitor’s gender and age. On the other
ARTICLE IN PRESS A. Beerli, J.D. Mart!ın / Tourism Management 25 (2004) 623–636
hand the study carried out by Baloglu (1997), which analyzed the image of the USA among German tourists, found no statistically significant relationships between the perceived image and the demographic variables of gender, income and education. However, the tourists’ marital status, age and occupation influenced the perceived image, albeit moderately, since statistically significant differences were seen regarding certain factors that explained the image. In a later work, Baloglu and McCleary (1999a) found that an individual’s age and level of education influenced the perceived image of various tourist destinations. Stern and Krakover (1993) analyzed the influence that the level of education had on perceived images of a city and found significant differences depending on the individuals’ level of education. MacKay and Fesenmaier (1997) analyzed how the visual content of tourist advertising material affected the formation of image, and reached the conclusion that an individual’s age and marital status do not affect the perceived image. However, they did find statistically significant differences linked to the individual’s gender and level of income. Chen and Kerstetter (1999), in a study of the image of Pennsylvania as a rural tourist destination, concluded that the tourists’ gender and family status significantly influenced the perceived image. Pearce (1982) argues that tourist destinations are usually associated with a social image, which factor attracts tourists of the same social class. On the same lines, Sirgy and Su (2000) consider that the greater the congruence between a tourist’s self-image and his/her image of visitors to a determined tourist destination, the more likelihood there is of the tourist being motivated to visit that destination. Therefore, although we have found no empirical evidence that has analyzed the relationship between individuals’ social class and the perceived tourist destination image, it is to be expected that there is a relationship between those two variables. Most of the empirical work has attempted to analyze the differences in destination images arising from cultural factors focus on the tourists’ geographical origin. For example Calantone et al. (1989) and Chen and Kerstetter (1999) found a relationship between the perceived image and the tourists’ country of origin. Similarly, Ahmed (1991) found statistically significant differences in the perceived image of Utah among North Americans, depending on the region where they lived. However, nationalities must not be considered synonyms of societies, which develop their own forms of social organization, and the concept of culture refers more to societies than to states or countries of origin. For example, the national boundaries in Africa correspond more to the logic of the colonial powers than to the lines of the cultural division of the native populations. As Hofstede (1994) points out, research into cultural differences between countries should be used
627
with caution, since, although each country has a characteristic cultural model, it may coexist with other cultural models developed internally at regional or community levels, or even externally at a supranational level. Based on theoretical foundations set out above, the following hypotheses about the influence of personal factors on perceived image are as follows: H1 The tourists’ country of origin significantly influences the perceptual/cognitive and affective components of the perceived image of the tourist destination. H2 The tourists’ social class significantly influences the perceptual/cognitive and affective components of the perceived image of the tourist destination. H3 The tourists’ motivations, taken to be the advantages sought on the vacation, significantly influence the affective component of the perceived image of the tourist destination. H4 The tourists’ previous experience of making leisure trips significantly influences the perceptual/cognitive and affective components of the perceived image of the tourist destination. H5 The tourists’ gender (male/female) significantly influences the perceptual/cognitive and affective components of the perceived image of the tourist destination. H6 The tourists’ age significantly influences the perceptual/cognitive and affective components of the perceived image of the tourist destination. H7 The tourists’ level of education significantly influences the perceptual/cognitive and affective components of the perceived image of the tourist destination.
4. The study and methodology 4.1. Research design To carry out this research, 616 tourists to Lanzarote (Canary Islands) were surveyed by means of a structured questionnaire. The sample was taken at random at Lanzarote Airport and a system of quotas relative to the dimensions (gender, age and nationality) was established, with proportional allocation of tourists in each of those dimensions. The distribution of the sample is shown in Table 2. 4.2. Measurement of variables (a) Cognitive image: To measure the cognitive component of image, a 24-item, 7-point Likert scale from the typology of attributes proposed in Table 1 was developed. The items were confirmed in interviews with eight experts involved either professionally or
ARTICLE IN PRESS A. Beerli, J.D. Mart!ın / Tourism Management 25 (2004) 623–636
628 Table 2 Sample distribution Country of origin
%Tourists
ni
Sex
% Tourists
ni
Age
% Tourists
ni
Germany Scandinaviaa Spain United Kingdom Holland Ireland Other countries
29.0 8.6 3.5 42.0 4.3 4.5 8.1
181 54 22 262 27 28 51
Male Female
50.1 49.9
313 312
18–34 35–49 50–64 >65
36.3 31.2 20.8 11.7
227 195 130 73
Total
100%
625
Total
100%
625
Total
100%
625
a
Comprises Finland, Denmark, Norway and Sweden.
