an assessment of destination brand personality...
TRANSCRIPT
AN ASSESSMENT OF DESTINATION BRAND PERSONALITY
AND
ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH INTENTION TO RECOMMEND
THESIS
SUBMITTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF JAMMU
FOR THE AWARD OF DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
IN
TOURISM MANAGEMENT
Under the supervision of:
Dr. Parikshat Singh Manhas Submitted by
Associate Professor Meenu Sharma
School of Hospitality and Tourism Management,
The Business School,
University of Jammu, Jammu
Faculty of Business Studies
University of Jammu
Jammu
2012
CERTIFICATE
Meenu Sharma who was registered for the degree of Ph.D. under my supervision has
completed her work. The exact title of her thesis is AN ASSESSMENT OF
DESTINATION BRAND PERSONALITY AND ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH
INTENTION TO RECOMMEND.
I certify that she has worked under my supervision and the work done by her is original
and worthy of consideration for the award of Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in
Tourism Management.
I further certify that
1. The thesis embodies the work of the candidate herself;
2. The candidate has worked under me for the period required under rules;
3. The candidate has put in the required attendance in the Department during the period; and
4. The conduct of the scholar remained satisfactory during the period of research.
Dated: (Dr. Parikshat Singh Manhas)
Associate Professor
School of Hospitality and Tourism Management
The Business School University of Jammu
Jammu
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest and most sincere appreciation to Dr.
Parikshat Singh Manhas, my guide, for his constant support, encouragement, patience and
invaluable guidance throughout my doctoral pursuit. His exceptional knowledge, research
skills and wisdom have certainly inspired and enriched me in many ways, both
professionally and personally. I will never be able to fully express my gratitude and respect
to him for what I have gained in the past three years.
I take this privilege to express my sincere thanks to Prof. Deepak Raj Gupta, Director,
School of Hospitality and Tourism Management, University of Jammu for always being a
support to me and for his invaluable guidance and suggestions at every step in my career.
I would also like to thank Dr. Suvidha Khanna with whom I had the pleasure of sharing
ideas and was highly benefited from her wide knowledge. I would never forget her
unselfish interest, her availability in helping me, her encouragement in the development of
this research and her kindness and patience in answering my questions.
I would also like to thank my wonderful faculty members for their time, energy and
contributions to my work. Their inspiration, suggestions and comments have improved the
work and made the whole process a pleasant learning experience.
I am also thankful to all the academicians, scholars, writers and authors whom I have
referred or quoted.
I would also like to thank the staff members in School of Hospitality and Tourism
Management office for their help and kind cooperation during my study. I am also thankful
to the staff of the library, School of Hospitality and Tourism Management, University of
Jammu for helping me with the books and journals from the library.
On the home front, I owe the biggest debt of gratitude to my father, Sh. J.D. Sadotra for the
intellectual stimulation and psychological support he has always provided. My mother,
Mrs. Rama Sharma, has all my thanks for always being very supportive and inspiring. I
dedicate my every success to my parents.
Next, I am also very thankful to my son, Saksham, for his patience regarding my absence
in the moments that I could not share.
I extend my very special thanks to my husband, Mr. Anil Pandotra, for his support that put
the research to its completion. He also rendered his skills at fixing computer snags.
I am also thankful to my parents-in-law for their encouragement and support throughout
my research period. And finally no words would suffice to express my deep sense of
appreciation to my grandparents, brothers, sister, sisters-in-laws, brother-in-law and my
friend.
Meenu Sharma
DEDICATION
To my parents,
my husband
and my son,
Saksham
LIST OF CONTENTS
Page No.
Preface i – ii
List of Tables iii – iv
List of Figures v
List of Annexure vi
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 – 38
CHAPETR 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 39 – 108
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 109 – 136
CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS 137 – 182
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 183 – 203
Bibliography 205 – 234
Appendices
Appendix 1 Questionnaire 235– 240
i
PREFACE
Just as branding is considered an important tool in marketing, in the same way, destination
branding is becoming an important area of research in the field of tourism. Destinations
need to create a brand to help them in positioning the uniqueness of the place. It depends
upon the destination marketing organizations how they promote these destinations in the
existing and emerging markets. This has introduced the concept of destination branding.
The challenge of branding a destination for a country like India is a big task because of the
diversity within the nation as well as the diversity in the target markets. Tourists travelling
to the destinations are concerned about what they might encounter. Destination Branding
helps in shaping perceptions of potential tourists. Destinations compete with one another to
attract investment and visitors. They need a vision and a brand for tourism development.
They must communicate to a broad market of tourists about what they do and the
consistency and quality of their offerings.
As places seek to become distinctive, destination personality is seen as an important
metaphor for understanding tourists‘ perception of places and for crafting a unique
destination identity. Destination personality influences tourists‘ choice processes, the
evaluation of that destination and future behavioral intention.
