The Behavioral Consequences of Tourist Experience

Tourism Management Perspectives 18 (2016) 84–91

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tourism Management Perspectives journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tmp

The Behavioral Consequences of Tourist Experience Chien-Hsin Lin a,⁎, Beryl Zi-Lin Kuo b a b

Department of International Business Management, Da-Yeh University, 168, University Rd., Dacun Township, Changhua County 51591, Taiwan, R.O.C. Department of Travel Management, Taipei College of Maritime Technology, 150, Sec 3, Binhai Rd., Tamsui District, New Taipei City 25172, Taiwan, R.O.C.

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 12 December 2015 Accepted 29 December 2015 Available online xxxx Keywords: Taiwan experience perceived value satisfaction MIMIC

a b s t r a c t The study investigates the behavioral consequences of experience in Taiwanese tourist townships. A multiple indicator-multiple cause (MIMIC) approach is applied to conceptualize the construct of tourist experience, a dynamic process in which tourists transform mere exposure of stimulus into a state of flow and positive emotion. The results reveal a psychological process of “tourist experience ➔ perceived value ➔ satisfaction ➔ loyalty intentions.” Perceived value intervenes between tourist experience and satisfaction. Satisfaction is a dominant antecedent of loyalty intentions. Overall, only when perceived value and satisfaction are considered together in the tourist experience model will the nuances of tourist behaviors be understood. Implications for theory and practice are discussed. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Tourist experience and destination choice have become a focus of tourism in both academy and industry. Tourists are value-driven, and the destination itself is a value provider for tourists. The nature and range of tourist experiences offered by a destination determines the destination’s value. Perceived value is a strategic instrument to maintain competitive advantage for destination management organizations (DMOs), and understanding the antecedents and consequences of perceived value of a destination has strategic relevance (Han & Hwang, 2013; Prebensen, Woo, Chen, & Uysal, 2012). Creating value is complex in particular when DMOs cover a large destination. In general, perceived value can be achieved through the enhancement of benefits and/or the reduction of sacrifices. For example, as a destination, Hong Kong is well known for its year-round sales promotions. Meanwhile, the number of tourists to Japan has increased substantially due to the depreciation of the Japanese Yen and tax exemptions favorable to tourists (Kyodo, 2015; Nip, 2014). These examples illustrate the effects of reducing perceived monetary costs at a national level. However, more local destinations can hardly compete with such aggressively strategic tools. For example, to encourage tourists to engage in an in-depth experiential tour, the Taiwan Tourism Bureau selected its “Top 10 small tourist townships” to promote the most featured areas within each city (Taiwan Tourism Bureau, 2012a), such that participating townships compete with each other for tourists based on an enjoyable experience.

The appeal to experience is consistent with the shift toward an experience economy (Pine & Gilmore, 1998). Due to the trend of service commoditization, tourism differentiation based on service attributes may lead to a homogeneous market structure and subsequent severe price competition (Morgan, Elbe, & de Esteban Curiel, 2009). Providing high-quality tourism products or services does not necessarily lead to an extraordinary experience, as experience is not merely the multiplicity of features offered (Meyer & Schwager, 2007). The primary goal of a tourist is to search for the peak experience (Quan & Wang, 2004), and thus meeting tourists’ inner need for experience becomes highly relevant. Building on above backgrounds, the current study investigates the behavioral consequences of tourist experience in the context of Taiwanese tourist townships. Our goal is to contribute to the literature on the essence of tourist experience and its influence on tourists’ loyalty intentions. The results may also provide guidelines for formulating strategic thinking for DMOs. This paper consists of four parts. First, we review literature on tourist experience, perceived value, and satisfaction, and present the conceptualization method of tourist experience. Second, we describe the research design. Next, we discuss our findings from data analyses. Finally, we discuss theoretical and practical implications, and make suggestions for future research. 2. Theory and Hypotheses 2.1. Process-based and outcome-based views of tourist experience

⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (C.-H. Lin), [email protected] (B.Z.-L. Kuo).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2015.12.017 2211-9736/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

A dynamic experience encompasses objective, interactive encounters and the resulting subjective outcomes (Duerden, Ward, & Freeman, 2015), and a tourist experience can be classified into before-,

C.-H. Lin, B.Z.-L. Kuo / Tourism Management Perspectives 18 (2016) 84–91

during-, and post-tour experiences (Aho, 2001). We further categorize during-tour experience (the actual visit) into process-based and outcome-based experiences (Helkkula, 2011). A process-based experience involves the transformation or change during an experience. A destination’s context—including its culture, history, religion, nature, events, shopping, architecture, hospitality, accommodation, and transportation—trigger tourist experiences. Similar to mere experience of simply passive exposure and acceptance of events, such experiential stimuli or direct responses from the stimuli, is only part of an experience; tourist experience is sequentially formed, and the endpoint involves searching for the moment of a memorable experience (Ritchie & Hudson, 2009). Therefore, external stimuli constitute the major source of subjective and internal responses to an experience in a longitudinal process. On the other hand, the outcome-based experience focuses on the immediate result of an experience. Studies have consistently conceptualized the end-state of experience with similar themes in terms of cognition or affect orientation (e.g., Ballantyne, Packer, & Sutherland, 2011; Kang & Gretzel, 2012). A cognitive experiential outcome involves thinking or a conscious mental state, whereas an affective experiential outcome involves one’s moods, feelings, and emotions. For the cognitive part of experience, tourists may seek “flow,” a state of optimal experience ”in which people are so involved in an activity that nothing else seems to matter” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). People screen out irrelevant thoughts and perceptions in the state of flow and focus entirely on interacting with the environment (Novak, Hoffman, & Yung, 2000). Tourists achieve optimal experiences when they actively participate in and are immersed in an activity (Pine & Gilmore, 1998). Regarding emotions, hedonic dimensions of feelings, fantasies, and fun (Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982) reflect the emotional state of an experience, and positive emotions are more easily remembered than negative ones by tourists (Wirtz, Kruger, Scollon, & Diener, 2003). While various experiential stimuli form an enduring process, flow and positive emotions such as happiness are both transitory states (Tsaur, Yen, & Hsiao, 2013). 2.2. Within-experience and between-experience comparison Post-tour comparison is an important stage of the tourist experience, with comparison results serving as an anchor for future actions (Aho, 2001). Perceived value and satisfaction are two major determinants of loyalty behaviors (e.g., Duman & Mattila, 2005; Gallarza & Saura, 2006; Lin & Kuo, 2013; Sun, Chi, & Xu, 2013); both display commitment to varying degrees (Oliver, 1999) and involve the concept of comparison. Perceived value is an overall assessment of what is received from the experience and what is given to acquire such experience (Zeithaml, 1988). Perceived value concerns the obtained experiences relative to the acquisition cost paid (either monetary or nonmonetary). Therefore, perceived value is a comparison within an experience. In contrast, satisfaction is a comparison across experiences. Satisfaction may arise from broad, multiple standards of comparison (Bolton & Lemon, 1999). Satisfaction involves comparing the actual, substantive experiences with the prior expectations formed based on various external or internal information sources. According to the expectation disconfirmation paradigm (Oliver, 1980), positive disconfirmation (i.e., experience outperforms expectation) increases feelings of gratification, and hence post-visit satisfaction. 2.3. Effect of tourist experience on loyalty through post-tour comparison We propose that the effects of the tourist experience on loyalty behaviors are through post-tour comparisons (i.e., perceived value and satisfaction). The role of post-tour comparisons as mediators of the experience-loyalty relationship would be supported by links between (1) experience and loyalty, (2) experience and comparison, and (3) comparison and loyalty.

