- Email: [email protected]
Nostalgia as travel motivation and its impact on tourists' loyalty
JBR-08090; No of Pages 6 Journal of Business Research xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Business Research
Nostalgia as travel motivation and its impact on tourists' loyalty Aliana Man Wai Leong a,1, Shih-Shuo Yeh b,2, Yu-Chen Hsiao c,⁎, Tzung-Cheng T.C. Huan d,3 a
Faculty of International Tourism and Management, City University of Macau, Avenida Xian Xing Hai, Ed. Golden Dragon Centre, 19° andar, Macau, China Department of Tourism Management, National Quemoy University, 1, University RD., Jinning, Kinmen 89250, Taiwan c Department of Sport Information and Communication, National Taiwan University of Physical Education and Sport, 52-16, Sec. 2, Syuefu Rd., Puzih City, Chiayi County 61363, Taiwan d College of Management, National Chiayi University, 580, Hsin-Ming Rd., Chiayi 60054, Taiwan b
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 1 March 2014 Received in revised form 1 April 2014 Accepted 1 May 2014 Available online xxxx Keywords: Nostalgia Destination attribute Push and pull motivations Supportive behavior Future visit intention Loyalty
a b s t r a c t This study examines associations among push and pull motives for travel in the context of Macau. As a cultural tourism destination, Macau possesses attributes that can meet tourists' need for nostalgia. Individuals high in nostalgia are attracted to Macau's historical and heritage pull attributes. However, in order to create loyalty, these pull attributes must also provide opportunities for family members or friends to bond. The study examines pull motives holistically and individually. The results indicate that while holistic examination of motives better predicts future intentions to visit, individual examination provides details that can help in understanding the interaction among different push and pull motives to visit a destination. © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Successful marketing of a tourism destination depends on a thorough understanding of tourists' motivations and their impact on subsequent behavioral intentions. The multifaceted nature of tourists (Dellaert, Ettema, & Lindh, 1998) makes the task of understanding the relationship between motivations and behavioral intentions difficult and complex. Because destinations often possess multiple attributes, tourists' motivations cannot be inferred simply based on the destination or activity chosen (McKercher & Chan, 2005). For example, a religious site with beautiful scenery may attract both religious and secular tourists (Shuo, Ryan, & Liu, 2009). To understand tourists' motivations, therefore, the researcher must examine both individuals' intrinsic desires and destinations' unique attributes (Ryan, Shuo, & Huan, 2010), also known as push and pull motivations, respectively (Yoon & Uysal, 2005). This study seeks to understand tourists' motivations in a specific market segment, namely culture and heritage tourism. Furthermore, this study focuses on tourists with nostalgically-triggered motivation to travel to the destination.
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +886 933359178. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A.M.W. Leong), [email protected] (S.-S. Yeh), [email protected] (Y.-C. Hsiao), [email protected] (T.-C.T.C. Huan). 1 Tel.: +853 66696651. 2 Tel.: +886 935 989 605. 3 Tel.: +886 916051041; fax: +886 5 2732805.
Nostalgia can be a powerful stimulus that can influence people's behavioral intention (Chen, Yeh, & Huan, 2014). Nostalgia is known to be an intrinsic motivation (Hsu, Cai, & Wong, 2007) that drives the individual to seek some form of remedy for the need to re-live past experiences, the memories of which trigger thoughts and feelings of pleasure and sadness. Understanding the need for nostalgia helps explain tourists' destination choices and how individuals respond to various destination attributes based on this need. This study seeks to understand how nostalgia (a destination choice push motive) affects tourists' responses to destination specific attributes (pull motives) and eventually influence tourists' loyalty. The level of tourists' loyalty is often measured by their willingness or intention to revisit the destination and their supportive behavior for the destination (Oppermann, 2000). Achieving high customer loyalty is a primary goal of almost all businesses, including tourism destinations. Most research uses an integrated technique (e.g., Yoon & Uysal, 2005) to measure motivations and to examine their effects. This study offers a comparison of both integrated and segregated approaches to examine the causal relationship among nostalgia (a push motive), destination attributes (pull motives), and loyalty. Two research models are proposed and compared in this research using structural equation modeling. The objective of this research is to help destination marketers understand how to effectively use nostalgia in their marketing efforts. By comparing results of two different models, this study facilitates the understanding of the impact of nostalgia on behavioral intentions.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.05.003 0148-2963/© 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: Leong, A.M.W., et al., Nostalgia as travel motivation and its impact on tourists' loyalty, Journal of Business Research (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.05.003
2
A.M.W. Leong et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
The geographical subject of this study is Macau which was designated as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) in 2005. Up until late 1999, Macau was the last remaining Portuguese colony in Asia. Four centuries of colonization created a unique local culture from the blending of Macau's indigenous culture with European colonists' cultures. A rich and diverse cultural background is one of the essential components of a destination that can evoke a sense of nostalgia (Yeh, Chen, & Liu, 2012), hence Macau is an ideal subject for this study. 2. Literature review 2.1. Motivation Among the many theoretical constructs that measure motivation are Maslow's hierarchy of needs, Alderfer's ERG theory, Herzberg's motivator-hygiene theory (Ghazi, Ali, Shahzad, Khan, & Hukamdad, 2010), Pearce's leisure ladder (Chuo & Heywood, 2006), Iso-Ahola's escape-seeking dichotomy (Matheson, Rimmer, & Tinsley, 2014), and push and pull factors (Yoon & Uysal, 2005). Despite differences in these theories, all agree that the study of motivation is based on human psychological and biological needs. Understanding motivation can therefore help to advance the understanding of why tourists travel and what they want to enjoy. From an escape-seeking dichotomy perspective (Yoon & Uysal, 2005), a tourist tries to escape mundane life by seeking satisfactory experiences. In the context of this study, nostalgia triggers an individual's desire for authentic cultural experiences to escape their everyday existence (Osbaldiston, 2012). This concept of nostalgia-driven travel allows the study here to adopt a widely accepted model in tourism motivation as its theoretical basis, namely push and pull factor typology. This theory suggests that the individual is pushed by his or her innate motive to travel and pulled by destination-specific attributes in choosing a travel destination (Ryan et al., 2010; Yoon & Uysal, 2005). The focus of this study is on examining the role of nostalgia as a push motive. Among the many travel destinations that can satisfy the need for nostalgic experiences Macau was chosen for this study. The study examines how Macau's destination attributes interact with individuals' nostalgia motive. Motivational research focuses on a wide range of both push and pull motives, and findings from these studies provide an important basis for understanding tourists' needs and wants. The main aim of the study here is to focus on a single type of push motive. Instead of broadening the understanding of tourists' motivations in general, this study seeks to deepen the understanding of one particular type of push motivation (i.e., nostalgia). The findings provide insights into a specific market segment, namely the need for nostalgia segment of tourists, and provide the basis for marketing strategy for enterprises supplying nostalgic products. 2.2. Nostalgia as push motive Nostalgia was originally a medical term used to describe the homesickness of soldiers fighting in a distant foreign land (Chen et al., 2014). The term's usage was later broadened to describe a sentimental longing for something far away, where the distance referred to here is both spatial and temporal (Stephan, Sedikides, & Wildschut, 2012). The temporal distance is not limited to one's own past experiences, but also includes a collective past such as history. This vicarious nostalgia (Merchant & Rose, 2013) is a romanticized way to view a past without personally experiencing it. Individuals with nostalgia tend to seek out objects associated with a longed-for past in order to soothe their feelings associated with thinking about these places and times. These objects take many forms including historical ruins, ancient text, or even old buildings, and represent pull motives associated with destination attributes. Although some pull motives are specifically associated