Jammu and Kashmir is one of such states of India which offers variety of experiences to
the tourists. Tourism needs variety and this state has varied tourism products which satisfy
the needs and demands of almost every class of visitors.
ii
However, very little research has been undertaken till date to understand the relationship of
destination brand personality and tourist‘s intention to recommend in this state.
The purpose of this study is to assess the destination brand personality of Jammu and
Kashmir as well as the tourist‘s personality and also investigates the relationship between
destination personality and intention to recommend. This study also proposed to find out
how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel.
The study also tries to find out whether tourists could associate destination brand
personality characteristics with the three regions of Jammu and Kashmir under study. It
also revealed about how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would make tourists feel. The
study also provided managerial implications for destination marketers based on the
research results. It will help the destination managers and marketers in planning of strategic
marketing programs, such as how to build a strong and distinct destination personality that
is congruent with their targeted tourist markets by adopting proper promotional strategies.
Also, the destination marketers should build a unique personality for their places. Many
other related areas can be explored as that of the congruency effect, the positioning of
tourism destinations using the personality dimensions, etc which can enhance the tourism
sector.
iii
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Number
Title Page
Number
Table 1.1 The five phases in destination branding 21
Table 1.2 The brand-building matrix 22
Table 3.1 Selection of Destinations 112
Table 3.2 Required Sample Size 115
Table 3.3 Total Sample Size taken 118
Table 3.4 Respondents‘ Brand Personality ratings for Destinations –
Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh
120-121
Table 3.5 Tourist‘s intention to recommend the destination to others 122-123
Table 3.6 Tourist‘s Personality 123-124
Table 3.7 Respondent‘s perception on How a Holiday at Jammu, Kashmir
and Ladakh would make them feel
125
Table 4.1 Demographic Profile of Respondents 138-139
Table 4.2 Destination Brand Personality 141
Table 4.3 Intention to Recommend 142-143
Table 4.4 Tourist‘s Brand Personality 143-144
Table 4.5 Respondents‘ perception on How a Holiday at Jammu, Kashmir
and Ladakh would make them feel
145-146
Table 4.6 KMO and Bartlett‘s Test for Destination Brand Personality 147
Table 4.7 Summary of results from scale Purification 148-149
Table 4.8 Comparative analysis of Destination Personality in Jammu,
Kashmir and Ladakh
153-154
Table 4.9 Summary of Cronbach‘s Alpha Reliability analysis for
Destination Personality
156
Table 4.10 Summary of Cronbach‘s Alpha Reliability analysis for
Intention to Recommend
156
iv
Table 4.11 ANOVA 158-160
Table 4.12 Correlation Analysis for Destination Personality and Intention
to Recommend.
162-163
Table 4.13 Model Summary 163
Table 4.14 ANOVA 164
Table 4.15 Model Summary 165-166
Table 4.16 Result after Scale Purification 168
Table 4.17 KMO and Bartlett's Test 171
Table 4.18 Comparative analysis of Personality of tourists visiting Jammu
and Kashmir
172
Table 4.19 KMO and Bartlett‘s Test 174
Table 4.20 Respondents‘ perception of how a holiday at Jammu and
Kashmir would make them feel
175
Table 4.21 Relationship between Respondents‘ perception of how a
holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel and
Intention to Recommend
176-178
Table 4.22 Model Summary 178
Table 4.23 Model Summary 179
v
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Title Page No.
Figure 2.1 The ‗Big five‘ Human Personality dimensions 48
Figure 2.2 Brand Personality Framework 49
Figure 2.3 Brand Personality Scale 51-52
Figure 2.4 Brand Personality Drivers 53
Figure 4.1 Scree Plot 151
Figure 4.2 Scree Plot 169
vi
LIST OF ANNEXURES
Annexure No. Title Page No.
Annexure 1 Questionnaire 235 – 240
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Page No.
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Tourism 1
1.2 World tourism scenario 2
1.3 Tourism in India 3
1.4 Growth trends 3
1.5 Tourism in Jammu and Kashmir 4
1.6 Viable Tourism Projects 6
1.7 Economic Benefits 6
1.8 Strategies for Marketing Jammu and Kashmir 6
1.9 Brand 8
1.10 Branding 15
1.11 Destination 17
1.12 Destination branding 18
1.13 The Destination Branding Process 20
1.14 Destination brand equity 23
1.14.1 Brand awareness 24
1.14.2 Brand Loyalty 25
1.14.3 Perceived Quality 25
1.14.4 Brand Association 26
1.14.5 Brand Identity 26
1.15 Outline of thesis 27
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1. Introduction
This chapter includes introduction to tourism industry, research background, and problem
discussion and research objectives.
1.1 Tourism
In today‘s world, tourism has become a big business and has been considered as a fastest
growing industry. This is primarily a service industry because it does not produce goods
but provides services to various classes of people. Tourism can play an effective role in
integrating the entire universe. Tourism helps both in investments and generation of
resources which leads to employment generation as well as socio-economic development
of the local population at large. Ryan (1991) stated that tourism is not simply about places
but it is about the experience of a place, about meeting people, the interaction between host
and visitor and with fellow tourists. It is perhaps the most intangible of all the service
industries. People save their money and their weeks of escape from work to buy what
becomes a memory. Another definition of tourism was made by Mill & Morrison (1992).