85

The first link between experience and loyalty is well established in literature. For example, brand experience influences loyalty (Brakus, Schmitt, & Zarantonello, 2009), and service experience influences word-of-mouth and loyalty behaviors (Klaus & Maklan, 2012). Tourists’ emotional experiences influence intentions to revisit and recommend a hotel (Han & Back, 2008) or a destination (Hosang, Prayag, Deesilatham, Cauševic, & Odeh, 2015). As for the link between experience and comparison, experience is positively correlated with perceived value in heritage tourism (Chen & Chen, 2010) and satisfaction in consumption (Brakus et al., 2009; Klaus & Maklan, 2012). At the outcome experience level, flow positively influences satisfaction of adventure recreation (Tsaur, Lin, & Cheng, 2015). Affective experience in group travels (Gallarza & Saura, 2006) and emotional response (Duman & Mattila, 2005) positively influence perceived value and satisfaction. Regarding the link between comparison and loyalty, the tradeoff evaluation of perceived value involves the process of receiving, selecting, organizing, and interpreting information from actual experiences (Prebensen et al., 2012). Perceived value has direct influence on word-of-mouth and revisit intentions (Duman & Mattila, 2005; Han & Hwang, 2013). Satisfaction is an affective state toward the holistic tourist experience (Oliver, 1980). Tourists evaluate whether or not the ideal tourism expectation is fulfilled based on the actual experience. Although outcome-based positive emotion and satisfaction both appear to be affective orientation, it is important to note their subtle differences. The positive emotion is an immediate and transitory state that occurs during tourism. According to hedonic adaptation (Nelson & Meyvis, 2008), the subjective intensity of affective experiences tends to decrease over time. In tourism, the affective destination image held by sport tourists after event participation decays over time (King, Chen, & Funk, 2015). On the contrary, the formation of overall satisfaction is based on not only the single, specific, and unique experience but also on the accumulation of multiple similar past experiences (Anderson, Fornell, & Lehmann, 1994). The positive effect of affective commitment, which is a closely related construct to satisfaction, on loyalty intentions increases over time (Johnson, Herrmann, & Huber, 2006). Thus, we posit that satisfaction is a closer antecedent of behavioral intentions than is experience of positive emotion. Previous studies have shown that tourist satisfaction influences intentions to recommend and revisit (Duman & Mattila, 2005; Sun et al., 2013). Taken together, we posit that perceived value and satisfaction mediate the relationship between tourist experience and loyalty intentions. Formally, we reach the following hypotheses: Hypothesis 1. Tourist experience is positively related to loyalty intentions through the creation of perceived value. Hypothesis 2. Tourist experience is positively related to loyalty intentions through the creation of satisfaction.

2.4. The relative importance of perceived value and satisfaction It is expected that evaluating value is easier than evaluating satisfaction for tourists. From the perspective of information processing theory (Bettman, 1979), post-tour comparison involves post-hoc recall of actual experiences, with memory playing a role in the process. Comparison of multiple experiences in forming satisfaction requires not only recall of actual experiences of the current target but also expectations or prior similar experiences. The information acquisition process is a difficult decision-making task that involves internal and external search. To facilitate remembering, individuals use the strategies of organizing, associating, and grouping information (Bower, 1972). The tradeoff judgment of value perception is explicit in nature. Therefore, tourists benefit by initially forming concrete perceived value from abstract experience to be used in subsequent between-experience comparison (i.e., satisfaction). In the literature, the effects of perceived value

86

C.-H. Lin, B.Z.-L. Kuo / Tourism Management Perspectives 18 (2016) 84–91

on loyalty intentions may occur partially or completely through satisfaction (Li & Petrick, 2010); thus, tourists conduct value comparison before they form satisfaction. Likewise, since experiences are already processed during the formation of perceived value, repeat utilization of the same experience information in forming satisfaction consumes cognitive resources and increase information processing load. Thus, tourists may try to place more weight on concrete perceived value than on abstract experience when forming satisfaction. Formally, we propose: Hypothesis 3. Perceived value is positively related to satisfaction. Hypothesis 4. The effect of tourist experience on perceived value is greater than on satisfaction. Hypothesis 5. The effect of perceived value on satisfaction is greater than the effect of tourist experience on satisfaction.