(b)
(c) (d)
(e)
(f)
academically with the tourist sector. The items used can be seen in Table 3, which shows the exploratory factorial analysis of the scale. Affective image: To measure this component of image, a 7-point Likert scale was constructed of the two emotional attributes that are needed to adequately represent the affective space of destination image, based on the work of Russel and Snodgrass (1987), Hanyu (1993) and Walmsley and Jenkins (1993) (see Table 4). Overall image: A 7-point Likert scale with one item whose extreme values are very positive/very negative. Motivations: Based on the typology of basic functions proposed by Fodness (1994), a 7-point, 19-item Likert motivational scale was developed (see Table 5). Experience of vacation travel: Measured by means of a 7-point Likert scale with one item that ranged from great experience to no experience. Socio-demographic characteristics: These variables refer to gender, age, level of education, social class and country of origin.
5. Results and discussion Before checking the hypotheses set out in this work, an exploratory factorial analysis was undertaken for the scales referring to the perceived cognitive and affective images, and to tourist motivations with the aim of reducing their dimensions and identifying the determinant factors. At the same time, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were calculated. The results of those analyses are shown in Tables 3–5. Table 3 shows that the Cronbach alphas’ values reported on factors 4 and 5 are low. This could be a consequence of these two factors comprising only three items and Cronbach’s alpha being sensitive to the number of items in a scale. Moreover, factor 4 mixes items related to both the social setting and the environment; and the item ‘‘good infrastructure of hotels and apartments’’ in factor 5 shows a factor
loading below 0.5. However, it was considered suitable to maintain the three items in each factor so that the scale would be coherent with the dimensions and attributes shown in Table 1. In the following sections, the results obtained in the different partial path models that we developed in different ways for tourists visiting for the first time and for those repeating the visit are shown since: (1) there are certain differences between the image perceived by each group of individuals that may affect the results; (2) there are differences between the two groups of tourists in their level of knowledge of the destination and in their motivations depending on whether they had previously visited the destination or not, and (3) it enables validation of the proposed model on two independent samples of tourists. Fig. 1 shows, in a simplified form, a path model that specifies the relationships between the tourists’ motivations and their degree of experience of vacation travel and perceived image. The models for first-time tourists to the destination and for repeat tourists show a relatively acceptable fit to the data according to the measures of absolute fit, except for the w2 value, which may be affected by the sample size. The measures of incremental fit are not at all satisfactory although the AGFI values are close to the acceptance threshold. With reference to first-time tourists to the destination, Table 6 shows that the motivations that have a statistically significant relationship with the affective dimension of image center on the utilitarian function of relaxation and on knowledge. The other two motivation factors related to entertainment and prestige have no significant relationship with the affective image. This could stem from the fact that the motivations related to rest, escape from routine and the alleviation of stress and getting to know new, different places are the most relevant for tourists visiting Lanzarote. In the case of repeat tourists, only the motivations linked to knowledge had a statistically significant negative relationship with affective image (see Table 7). This may be due to the fact that, when tourists make a repeat visit to a destination. The need for knowledge of
ARTICLE IN PRESS A. Beerli, J.D. Mart!ın / Tourism Management 25 (2004) 623–636
629
Table 3 Factor analysis of cognitive image Factorsa
Variables
COG1
COG2
COG3
COG4
COG5
Cronbach’s alpha
Great variety of fauna and flora Places of historical or cultural interest Richness and beauty of landscape Unusual ways of life and customs Interesting cultural activities
0.7294 0.7162 0.6300 0.6186 0.5968
0.1227 0.2385 0.0095 0.2372 0.4143
0.1492 0.0386 0.0409 0.1928 0.2509
0.0468 0.2123 0.0087 0.1644 0.0478
0.1914 0.0160 0.4797 0.0035 0.0989
0.7802
Shopping facilities Good night-life Varied gastronomy Opportunities of sports activities Well-developed general infrastructures
0.0977 0.0425 0.2785 0.2633 0.2653
0.7328 0.7070 0.5844 0.5432 0.5132