They were of the view that tourism is the term given to the activity that occurs when
people travel. This encompasses everything from the planning of the trip, the travel to the
destination area, the stay itself, the return and the reminiscences about it afterwards. It
includes those activities which the traveler undertakes as part of the trip, the purchase
made and the interactions that occurred between host and guest in the destination area. In
2
sum, it is all of the activities and impacts that occur when a visitor travels. Also, according
to the definition made by the World Tourism Organization (1994), tourism is the sum total
of activities of persons travelling to and staying in places outside their usual environment
for not more than one consecutive year for leisure, businesses and other purposes.
Page (2005) observed that even though there is on-going controversy over the extent to
which tourism can be defined both as an industry and a service activity, it is widely
recognized that tourism combines a broad range of economic activities and services
designed to meet the needs of tourists.
1.2 World tourism scenario
Nowadays people are viewing tourism as a way of life rather than a luxury item reserved
for the affluent and the elite. Tourism has become the largest service industry globally in
terms of gross revenue as well as foreign exchange earnings. The present annual global
income from tourism (international and domestic) is nearly US$13 trillion which is more
than the GNP of all countries except the United States. According to WTO forecasts, by
2020, international arrivals will reach 1.6 billion nearly three times the number of
international trips made in 1996 which was 592 million. The ―Tourism 2020 vision‖
forecast predicts that by 2020 one out of every three trips will be long haul journeys to
other regions of the world. Long-haul travel is expected to increase from 24% of all
international tourism in 1995 to 35% of all international traffic arrivals by the year 2020
(World of tourism, 2012).
The Travel and Tourism (T&T) industry directly contributes about 3.6% of the world‘s
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and indirectly contributes about 10.3% to it. As one of the
biggest contributors to the global GDP, this industry directly employs nearly 77 million
3
people worldwide, which comprises about 3% of the world‘s total employment. The T&T
industry also contributes to indirect employment generation to the tune of 234 million or
8.7 % of the total employment implying that one in every twelve jobs in the world is in the
tourism industry. The industry also represents about 12% of the total world exports
(Gujarat Infrastructure Development Board, 2012).
1.3 Tourism in India
India currently holds the 12th position in Asia and 68th position in the list of overall in the
list of the world's most attractive tourist destinations, as per the Travel and Tourism
Competitiveness Report 2011 by the World Economic Forum (India Brand Equity
Foundation, 2012).The increasing numbers of both domestic as well as international
tourists have been very encouraging for the Indian travel and hospitality sector which has
nearly doubled during the last three years. The tourism and hospitality industry
experienced a healthy growth trend of 24.6 per cent during 2009-2010 as compared to
2008-2009. The total number of foreign tourists in the country in 2010 was 5.58 million as
compared to 5.17 million in 2009, registering a rise of 8.1 per cent, according to the
Market Research Division of the Ministry of Tourism (Harit India, 2012).
1.4 Growth Trends
Tourism and hospitality being the largest service sector in the country, contributes around
6.23 per cent to the national GDP and 8.78 per cent of the total employment in the country.
The country welcomes around 6 million international visitors every year and nearly 562
million domestic tourists (The Ground Report India , 2012).
4
The Union Ministry of Tourism compiles a monthly estimate on the foreign tourist arrivals
(FTAs) and foreign exchange earnings (FEE) based on the total number of foreign visitors
in the country. The important trends in the sector for June 2011 based on the report by the
Ministry of Tourism are as follows:
The total number of tourists visiting the country during June 2011 were 0.39 million as
compared to 0.37 million during June 2010 and 0.352 million in June 2009. A growth of
7.2 per cent has been registered during June 2011 as compared to 4.9 per cent growth in
June 2010. Also, the 7.2 per cent growth rate in June 2011 was higher than the observed
growth rate of 7.0 per cent in May 2011. FTAs during the period January-June 2011 were
2.91 million with a growth of 10.9 per cent as compared to the FTAs of 2.63 million with a
growth of 8.9 per cent during January-June 2010 over the corresponding period of 2009.
FEE during the month of June 2011 were US$ 1,213 million as compared to FEE of US$
1,020 million during the month of June 2010 and US$ 796 million in June 2009. The
growth rate in FEE in June 2011 over June 2010 was 18.9 per cent as compared to the
growth of 28.1 per cent in June 2010 over June 2009. FEE from tourism during January-
June 2011 were US$ 7,811 million with a growth of 14.2 per cent, as compared to US$
6,842 million, with a growth of 36.6 per cent during January-June 2010, over the
corresponding period of 2009 (India Brand Equity Foundation, 2011).