with nostalgia, this study also includes other generic pull motives. The idea is to see how nostalgia interacts with pull motivations that are not specifically associated with it. 2.3. Destination attributes as pull motive Some research that does not adopt the push and pull typology to study tourists' motivations (e.g., Kim, Borges, & Chon, 2006; Rid, Ezeuduji, & Pröbstl-Haider, 2014) is, nevertheless, valuable to the research here, especially studies that examine situation-specific motives by focusing on one destination or one event. For example, Kim et al. (2006) classify festival participants' motives in Brazil as family togetherness, socialization, site attraction, festival attraction, and escape from routine. Kim and Prideaux (2005) classify motives for inbound tourists in Korea as enjoying various tourist resources, culture and history, escaping from everyday routine, socialization, and social status. Rid et al. (2014) classify motives for travelers to rural Gambia as heritage & nature, authentic rural experience, learning, and sun & beach. Researchers that adopt the push and pull factor typology (e.g., Hanqin & Lam, 1999; Yoon & Uysal, 2005) tend to be quite meticulous in generating lists of pull motives since many attributes often comprise a single destination and researchers are attempting to develop a general theoretical construct. Although this study includes some generic pull motives, the authors do not include an extensive list of pull motives to avoid blurring the focus of this study. This study adopts the light version of the pull motive construct. The list of pull motives for this study appears in Table 1. The pull motives are categorized into four types: historical and heritage attractions (H&H), cultural and cuisine experiences (C&C), rest and relaxation facilities (R&R), and family and friend bonding opportunities (F&F). The first two types of pull motive are specifically related to fulfilling the nostalgic push motive. The other two types are generic pull motives involving attractions or experiences that satisfy relaxation and social needs. Meeting relaxation and social needs are two types of destination attributes most commonly recognized in the literature cited above. 2.4. Loyalty Customer loyalty is often measured by an individual's willingness to repurchase a product, willingness to recommend the product to others (Han, Hsu, & Sheu, 2010), willingness to pay more for the product, actual purchase of a higher quantity of the product, and making the product the first choice among alternatives (Chen et al., 2014). Loyalty is often treated as a one-dimensional construct. For some products, such as restaurants, opportunities for repurchase happen quite frequently. However, the likelihood that an individual will return to the same
Table 1 Pull motives. Factor
Reference
Measure
H&H
Prayag and Hosany (2014) Prayag and Hosany (2014) Kastenholz and Lima (2011) Prayag and Hosany (2014) Yang, Ryan, and Zhang (2013) Prayag and Hosany (2014) Mehmetoglu (2011) Rid et al. (2014) Kim and Ritchie (2012) Hyde and Harman (2011)
Rich heritage and history Interesting architecture Famous historic monuments Cuisine conform to culture of Macau Experience exotic cultural atmosphere Learn about Macau's culture Beautiful resort Sandy beach Entertainment facility such as golf club I can have a good time with my friends/ family in Macau It is safe for my friends/family to vacation in Macau I can create good memory with friends/ family in Macau
C&C
R&R
F&F
Chand (2010) Tung and Brent Ritchie (2011)
Please cite this article as: Leong, A.M.W., et al., Nostalgia as travel motivation and its impact on tourists' loyalty, Journal of Business Research (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.05.003
A.M.W. Leong et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
tourist destination within a short span of time is much smaller. For this reason, loyalty behaviors in this study include supportive behaviors as well as the intention to visit the destination in the future. Supportive behavior is actions taken to benefit the destination, such as positive word-of-mouth communication, encouraging others to visit the destination, and sharing photos of the destination. Future visit intention includes the likelihood of revisiting the destination within two years, revisiting the destination even if the price goes up a little, and making it my first choice of vacation destination. The purpose of the study is to see if and how different travel motives impact loyalty behaviors—and where these impacts are the same or different.
3
M2H2 H&H
M2H4a
M2H1a
M2H4b
Supportive behavior
M2H5a M2H1b
Nostalgia push motive
C&C M2H5b M2H6a
M2H1c
R&R M2H1d
M2H6b M2H7a
Future visit intention
M2H7b
F&F
M2H3 H&H: historical and heritage attraction; C&C: cultural and cuisine experiences; R&R: rest and relaxation facilities; F&F: family and friend bonding opportunities.
3. Research method
Fig. 2. Proposed segregated Model 2.
3.1. The proposed models This study examines the causal relationship between push, pull motivation, and loyalty by using both integrated and segregated approaches. The two theoretical models proposed for this study appear in Figs. 1 and 2. In Fig. 1, four aspects of a destination's specific attributes are combined to measure the pull factor as one integrated, holistic dimension. The study postulates that nostalgia (push motive) positively affects the holistic destination attribute (pull motive)—a combination of H&H, C&C, R&R, and F&F sub-dimensions. Furthermore, both push and pull motives positively affect loyalty. Loyalty indicators are split into two sub-dimensions, namely supportive behavior and future visit intention. The proposed hypotheses follow.
Comparing Model 1 and Model 2 allows the researchers to determine if one model is superior to the other in explaining effects. Based on Model 2, proposed hypotheses are as follows.
M1H1. The greater an individual's nostalgia, the more positive its affect on the individual's response to the holistic destination attribute.
M2H4. High versus low H&H affects an individual's commitment to supportive behavior of the destination (M2H4a) and future visit intention (M2H4b).
M1H2. The greater an individual's nostalgia, the more positive its affect on the individual's commitment to supportive behavior of the destination. M1H3. The greater an individual's nostalgia, the more positive its affect on the individual's future visit intention. M1H4. The stronger the holistic destination attribute, the more positive its affect on the individual's commitment to supportive behavior of the destination. M1H5. The stronger the holistic destination attribute, the more positive its affect on the individual's future visit intention. The second proposed model, illustrated in Fig. 2, measures pull motives individually and examines their contribution to both aspects of loyalty behaviors separately. The purposes of this design are two-fold: (1) to determine how nostalgia impacts each of the pull motives and (2) to examine which pull motive is more prominent contributor to loyalty.
M1H2
Nostalgia push motive
M1H1
Supportive behavior M1H4
Destination pull motive
M1H5 H&H
C&C
R&R
F&F
Future visit intention
M1H3 H&H: historical and heritage attraction; C&C: cultural and cuisine experiences; R&R: rest and relaxation facilities; F&F: family and friend bonding opportunities. Fig. 1. Proposed integrated Model 1.
M2H1. High versus low nostalgia positively affects an individual's response to four types of destination attribute, namely H&H (M2H1a), C&C (M2H1b), R&R (M2H1c), and F&F (M2H1d). M2H2. High versus low nostalgia positively affects an individual's commitment to supportive behavior of the destination. M2H3. High versus low nostalgia positively affects an individual's future visit intention.
M2H5. High versus low C&C affects an individual's commitment to supportive behavior of the destination (M2H5a) and future visit intention (M2H5b). M2H6. High versus low R&R affects an individual's commitment to supportive behavior of the destination (M2H6a) and future visit intention (M2H6b). M2H7. High versus low F&F affects an individual's commitment to supportive behavior of the destination (M2H7a) and future visit intention (M2H7b).
3.2. Survey Taiwan and Hong Kong are two major sources of inbound tourists to Macau. Therefore, Taiwanese and Hong Kong tourists to Macau are the focus of the study. The survey was distributed in two locations, the Cathedral of St. Paul (Cathedral) and the airport. Both locations featured the importance of the Cathedral, arguably one of the most significant historical landmarks in Macau. Given that the intention of this study was to investigate the nostalgia motive in a cultural tourism destination, the sites chosen for administering the survey seemed appropriate. The first location, the Cathedral, is a very famous landmark that was expected to draw many potential respondents. Interviewers were required to identify (screen for) Taiwanese and Hong Kong (HK) tourists before conducting the survey. Interviewers were instructed to use a stratified sampling method in an attempt to include an equal number of male and female respondents. Data collection was conducted every Tuesday (Weekday), Thursday (Weekday), and Saturday (Weekend) between 15:00 and 17:00 with the anticipation of collecting 400 responses at the Cathedral. Some visitors to Macau do not visit the Cathedral of St. Paul, and not all visitors to the Cathedral are tourists.