2.5. Conceptualization of tourist experience To sum up, the dynamic view of tourist experience is consistent with the stimulus-organism-response (S-O-R) paradigm (Mehrabian & Russell, 1974). The process-based experiential stimuli (S) are external to the tourist and could be controlled by management. The tourist, as an organism (O), may respond differently to the same stimulus depending on his or her outcome-based mental state (i.e., flow and positive emotion). Organism is an internal process intervening between the external stimuli and the subsequent behavioral responses (S) (Bagozzi, 1986). Using Jacoby’s (2002) modeling concept of S-O-R, tourist experience incorporates the encountered environment and consciousness of the tourist moment. In turn, once aspects of experiential stimuli impinge on the tourist, the mental state of flow and positive emotion serve as internal stimuli for responses. Perceived value and satisfaction operate as internal responses that influence external responses, such as word-of-mouth and revisiting. To be consistent with the theoretical meaning of experience in a process manner, tourist experience is conceptualized using a multiple indicator-multiple cause (MIMIC) model in which there are both formative (causal) and reflective (effect) indicators (Bollen, 1989). The concept of MIMIC has been applied by Song, van der Veen, Li, and Chen (2012) in their Hong Kong tourist satisfaction index. Specifically, the experiential stimuli are formative indicators, and flow and positive emotion are reflective indicators of tourist experience (as described in the Measures section). The experiential stimuli influence the latent construct of tourist experience, whereas flow and positive emotion are experiential outcomes that are a function of the tourist experience. It should be noted that the experiential stimuli are not antecedents of the tourist experience, and flow and positive emotion are not consequences of the tourist experience; instead, they are all integral parts of the tourist experience corresponding with the dynamics of experience. Namely, experiential stimuli provoke the experiential outcomes of flow and positive emotion. 3. Method 3.1. Sample and procedures We focused on the 17 candidate townships in the “Top 10 Small Tourist Townships” contest (Taiwan Tourism Bureau, 2012a). Seventeen candidate townships out of 39 participating townships were selected by a committee of “mystery” expert tourists at the first round. From January 21 to March 9, 2012, Taiwan residents voted on the 17 townships online or via postcard. The final results were determined by giving 20% weight to the votes and 80% to the committee’s evaluation, based on environmental accessibility, featured motif, local government’s support system, amenities, and friendliness to foreign tourists.

The 17 participating townships attracted more than 21 million visitors in 20141. The final results of the vote and featured motif for each township are summarized in Table 1. During September and October 2012, we conducted Web-based surveys by inviting members of online travel discussion forums to participate in the study. Only tourists who had visited at least one of the 17 townships within the last 12 months were qualified to participate. Respondents who had multiple visits to the various townships were asked to consider their most recent experience as a reference target. Respondents were entered into a sweepstakes (NT$24,500 worth of gift cards) as an incentive for their participation. We collected a total of 640 complete samples. Notably, the Lukang sample accounted for 17.8 percent of the total sample in the study, probably due to the fact that the 2012 Taiwan Lantern Festival was held in Lukang, Changhua from February 6-19, 2012 (Taiwan Tourism Bureau, 2012b). Table 2 shows the sample demographics. The age of the respondents was distributed evenly above 20 years; 62 percent were female; 56 percent were unmarried; 72 percent had a university degree or higher; 64 percent were employed; and 23 percent were students; most of the respondents lived in northern (45%) or central (40%) Taiwan. Table 3 summarizes the respondents’ travel behaviors. Over half (56%) of the sample went to the chosen township on weekends; nearly 60 percent of the respondents had preplanned their trip; 91 percent managed their schedules on their own; 70 percent took a one-day trip; the median number of times of visits to the target township was 3 (average time = 4.51); most (53%) were travelling with 1 to 3 persons; and 68 percent spent below NT$2,000 in this trip. As for the general travel, the median number of times of travel per year is nearly 5; 65 percent had an average travel budget per year of less than NT$30,000. Overall, the travel behaviors of the samples in the study are consistent with the general travel behaviors of citizens in Taiwan in terms of date of travel, type of schedule, duration of stay, expense, and travel times per year (Taiwan Tourism Bureau, 2014). 3.2. Measures The questionnaire consisted of the experiential stimuli, flow, positive emotion, perceived value, satisfaction, recommendation, and revisit intentions, as well as demographic variables and general travel behaviors. Unless otherwise noted, all multi-item scales were assessed on a Likert scale anchored with 1, “strongly disagree,” to 7, “strongly agree.” 3.2.1. Tourist experience The stimuli and outcomes of experience are both considered in the measurement. Experiential stimuli were assessed with sensory, affective, behavioral, intellectual (Brakus et al., 2009), and relational experiences (Schmitt, 1999). Since visitors do not necessarily perceive all five stimuli simultaneously in tourist townships, there is no rationale to expect these items are correlated. We operationalized the experiential stimuli items as formative indicators of the tourist experience construct. On the other hand, the tourist experience involves outcomes of flow and positive emotion. Following the suggestion of direct unidimensional measures of flow (Novak et al., 2000), flow was measured with three items regarding the magnitude and frequency of flow experience. Respondents were instructed to read a descriptive statement of flow before indicating their flow state during their tourist township experience. The scales were anchored from endpoints 1-7. The coefficient α of flow was 0.96. Positive emotion was measured with three semantic scales adopted from Mehrabian and Russell’s (1974) PAD scale (Pleasure, Arousal, Dominance). Items included “Unhappy/happy,” “Annoyed/ 1 It should be noted that there are no estimates of times of visits for each tourist township. We estimated the number from Visitors to the Major Scenic Spots in 2014 (Tourism Bureau, Taiwan 2015), and the estimated numbers may be substantially underestimated. 2 NT$ = New Taiwan Dollar. Roughly NT$29.3 = US$1.0 at the time of survey, and roughly NT$32.2 = US$1.0 on August, 2015.