0.2041 0.2744 0.0642 0.1243 0.0206
0.0674 0.0490 0.2254 0.1874 0.2284
0.1957 0.1556 0.0472 0.0656 0.2766
0.7455
Luxury Fashionable Exotic A good name and reputation A good quality of life
0.0479 0.1538 0.3958 0.1620 0.0139
0.2349 0.3774 0.0177 0.1858 0.1386
0.7526 0.7063 0.6781 0.5001 0.4780
0.2555 0.0377 0.0022 0.3495 0.4125
0.1576 0.0692 0.0771 0.2800 0.1583
0.7656
Offers personal safety Clean Hospitable, friendly people
0.0478 0.0394 0.3303
0.2256 0.1244 0.0737
0.1174 0.1033 0.1174
0.6716 0.6588 0.6393
0.0946 0.1302 0.0272
0.5636
0.1147 0.0019 0.1254
0.1345 0.1614 0.3546
0.2417 0.0141 0.1192
0.0075 0.2510 0.3615
0.7401 0.6364 0.4777
0.5803
Good beaches Good weather Good infrastructure of hotels and apartments Cronbach’s alpha of the total scale % Variance explained: 55.736 KMO: 0.908 Bartlett: 3835.082 Significance: 0.000
0.8842
a
Note: COG1: Natural and cultural resources, COG2: General, tourist and leisure infrastructures, COG3: Atmosphere, COG4: Social setting and environment and COG5: Sun and Beach. Table 4 Factor analysis of affective image Variables
Pleasant/unpleasant place Exciting/boring place Cronbach’s alpha of the total scale % Variance explained: 78.992 KMO: 0.500 Bartlett: 241.415 Significance: 0.000
Factor AFF
Cronbach’s alpha
0.889 0.889
0.7293
0.7293
new places is comparatively unimportant in the affective appraisal of that destination. Those results lead us to confirm, in a moderate way, hypothesis H1 that the tourists’ motivations, understood to be the benefits sought on the vacation, significantly influence the affective component of the perceived image of the destination. As Tables 6 and 7 show, the tourists’ degree of experience of vacation travel has a statistically signifi-
cant relationship with the environmental and social dimension of cognitive image in the case of first-time tourists, and with the affective dimension of image in the case of repeat tourists. Therefore, we can say that there is a certain connection between the tourists’ previous experience and the subjective interpretation of the present experience. This leads us to confirm, to a moderate degree, hypothesis H2 that the tourists’ previous experience of traveling for pleasure significantly influences the cognitive and affective components of the perceived image. The possible influence of the tourists’ socio-demographic characteristics in the cognitive and affective components of image was analyzed using a ANOVA, checking its significance by means of the F statistic. That analysis was carried out differentiating between the first-time tourists and repeat tourists. The relationship between the gender of the tourists and the perceived image is shown in Table 8 in the case of first-time tourists and in Table 9 for repeat tourists. It can be seen that, for the former group of tourists, there is a statistically significant relationship between gender
ARTICLE IN PRESS A. Beerli, J.D. Mart!ın / Tourism Management 25 (2004) 623–636
630 Table 5 Factor analysis of motivations
Factorsa
Variables
MOT1
MOT2
MOT3
MOT4
Cronbach’s alpha
0.8442 0.8016 0.7121 0.6784
0.0029 0.0836 0.2527 0.0677
0.0706 0.0588 0.0995 0.1825
0.0406 0.2260 0.0502 0.3146
0.7923
0.0142 0.0399 0.0414
0.8423 0.8272 0.8167
0.0288 0.0883 0.1911
0.0232 0.0510 0.0130
0.7944
To seek adventure and pleasure To seek diversion and entertainment To do exciting things
0.1522 0.0126 0.1876
0.1097 0.1001 0.1229
0.8368 0.8253 0.7585
0.1316 0.0950 0.2160
0.7908
Go to places that friends have not visited To tell friends about the experiences on vacation To go to fashionable places
0.1538 0.1997 0.1225
0.0323 0.1974 0.1151
0.0695 0.1197 0.2870
0.8418 0.8008 0.6910
0.7493
To know different cultures/ways of life Intellectual improvement To know new, different places To attend cultural events Rest and relaxation To alleviate stress and tension To escape daily routine
Cronbach’s alpha of the total scale % Variance explained: 68.483 KMO: 0.797 Bartlett: 2779.118 Significance: 0.000 a
0.8068
Note: MOT1: Knowledge, MOT2: Relaxation, MOT3: Entertainment and MOT4: Prestige.
Factors of Cognitive Image Natural/Cultural Resources (COG1)
Infrastructures (COG2)
Tourist Experience (EXP)
Social Setting/ Environment (COG4)
Atmosphere (COG3)
Overall Image (OI)
Affective Image (AFF)
Knowledge (MOT1)
Relaxation (MOT2)
Entertainment (MOT3)
Sun and Beach (COG5)
Prestige (MOT4)
Motivations RESULTS OF FIT MEASURES OF MODEL First-Time Tourists to Destination
RESULTS OF FIT MEASURES OF MODEL Repeat Tourists
CMIN= 210.067 p= 0.000 GFI= 0.921 RMSEA= 0.101 NFI= 0.625 AGFI= 0.866 PGFI= 0.543 CMINDF= 4.567 PNFI= 0.436
CMIN= 197.602 p= 0.000 GFI= 0.895 RMSEA= 0.112 NFI= 0.513 AGFI= 0.822 PGFI= 0.528 CMINDF= 4.296 PNFI= 0.357
Fig. 1. Diagram of the path model of relationships between motivations and tourism experience and perceived image.