Please cite this article as: Leong, A.M.W., et al., Nostalgia as travel motivation and its impact on tourists' loyalty, Journal of Business Research (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.05.003
4
A.M.W. Leong et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
Interviewers at the second location, the airport, could more easily identify the target respondents' nationality based on the flights on which they arrived. Airport interviewers were instructed to collect 200 responses using the same procedures applied at the Cathedral. Interviewers collected a total of 576 valid responses. Given the number of interviewers conducting the survey at different locations and the relative confusion at these locations, it was not practical to track the exact number of potential respondents approached. Estimating that 800 potential qualified respondents were approached by the interviewers, the response rate was about 72%. Data collection yielded 386 responses from the Cathedral and 190 responses from the airport. The sample included 414 HK tourists and 162 Taiwanese tourists with male respondents slightly outnumbering female respondents, as Table 2 indicates. 4. Data analysis and discussion Data were analyzed by structural equation modeling (SEM) via AMOS statistical software using the maximum likelihood method. SEM is designed to test how well an observed value adequately fits the expected value in the proposed model. Furthermore, this approach allows for analysis of causal relationships among dimensions (Yoon & Uysal, 2005). Each construct was tested (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988) before running the proposed models. For each construct, model fit indices (Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2009; Hooper, Coughlan, & Mullen, 2008), composite reliability (CR) and average of variance extracted (AVE) were examined (Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1993). Based on the consensus of scholars (Hair et al., 2009; Hooper et al., 2008), adequate model fit is achieved when the goodness-of-fit (GFI) and the comparative fit (CFI) indices exceed 0.8, and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) does not exceed 0.08. Chi-square is very sensitive to large sample sizes (Yoon & Uysal, 2005), and therefore is not examined. The value of alternative measures for chi-square ranges from a high of 5 and a low of 2 (Hooper et al., 2008). As for CR and AVE, Fornell and Larcker (1981) recommend that CR should not exceed 0.6 and AVE should be higher than 0.5 to ensure data and construct reliability and validity. As indicated in Table 3, all of the indices met the proposed criteria suggesting that the model fit, and that construct reliability and validity are acceptable. After assessing measurement validity, the structural model is specified and analyzed. Model fit indices were examined for the two models. The results for the integrated model, Model 1, are shown in Fig. 3. Model 1 fit indices were GFI = .918, CFI = .933, and RMSEA = .053. The results for the segregated model, Model 2, are shown in Fig. 4. In Model 2 the indices were GFI = .903, CFI = .910, and RMSEA = .061. The integrated Model 1 scored better model fit indices suggesting that it is a better way to assess the causal relationship among the constructs. The value of Model 2, however, is that it provides specific information regarding how the push motive interacts with individual pull motives. Next, causal relationships were examined. The results offered support for the hypothesized causal relationships in Fig. 1 at a significance level of 0.05. The causal impact of the nostalgia push motive on both types of loyalty behaviors, supportive behavior and future visit intention, is significant with standardized coefficients of .11 (p b 0.05) and .14 (p b 0.01), respectively. Most of the impact of nostalgia on loyalty is mediated by the pull motives. The causal relation between nostalgia (push) and the overall destination attribute (pull) is significant with a standardized coefficient of .29 at the 0.001 significance level. The overall
Table 3 Construct model fit indices. Construct Push Pull
Loyalty
NPM H&H C&C R&R F&F SB FVI
Item
GFI
CFI
RMSEA
CR
AVE
6 3 3 3 3 3 3
.992 .954
.990 .953
.060 .068
.983
.983
.076
.804 .824 .818 .780 .765 .778 .809
.409 .610 .602 .557 .521 .542 .585
NPM: nostalgia push motive; SB: supportive behavior; FVI: future visit intention.
destination attribute has a significant positive impact on both supportive behavior (β = .59; p b 0.001) and future visit intention (β = .58; p b 0.001). Adjusted R2 values provide additional information. The results indicate that nostalgia, a single push motive, explains only 9% of the variance in destination pull motives. Although the list of pull attributes used in this study is not comprehensive, more pull constructs are involved in the analysis compared to the single push construct, nostalgia. Therefore, the overall destination pull motive, in conjunction with nostalgia, explains 39% of the variance in supportive behavior and 40% of the variance in future visit intention. This evidence is consistent with the multidimensional nature of motivation (Reiss, 2012). The composition of the pull motive warrants discussion here. As indicated by the R2 values, F&F is the main component (R2 = .79) of the overall pull motive followed by R&R (R2 = .39). This finding suggests that even though Macau is a famous culture/heritage tourism destination, its ability to provide rest and socializing opportunities are more dominant pull forces. Macau's cultural elements are just a means of facilitating tourists' bonding with family and friends and opportunities for rest and relaxation. The second proposed model is tested and presented in Fig. 4. As indicated by the results, the nostalgia push motive is most effective in terms of contributing to H&H (β = .35; p b 0.001; R2 = .12). An individual with the nostalgia travel motive is more likely to respond to the pull force of Macau's historical and heritage qualities. The H&H construct, however, negatively impacts supportive behavior (β = − .11; p = .074) and future visit intention (β = − .08; p = .209). Although not significant, these negative relationships indicate that historical and heritage attractions alone are insufficient to create loyalty behavior. The most significant contributor to loyalty behavior is still F&F pull motives with standardize coefficients of more than .40 at the 0.001 significance level. This finding raises interesting issues concerning the relationships among the different pull motives and how they individually affect loyalty. In order to address these issues, additional analysis was required. Fig. 5 shows the results of the new version of the model with H&H and F&F as the only pull motives. Model fit indices were GFI = .929, CFI = .931, and RMSEA = .061. As indicated in Fig. 5, nostalgia's causal influence on F&F (β = .22; p b 0.001) is mostly channeled through H&H
.11* R =.09 Nostalgia push motive
.29***
H&H Table 2 Sample characteristics.
Male Female Total
2
R =.30
HK
Taiwan
Total
211 203 414
86 76 162
297 279 576
Supportive behavior
2
Destination pull motive
C&C 2
R =.30
R&R 2
R =.39
.59***
R 2 =.39
.58***
R 2 =.40
F&F
Future visit intention
2
R =.79
.14** H&H: historical and heritage attraction; C&C: cultural and cuisine experiences; R&R: rest and relaxation facilities; F&F: family and friend bonding opportunities. Fig. 3. Testing proposed integrated Model 1.
Please cite this article as: Leong, A.M.W., et al., Nostalgia as travel motivation and its impact on tourists' loyalty, Journal of Business Research (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.05.003
A.M.W. Leong et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
.16***
Table 4 Summary of results.
2
R =.12
H&H .35***
R =.04
.16**
R&R .22***
Model 1
.12* .12*
2
R =.03
.16***
Supportive behavior R 2 =.33
C&C
.21***
Nostalgia push motive
-.11 -.08
2
R 2 =.33 .12*
2
R =.05
.41***
Future visit intention
Model 2
.42***
F&F
.19*** H&H: historical and heritage attraction; C&C: cultural and cuisine experiences; R&R: rest and relaxation facilities; F&F: family and friend bonding opportunities. Fig. 4. Testing proposed segregated Model 2.
(weight = .35 × .45 = .16), thus the direct impact is not significant (.07; p = .185). The researchers, therefore, conclude that nostalgia contributes to F&F indirectly through H&H. Although the impacts of H&H on supportive behavior (.03; p = .624) and future visit intention (.06; p = .285) are not significant, H&H positively contributes to F&F (β = .45; p b 0.001). Furthermore, this modification of the model improves the standardized coefficients of F&F on the two loyalty behaviors from about 0.4 in Fig. 4 to greater than 0.5 in Fig. 5. This means that while H&H does not contribute to loyalty directly, historical and heritage attractions facilitate relationship bonding opportunities making the tourists' experiences more appealing and thus strengthening loyalty. 5. Conclusion Table 4 provides a summary of the findings; the findings indicate that an integrated model is more effective than the model proposals in terms of predicting loyalty behaviors. Additionally, by examining nostalgia's impact on individual pull motives, the study provides better understanding of the interaction among different types of motives. The results of this study make a strong case for attracting tourists with nostalgic motives to visit Macau with its historical and heritage attractions even though nostalgia does not directly impact loyalty. In order to generate loyalty, a destination must provide a place for families and friends to share quality time together. Examining motivations individually provides better insights into segmenting tourists' markets for a particular destination. Limitations of this research offer opportunities for future investigation. The study focuses on the interaction between push and pull motivations. In order to reduce the potential complexity of the model, certain constructs (e.g., satisfaction) were intentionally omitted from the analyses. Future research might reintroduce these constructs to a more refined version of the model developed here. Also, the study focused on only one destination, Macau, as a place for nostalgic tourists to visit. What other destinations might include a nostalgia travel market 2
R =.12
H&H
.03 .06
.35***
Supportive behavior 2
R =.30 Nostalgia push motive
.45*** 2
R =.31 .07
R 2=.23
.54***
F&F
5
.52***
H&H: historical and heritage attraction; F&F: family and friend bonding opportunities. Fig. 5. Testing proposed Model 3.