C.-H. Lin, B.Z.-L. Kuo / Tourism Management Perspectives 18 (2016) 84–91

87

Table 1 Featured Motif and Sample Percentage of Tourist Townships. Township

Featured motif

N (%) in the study

Official vote % (including postcard and online votes)a

Final results

Dajia, Taichung Daxi, Taoyuan Beitou, Taipei City Anping, Tainan Jincheng, Kinmen Meinong, Kaohsiung Lukang, Changhua Jiji, Nantou Rueifang, New Taipei City Jiaoxi, Yilan Sanyi, Miaoli Rueisuei, Hualien Xinyi, Taipei City Beigan, Lienchiang Liouciou, Pingtung Magong, Penghu Luye, Taitung

Matsu culture A presidential township Small town elegance Namesake of Taiwan Old world charm in Houpu Hakka beauty and hospitality Craftsmanship, cuisine, and historic sites Railway image and cycling excursions Gold mines LOHAS at hot springs Wood sculptural art Leisure at hot springs Fashion Battlefield Ecological preservation Folklore Hot air balloon Total

54 (8.44) 30 (4.69) 26 (4.06) 81 (12.66) 13 (2.03) 11 (1.72) 114 (17.81) 41 (6.41) 26 (4.06) 65 (10.16) 42 (6.56) 24 (3.75) 34 (5.31) 5 (0.78) 19 (2.97) 24 (3.75) 31 (4.84) 640 (100)

8.34 9.85 5.05 8.39 7.84 6.30 4.63 5.61 5.44 6.11 9.07 4.94 5.03 1.99 4.66 3.87 2.87 100

Top 10 Top 10 Top 10 Top 10 Top 10 Top 10 Top 10 Top 10 Top 10 Top 10 The most featured township The tidiest and cleanest township The most globally potential Potential township Potential township Potential township Potential township

Notes: a. Data source: Voting results for the Top 10 Small Tourist Townships contest (Taiwan Tourism Bureau, 2012a).

pleased,” and “Melancholic/contented.” The scales were anchored with endpoints 1-7. The coefficient α of positive emotion was 0.96. We operationalized flow and positive emotion as reflective indicators of experience and respectively averaged the subdimensions into two scores to be used in the MIMIC model.

3.2.4. Loyalty intentions Intentions to recommend and revisit were measured with three items, respectively, adapted from Zeithaml, Berry, and Parasuraman (1996). The coefficients α of recommendation and revisit were 0.95 and 0.86, respectively.

3.2.2. Perceived value Overall perceived value was measured with three items adapted from Gallarza and Saura (2006) and Johnson et al. (2006). The coefficient α of perceived value was 0.95.

4. Results

3.2.3. Satisfaction Satisfaction was measured with four items consisting of overall satisfaction, expectancy disconfirmation (Fornell, Johnson, Anderson, Cha, & Bryant, 1996), and doing the right thing (Oliver, 1980). The coefficient α of satisfaction was 0.95.

4.1. Descriptive statistics Table 4 shows descriptive statistics, reliability coefficients, and correlations between the variables. All correlations of the variables are positive and significant (all p’s b0.001).

Table 3 Respondents’ Travel Behaviors. Table 2 Sample Characteristics. Demographics Sex Marital status

Age (years)

Education

Residential area

Occupation

Male Female Unmarried Married Other status b=20 21-30 31-40 N40 Junior high school or below Senior high school College University Graduate school or above Northern Taiwan Central Taiwan Southern Taiwan Eastern Taiwan Offshore islands Student Employed Housekeeping Unemployed Retired

N

%

246 393 358 260 21 68 213 186 172 10 71 100 338 120 287 257 78 15 2 148 411 40 25 15

38.5 61.5 56.0 40.7 3.3 10.6 33.3 29.1 26.9 1.6 11.1 15.6 52.9 18.8 44.9 40.2 12.2 2.3 0.3 23.2 64.3 6.3 3.9 2.3

Travel behavior

N (%)

Date of travel

220 (34.4) 29.5 360 (56.3) 58.6 60 (9.4) 11.9 383 (59.8) N.A. 257 (40.2) 584 (91.3) 89.1 56 (8.8) 10.9b 351 (54.8) N.A. 289 (45.2) 29 (4.5) N.A. 342 (53.4) 269 (42.0) 448 (70.0) 71.6 192 (30.0) 28.4 437 (68.3) NT$1,886 NT$1,908 203 (31.7) 336 (52.6) 6.75 times 6.85 times 303 (47.4) 417 (65.3) N.A. 222 (34.7)

Weekdays Weekends National holidays Motive of travel Planned Random or spontaneous Type of trip schedule Self-managed schedule Tour package Number of times of b=3 visits N3 Number of company 0 (i.e., travel alone) (persons) 1-3 N=4 Duration of stay One day trip N one day Total expense in this b=2,000 trip (NT$) N2,000 Average times of 1-5 travel per year N5 Average travel budget b=30,000 per year (NT$) N30,000

Means

% or means in official reporta

Notes: a. Data sources: Citizens’ general travel behaviors in Taiwan in year 2013 (Taiwan Tourism Bureau, 2014). b. The official categorization includes self-managed schedule and other travel types, such as travel agency’s tour packages, company’s incentive travel, religious travel, school travel, and so on. Hence, the 10.9% in the official report are not necessarily tour packages.

88

C.-H. Lin, B.Z.-L. Kuo / Tourism Management Perspectives 18 (2016) 84–91

Table 4 Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlationsa,b.

1.Stimulus 2.Flow 3.Emotion 4.Value 5.Satisfaction 6.Recommend 7.Revisit

Table 5 Measurement Propertiesa.

M

SD

1

2

3

5.01 4.38 5.75 5.10 5.10 5.40 4.46

1.24 1.62 1.28 1.37 1.31 1.52 1.42

0.92c 0.71 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.67 0.65

0.96 0.59 0.58 0.59 0.53 0.53

0.96 0.72 0.75 0.68 0.60

4

0.95 0.88 0.77 0.72

5

0.95 0.82 0.77

6

0.95 0.71

7

0.86

Notes: a Bold numbers along the diagonal show the reliability coefficients α for the scales. b All correlations are significant at p b0.001. c Experiential stimuli are defined as formative indicators of tourist experience, and the concept of internal consistency may not be meaningful (Jarvis, MacKenzie, & Podsakoff, 2003).