and the factors of the cognitive image related to the general and tourist leisure infrastructures, and to natural and cultural resources, although the significance level for the latter dimension was P ¼ 0:06: At the same time,
there is a significant relationship with the affective dimension of image, insofar as women tend to assess the destination more favorably than do men. In the case of repeat tourists, there is a significant relationship only
ARTICLE IN PRESS A. Beerli, J.D. Mart!ın / Tourism Management 25 (2004) 623–636
631
Table 6 Regression weight estimates of the path model of the motivations and experience of first-time tourists Variables
Standardized estimates
Critical ratio (CR)
Variables
Standardized estimates
Critical ratio (CR)
COG1’EXP COG3’EXP COG2’EXP COG4’EXP COG5’EXP AFF’EXP AFF’COG5 AFF’COG4 AFF’COG2 AFF’COG3 AFF’COG1
0.042 0.076 0.080 0.203 0.077 0.042 0.290 0.175 0.246 0.193 0.195
0.777 1.419 1.506 3.872 1.434 0.915 6.526 3.853 5.511 4.322 4.377
AFF’MOT1 AFF’MOT2 AFF’MOT3 AFF’MOT4 OI’AFF OI’COG5 OI’COG4 OI’COG2 OI’COG3 OI’COG1
0.141 0.164 0.024 0.010 0.455 0.236 0.075 0.051 0.056 0.122
3.181 3.700 0.545 0.232 9.522 5.447 1.782 1.187 1.337 2.898
Table 7 Regression weight estimates of the path model of the motivations and experience of repeat tourists Variables
Standardized estimates
Critical ratio (CR)
variables
Standardized estimates
Critical ratio (CR)
COG1’EXP COG3’EXP COG2’EXP COG4’EXP COG5’EXP AFF’EXP AFF’COG5 AFF’COG4 AFF’COG2 AFF’COG3 AFF’COG1
0.114 0.043 0.094 0.086 0.001 0.103 0.170 0.198 0.346 0.191 0.213
1.861 0.693 1.541 1.410 0.014 2.009 3.366 3.914 6.830 3.785 4.208
AFF’MOT1 AFF’MOT2 AFF’MOT3 AFF’MOT4 OI’AFF OI’COG5 OI’COG4 OI’COG2 OI’COG3 OI’COG1
0.105 0.035 0.072 0.091 0.490 0.030 0.031 0.135 0.029 0.122
2.091 0.690 1.419 1.797 8.374 0.594 0.605 2.53 0.568 2.386
Table 8 The influence of the gender of first-time tourists to a destination on the perceived destination image Gender
Male Female F P Eta
N
154 196
Factors of cognitive image
Affective image
Natural/cultural resources
General/tourist leisure infrastructures
Atmosphere
Social setting/ environment
Sun and beach
0.180 0.018 3.568 0.060 0.101
0.184 0.017 3.729 0.054 0.103
0.076 0.045 0.092 0.762 0.016
0.006 0.057 0.356 0.551 0.032
0.122 0.055 0.356 0.551 0.032
with the factor referring to sun and beach, with women once again assessing this dimension of image more positively. Therefore, we partially confirm hypothesis H3 that the gender of the tourists significantly influences the perceived image. The age of tourists significantly influenced only the cognitive dimension of natural and social environment, both for first-time and repeat tourists (see Tables 10 and 11), with the older tourists being those who made a more positive evaluation of this dimension of image. The other dimensions, both of cognitive and affective image, showed no significant differences among age groups, and so hypothesis H4 is only partially sustained.
0.312 0.111 14.890 0.000 0.203
The perceived image of the tourist destination is only partially influenced by the level of education, since this variable has a significant effect only on the affective dimension of image (see Tables 12 and 13) and, the higher the level of education is, the lower the evaluation of this dimension of image. However, in the case of first-time tourists to the destination, the significance level in the relationship between level of education and affective image is P ¼ 0:094: On the basis of those results hypothesis H5 is only partly supported. The social class of first-time tourists to the destination has a significant relationship with the factor of cognitive image that relates to natural and cultural
ARTICLE IN PRESS A. Beerli, J.D. Mart!ın / Tourism Management 25 (2004) 623–636
632
Table 9 The influence of the gender of repeat tourists on the perceived destination image Gender
Male Female F P Eta
N
137 129
Factors of cognitive image
Affective image
Natural/cultural resources
General/tourist leisure infrastructures
Atmosphere
Social setting/ environment
Sun and beach
0.176 0.000 1.998 0.159 0.087
0.061 0.129 0.292 0.590 0.033
0.031 0.126 0.575 0.449 0.047
0.018 0.099 0.881 0.349 0.058
0.005 0.234 4.385 0.037 0.128
0.093 0.104 0.010 0.922 0.006
Table 10 The influence of the age of first-time tourists to a destination on the perceived destination image Age (yr)
16–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–64 65 F P Eta
N
49 113 75 70 32 11
Factors of cognitive image
Affective image
Natural/Cultural resources
General/Tourist leisure infrastructures
Atmosphere
Social setting/ environment
Sun and beach
0.036 0.132 0.054 0.147 0.022 0.697 1.573 0.167 0.150
0.050 0.078 0.315 0.062 0.097 0.228 1.618 0.155 0.152
0.103 0.018 0.145 0.114 0.158 0.340 0.821 0.536 0.109
0.280 0.110 0.187 0.141 0.383 0.023 2.848 0.016 0.199
0.005 0.100 0.065 0.071 0.267 0.040 0.298 0.914 0.066
0.084 0.111 0.091 0.138 0.148 0.205 0.538 0.748 0.088
Table 11 The influence of the age of repeat tourists to the destination on the perceived destination image Age (yr)
16–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–64 65 F P Eta
N
19 47 59 78 48 15
Factors of cognitive image
Affective image
Natural/cultural resources
General/tourist leisure infrastructures
Atmosphere
Social setting/ environment
Sun and beach
0.157 0.141 0.055 0.159 0.161 0.297 0.747 0.589 0.119
0.072 0.167 0.015 0.233 0.017 0.093 0.652 0.660 0.111
0.440 0.104 0.033 0.040 0.066 0.064 0.574 0.720 0.104
0.599 0.095 0.174 0.036 0.036 0.387 2.202 0.054 0.202
0.110 0.132 0.065 0.128 0.178 0.207 0.326 0.897 0.079
resources. As the results in Table 14 show, the higher the social class of the tourists, the lower the score they give to the natural and cultural resources of the destination. However, the relationship between the dimension of atmosphere and social class shows a significance level of P ¼ 0:076: The social class of this group of tourists does not influence the other dimensions of the cognitive and affective images. In the case of repeat tourists to the destination, no statistically significant relationships are seen in any of the dimensions (see Table 15). Therefore, hypothesis H6 is partially confirmed.