Future visit intention
Hypothesis
Description
M1H1 M1H2 M1H3 M1H4 M1H5 M2H1a M2H1b M2H1c M2H1d M2H2 M2H3 M2H4a M2H4b M2H5a M2H5b M2H6a M2H6b M2H7a M2H7b
NPM → DPM NPM → SB NPM → FVI DPM → SB DPM → FVI NPM → H&H NPM → C&C NPM → R&R NPM → F&F NPM → SB NPM → FVI H&H → SB H&H → FVI C&C → SB C&C → FVI R&R → SB R&R → FVI F&F → SB F&F → FVI
β
Result .29⁎⁎⁎ .11⁎ .14⁎⁎ .59⁎⁎⁎ .58⁎⁎⁎ .35⁎⁎⁎ .21⁎⁎⁎ .16⁎⁎⁎ .22⁎⁎⁎ .16⁎⁎⁎ .19⁎⁎⁎
−.11 −.08 .16⁎⁎ .12⁎ .12⁎ .12⁎ .41⁎⁎⁎ .42⁎⁎⁎
Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Not Supported Not Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported
NPM: nostalgia push motive; DPM: destination pull motive; H&H: historical and heritage attraction; C&C: cultural and cuisine experiences; R&R: rest and relaxation facilities; F&F: family and friend bonding opportunities; SB: supportive behavior; FVI: future visit intention. ⁎ p b 0.05. ⁎⁎ p b 0.01. ⁎⁎⁎ p b 0.001.
segment and how do they compare to this destination? Finally, the study examined tourists from Hong Kong and Taiwan only. The results might be different if Chinese tourists were to also be included in the study. References Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin 103(3), 411–423. Chand, M. (2010). A cross-national study of motivational determinants among nonresident Indian visitors to religious centers in India. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration 11(1), 22–38. Chen, H. -B., Yeh, S. -S., & Huan, T. -C. (2014). Nostalgic emotion, experiential value, brand image, and consumption intentions of customers of nostalgic-themed restaurants. Journal of Business Research 67(3), 354–360. Chuo, H. -Y., & Heywood, J. L. (2006). Theme park visitors' dynamic motivations. In J. S. Chen (Ed.), Advances in hospitality and leisure. Vol. 2. (pp. 73–90). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Dellaert, B. G. C., Ettema, D. F., & Lindh, C. (1998). Multi-faceted tourist travel decisions: A constraint-based conceptual framework to describe tourists' sequential choices of travel components. Tourism Management 19(4), 313–320. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research 18(3), 382–388. Ghazi, S. R., Ali, R., Shahzad, S., Khan, M. S., & Hukamdad, M. (2010). Parental involvement in children academic motivation. Asian Social Science 6(4), 93–99. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall. Han, H., Hsu, L. T., & Sheu, C. (2010). Application of the theory of planned behavior to green hotel choice: Testing the effect of environmental friendly activities. Tourism Management 31(3), 325–334. Hanqin, Z. Q., & Lam, T. (1999). An analysis of Mainland Chinese visitors' motivations to visit Hong Kong. Tourism Management 20(5), 587–594. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. The Electronic Journal of Business Methods 6(1), 53–60. Hsu, C. H. C., Cai, L. A., & Wong, K. K. F. (2007). A model of senior tourism motivations— Anecdotes from Beijing and Shanghai. Tourism Management 28(5), 1262–1273. Hyde, K. F., & Harman, S. (2011). Motives for a secular pilgrimage to the Gallipoli battlefields. Tourism Management 32(6), 1343–1351. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: User's reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software International. Kastenholz, E., & Lima, J. (2011). The integral rural tourism experience from the tourist s point of view: A qualitative analysis of its nature and meaning. Tourism & Management Studies 7, 62–74. Kim, H., Borges, M. C., & Chon, J. (2006). Impacts of environmental values on tourism motivation: The case of FICA, Brazil. Tourism Management 27(5), 957–967. Kim, S. S., & Prideaux, B. (2005). Marketing implications arising from a comparative study of international pleasure tourist motivations and other travel-related characteristics of visitors to Korea. Tourism Management 26(3), 347–357.
Please cite this article as: Leong, A.M.W., et al., Nostalgia as travel motivation and its impact on tourists' loyalty, Journal of Business Research (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.05.003
6
A.M.W. Leong et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
Kim, J. H., & Ritchie, B. W. (2012). Motivation-based typology: An empirical study of golf tourists. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research 36(2), 251–280. Matheson, C. M., Rimmer, R., & Tinsley, R. (2014). Spiritual attitudes and visitor motivations at the Beltane Fire Festival, Edinburgh. Tourism Management 44, 16–33. McKercher, B., & Chan, A. (2005). How special is special interest tourism? Journal of Travel Research 44(1), 21–31. Mehmetoglu, M. (2011). Examining the relationship between push and pull factors through partial least-squares path modeling. In J. S. Chen (Ed.), Advances in hospitality and leisure. vol. 7. (pp. 153–171). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Merchant, A., & Rose, G. M. (2013). Effects of advertising-evoked vicarious nostalgia on brand heritage. Journal of Business Research 66(12), 2619–2625. Oppermann, M. (2000). Tourism destination loyalty. Journal of Travel Research 39(1), 78–84. Osbaldiston, N. (2012). Seeking authenticity in place, culture, and the self: The great urban escape. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Prayag, G., & Hosany, S. (2014). When Middle East meets West: Understanding the motives and perceptions of young tourists from United Arab Emirates. Tourism Management 40, 35–45. Reiss, S. (2012). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Teaching of Psychology 39(2), 152–156. Rid, W., Ezeuduji, I. O., & Pröbstl-Haider, U. (2014). Segmentation by motivation for rural tourism activities in The Gambia. Tourism Management 40, 102–116.
Ryan, C., Shuo, Y. S., & Huan, T. -C. (2010). Theme parks and a structural equation model of determinants of visitor satisfaction—Janfusan Fancyworld, Taiwan. Journal of Vacation Marketing 16(3), 185–199. Shuo, Y. S., Ryan, C., & Liu, G. (2009). Taoism, temples and tourists: The case of Mazu pilgrimage tourism. Tourism Management 30(4), 581–588. Stephan, E., Sedikides, C., & Wildschut, T. (2012). Mental travel into the past: Differentiating recollections of nostalgic, ordinary, and positive events. European Journal of Social Psychology 42(3), 290–298. Tung, V. W. S., & Brent Ritchie, J. R. (2011). Exploring the essence of memorable tourism experiences. Annals of Tourism Research 38(4), 1367–1386. Yang, J., Ryan, C., & Zhang, L. (2013). Ethnic minority tourism in China—Han perspectives of Tuva figures in a landscape. Tourism Management 36, 45–56. Yeh, S. -S., Chen, C., & Liu, Y. -C. (2012). Nostalgic emotion, experiential value, destination image, and place attachment of cultural tourists. In J. S. Chen (Ed.), Advances in hospitality and leisure. Vol. 8. (pp. 167–187). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction on destination loyalty: A structural model. Tourism Management 26(1), 45–56.