4.2. Model estimation The Mardia's estimate of multivariate skewness (112.76, p b0.001) and kurtosis (1,000.02, p b 0.001) indicate that the data are not multivariate normal. We applied bootstrap resampling to address the problems associated with ML estimation under data non-normality. The number of bootstrap samples was 1,000. The lavaan program (version 0.5-17) for R (Rosseel, 2012) was used.

4.3. Measurement model tests We conducted confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to examine the measurement properties for the reflective indicators. As shown in Table 5, the CFA model fit the data well (X2 = 462.45, df = 137; CFI =0.98; TLI =0.97; RMSEA =0.06; SRMR =0.03). Composite reliabilities (Fornell & Larcker, 1981) are high and exceed the recommended threshold of 0.70. Convergent validity is assessed by the magnitude of the factor loading. All factor loadings are highly significant (all p’s b0.001), showing that all indictors are effectively measuring their proposed constructs. Discriminant validity is evaluated by the average variance extracted (AVE) test (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). To support the discriminant validity, the AVE measure should be greater than the variance shared between the construct and other constructs in the model. As shown in Table 6, except for perceived value and satisfaction as well as satisfaction and revisit intention, all AVE measures on the diagonal are greater than the off-diagonal elements in the corresponding rows and columns. We adopted further tests to examine the distinctiveness between perceived value and satisfaction as well as between satisfaction and revisit intention. First, we conducted Hotelling’s t-test to examine whether there are differences between the correlations that the two predicators, perceived value and satisfaction, have with the two criterion variables, recommend and revisit. Evidence for discriminant validity would be established if the two correlations were unequal (Wang, Law, Hackett, Wang, & Chen, 2005). The t-statistic from the Hotelling’s t-test for the difference between the perceived value-recommend correlation and the satisfaction-recommend correlation was 4.57 (df = 637, p b 0.001). When revisit was used as the criterion, the t-statistic was 4.08 (df =637, p b0.001). The tests indicate that perceived value is distinct from satisfaction. Also, the satisfaction-perceived value correlation and revisit-perceived value correlation are significantly unequal (t-value =12.66, df =637, p b 0.001), and thus satisfaction and revisit intention are distinct. Next, the 95% confidence intervals around the correlation estimates between perceived value and satisfaction [0.91, 0.94] as well as between satisfaction and revisit intention [0.81, 0.87] do not include 1.0, further providing support for the distinctiveness of the constructs (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). Overall, all the information implies the discriminant validity of the measures and demonstrates adequate measurement properties.

Standardized Variance Reliability Loadings Extracted

Construct and Indicator Flow Have ever experienced flow Frequency of flow Most of the time in flow state Positive emotion Unhappy/happy Annoyed/pleased Melancholic/contented Perceived value A good experience for the money paid Give-get tradeoff A great experiential value Satisfaction Overall satisfaction Expectancy disconfirmation Close to the ideal travel experience Did the right thing Intention to recommend Say positive things Recommend Encourage Intention to revisit First choice in next travel plan Spend more in this township Pay a higher price here than in other townships

0.96c 0.86 0.96 0.88 0.96d 0.90 0.90 0.85 0.95d 0.90 0.85 0.81 0.95d 0.86 0.86 0.79 0.85 0.95d 0.77 0.94 0.90 0.86d 0.67 0.72 0.64

0.93b 0.98 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.95 0.92 0.90 0.93 0.93 0.89 0.92 0.88 0.97 0.95 0.82 0.85 0.80

0.90

0.89

0.85

0.84

0.87

0.68

Notes: a Model fit: X2 =462.45, df =137; CFI =0.98; TLI =0.97; RMSEA =0.06; SRMR =0.03. b All loadings are significant at p b0.001. c Composite reliability.

4.4. Results of the MIMIC model Tourist experience was conceptualized as a MIMIC model within the structural model. We show the results of the MIMIC model in Table 7 before discussing the structural relationships between constructs. The composite weights of sensory, affective, behavioral, and relational experiences are highly significant (p b 0.001), with affective experience having the greatest impact in forming tourist experience (β = 0.44). The effect of intellectual experience is only marginal (β =0.08, p =0.07). In terms of the effect indicators of flow and positive emotion, both factor loadings are highly significant (p b0.001), suggesting that tourist experience was adequately reflected on flow and positive emotion. Overall, the MIMIC model captured the dynamic nature of tourist experience well. 4.5. Hypotheses testing Table 8 exhibits the results of the structural model, which fit the data well (X2 = 487.91, df = 150; CFI = 0.97; TLI = 0.97; RMSEA = 0.06; SRMR =0.03). As expected, the effects of tourist experience on recommendation (β = 0.12, p = 0.09) and revisit (β = 0.14, p = 0.09) are

Table 6 AVE Test and Discriminant Validity. Variables

1

2

3

4

5

6

1.Flow 2.Emotion 3.Value 4.Satisfaction 5.Recommend 6.Revisit

0.90 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.29 0.33

0.89 0.58 0.62 0.51 0.43

0.85 0.86 0.65 0.63

0.84 0.74 0.71

0.87 0.61

0.68

Notes: Bold numbers along the diagonal show the AVE. Numbers below the diagonal represent the squared correlations.

C.-H. Lin, B.Z.-L. Kuo / Tourism Management Perspectives 18 (2016) 84–91 Table 7 Results of the MIMIC Model of Tourist Experience.