0.111 0.051 0.177 0.077 0.190 0.065 0.418 0.836 0.089
The tourist’s country of origin may determine different cultural factors that affect their perceptions on both a cognitive and affective level. The results shown in Tables 16 and 17 reveal that, from a statistical point of view, there are significant relationships between the perceived image and the country of origin. First-time and repeat tourists alike made different evaluations of all the cognitive factors of image, except the natural environment factor, depending on their country of origin. The affective image is similarly influenced by this variable. This leads to a confirmation of hypothesis H7 that the country of origin
ARTICLE IN PRESS A. Beerli, J.D. Mart!ın / Tourism Management 25 (2004) 623–636
633
Table 12 The influence of the level of education of first-time tourists to a destination on the perceived destination image Level of education
No education Grade school High school Lower univ. degree Higher univ. degree F P Eta
N
7 77 140 82 44
Factors of cognitive image
Affective image
Natural/cultural resources
General/tourist leisure infrastructures
Atmosphere
Social setting/ environment
Sun and beach
0.306 0.079 0.051 0.157 0.183 0.869 0.482 0.100
0.177 0.149 0.024 0.150 0.133 0.751 0.558 0.093
0.454 0.104 0.027 0.152 0.014 0.803 0.524 0.096
0.696 0.033 0.084 0.092 0.085 1.324 0.261 0.123
0.284 0.154 0.025 0.193 0.077 0.759 0.553 0.093
0.301 0.129 0.066 0.311 0.014 1.998 0.094 0.150
Table 13 The influence of the level of education of repeat tourists to a destination on the perceived destination image Level of education
No education Grade school High school Lower univ. Degree Higher univ. Degree F P Eta
N
7 65 102 54 38
Factors of cognitive image
Affective image
Natural/cultural resources
General/tourist leisure infrastructures
Atmosphere
Social setting/ environment
Sun and beach
0.461 0.326 0.069 0.103 0.047 1.781 0.133 0.163
0.714 0.091 0.217 0.062 0.122 1.749 0.140 0.162
0.015 0.118 0.187 0.014 0.261 1.307 0.268 0.140
0.256 0.142 0.031 0.031 0.114 0.489 0.744 0.086
0.261 0.101 0.058 0.043 0.340 0.765 0.549 0.108
0.705 0.038 0.337 0.148 0.069 4.114 0.003 0.244
Table 14 The influence of the social class of first-time tourists to a destination on the perceived destination image Social class
High Middle–high Middle Low–middle/Low F P Eta
N
38 71 176 65
Factors of cognitive image
Affective image
Natural/cultural resources
General/tourist leisure infrastructures
Atmosphere
Social setting/ environment
Sun and beach
0.530 0.151 0.045 0.226 5.161 0.002 0.207
0.151 0.121 0.161 0.094 1.859 0.136 0.126
0.093 0.167 0.175 0.029 2.313 0.076 0.140
0.145 0.031 0.011 0.069 0.301 0.825 0.051
0.141 0.113 0.077 0.041 0.095 0.963 0.029
significantly influences the cognitive and affective components of the perceived image of the tourist destination.