Please cite this article as: Leong, A.M.W., et al., Nostalgia as travel motivation and its impact on tourists' loyalty, Journal of Business Research (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.05.003
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Business Research
Nostalgia as travel motivation and its impact on tourists' loyalty Aliana Man Wai Leong a,1, Shih-Shuo Yeh b,2, Yu-Chen Hsiao c,⁎, Tzung-Cheng T.C. Huan d,3 a
Faculty of International Tourism and Management, City University of Macau, Avenida Xian Xing Hai, Ed. Golden Dragon Centre, 19° andar, Macau, China Department of Tourism Management, National Quemoy University, 1, University RD., Jinning, Kinmen 89250, Taiwan c Department of Sport Information and Communication, National Taiwan University of Physical Education and Sport, 52-16, Sec. 2, Syuefu Rd., Puzih City, Chiayi County 61363, Taiwan d College of Management, National Chiayi University, 580, Hsin-Ming Rd., Chiayi 60054, Taiwan b
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 1 March 2014 Received in revised form 1 April 2014 Accepted 1 May 2014 Available online xxxx Keywords: Nostalgia Destination attribute Push and pull motivations Supportive behavior Future visit intention Loyalty
a b s t r a c t This study examines associations among push and pull motives for travel in the context of Macau. As a cultural tourism destination, Macau possesses attributes that can meet tourists' need for nostalgia. Individuals high in nostalgia are attracted to Macau's historical and heritage pull attributes. However, in order to create loyalty, these pull attributes must also provide opportunities for family members or friends to bond. The study examines pull motives holistically and individually. The results indicate that while holistic examination of motives better predicts future intentions to visit, individual examination provides details that can help in understanding the interaction among different push and pull motives to visit a destination. © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Successful marketing of a tourism destination depends on a thorough understanding of tourists' motivations and their impact on subsequent behavioral intentions. The multifaceted nature of tourists (Dellaert, Ettema, & Lindh, 1998) makes the task of understanding the relationship between motivations and behavioral intentions difficult and complex. Because destinations often possess multiple attributes, tourists' motivations cannot be inferred simply based on the destination or activity chosen (McKercher & Chan, 2005). For example, a religious site with beautiful scenery may attract both religious and secular tourists (Shuo, Ryan, & Liu, 2009). To understand tourists' motivations, therefore, the researcher must examine both individuals' intrinsic desires and destinations' unique attributes (Ryan, Shuo, & Huan, 2010), also known as push and pull motivations, respectively (Yoon & Uysal, 2005). This study seeks to understand tourists' motivations in a specific market segment, namely culture and heritage tourism. Furthermore, this study focuses on tourists with nostalgically-triggered motivation to travel to the destination.
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +886 933359178. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A.M.W. Leong), [email protected] (S.-S. Yeh), [email protected] (Y.-C. Hsiao), [email protected] (T.-C.T.C. Huan). 1 Tel.: +853 66696651. 2 Tel.: +886 935 989 605. 3 Tel.: +886 916051041; fax: +886 5 2732805.
Nostalgia can be a powerful stimulus that can influence people's behavioral intention (Chen, Yeh, & Huan, 2014). Nostalgia is known to be an intrinsic motivation (Hsu, Cai, & Wong, 2007) that drives the individual to seek some form of remedy for the need to re-live past experiences, the memories of which trigger thoughts and feelings of pleasure and sadness. Understanding the need for nostalgia helps explain tourists' destination choices and how individuals respond to various destination attributes based on this need. This study seeks to understand how nostalgia (a destination choice push motive) affects tourists' responses to destination specific attributes (pull motives) and eventually influence tourists' loyalty. The level of tourists' loyalty is often measured by their willingness or intention to revisit the destination and their supportive behavior for the destination (Oppermann, 2000). Achieving high customer loyalty is a primary goal of almost all businesses, including tourism destinations. Most research uses an integrated technique (e.g., Yoon & Uysal, 2005) to measure motivations and to examine their effects. This study offers a comparison of both integrated and segregated approaches to examine the causal relationship among nostalgia (a push motive), destination attributes (pull motives), and loyalty. Two research models are proposed and compared in this research using structural equation modeling. The objective of this research is to help destination marketers understand how to effectively use nostalgia in their marketing efforts. By comparing results of two different models, this study facilitates the understanding of the impact of nostalgia on behavioral intentions.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.05.003 0148-2963/© 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: Leong, A.M.W., et al., Nostalgia as travel motivation and its impact on tourists' loyalty, Journal of Business Research (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.05.003
2
A.M.W. Leong et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
The geographical subject of this study is Macau which was designated as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) in 2005. Up until late 1999, Macau was the last remaining Portuguese colony in Asia. Four centuries of colonization created a unique local culture from the blending of Macau's indigenous culture with European colonists' cultures. A rich and diverse cultural background is one of the essential components of a destination that can evoke a sense of nostalgia (Yeh, Chen, & Liu, 2012), hence Macau is an ideal subject for this study. 2. Literature review 2.1. Motivation Among the many theoretical constructs that measure motivation are Maslow's hierarchy of needs, Alderfer's ERG theory, Herzberg's motivator-hygiene theory (Ghazi, Ali, Shahzad, Khan, & Hukamdad, 2010), Pearce's leisure ladder (Chuo & Heywood, 2006), Iso-Ahola's escape-seeking dichotomy (Matheson, Rimmer, & Tinsley, 2014), and push and pull factors (Yoon & Uysal, 2005). Despite differences in these theories, all agree that the study of motivation is based on human psychological and biological needs. Understanding motivation can therefore help to advance the understanding of why tourists travel and what they want to enjoy. From an escape-seeking dichotomy perspective (Yoon & Uysal, 2005), a tourist tries to escape mundane life by seeking satisfactory experiences. In the context of this study, nostalgia triggers an individual's desire for authentic cultural experiences to escape their everyday existence (Osbaldiston, 2012). This concept of nostalgia-driven travel allows the study here to adopt a widely accepted model in tourism motivation as its theoretical basis, namely push and pull factor typology. This theory suggests that the individual is pushed by his or her innate motive to travel and pulled by destination-specific attributes in choosing a travel destination (Ryan et al., 2010; Yoon & Uysal, 2005). The focus of this study is on examining the role of nostalgia as a push motive. Among the many travel destinations that can satisfy the need for nostalgic experiences Macau was chosen for this study. The study examines how Macau's destination attributes interact with individuals' nostalgia motive. Motivational research focuses on a wide range of both push and pull motives, and findings from these studies provide an important basis for understanding tourists' needs and wants. The main aim of the study here is to focus on a single type of push motive. Instead of broadening the understanding of tourists' motivations in general, this study seeks to deepen the understanding of one particular type of push motivation (i.e., nostalgia). The findings provide insights into a specific market segment, namely the need for nostalgia segment of tourists, and provide the basis for marketing strategy for enterprises supplying nostalgic products. 2.2. Nostalgia as push motive Nostalgia was originally a medical term used to describe the homesickness of soldiers fighting in a distant foreign land (Chen et al., 2014). The term's usage was later broadened to describe a sentimental longing for something far away, where the distance referred to here is both spatial and temporal (Stephan, Sedikides, & Wildschut, 2012). The temporal distance is not limited to one's own past experiences, but also includes a collective past such as history. This vicarious nostalgia (Merchant & Rose, 2013) is a romanticized way to view a past without personally experiencing it. Individuals with nostalgia tend to seek out objects associated with a longed-for past in order to soothe their feelings associated with thinking about these places and times. These objects take many forms including historical ruins, ancient text, or even old buildings, and represent pull motives associated with destination attributes. Although some pull motives are specifically associated