Path Sensory ➔ Tourist experience Affective ➔ Tourist experience Behavioral ➔ Tourist experience Intellectual ➔ Tourist experience Relational ➔ Tourist experience Tourist experience ➔ Flow Tourist experience ➔ Positive emotion

Standardized composite weights or factor loadings

t-valuea

0.20⁎⁎⁎ 0.44⁎⁎⁎ 0.18⁎⁎⁎ 0.08 0.13⁎⁎⁎ 0.73⁎⁎⁎

3.59 5.54 4.55 1.82 3.45 14.22

0.85⁎⁎⁎

14.11

Notes: a t-values are based on bootstrapped standard errors. ⁎⁎⁎ Significant at p b0.001.

insignificant. The effects of tourist experience on perceived value (β = 0.85, p b 0.001) and satisfaction (β = 0.28, p b 0.001) are significant. The effect of perceived value on satisfaction is significant (β = 0.69, p b0.001), but its effects on intention to recommend (β =0.03, p =0.74) and intention to revisit (β =0.07, p =0.54) are insignificant. Satisfaction has significant effects on intention to recommend (β = 0.73, p b0.001) and intention to revisit (β = 0.65, p b0.001). Collectively, the results provide evidence confirming that perceived value is positively related to satisfaction (Hypothesis 3). The results provide initial evidences that the effects of tourist experience on loyalty intentions are through satisfaction (Hypothesis 2). However, the mediating role of perceived value between tourist experience and loyalty intentions (Hypothesis 1) is not confirmed. Further, in supporting Hypothesis 4, tourist experience has a significantly stronger effect on perceived value (β =0.85) than on satisfaction (β = 0.28) (the difference is significant at p b0.001). Consistent with Hypothesis 5, the effect of perceived value on satisfaction (β =0.69) is greater than the effect of tourist experience on satisfaction (β =0.28) (the difference is significant at p b 0.01). Fig. 1 illustrates the results.

4.6. Mediation analyses To find strong evidence for the mediating effect of satisfaction, we conducted analyses of indirect analyses (Iacobucci, Saldanha, & Deng, 2007). As perceived value intervenes between experience and satisfaction (as shown above), the effect of perceived value was controlled in analyzing the mediating effect of satisfaction between experience and loyalty intentions. Table 9 summarizes the results of bootstrapped indirect (mediating) and total effects. All the indirect effects are significant (all p’s b 0.001).

Table 8 Standardized Parameter Estimatesa Path

Standardized coefficients

t-valueb

Tourist experience ➔ Perceived value Tourist experience ➔ Satisfaction Tourist experience ➔ Recommend Tourist experience ➔ Revisit Perceived value ➔ Satisfaction Perceived value ➔ Recommend Perceived value ➔ Revisit Satisfaction ➔ Recommend Satisfaction ➔ Revisit

0.85⁎⁎⁎ 0.28⁎⁎⁎

8.24 3.85 1.71 1.68 6.08 0.33 0.62 5.82 4.79

0.12 0.14 0.69⁎⁎⁎ 0.03 0.07 0.73⁎⁎⁎ 0.65⁎⁎⁎

Notes: a Model fit: X2 =487.91, df =150; CFI =0.97; TLI =0.97; RMSEA =0.06; SRMR =0.03. b t-values are based on bootstrapped standard errors. ⁎⁎⁎ Significant at p b0.001.

89

The results provide evidences that the influence of tourist experience on loyalty intentions are through satisfaction and perceived value. By comparing the relative sizes of the indirect vs. total effect (proportion of mediation), 83% and 80% of the variance in intention to recommend and revisit are explained indirectly by tourist experience through perceived value and satisfaction, collectively. Though not formally hypothesized, the results also reveal that the effect of tourist experience on satisfaction is mostly through perceived value; the proportion of mediation is 67%. Further, the results corroborate that the effects of perceived value on both loyalty intentions are completely mediated by satisfaction; 94% and 86% of the variance in intention to recommend and revisit are explained indirectly by perceived value through satisfaction. As for Hypothesis 2, it is difficult to make a definite conclusion of the precise role of satisfaction. Taking all the results together, the relationships between tourist experience and loyalty intentions are completely mediated by perceived value and satisfaction, collectively. As the role of perceived value is minimized in directly influencing loyalty behaviors, the mediating process of perceived value is essentially between tourist experience and satisfaction instead of between tourist experience and loyalty intentions. 5. Discussion 5.1. Theoretical contributions The research provides empirical evidences supporting a psychological mechanism of tourist experience ➔ perceived value ➔ satisfaction ➔ loyalty intentions in Taiwanese tourist townships. Several findings emerge that are worthy of further discussion. First, the study joins a growing literature that examines relationships among perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty intentions. In this article, the effect of perceived value on loyalty intentions is completely through satisfaction, and satisfaction is an immediate antecedent of loyalty. The results are consistent with past studies (e.g., Gallarza & Saura, 2006; Song et al., 2012; Sun et al., 2013). When perceived value is unidimensionally conceptualized, satisfaction completely mediates the relationship between perceived value and behavioral intentions (Lin, Sher, & Shih, 2005). Second, the results exhibit that perceived value partially meditates the effect of tourist experience on satisfaction, suggesting a more efficient use of experiential information to form perceived value than to form satisfaction. It appears that comparing experiential benefits and sacrifices of a tour is an easier task than comparing experiences across tours or to mere expectation; thus, tourists resort to concrete perceived value in forming satisfaction. Third, to capture the dynamic stimulus-organism process, we conceptualized tourist experience using the MIMIC model in which experiential stimuli are causal indicators and both flow and positive emotion are effect indicators. Their relationships are not causal ones at the structural level; instead, stimuli, flow, and positive emotion are integral components of the tourist experience in which stimuli are a process to yield experience, and the outcomes are flow and positive emotion. By aligning conceptualization with theoretical meaning, we believe the empirical results in the nomological network are more convincing than simply applying reflective or formative indicators in conceptualizing the construct of experience. 5.2. Managerial implications In practice, the substantive meaning of experiential stimuli in the MIMIC model is no longer measurement. The government authorities or practical managers could proactively apply the MIMIC model to form a tourist experiential index by the composite weights relating the experiential stimuli to tourist experience that is reflectively measured by flow and positive emotion. Then, in situations where flow or positive emotion is not available, mangers still can estimate the tourist

90

C.-H. Lin, B.Z.-L. Kuo / Tourism Management Perspectives 18 (2016) 84–91

Fig. 1. Results of Structural Model. Notes: 1. The dotted line represents an insignificant (p N .05) path coefficient. 2. Significant standardized coefficients appear near the associated path. 3. The model in the square represents the MIMIC model. ⁎⁎⁎ Significant at p b0.001.

experience of a destination from the degree of experiential stimuli (cf. Howell, Breivik, & Wilcox, 2007). The gap between estimates based on external stimuli and internal experiential outcomes represent the experiential components not captured by current formative indicators (cf. Song et al., 2012). The results facilitate strategic thinking for DMOs. Perceived value and satisfaction together completely mediate the effect of tourist experience on loyalty intentions. Results from a model omitting either perceived value or satisfaction lead to misunderstanding of tourist behaviors and jeopardize the quality of strategic decision making. The mediating role of satisfaction suggests that perceived value alone is not sufficient to activate loyalty behaviors, and satisfaction warrants future loyalty behaviors. For example, low-fare tours may promote the original, perceived monetary acquisition value, tourist experiences are at stake, and the consequence is dissatisfaction (Wong & McKercher, 2012).