6. Conclusions In this study, based within the theoretical framework developed from the existing literature, relationships
0.033 0.060 0.191 0.159 1.997 0.114 0.130
between tourist characteristics and perceptions of place have been analyzed. The results make it evident that tourists’ motivations influence the affective component of image. These results are consistent with those of Baloglu and McCleary (1999a) and suggest that, when there is congruence between the tourists’ motivations and the nature of the destination, the affective image is positively influenced. In this study, it is clear that in the case of a destination in a competitive position regarding
ARTICLE IN PRESS A. Beerli, J.D. Mart!ın / Tourism Management 25 (2004) 623–636
634
Table 15 The influence of the social class of repeat tourists to a destination on the perceived destination image Social class
High Middle–High Middle Low–Middle/Low F P Eta
N
22 58 130 56
Factors of cognitive image
Affective image
Natural/cultural resources
General/tourist leisure infrastructures
Atmosphere
Social setting/ environment
Sun and beach
0.037 0.048 0.111 0.238 0.871 0.457 0.099
0.135 0.046 0.124 0.164 0.528 0.664 0.078
0.300 0.040 0.108 0.043 0.662 0.576 0.087
0.049 0.127 0.088 0.131 0.828 0.479 0.097
0.352 0.172 0.087 0.008 0.819 0.484 0.096
0.168 0.119 0.030 0.211 0.544 0.653 0.079
Table 16 The influence of the country of origin of first-time tourists to a destination on the perceived destination image Country of origin
Germany United Kingdom Ireland Spain Holland Scandinavia Other Countries F P Eta
N
108 136 14 16 21 29 26
Factors of cognitive image
Affective image
Natural/cultural resources
General/tourist leisure infrastructures
Atmosphere
Social setting/ environment
Sun and beach
0.209 0.291 0.130 0.198 0.214 0.606 0.175 5.181 0.000 0.289
0.317 0.004 0.330 0.308 0.005 0.295 0.013 2.643 0.016 0.210
0.408 0.078 0.475 0.509 0.498 0.015 0.315 6.248 0.000 0.314
0.030 0.164 0.101 0.185 0.163 0.254 0.136 1.203 0.304 0.144
0.435 0.183 0.483 0.226 0.076 0.132 0.200 4.630 0.000 0.274
0.367 0.064 0.537 0.369 0.282 0.308 0.238 4.118 0.001 0.259
Table 17 The influence of the country of origin of repeat tourists to a destination on the perceived destination image Country of origin
Germany United Kingdom Ireland Spain Holland Scandinavia Other Countries F P Eta
N
77 130 11 5 8 24 11
Factors of cognitive image
Affective image
Natural/cultural resources
General/tourist leisure infrastructures
Atmosphere
Social setting/ environment
Sun and beach
0.392 0.140 0.220 0.560 0.900 0.087 0.606 4.287 0.000 0.301
0.100 0.287 0.062 1.416 1.430 0.356 0.421 7.309 0.000 0.381
0.453 0.346 0.454 0.688 0.101 0.067 0.110 6.112 0.000 0.352
0.026 0.068 0.115 0.338 0.410 0.035 0.357 0.605 0.726 0.118
0.060 0.144 0.904 0.459 0.388 0.013 0.241 2.266 0.038 0.223
‘‘sun and beach’’, the motivations favorably affecting first-time tourists’ affective image are related to ‘‘relaxation’’ and to a lesser extent with ‘‘knowledge’’. Therefore, it is essential for tourist destinations in a similar position to be oriented towards those market segments whose motivations are those of rest, relaxation, stress
0.145 0.203 0.293 0.199 0.742 0.353 0.384 2.847 0.011 0.249
relief and escape from the daily routine. For repeat tourists, which in the case of the destination studied were 43.2% of the sample, only the motives linked to knowledge negatively influenced the affective image, possibly because the island of Lanzarote is small, both in size and in offer, and does not get to satisfy that need.
ARTICLE IN PRESS A. Beerli, J.D. Mart!ın / Tourism Management 25 (2004) 623–636
Therefore, in sun-based destinations with high levels of repeat visitation, it would be advisable to develop a significant variety of attractions and maintain a portfolio of ‘new’ attractions or activities. Furthermore, the affective image that the tourists have after their visit will influence the messages that they spread by word of mouth. It is necessary that the image projected by the destinations through their advertising possess integrity, since that image forms the customer’s expectations of the destination. Failure to do otherwise ‘disconfirms’ the gap between expectation and evaluation of place. The tourists’ level of experience of vacation travel has a positive and significant relationship with the cognitive image among first-time tourists to the destination and with the affective dimension of the image among repeat tourists. This suggests that the experience accumulated by traveling results in tourists being more tolerant when assessing the destination because they know other realities that serve as points of comparison. Since we have found no other empirical evidence confirming this hypothesis, it would be advisable to make a detailed study of this variable, which, as Yang (1995) states, could be of use as a criterion for market segmentation and selection. Finally, relationships between the affective and cognitive components of image and the tourists’ sociodemographic characteristics were found with reference to gender, age, level of education and social class. The country of origin was the socio-demographic characteristic exerting most influence on the cognitive and affective components of image, both in the case of first-time and that of repeat tourists. This suggests a need to follow different communication strategies dependent on the tourists’ country of origin. However, nationalities must not be considered synonyms of societies, which develop their own forms of social organization, and the concept of culture refers more to societies than to states or countries of origin. Therefore, given the absence of evidence in this part of the research project, it would advisable to study in depth the influence of cultural values on the perceived image of destinations, because they could form a basis for the segmentation of tourist markets. Referring to the design of the research, the causal relationships revealed in our study need to be treated with caution, since its design does not permit us to confirm rigid compliance with the conditions for causality. The proposed relationships are solely those of statistical relationships and a specific model of causality has not been constructed. The items were not tested by any process of qualitative research with visitors to Lanzarote, and hence the items derived from literature may, or may not be applicable to that location. Equally, any generalization of the results is not proven, since the area of research only permits the
635
results to be generalized to the population of our sample and to the tourist destination of Lanzarote, making it advisable both to replicate this research in other settings and to analyze the factors that influence the perceived image in other destinations.