1.5 Tourism in Jammu and Kashmir
Tourism is one of the state‘s major industries. It has played an important role for
developing the economy, particularly in the region of the Valley and Ladakh. The industry
has given jobs to a very large number of people, particularly to the younger generation and
generated economic activities in the primary, secondary and tertiary sectors in the state
5
which owes dependence to a large extent to this industry. Some of the key attributes of the
tourism industry in Jammu and Kashmir are virgin area, pilgrimage, different geographical
locations, culture, climate, handicrafts, landscape, hospitality, architecture, historical
heritage etc.
Jammu & Kashmir is full of colourful Rocky Mountains, valleys, trekking trail, several
high rising chortens, snowy mountains, meadows of flowers, lakes, gardens, orchards,
monuments, temples, forts and palaces. Ladakh is famous for its spectacular monasteries
while Jammu is famous for its temples or religious tourism and Kashmir is known for its
beauty.
The State of Jammu and Kashmir has three distinct regions, viz. Jammu, Kashmir and
Ladakh and all the three have great potential for tourism for both domestic as well as
international tourists. There are many destinations which are untapped and can be
developed as major tourist destinations, having the entire natural as well as the cultural
resources for attracting tourists. Some of these destinations include important natural
resources such as excellent climate, beautiful lakes, locations for adventure sports, wild
life, natural and manmade parks like Shalimar and Nishat of the Mughal period, flora and
fauna, alpine forests, natural waterfalls and streams etc. Some other destinations include
various cultural resources of the state such as religious shrines of Hindus, historical
monuments, plethora of local festivals, distinct cuisines, craftsmanship skills for intricate
and fine woodwork, woolens, carpets, textiles, paper machie, inlay work etc.
But there is another reality that tourism has been directly hit at least in the region of
Kashmir Valley. There is a state of despondency in all support services to the state tourism
industry. Because of the violence prone environment, no well-known financial institutions
6
are willing to invest in the state as they could have invested before militancy occurred in
this region (Final report for 20 year Perspective Plan for Sustainable Development of
Tourism in Jammu and Kashmir, 2012).
1.6 Viable Tourism Projects
In addition to the various projects recommended, an integrated approach has to be made in
terms of back end support and forward end support to the tourism activities. The activities,
which are directly or indirectly related to tourism, have to be given utmost importance to
make Jammu and Kashmir the most attractive state in the country and in the world for
domestic as well as foreign tourists. Many new initiatives or projects which should be
undertaken in the next twenty years are being recommended with the recommendation that
the ongoing projects should be completed as soon as possible.
1.7 Economic Benefits
Tourism industry has played an important role in the development of the economy of the
state as a whole. The economic activities are generated in the primary, secondary and
tertiary sector of the valley. Hence tourism generated employment may be classified into
three major heads. One is direct employment that sells goods and services directly e.g.
hotels, restaurants, shops etc. Second one is indirect employment which generally supplies
goods, services to the tourism business and thirdly investment related employment in
construction and other capital goods industries.
1.8 Strategies for Marketing Jammu and Kashmir
Strategies have to be undertaken to market the destination Jammu and Kashmir in the
global as well as national arena. Sustained efforts have to be made to increase Jammu and
7
Kashmir‘s visibility and awareness. Marketing has to be done in such a way so as to attract
the best of the various segments of tourists having different tastes of recreation,
entertainment, adventure etc.
Five strategies to increase Jammu and Kashmir‘s visibility on the world tourism map:
1. Development and organization of a tourism product keeping in view tourist‟s
expectations:
Faced with increasing competition and the need to satisfy tourists with an
increasingly broad range of interests, Jammu and Kashmir should offer a tourism
product that is competitive and innovative. Both the development and the
organization of the tourism products are important in the success of promotional
strategies.
2. Adjusting promotional strategies to new information and communication
technologies
There is a great upheaval in the world of communication, prompting major
changes in tourist behavior which are noticeable in travel planning and
reservations. Jammu and Kashmir will have to adopt a promotional approach
which should be consistent with these new tendencies.
3. Establishing a strong business relationship between Department of Tourism of
Jammu and Kashmir and the tourism industry in Jammu and Kashmir.
Partners must be grouped together to increase the impact of Jammu and
Kashmir‘s tourism industry on foreign markets.
8
4. Setting up a customized tourism product
The success of promotional strategies depend on two things, one on improving our
knowledge of tourist‘s needs and interests and secondly rigorously assessing the
results obtained.
5. Promotion
With the changing times and new realities, the tourism operators should reassess
their marketing strategies. New Media Action Plan is needed that will increase the
marketing reach and lower the costs such as printed material, magazines,
advertising, trade shows, television, targeting etc. Targeting is one of most
important marketing mix of the marketing strategy. We should target the right kind
of tourists who can generate revenues for the tourism industry.
Strategy for tourism promotion should include
i) Development of facilities, activities, physical environment and infrastructure.
ii) Marketing the region and selling an image.
iii) Expanding culture, sport, natural and other tourist attractions.
iv) Physically regenerating the area.
v) Expanding tourism resources comprising primary and secondary elements.