5.3. Limitations and further research The current study suggests directions for future research. First, it bolsters the sequence of perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty intentions; however, perceived value and satisfaction may have parallel influences on behavioral intentions (e.g., Chen & Chen, 2010), and satisfaction may be modeled as an antecedent of perceived value at times (e.g., Duman & Mattila, 2005). Future research may further delve into tourists’ subtle psychological mechanisms. Next, prior experiences may influence future experiences. Perceived value and satisfaction have varying impact on loyalty behaviors over a customer’s relationship cycle (Lin & Kuo, 2013). Future research could take into account the dynamics of the tourist experience.

Acknowledgements This study was supported by a grant from the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan. Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary data to this article can be found online at http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2015.12.017. References Aho, S.K. (2001). Towards a general theory of touristic experiences: Modelling experience process in tourism. Tourism Review, 56(3/4), 33–37. Anderson, E.W., Fornell, C., & Lehmann, D.R. (1994). Customer satisfaction, market share, and profitability: Findings from Sweden. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 53–66. Anderson, J.C., & Gerbing, D.W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommend two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423. Bagozzi, R. (1986). Principles of marketing management. Chicago, IL: Science Research Associates. Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Sutherland, L.A. (2011). Visitors’ memories of wildlife tourism: Implications for the design of powerful interpretive experiences. Tourism Management, 32(4), 770–779. Bettman, J.R. (1979). An information processing theory of consumer choice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Bollen, K.A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley. Bolton, R.N., & Lemon, K.N. (1999). A dynamic model of customers’ usage of services: Usage as an antecedent and consequence of satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(2), 171–186. Bower, G.H. (1972). A selective review of organizational factors in memory. In E. Tulving, & W. Donaldson (Eds.), Organization of memory (pp. 93–137). New York: Academic. Brakus, J.J., Schmitt, B.H., & Zarantonello, L. (2009). Brand experience: What is it? How is it measured? Does it affect loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 73(2), 52–68. Chen, C. -F., & Chen, F. -S. (2010). Experience quality, perceived value, satisfaction and behavioral intentions for heritage tourists. Tourism Management, 31(1), 29–35. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper and Row.

Table 9 Bootstrapped Indirect and Total Effects. Path

Unstandardized indirect effects

Unstandardized total effects

Tourist experience ➔ perceived value ➔ satisfaction Tourist experience ➔ (perceived value + satisfaction) ➔ recommend Tourist experience ➔ (perceived value + satisfaction) ➔ revisit Perceived value ➔ satisfaction ➔ recommend Perceived value ➔ satisfaction ➔ revisit

0.699 0.520 0.437 0.522 0.438

1.040 0.623 0.544 0.555 0.507

Notes: All indirect and total effects are significant at p b0.001.

% Variance explained through indirect effect 67% 83% 80% 94% 86%

C.-H. Lin, B.Z.-L. Kuo / Tourism Management Perspectives 18 (2016) 84–91 Duerden, M.D., Ward, P.J., & Freeman, P.A. (2015). Conceptualizing structured experiences: Seeking interdisciplinary integration. Journal of Leisure Research, 47(5), 601–620. Duman, T., & Mattila, A.S. (2005). The role of affective factors on perceived cruise vacation value. Tourism Management, 26(3), 311–323. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. Fornell, C., Johnson, M.D., Anderson, E.W., Cha, J., & Bryant, B.E. (1996). The American customer satisfaction index: Nature, Purpose, and Findings. Journal of Marketing, 60(4), 7–18. Gallarza, M.G., & Saura, I.G. (2006). Value dimensions, perceived value, satisfaction and loyalty: An investigation of university students’ travel behavior. Tourism Management, 27(3), 437–452. Han, H., & Back, K. -J. (2008). Relationships among image congruence, consumption emotions, and customer loyalty in the lodging industry. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 32(4), 467–490. Han, H., & Hwang, J. (2013). Multi-dimensions of the perceived benefits in a medical hotel and their roles in international travelers’ decision-making process. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 35, 100–108. Helkkula, A. (2011). Characterizing the concept of service experience. Journal of Service Management, 22(3), 367–389. Holbrook, M.B., & Hirschman, E.C. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 132–142. Hosang, S., Prayag, G., Deesilatham, S., Cauševic, S., & Odeh, K. (2015). Measuring tourists’ emotional experiences: Further validation of the destination emotion scale. Journal of Travel Research, 54(4), 482–495. Howell, R.D., Breivik, E., & Wilcox, J.B. (2007). Is formative measurement really measurement? Reply to Bollen (2007) and Bagozzi (2007). Psychological Methods, 12(2), 238–245. Iacobucci, D., Saldanha, N., & Deng, X. (2007). A meditation on mediation: Evidence that structural equations models perform better than regressions. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(2), 140–154. Jacoby, J. (2002). Stimulus-organism-response reconsidered: An evolutionary step in modeling (consumer) behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12(1), 51–57. Jarvis, C.B., MacKenzie, S.B., & Podsakoff, P.M. (2003). A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 199–218. Johnson, M., Herrmann, A., & Huber, F. (2006). The evolution of loyalty intentions. Journal of Marketing, 70(2), 122–132. Kang, M., & Gretzel, U. (2012). Effects of podcast tours on tourist experiences in a national park. Tourism Management, 33(2), 440–455. King, C., Chen, N., & Funk, D.C. (2015). Exploring destination image decay: A study of sport tourists’ destination image change after event participation. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 39(1), 3–31. Klaus, P.P., & Maklan, S. (2012). EXQ: A multiple-item scale for assessing service experience. Journal of Service Management, 23(1), 5–33. Kyodo (2015). Foreign visitor arrivals to Japan hit record 1.7 million in April. The Japan Times (Retrieved from http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/05/21/national/ foreign-visitor-arrivals-to-japan-hit-record-1-7-million-in-april/#.Vaj2HEahZS0 (Accessed on June 20, 2015)). Li, X., & Petrick, J.F. (2010). Towards an integrative model of loyalty formation: The role of quality and value. Leisure Sciences, 32(3), 201–221. Lin, C. -H., & Kuo, B.Z. -L. (2013). Escalation of loyalty and the decreasing impact of perceived value and satisfaction over time. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 14(4), 348–362. Lin, C. -H., Sher, P.J., & Shih, H. -Y. (2005). Past progress and future directions in conceptualizing customer perceived value. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 16(4), 318–336. Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J.A. (1974). An approach to environmental psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Meyer, C., & Schwager, A. (2007). Understanding customer experience. Harvard Business Review, 85(2), 117–126. Morgan, M., Elbe, J., & de Esteban Curiel, J. (2009). Has the experience economy arrived? The views of destination managers in three visitor-dependent areas. International Journal of Tourism Research, 11(2), 201–216. Nelson, L.D., & Meyvis, T. (2008). Interrupted consumption: Disrupting adaptation to hedonic experience. Journal of Marketing Research, 45, 654–664. Nip, A. (2014). Low yen makes Japan the No 1 destination for Hongkongers. South China Morning Post (Retrieved from http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/ 1632060/low-yen-makes-japan-no-1-destination-hongkongers (accessed on 2014, November 5)). Novak, T.P., Hoffman, D.L., & Yung, Y. -F. (2000). Measuring the customer experience in online environments: A structural modeling approach. Marketing Science, 19(1), 22–42. Oliver, R.L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 460–469. Oliver, R.L. (1999). Whence Consumer Loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 63(4), 33–44.