References Ahmed, Z. U. (1991). Marketing your community: Correcting a negative image. The Cornell H.R.A. Quarterly, February, 24–27. Alhemoud, A. M., & Armstrong, E. G. (1996). Image of tourism attractions in Kuwait. Journal of Travel Research, Spring, 76–80. Anand, P., Holbrook, M. B., & Stephens, D. (1988). The formation of affective judgments: The cognitive–affective model versus the independence hypothesis. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 386–391. Ashworth, G. J., & Voogd, H. (1990). Selling the city: Marketing approaches in public sector urban planning. London: Belhaven Press. ! de la Evaluaci!on: percepAzpiazu Cuenca, J. (1997). Modelizacion ! ciones y preferencias. In J. M. Mujica, & S. Ruiz de Maya (Eds.), El comportamiento del Consumidor. Barcelona: Ariel. Baloglu, S. (1997). The relationship between destination images and sociodemographic and trip characteristics of international travelers. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 3(3), 221–233. Baloglu, S., & Brinber, D. (1997). Affective images of tourism destination. Journal of Travel Research, 35(4), 11–15. Baloglu, S., & McCleary, K. W. (1999a). A model of destination image formation. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(4), 868–897. Baloglu, S., & McCleary, K. W. (1999b). US international pleasure travelers’ images of four Mediterranean destinations: A comparison of visitors and nonvisitors. Journal of Travel Research, 38(2), 114–129. Beerli, A. (1998). Imagen exterior. In Gran Canaria Siglo XXI. ! ! Tomo II. Excmo. Cabildo Insular de Diagnostico de Situacion. Gran Canaria: Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria (pp. 1.956–1.980). Bign!e, E., S!anchez, M. I., & S!anchez, J. (2001). Tourism image, evaluation variables and after purchase behaviour: Inter-relationship. Tourism Management, 22, 607–616. Bramwell, B., & Rawding, L. (1996). Tourism marketing images of industrial cities. Annals of Tourism Research, 13(1), 201–221. Calantone, R. J., Di Benetton, C. A., Hakam, A., & Bojanic, D. C. (1989). Multiple multinational tourism positionating using correspondence analysis. Journal of Travel Research, 28(2), 25–32. Chaudhary, M. (2000). India’s image as a tourist destination—a perspective of foreign tourists. Tourism Management, 2, 293–297. Chen, P. J., & Kerstetter, D. L. (1999). International students’ image of rural Pennsylvania as a travel destination. Journal of Travel Research, 37, 256–266. Chon, K. S. (1990). The role of destination image in tourism: A review and discussion. The Tourist Review, 45(2), 2–9. Chon, K. S., Weaver, P. A., & Kim, C. Y. (1991). Marketing you community: Image analysis in Norfolk. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 31(4), 31–37. Court, B., & Lupton, R. A. (1997). Customer portfolio development: Modeling destination adopters, inactives and rejecter. Journal of Travel Research, 36(1), 35–43. Crompton, J. L. (1979a). Motivations for pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research, 6, 408–424. Crompton, J. L. (1979b). An Assessment of the image of Mexico as a vacation destination and the influence of geographical location upon that image. Journal of Travel Research, 17(4), 18–24. Dann, G. M. S. (1996). Tourist images of a destination: An alternative analysis. In D. Fesenmaier, J. T. O’Leary, & M. Usysal (Eds.),
ARTICLE IN PRESS 636
A. Beerli, J.D. Mart!ın / Tourism Management 25 (2004) 623–636
Recent advances in tourism marketing research. New York: The Haworth Press. Echtner, C. M., & Ritchie, J. R. (1993). The measurement of destination Image: An empirical assessment. Journal of Travel Research, 31(Spring), 3–13. Fakeye, P. C., & Crompton, J. L. (1991). Image differences between prospective, first-time, and repeat visitors to the lower Rio Grande valley. Journal of Travel Research, Fall, 10–16. Fodness, D. (1994). Measuring tourist motivation. Annals of Tourism Research, 21(3), 555–581. Gartner, W. C. (1989). Image formation process. In Uysal, & Fesenmaier (Eds.), Communication and channel systems in tourism marketing. New York: Haworth Press. Gartner, W. C., & Hunt, J. D. (1987). An analysis of state image change over a twelve-year period (1971–1983). Journal of Travel Research, 26(2), 15–19. Gartner, W. C., & Shen, J. (1992). The impact of Tiananmen square on China’s tourism image. Journal of Travel Research, 30(4), 47–52. Goodrich, J. N. (1977). Differences in perceived similarity of tourism regions: A spatial analysis. Journal of Travel Research, 16(1), 10–13. Goodrich, J. N. (1978a). A new approach to image analysis through multidimensional scaling. Journal of Travel Research, 16, 3–7. Goodrich, J. N. (1978b). The relationship between preferences for a perceptions of vacation destinations: Application of a choice mode. Journal of Travel Research, Fall, 8–13. Gunn, C. A. (1988). Vacationscape: Designing tourist regions (2nd ed.).). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Hanyu, K. (1993). The affective meaning of Tokyo: Verbal and nonverbal approaches. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 13, 161–172. Hofstede, G. (1994). Cultures and organizations. intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival. Glasgow: Harper Collins Publishers. Holbrook, M. B. (1978). Beyond attitude structure: Toward the informational determinants of attitude. Journal of Marketing Research, 15, 545–556. Hu, Y., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (1993). Measuring destination attractiveness: A contextual approach. Journal of Travel Research, Fall, 25–34. Hunt, J. D. (1975). Image as a factor in tourism development. Journal of Travel Research, 13, 1–7. Joppe, M., Martin, D. W., & Waalen, J. (2001). Toronto’s image as a destination: A comparative importance-satisfaction. Analysis by origin of visitor. Journal of Travel Research, 39, 252–260. ! de Kotler, P., C!amara, D., Grande, I., & Cruz, I. (2000). Direccion marketing. Madrid: Prentice-Hall. Kotler, P., Haider, D. H., & Rein, I. (1993). Marketing lugares. New York: Free Press. Lew, A. A. (1987). A framework of tourist attraction research. Annals of Tourism Research, 14, 553–575. MacKay, K. J., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (1997). Pictorial element of destination in image formation. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(3), 537–565.
Mazanec, J., & Schweiger, G. (1981). Improved marketing efficiency through multiproduct brand names? An empirical investigation of image transfer. European Research, 9, 32–44. Mazursky, D. (1989). Past experience and future tourism decisions. Annals of Tourism Research, 16, 333–344. Moutinho, L. (1987). Consumer behaviour in tourism. European Journal of Marketing, 21(10), 5–44. Pearce, P. L. (1982). Perceived changes in holiday destinations. Annals of Tourism Research, 9, 145–164. Phelps, A. (1986). Holiday destination image—the problem of assessment. An example developed in Menorca. Tourism Management, September, 168–180. Ross, G. E. (1993). Resident perceptions of the impact of tourism on an Australian city. Journal of Travel Research, 30, 13–17. Russel, J. A., & Pratt, G. (1980). A description of affective quality attributed to environment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 311–322. Russel, J. A., & Snodgrass, J. (1987). Emotion and environment. In Stockols, & Altman (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology. New York: Wiley. Schreyer, R., Lime, D. W., & Willams, D. R. (1984). Characterizing the influence of past experience on recreation behavior. Journal of Leisure Research, 16(1), 34–50. Sirgy, M. J., & Su, Ch. (2000). Destination image, self-congruity, and travel behavior: Toward an integrative model. Journal of Travel Research, 38, 340–352. Stabler, M. J. (1995). The image of destination regions: Theoretical and empirical aspects. In B. Goodall, & G. Ashworth (Eds.), Marketing in tourism Industry: The Promotion of destination regions (pp. 133–159). London. Stern, E., & Krakover, S. (1993). The formation of a composite urban image. Geographical Analysis, 25(2), 130–146. Um, S., & Crompton, J. L. (1990). Attitude determinants in tourism destination choice. Annals of Tourism Research, 17, 432–448. Um, S., & Crompton, J. L. (1992). The roles of perceived inhibitors and facilitators in pleasure travel destination decisions. Journal of Travel Research, Winter, 18–25. Walmsley, D. J., & Jenkins, J. M. (1993). Appraisive images of tourist areas: Application of personal construct. Australian Geographer, 24(2), 1–13. Walmsley, D. J., & Young, M. (1998). Evaluative images and tourism: The use of personal constructs to describe the structure of destination images. Journal of Travel Research, 36, 65–69. Woodside, A. G., & Lysonski, S. (1989). A general model of traveler destination choice. Journal of Travel Research, 27(4), 8–14. Yang, M. C. (1995). An exploratory analysis of the travel benefits sought, travel satisfaction, culture shock, and image differences among international tourists on bus tour between Los Angeles and Las Vegas. Michigan: UMI Dissertation Services.