with nostalgia, this study also includes other generic pull motives. The idea is to see how nostalgia interacts with pull motivations that are not specifically associated with it. 2.3. Destination attributes as pull motive Some research that does not adopt the push and pull typology to study tourists' motivations (e.g., Kim, Borges, & Chon, 2006; Rid, Ezeuduji, & Pröbstl-Haider, 2014) is, nevertheless, valuable to the research here, especially studies that examine situation-specific motives by focusing on one destination or one event. For example, Kim et al. (2006) classify festival participants' motives in Brazil as family togetherness, socialization, site attraction, festival attraction, and escape from routine. Kim and Prideaux (2005) classify motives for inbound tourists in Korea as enjoying various tourist resources, culture and history, escaping from everyday routine, socialization, and social status. Rid et al. (2014) classify motives for travelers to rural Gambia as heritage & nature, authentic rural experience, learning, and sun & beach. Researchers that adopt the push and pull factor typology (e.g., Hanqin & Lam, 1999; Yoon & Uysal, 2005) tend to be quite meticulous in generating lists of pull motives since many attributes often comprise a single destination and researchers are attempting to develop a general theoretical construct. Although this study includes some generic pull motives, the authors do not include an extensive list of pull motives to avoid blurring the focus of this study. This study adopts the light version of the pull motive construct. The list of pull motives for this study appears in Table 1. The pull motives are categorized into four types: historical and heritage attractions (H&H), cultural and cuisine experiences (C&C), rest and relaxation facilities (R&R), and family and friend bonding opportunities (F&F). The first two types of pull motive are specifically related to fulfilling the nostalgic push motive. The other two types are generic pull motives involving attractions or experiences that satisfy relaxation and social needs. Meeting relaxation and social needs are two types of destination attributes most commonly recognized in the literature cited above. 2.4. Loyalty Customer loyalty is often measured by an individual's willingness to repurchase a product, willingness to recommend the product to others (Han, Hsu, & Sheu, 2010), willingness to pay more for the product, actual purchase of a higher quantity of the product, and making the product the first choice among alternatives (Chen et al., 2014). Loyalty is often treated as a one-dimensional construct. For some products, such as restaurants, opportunities for repurchase happen quite frequently. However, the likelihood that an individual will return to the same
Table 1 Pull motives. Factor
Reference
Measure
H&H
Prayag and Hosany (2014) Prayag and Hosany (2014) Kastenholz and Lima (2011) Prayag and Hosany (2014) Yang, Ryan, and Zhang (2013) Prayag and Hosany (2014) Mehmetoglu (2011) Rid et al. (2014) Kim and Ritchie (2012) Hyde and Harman (2011)
Rich heritage and history Interesting architecture Famous historic monuments Cuisine conform to culture of Macau Experience exotic cultural atmosphere Learn about Macau's culture Beautiful resort Sandy beach Entertainment facility such as golf club I can have a good time with my friends/ family in Macau It is safe for my friends/family to vacation in Macau I can create good memory with friends/ family in Macau
C&C
R&R
F&F
Chand (2010) Tung and Brent Ritchie (2011)
Please cite this article as: Leong, A.M.W., et al., Nostalgia as travel motivation and its impact on tourists' loyalty, Journal of Business Research (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.05.003
A.M.W. Leong et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
tourist destination within a short span of time is much smaller. For this reason, loyalty behaviors in this study include supportive behaviors as well as the intention to visit the destination in the future. Supportive behavior is actions taken to benefit the destination, such as positive word-of-mouth communication, encouraging others to visit the destination, and sharing photos of the destination. Future visit intention includes the likelihood of revisiting the destination within two years, revisiting the destination even if the price goes up a little, and making it my first choice of vacation destination. The purpose of the study is to see if and how different travel motives impact loyalty behaviors—and where these impacts are the same or different.
3
M2H2 H&H
M2H4a
M2H1a
M2H4b
Supportive behavior
M2H5a M2H1b
Nostalgia push motive
C&C M2H5b M2H6a
M2H1c
R&R M2H1d
M2H6b M2H7a
Future visit intention
M2H7b
F&F
M2H3 H&H: historical and heritage attraction; C&C: cultural and cuisine experiences; R&R: rest and relaxation facilities; F&F: family and friend bonding opportunities.
3. Research method
Fig. 2. Proposed segregated Model 2.
3.1. The proposed models This study examines the causal relationship between push, pull motivation, and loyalty by using both integrated and segregated approaches. The two theoretical models proposed for this study appear in Figs. 1 and 2. In Fig. 1, four aspects of a destination's specific attributes are combined to measure the pull factor as one integrated, holistic dimension. The study postulates that nostalgia (push motive) positively affects the holistic destination attribute (pull motive)—a combination of H&H, C&C, R&R, and F&F sub-dimensions. Furthermore, both push and pull motives positively affect loyalty. Loyalty indicators are split into two sub-dimensions, namely supportive behavior and future visit intention. The proposed hypotheses follow.
Comparing Model 1 and Model 2 allows the researchers to determine if one model is superior to the other in explaining effects. Based on Model 2, proposed hypotheses are as follows.
M1H1. The greater an individual's nostalgia, the more positive its affect on the individual's response to the holistic destination attribute.
M2H4. High versus low H&H affects an individual's commitment to supportive behavior of the destination (M2H4a) and future visit intention (M2H4b).
M1H2. The greater an individual's nostalgia, the more positive its affect on the individual's commitment to supportive behavior of the destination. M1H3. The greater an individual's nostalgia, the more positive its affect on the individual's future visit intention. M1H4. The stronger the holistic destination attribute, the more positive its affect on the individual's commitment to supportive behavior of the destination. M1H5. The stronger the holistic destination attribute, the more positive its affect on the individual's future visit intention. The second proposed model, illustrated in Fig. 2, measures pull motives individually and examines their contribution to both aspects of loyalty behaviors separately. The purposes of this design are two-fold: (1) to determine how nostalgia impacts each of the pull motives and (2) to examine which pull motive is more prominent contributor to loyalty.
M1H2
Nostalgia push motive
M1H1
Supportive behavior M1H4
Destination pull motive
M1H5 H&H
C&C
R&R
F&F
Future visit intention
M1H3 H&H: historical and heritage attraction; C&C: cultural and cuisine experiences; R&R: rest and relaxation facilities; F&F: family and friend bonding opportunities. Fig. 1. Proposed integrated Model 1.
M2H1. High versus low nostalgia positively affects an individual's response to four types of destination attribute, namely H&H (M2H1a), C&C (M2H1b), R&R (M2H1c), and F&F (M2H1d). M2H2. High versus low nostalgia positively affects an individual's commitment to supportive behavior of the destination. M2H3. High versus low nostalgia positively affects an individual's future visit intention.
M2H5. High versus low C&C affects an individual's commitment to supportive behavior of the destination (M2H5a) and future visit intention (M2H5b). M2H6. High versus low R&R affects an individual's commitment to supportive behavior of the destination (M2H6a) and future visit intention (M2H6b). M2H7. High versus low F&F affects an individual's commitment to supportive behavior of the destination (M2H7a) and future visit intention (M2H7b).
3.2. Survey Taiwan and Hong Kong are two major sources of inbound tourists to Macau. Therefore, Taiwanese and Hong Kong tourists to Macau are the focus of the study. The survey was distributed in two locations, the Cathedral of St. Paul (Cathedral) and the airport. Both locations featured the importance of the Cathedral, arguably one of the most significant historical landmarks in Macau. Given that the intention of this study was to investigate the nostalgia motive in a cultural tourism destination, the sites chosen for administering the survey seemed appropriate. The first location, the Cathedral, is a very famous landmark that was expected to draw many potential respondents. Interviewers were required to identify (screen for) Taiwanese and Hong Kong (HK) tourists before conducting the survey. Interviewers were instructed to use a stratified sampling method in an attempt to include an equal number of male and female respondents. Data collection was conducted every Tuesday (Weekday), Thursday (Weekday), and Saturday (Weekend) between 15:00 and 17:00 with the anticipation of collecting 400 responses at the Cathedral. Some visitors to Macau do not visit the Cathedral of St. Paul, and not all visitors to the Cathedral are tourists.