91

Pine, B.J., & Gilmore, J.H. (1998). Welcome to the experience economy. Harvard Business Review, 76(4), 97–105. Prebensen, N.K., Woo, E., Chen, J.S., & Uysal, M. (2012). Motivation and involvement as antecedents of the perceived value of the destination experience. Journal of Travel Research, 52(2), 253–264. Quan, S., & Wang, N. (2004). Towards a structural model of the tourist experience: An illustration from food experiences in tourism. Tourism Management, 25(3), 297–305. Ritchie, J.R.B., & Hudson, S. (2009). Understanding and meeting the challenges of consumer/tourist experience research. International Journal of Tourism Research, 11(2), 111–126. Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. Schmitt, B.H. (1999). Experiential marketing: How to get customers to sense, feel, think, act, and relate to your company and brand. New York: The Free Press. Song, H., van der Veen, R., Li, G., & Chen, J.L. (2012). The Hong Kong tourist satisfaction index. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1), 459–479. Sun, X., Chi, C.G. -Q., & Xu, H. (2013). Developing destination loyalty: The case of Hainan Island. Annals of Tourism Research, 43, 547–577. Taiwan Tourism Bureau (2012a). The top 10 small tourist townships. (in Chinese). Retrieved from http://2012town.gvm.com.tw/ (accessed on July 10, 2014) Taiwan Tourism Bureau (2012b). 2012 Lantern Festival in Lukang. (in Chinese). Retrieved from http://www.taiwan.net.tw/2012TaiwanLantern/2/index.aspx (accessed on July 10, 2014) Taiwan Tourism Bureau (2014). Citizens’ general travel behaviors in Taiwan in year 2013. (in Chinese). Retrieved from http://admin.taiwan.net.tw/upload/statistic/20140730/ c85afcd9-6b76-4228-84a8-f40997d714f3.doc (accessed on June 20, 2015) Tsaur, S. -H., Lin, W. -R., & Cheng, T. -M. (2015). Toward a structural model of challenge experience in adventure recreation. Journal of Leisure Research, 47(3), 322–336. Tsaur, S. -H., Yen, C. -H., & Hsiao, S. -L. (2013). Transcendent experience, flow and happiness for mountain climbers. International Journal of Tourism Research, 15(4), 360–374. Wang, H., Law, K.S., Hackett, R.D., Wang, D., & Chen, Z.X. (2005). Leader-member exchange as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and followers’ performance and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 420–432. Wirtz, D., Kruger, J., Scollon, C.N., & Diener, E. (2003). What to do on spring break? The role of predicted, on-line, and remembered experience in future choice. Psychological Science, 14, 520–524. Wong, C.U.I., & McKercher, B. (2012). Day tour itineraries: Searching for the balance between commercial needs and experiential desires. Tourism Management, 33(6), 1360–1372. Zeithaml, V.A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2–22. Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The behavioral consequences of service quality. Journal of Marketing, 60(2), 31–46. Dr. Chien-Hsin Lin is an Associate Professor in the Department of International Business Management, Da-Yeh University, Taiwan. He completed his Ph.D. degree at National Chi Nan University (NCNU) in 2008. He previously worked in the international marketing division of the computer and machine tool industry. His current research interests include tourist experience and behavior, and cross-culture consumption. His research has contributed to theoretical understandings in consumer and tourist perceived value. His work has appeared in the Psychology & Marketing, Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, the Service Industries Journal, International Journal of Service Industry Management, and other scholarly journals.

Dr. Beryl Zi-Lin Kuo is an Assistant Professor of experience industries and innovation economy in the department of travel management, Taipei College of Maritime Technology, Taiwan (R.O.C.). She completed her Ph.D. degree at National Chi Nan University in Taiwan in 2011. She previously worked for Nestlé Co., Ebara Corp. and started her own business in Malaysia. Her current research interests include the experience economy and destination marketing. Her work has appeared in the Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, and other scholarly journals.