1.9 Brand
We all come across brands several times every day. They are in stores we visit, in our own
homes, in simple words, they are everywhere in our society. Even though brands are part
9
of our everyday life, the question remains: What exactly is a brand? Trying to define in
much detail what a brand is can be very difficult (e.g. Brown, 2006, p. 50) and the
definition can also vary within the literature.
Branding began many centuries before the term acquired its modern usage. There were
various ways of promoting wares or goods before Greeks and Romans and others. In
classical times, most consumers of most products were illiterate and purchased a particular
product only by identifying it from a picture. In today‘s more sophisticated and literate
age, the use of visual puns still exists. Modern branding is, however, concerned with
assembling together and maintaining a mix of values, both tangible and intangible, which
are relevant to consumers (Hart & Murphy, 1998).
‗Brand‘ is derived from the old Norse word brand, ―meaning burn and it was by this
method that early man marked his livestock‖ (Blackett, 1991). The term ―brand,‖
traditionally came from the practice of cattle branding. This was a means of identifying
suppliers and to differentiate one farmer‘s stock from another, which acted as an assurance
of quality to buyers (Breakenridge, 2001). There are different definitions about the concept
of brand but the core meaning is consistent. It is a valuable and abstract asset which is
issued by marketers to differentiate otherwise identical products (Martenson, 2007). A
traditional definition of the term brand is the name associated with one or more items in
the product line that is used to identify the source of character of the item(s) (Kotler, 2000).
The American Marketing Association (AMA) defined a brand as a name, term, sign,
symbol or design or a combination of them, intended to identify the goods and services of
one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate them from those of competitors. Keller
(2003a) stated that whenever a marketer creates a new name, logo or symbol for a new
product, he or she has created a brand. He recognized that brands today are much more
10
than that. According to these definitions, brands have a simple and clear function as
identifiers. Similarly, Jobber (2004) was of the view that a brand can be defined as a
distinctive product offering created by the use of name, symbol, design, packaging or some
combination of these intended to differentiate it from its competitors. He further defined
branding as the process by which companies distinguish their product offerings from the
competition. De Chernatony and Riley (1998) defined a brand as a complex
multidimensional construct in which managers augment products and services with values
and this facilitates the process by which consumers confidently recognise and appreciate
these values. Anholt (2007) explained that the brand name acts as our short cut to an
informed buying decision. De Chernatony and Riley (1998) argued that the interpretation
of the brand as a shorthand device recognizes how the myriad of marketing activities are
integrated in the consumer's mind to form the brand entity. The clarity of an effective
brand will minimize the risk of misinterpretation. However, this may also reduce the
amount of consumers who successfully develop an emotional relationship with the product
(Nickerson & Moisey, 1999).
Within marketing, however, the term ―brand‖ has become a little unclear (De Chernatony
and Dall‘ Olmo Riley, 1998) and has adopted multiple meanings due to semantic
confusion (Stern, 2006). Brands can also be seen as referring to the strategies that
managers use when they want to create an identity for their business (Solomon et al.,
2010). Brands give products a symbolic meaning (Kim, 1992). The symbolic meaning can
be used as emblems or for decorating products with brand names (Davis & Chun, 2003).
To some, a brand is simply the name of a product. A brand has often been defined as a
name, term, sign, symbol, design or a combination of them, intended to identify the goods
or services of one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate them from those of
11
competitors (Kotler and Keller, 2006). It is also often used as shorthand for quality and
provides a consumer with a bundle of information about what can be expected from a
product or service (Zeithaml, 1988). The brand itself is said to be intangible and regarded
as a promise made that reflects what the consumer can expect from a product, service or
company (Deighton, 1992). This promise is based on customer beliefs and expectations
that are formed through time and interaction. This suggests that by recalling a brand name,
consumers evoke beliefs, which means that the brand name develops a connotation of
relative quality over repeated purchase (Prabhaker and Sauer, 1994). Brands are assigned
with life and have the possibility to have a relationship with them (Patterson & O
‟ Malley, 2006). According to Kim (1992) the meaning of brands do not link with the
product itself and its abilities but rather with the conceptions and meanings for consumers.
Although brands are officially trademarked, yet they are intangible, existing as an ―idea‖ or
―mental construct‖. Therefore, they are not only fully owned by the corporation behind it
but also by the consumers (Kim, 1992). Thus a brand is based primarily on customers‘
perceptions, which in turn, are influenced by additional elements that make up the brand.
Sterne (1999) summarized the above ideas by saying that a brand is said to be an extremely
valuable intangible asset to any company, as it defines the company and carries a ton of
information in a fraction of a second. The effect of a brand on a company is not easily
measured but can provide benefits if managed effectively. Thus, once a customer is
accustomed to the brand it takes a lot to change them to substitute products (Rooney,
1995).