Please cite this article as: Leong, A.M.W., et al., Nostalgia as travel motivation and its impact on tourists' loyalty, Journal of Business Research (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.05.003
4
A.M.W. Leong et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
Interviewers at the second location, the airport, could more easily identify the target respondents' nationality based on the flights on which they arrived. Airport interviewers were instructed to collect 200 responses using the same procedures applied at the Cathedral. Interviewers collected a total of 576 valid responses. Given the number of interviewers conducting the survey at different locations and the relative confusion at these locations, it was not practical to track the exact number of potential respondents approached. Estimating that 800 potential qualified respondents were approached by the interviewers, the response rate was about 72%. Data collection yielded 386 responses from the Cathedral and 190 responses from the airport. The sample included 414 HK tourists and 162 Taiwanese tourists with male respondents slightly outnumbering female respondents, as Table 2 indicates. 4. Data analysis and discussion Data were analyzed by structural equation modeling (SEM) via AMOS statistical software using the maximum likelihood method. SEM is designed to test how well an observed value adequately fits the expected value in the proposed model. Furthermore, this approach allows for analysis of causal relationships among dimensions (Yoon & Uysal, 2005). Each construct was tested (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988) before running the proposed models. For each construct, model fit indices (Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2009; Hooper, Coughlan, & Mullen, 2008), composite reliability (CR) and average of variance extracted (AVE) were examined (Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1993). Based on the consensus of scholars (Hair et al., 2009; Hooper et al., 2008), adequate model fit is achieved when the goodness-of-fit (GFI) and the comparative fit (CFI) indices exceed 0.8, and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) does not exceed 0.08. Chi-square is very sensitive to large sample sizes (Yoon & Uysal, 2005), and therefore is not examined. The value of alternative measures for chi-square ranges from a high of 5 and a low of 2 (Hooper et al., 2008). As for CR and AVE, Fornell and Larcker (1981) recommend that CR should not exceed 0.6 and AVE should be higher than 0.5 to ensure data and construct reliability and validity. As indicated in Table 3, all of the indices met the proposed criteria suggesting that the model fit, and that construct reliability and validity are acceptable. After assessing measurement validity, the structural model is specified and analyzed. Model fit indices were examined for the two models. The results for the integrated model, Model 1, are shown in Fig. 3. Model 1 fit indices were GFI = .918, CFI = .933, and RMSEA = .053. The results for the segregated model, Model 2, are shown in Fig. 4. In Model 2 the indices were GFI = .903, CFI = .910, and RMSEA = .061. The integrated Model 1 scored better model fit indices suggesting that it is a better way to assess the causal relationship among the constructs. The value of Model 2, however, is that it provides specific information regarding how the push motive interacts with individual pull motives. Next, causal relationships were examined. The results offered support for the hypothesized causal relationships in Fig. 1 at a significance level of 0.05. The causal impact of the nostalgia push motive on both types of loyalty behaviors, supportive behavior and future visit intention, is significant with standardized coefficients of .11 (p b 0.05) and .14 (p b 0.01), respectively. Most of the impact of nostalgia on loyalty is mediated by the pull motives. The causal relation between nostalgia (push) and the overall destination attribute (pull) is significant with a standardized coefficient of .29 at the 0.001 significance level. The overall
Table 3 Construct model fit indices. Construct Push Pull
Loyalty
NPM H&H C&C R&R F&F SB FVI
Item
GFI
CFI
RMSEA
CR
AVE
6 3 3 3 3 3 3
.992 .954
.990 .953
.060 .068
.983
.983
.076
.804 .824 .818 .780 .765 .778 .809
.409 .610 .602 .557 .521 .542 .585
NPM: nostalgia push motive; SB: supportive behavior; FVI: future visit intention.
destination attribute has a significant positive impact on both supportive behavior (β = .59; p b 0.001) and future visit intention (β = .58; p b 0.001). Adjusted R2 values provide additional information. The results indicate that nostalgia, a single push motive, explains only 9% of the variance in destination pull motives. Although the list of pull attributes used in this study is not comprehensive, more pull constructs are involved in the analysis compared to the single push construct, nostalgia. Therefore, the overall destination pull motive, in conjunction with nostalgia, explains 39% of the variance in supportive behavior and 40% of the variance in future visit intention. This evidence is consistent with the multidimensional nature of motivation (Reiss, 2012). The composition of the pull motive warrants discussion here. As indicated by the R2 values, F&F is the main component (R2 = .79) of the overall pull motive followed by R&R (R2 = .39). This finding suggests that even though Macau is a famous culture/heritage tourism destination, its ability to provide rest and socializing opportunities are more dominant pull forces. Macau's cultural elements are just a means of facilitating tourists' bonding with family and friends and opportunities for rest and relaxation. The second proposed model is tested and presented in Fig. 4. As indicated by the results, the nostalgia push motive is most effective in terms of contributing to H&H (β = .35; p b 0.001; R2 = .12). An individual with the nostalgia travel motive is more likely to respond to the pull force of Macau's historical and heritage qualities. The H&H construct, however, negatively impacts supportive behavior (β = − .11; p = .074) and future visit intention (β = − .08; p = .209). Although not significant, these negative relationships indicate that historical and heritage attractions alone are insufficient to create loyalty behavior. The most significant contributor to loyalty behavior is still F&F pull motives with standardize coefficients of more than .40 at the 0.001 significance level. This finding raises interesting issues concerning the relationships among the different pull motives and how they individually affect loyalty. In order to address these issues, additional analysis was required. Fig. 5 shows the results of the new version of the model with H&H and F&F as the only pull motives. Model fit indices were GFI = .929, CFI = .931, and RMSEA = .061. As indicated in Fig. 5, nostalgia's causal influence on F&F (β = .22; p b 0.001) is mostly channeled through H&H
.11* R =.09 Nostalgia push motive
.29***
H&H Table 2 Sample characteristics.
Male Female Total
2
R =.30
HK
Taiwan
Total
211 203 414
86 76 162
297 279 576
Supportive behavior
2
Destination pull motive
C&C 2
R =.30
R&R 2
R =.39
.59***
R 2 =.39
.58***
R 2 =.40
F&F
Future visit intention
2
R =.79
.14** H&H: historical and heritage attraction; C&C: cultural and cuisine experiences; R&R: rest and relaxation facilities; F&F: family and friend bonding opportunities. Fig. 3. Testing proposed integrated Model 1.
Please cite this article as: Leong, A.M.W., et al., Nostalgia as travel motivation and its impact on tourists' loyalty, Journal of Business Research (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.05.003
A.M.W. Leong et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
.16***
Table 4 Summary of results.
2
R =.12
H&H .35***
R =.04
.16**
R&R .22***
Model 1
.12* .12*
2
R =.03
.16***
Supportive behavior R 2 =.33
C&C
.21***
Nostalgia push motive
-.11 -.08
2
R 2 =.33 .12*
2
R =.05
.41***
Future visit intention
Model 2
.42***
F&F
.19*** H&H: historical and heritage attraction; C&C: cultural and cuisine experiences; R&R: rest and relaxation facilities; F&F: family and friend bonding opportunities. Fig. 4. Testing proposed segregated Model 2.
(weight = .35 × .45 = .16), thus the direct impact is not significant (.07; p = .185). The researchers, therefore, conclude that nostalgia contributes to F&F indirectly through H&H. Although the impacts of H&H on supportive behavior (.03; p = .624) and future visit intention (.06; p = .285) are not significant, H&H positively contributes to F&F (β = .45; p b 0.001). Furthermore, this modification of the model improves the standardized coefficients of F&F on the two loyalty behaviors from about 0.4 in Fig. 4 to greater than 0.5 in Fig. 5. This means that while H&H does not contribute to loyalty directly, historical and heritage attractions facilitate relationship bonding opportunities making the tourists' experiences more appealing and thus strengthening loyalty. 5. Conclusion Table 4 provides a summary of the findings; the findings indicate that an integrated model is more effective than the model proposals in terms of predicting loyalty behaviors. Additionally, by examining nostalgia's impact on individual pull motives, the study provides better understanding of the interaction among different types of motives. The results of this study make a strong case for attracting tourists with nostalgic motives to visit Macau with its historical and heritage attractions even though nostalgia does not directly impact loyalty. In order to generate loyalty, a destination must provide a place for families and friends to share quality time together. Examining motivations individually provides better insights into segmenting tourists' markets for a particular destination. Limitations of this research offer opportunities for future investigation. The study focuses on the interaction between push and pull motivations. In order to reduce the potential complexity of the model, certain constructs (e.g., satisfaction) were intentionally omitted from the analyses. Future research might reintroduce these constructs to a more refined version of the model developed here. Also, the study focused on only one destination, Macau, as a place for nostalgic tourists to visit. What other destinations might include a nostalgia travel market 2
R =.12
H&H
.03 .06
.35***
Supportive behavior 2
R =.30 Nostalgia push motive
.45*** 2
R =.31 .07
R 2=.23
.54***
F&F
5
.52***
H&H: historical and heritage attraction; F&F: family and friend bonding opportunities. Fig. 5. Testing proposed Model 3.