Much has been written about brands but in a form of a summary, De Chernatony and
Dall‘Olmo Riley (1998) noted that the definitions in the literature variably regarded brands
in the context of (i) legal instrument; (ii) logo; (iii) companies; (iv) shorthand; (v) risk
12
reducers; (vi) identity systems; (vii) image in consumers‘ minds; (viii) value system; (ix)
personalities; (x) relationships; (xi) adding value and (xii) evolving entities. There are
many stakeholders who have an interest in a firm‘s brand (e.g. employees, shareholders,
suppliers, partners, investors, regulators etc). Every brand theme takes the perspective
either of a firm‘s staff for its consumers (or both) to determine the antecedents and the
consequences of the brand. Hence, a firm‘s activities (input) and its consumers‘
perceptions (output) are the two main boundaries of the brand construct. They are of the
view that existence of brands is a continuous process, whereby the values and expectations
imbued in the brand object (product or service) are set and enacted by the firm‘s staff and
interpreted and redefined by the consumers. Accordingto HankinsonandCowking
(1993), asuccessful brand should stands thetest oftimeand thebrand should say
somethingdistinct. Also, thepoint ofdistinctionshould be embodied inthebrand
proposition. Advertising inmedia is one ofthe most effective channelsfor
communicating with consumers.Indifferent mediachannels marketers have the
opportunity to establish a relationship with the consumers and they can communicate both
positing and personality.
A brand is applied to products to improve customer recognition and it leads to purchase
behavior and accordingly increases the possibility of brand loyalty. There are four streams
of brand conceptualisation that are all inextricably linked and have been identified within
academic literature. These four groups are brands as communicators, brands as perceptual
entities, brands as value enhancers and brands as relationships; each stream being unique
and integral to place brand development (Hankinson, 2004).
13
There is no doubt that brands are powerful in today's market place and King (1998)
showed the real power of brands by saying that a product is something that is made in a
factory but a brand is something that is bought by a customer. A product can be copied by
a competitor but a brand is unique. A product can be quickly outdated but a successful
brand is timeless.
A brand is a more enduring asset than specific products and facilities (Kotler et al., 2005).
According to De Chernatony and Mc Donald (1997), brands have evolved from only being
a tool which indicates what type of product it is, to the branding of today when brands are
used to communicate different benefits with the specific product. Hence, benefits can range
from product quality to feelings and status associated with the brand. Brands are no longer
simply product labels but rather mediums of communication towards customers,
transmitting specific attributes of the products which differentiate them from other
products (Henkel et al., 2007; Boyd & Sutherland, 2006). The brand is connected with
specific values that are hard to measure but still important asset to the companies and due
to the excessive amount of similar products, today‘s companies must build strong brands to
be competitive (Boyd & Sutherland, 2006).
Kapferer (1997) stated that a brand is a relationship. He continued by saying that brands
are involved in the transactions between people. A brand is also a reflection or image of
the personalities of the targeted consumers. The self-image is a similar concept as the
reflection, but the self-image reflects the consumer‘s own inner reflection.
Strong and successful brands clearly generate higher returns on sales and on investment.
They could also help companies in maintaining market share in the face of a changing
competitive environment (Hankinson & Cowking, 1997; Doyle, 1990).
14
According to Delgado Ballester and Munuera Aleman (2005), creating a strong brand is
often a goal for many organizations since it provides several advantages. They stated that it
helps organizations to be less vulnerable to competitive marketing actions, gain larger
margins, as well as create brand extension opportunities. In consumer marketing, brands
can provide differentiation among competitors and because of this brands have become
more important in corporate marketing strategies (Opoku, 2006).
One of the ways that brands deliver value to customers is their time saving function. By
recalling either brand experience or marketing claims, the consumer can save the effort of
having to seek for information (Chernatony & McDonald, 1992). In this way, brands act as
short hand devices. This is an important attribute in today‘s crowded market place. An
additional strength of brands is their ability to add value which satisfies not only functional
but also social and physiological needs. According to Aaker and Biel (1993), one of the
main benefits of brands is that they can be used as personality statements (badges). This
may be of the fact that consumers seek brands with personalities that are congruent with
either its own.
Ogilvy (1985) described a brand as the intangible sum of a product‘s attributes i.e. its
name, packaging and price, its history, its reputation and the way it is advertised (Miller &
Muir, 2004).
Thus, a brand is in fact an experience that a consumer has with a product, service or
organization. No one part defines what a brand is, as it is made up of a number of different
characteristics. An organisation can attempt to create a brand name. However, customers
are the ones who ultimately determine whether a brand will become alive (Timacheff and
Rand, 2001). Uggla (2006) stated that brands have become likeacurrencythatcan be
15
bought, sold and rented. It may be simple to state all the aspects that form a brand such as
a creative naming or logo design but branding is also about solid and strategic business
planning. It can also be inferred from the above analysis that branding is not easy and it
requires considerable effort on company‘s part to create a successful brand with positive
associations.
1.10 Branding
Branding is a basic element of marketing. The process involving actions to develop a brand
is called branding. Nickerson and Moisey (1999) defined branding as the images people
have of the state and what kind of relationship they have with it. Furthermore, De
Chernatony and Riley (1998) described the branding process as the process in which brand
is positioned by the firm through the elements of the marketing mix, which work together
to convey a pre-determined brand identity and personality.
Branding can also be used to communicate corporate values with the intention of creating a
passion for the company by the customers which can be decisive in future purchasing
decisions (Henkel et al, 2007; Martenson, 2007). Branding gives the brand an individual
identity and allows customers to develop associations with the brand. The brand can be
associated with things like prestige, economy and quality (Jobber, 2004).
According to Doyle (1998), one major advantage of branding is the ability of adding value
to a product. By added value, people will prefer the brand before others and also be willing
to pay a higher price for it. Branding is about creating and managing brands. Branding
does not only involve creating a brand from scratch but also to strengthen, reposition,
restate/rejuvenate, expand or extend an already existing brand. According to Bergstrom
16
(1996), branding is a six-step process, which starts with getting to know one‘s brand and
ends with a monitor, measure and adjust phase.
Branding has in recent years, come to attract a much broader attention from companies. As
markets are becoming more complex and competitive and the advances in manufacturing,
distribution and communication have created a large array of products and services;
marketers turn to branding because it offers the best opportunity to create growth.
Branding a product includes marketing initiatives which to help convey the developed
brand. Branding is complex and can be influenced by a variety of external factors that
influence customer perceptions. Therefore, individual self-concept plays a role in how a
brand is interpreted and will determine which images become associated with that brand
(aspirational or ideal) personality.
Branding is perhaps the most fashionable approach for contemporary destination marketers
confronted with increasing product parity, substitutability and competition (Morgan,
Pritchard and Piggot, 2003). According to Morgan et al (2003), the need for destinations to
portray a unique identity is more critical than ever. They also argued that brands are meant
to differentiate by inciting belief, evoking emotions and prompting behaviors and that
brands should have social, emotional and identity value to the users. It is proposed that
those places become brand winners that are rich in emotional meaning, have great
conversation value and hold high anticipation for potential tourists whereas brand losers
are said to be places with little meaning, even less status, virtually no conversation value
and zero anticipation for tourists (Morgan and Pritchard, 2002).
Branding seeks to encourage awareness and establish perceptions of quality and favourable
associations. A brand name allows customers to easily recognise what is being provided,
17
creates a suitable image and offers familiarity and reduced risk. Brands are traditionally
associated with consumer goods but promoters of destinations are increasingly adopting
the technique (Henderson, 2000). Hankinson (2001) argued that to create brands in the way
in which they are defined and discussed in the traditional marketing literature is a more
difficult and complex process with regard to locations than is the case with more
mainstream products and services. Cai (2002) defined the image of a destination brand as
perceptions about a place as reflected by the associations held in tourist memory. Keller
(1998) was of the view that building a brand image amounts to identifying the most
relevant associations and strengthening their linkages to the brand.
1.11 Destination
Destinations are the centre piece of tourism. A destination is a place that attracts visitors
for a temporary stay. A destination‘s scope can vary from continents and countries as
destinations over states and cities and furthermore villages and resort areas. The places
where a vacation or visit can take place, the term destination can be used. Here the visitor
can spend holidays or just time when talking about day trips. Pike (2008) argued that a
destination is a geographical space in which a cluster of tourism resources exists rather
than a political boundary. He also stated that nowadays destinations are emerging as the
world‘s biggest brands. Buhalis (2000) stated that the destination offers a mixture of all
products, services and experiences which are provided locally. Hu and Ritchie (1993) have
defined a tourism destination as a package of tourism facilities and services which like any
other consumer product or service, is composed of a number of multidimensional attributes
that together determine its attractiveness to a particular individual in a given choice
18
situation. Ashworth and Voogt (1990) were of the view that a destination is a product is a
bundle of services and experiences.
To ensure the creation and consumption of a destination it is essential to create unique
selling points. Urry (1990) furthermore stated that this is due to the fact that tourism
consumption involves gazing for the unfamiliar. The tourist‘s aim is to get out of his daily
life, to see something different and do something different. Tourists are, for instance,
searching for recovering and recreation during their vacation or even visits at the
destination. Many authors stated that a place is a product of combinations of the place‘s
macro environments and the products and services offered by the infrastructure sector. It
creates the tourist‘s experience of the destination which is additionally stated by Murphy,
Pritchard and Smith (2000) and Kotler, Bowen and Masken‘s (1996).
1.12 Destination Branding
According to Keller (2003), destination branding includes geographic locations, like
organisations or products, which can also be branded and the goal of such branding is to
make people aware of the location and then link desirable associations to create a
favourable image to entice visits and businesses. Morgan et al. (2004) noted the significant
increase of awareness regarding destination branding and that it is one of the hottest topics
amongst place marketing professionals and politicians. The rise in positive attention to this
field of research is beneficial for both the academic community as well as national
government agencies responsible for tourism development and promotion.