Future visit intention
Hypothesis
Description
M1H1 M1H2 M1H3 M1H4 M1H5 M2H1a M2H1b M2H1c M2H1d M2H2 M2H3 M2H4a M2H4b M2H5a M2H5b M2H6a M2H6b M2H7a M2H7b
NPM → DPM NPM → SB NPM → FVI DPM → SB DPM → FVI NPM → H&H NPM → C&C NPM → R&R NPM → F&F NPM → SB NPM → FVI H&H → SB H&H → FVI C&C → SB C&C → FVI R&R → SB R&R → FVI F&F → SB F&F → FVI
β
Result .29⁎⁎⁎ .11⁎ .14⁎⁎ .59⁎⁎⁎ .58⁎⁎⁎ .35⁎⁎⁎ .21⁎⁎⁎ .16⁎⁎⁎ .22⁎⁎⁎ .16⁎⁎⁎ .19⁎⁎⁎
−.11 −.08 .16⁎⁎ .12⁎ .12⁎ .12⁎ .41⁎⁎⁎ .42⁎⁎⁎
Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Not Supported Not Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported
NPM: nostalgia push motive; DPM: destination pull motive; H&H: historical and heritage attraction; C&C: cultural and cuisine experiences; R&R: rest and relaxation facilities; F&F: family and friend bonding opportunities; SB: supportive behavior; FVI: future visit intention. ⁎ p b 0.05. ⁎⁎ p b 0.01. ⁎⁎⁎ p b 0.001.
segment and how do they compare to this destination? Finally, the study examined tourists from Hong Kong and Taiwan only. The results might be different if Chinese tourists were to also be included in the study. References Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin 103(3), 411–423. Chand, M. (2010). A cross-national study of motivational determinants among nonresident Indian visitors to religious centers in India. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration 11(1), 22–38. Chen, H. -B., Yeh, S. -S., & Huan, T. -C. (2014). Nostalgic emotion, experiential value, brand image, and consumption intentions of customers of nostalgic-themed restaurants. Journal of Business Research 67(3), 354–360. Chuo, H. -Y., & Heywood, J. L. (2006). Theme park visitors' dynamic motivations. In J. S. Chen (Ed.), Advances in hospitality and leisure. Vol. 2. (pp. 73–90). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Dellaert, B. G. C., Ettema, D. F., & Lindh, C. (1998). Multi-faceted tourist travel decisions: A constraint-based conceptual framework to describe tourists' sequential choices of travel components. Tourism Management 19(4), 313–320. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research 18(3), 382–388. Ghazi, S. R., Ali, R., Shahzad, S., Khan, M. S., & Hukamdad, M. (2010). Parental involvement in children academic motivation. Asian Social Science 6(4), 93–99. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall. Han, H., Hsu, L. T., & Sheu, C. (2010). Application of the theory of planned behavior to green hotel choice: Testing the effect of environmental friendly activities. Tourism Management 31(3), 325–334. Hanqin, Z. Q., & Lam, T. (1999). An analysis of Mainland Chinese visitors' motivations to visit Hong Kong. Tourism Management 20(5), 587–594. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. The Electronic Journal of Business Methods 6(1), 53–60. Hsu, C. H. C., Cai, L. A., & Wong, K. K. F. (2007). A model of senior tourism motivations— Anecdotes from Beijing and Shanghai. Tourism Management 28(5), 1262–1273. Hyde, K. F., & Harman, S. (2011). Motives for a secular pilgrimage to the Gallipoli battlefields. Tourism Management 32(6), 1343–1351. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: User's reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software International. Kastenholz, E., & Lima, J. (2011). The integral rural tourism experience from the tourist s point of view: A qualitative analysis of its nature and meaning. Tourism & Management Studies 7, 62–74. Kim, H., Borges, M. C., & Chon, J. (2006). Impacts of environmental values on tourism motivation: The case of FICA, Brazil. Tourism Management 27(5), 957–967. Kim, S. S., & Prideaux, B. (2005). Marketing implications arising from a comparative study of international pleasure tourist motivations and other travel-related characteristics of visitors to Korea. Tourism Management 26(3), 347–357.
Please cite this article as: Leong, A.M.W., et al., Nostalgia as travel motivation and its impact on tourists' loyalty, Journal of Business Research (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.05.003
6
A.M.W. Leong et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
Kim, J. H., & Ritchie, B. W. (2012). Motivation-based typology: An empirical study of golf tourists. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research 36(2), 251–280. Matheson, C. M., Rimmer, R., & Tinsley, R. (2014). Spiritual attitudes and visitor motivations at the Beltane Fire Festival, Edinburgh. Tourism Management 44, 16–33. McKercher, B., & Chan, A. (2005). How special is special interest tourism? Journal of Travel Research 44(1), 21–31. Mehmetoglu, M. (2011). Examining the relationship between push and pull factors through partial least-squares path modeling. In J. S. Chen (Ed.), Advances in hospitality and leisure. vol. 7. (pp. 153–171). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Merchant, A., & Rose, G. M. (2013). Effects of advertising-evoked vicarious nostalgia on brand heritage. Journal of Business Research 66(12), 2619–2625. Oppermann, M. (2000). Tourism destination loyalty. Journal of Travel Research 39(1), 78–84. Osbaldiston, N. (2012). Seeking authenticity in place, culture, and the self: The great urban escape. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Prayag, G., & Hosany, S. (2014). When Middle East meets West: Understanding the motives and perceptions of young tourists from United Arab Emirates. Tourism Management 40, 35–45. Reiss, S. (2012). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Teaching of Psychology 39(2), 152–156. Rid, W., Ezeuduji, I. O., & Pröbstl-Haider, U. (2014). Segmentation by motivation for rural tourism activities in The Gambia. Tourism Management 40, 102–116.
Ryan, C., Shuo, Y. S., & Huan, T. -C. (2010). Theme parks and a structural equation model of determinants of visitor satisfaction—Janfusan Fancyworld, Taiwan. Journal of Vacation Marketing 16(3), 185–199. Shuo, Y. S., Ryan, C., & Liu, G. (2009). Taoism, temples and tourists: The case of Mazu pilgrimage tourism. Tourism Management 30(4), 581–588. Stephan, E., Sedikides, C., & Wildschut, T. (2012). Mental travel into the past: Differentiating recollections of nostalgic, ordinary, and positive events. European Journal of Social Psychology 42(3), 290–298. Tung, V. W. S., & Brent Ritchie, J. R. (2011). Exploring the essence of memorable tourism experiences. Annals of Tourism Research 38(4), 1367–1386. Yang, J., Ryan, C., & Zhang, L. (2013). Ethnic minority tourism in China—Han perspectives of Tuva figures in a landscape. Tourism Management 36, 45–56. Yeh, S. -S., Chen, C., & Liu, Y. -C. (2012). Nostalgic emotion, experiential value, destination image, and place attachment of cultural tourists. In J. S. Chen (Ed.), Advances in hospitality and leisure. Vol. 8. (pp. 167–187). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction on destination loyalty: A structural model. Tourism Management 26(1), 45–56.
Please cite this article as: Leong, A.M.W., et al., Nostalgia as travel motivation and its impact on tourists' loyalty, Journal of Business Research (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.05.003