Destination branding refers to the branding of a particular destination, regardless of
geographical, political or social scale. Hankinson (2004) defined branding in the context of
a destination brand as the built environment in which the various services forming part of
19
the core brand take place. Fan (2006) argued that nation branding is applying branding and
marketing communications techniques to promote a nation‘s image. Furthermore, the place
branding is to promote the country (or may be a city in the country) as a destination for
tourism. The key function of a destination brand is the development of differentiation
among competitors. The ability to effectively capture the attention of a potential consumer
and foster an emotional connection between the individual and the destination is a
determinant of the brands effectiveness (Morgan & Pritchard, 2004).
The capability of a destination to market itself through positive image building will help to
distinguish itself among similar destinations (Cai, 2002). Hankinson (2004) dictated that
the successful branding of destinations results from a combination of imaginative
marketing supported by investment in the key services and facilities required to deliver the
experience on offer. Ultimately, the primary objective of destination branding is to
captivate the potential consumer and to develop an inherent interest in a destination that
will positively influence destination choice.
Blain et al (2005) introduced the definition of branding for tourism destinations. They
stated that destination branding is the set of marketing activities that (1) support the
creation of a name, symbol, logo, word mark or other graphic that readily identifies and
differentiates a destination; that (2) consistently convey the expectation of a memorable
travel experience that is uniquely associated with the destination; that (3) serve to
consolidate and reinforce the emotional connection between the visitor and the destination;
and that (4) reduce consumer search costs and perceived risk. Collectively, these activities
serve to create a destination image that positively influences consumer destination choice.
20
As many destinations promote similar attributes such as scenery, history and culture, an
effective destination branding requires a unique selling proposition (Blain et al, 2005).
This proposition needs to be sustainable, believable, relevant and attractive in competitors‘
eyes so that they would like to copy, but cannot surpass or take over (Morgan et al, 2004).
1.13 The Destination Branding Process
A destination should possess a vision. Fabricius (2006b) stated that vision that is shared by
all the stakeholders and potential consumers should be clearly expressed in the core values
of the brand when the brand is launched. Ooi (2003) emphasized that the actions of
monitoring, evaluation and review can help the destination to communicate a clear identity,
consistency and a unique brand identity.
Destinations should create ―trust marks‖, a name or symbol that links a destination
emotionally with the desires and aspirations of its tourists and ultimately creates ―love-
marks‖ (Morgan et al., 2002). The first step in the destination branding process is to
establish the destination‘s core values and these should be durable, relevant and salient for
the potential tourist (Heath, 2007). The values should also represent matters that are
deliverable, differentiating and enthusing and should be in resonance with the consumers
(Morgan et al., 2004).
Phases in building a destination-brand
The branding approach to destinations is similar to what is done in respect of products. For
marketing purposes, destinations can be treated similar to products such as Coca-cola or
McDonalds‘ burgers (Laws, 2002). Heath (2007) has described five phases in the brand
building process. These phases are as follows:
21
Table 1.1 The five phases in destination branding
Phase one: Market investigation, analysis and strategic recommendations
Phase two: Brand identity development
Phase three: Brand launch and introduction, i.e. communicating the vision
Phase four: Brand implementation
Phase five: Monitoring, evaluation and review.
Source: Adapted from Heath (2007) and Morgan, Prichard & Pride (2004).
In order to determine the destination‘s competitiveness, resources available and the tourist
demand segments, it is important to know the quality of the experiences that are offered at
the destination level.
Cai (2000) stated that destinations should attempt to convey a sense of experiencing the
brand, rather than merely delivering the encounter with the site. Similarly, Buhalis (2000)
was of the view that successful brands reflect and respond to changes in the consumer‘s
life. The brand‘s core values remain the same but its personality keeps on changing. The
brand building process should take consider experience, identity, communication and
quality which are very important in developing a brand architecture. Table 1.2 presents a
brand-building matrix that has four important components, which should be considered in
the brand-building process.
22
Table 1.2: The brand-building matrix
EXPERIENCE COMMUNICATION
Customer expectations Public relations and advertising strategies
Quality letterheads and writing materials
Internet presence
Customer service
Actions of sales delivery staff and other
staff
Brand evolution over the years, changes
to any aspect of the brand should reflect
the changing market demands
News releases, sponsored press and articles etc
Other verbal and non-verbal means of
communication Road shows and events
Seeing and believing/disbelieving
IDENTITY QUALITY
Strong and visible
Tastes and level of service Memorable names
Logos and colours /packaging Ingredients and raw materials
Sponsorships Product durability
Shelf position/display Guarantees
Vehicle displays/branding Cutting-edge technology
Corporate uniforms Country of origin effect
Source: Adapted from Olins( 2002) & Nworah (2005)
23
1.14 Destination brand equity
Destination brand equity is the emotional value that results from the consumer‘s
association with the destination. According to Aaker (1996), brand equity is a set of assets
that are linked to the brand‘s name and symbol which add to or subtract from the value
provided by a product or service to a firm and that firm‘s customers. Ritchie & Ritchie
(1998) argued that brand equity is the total accumulated value or worth of a brand. Brand
equity includes the tangible and intangible assets that a brand contributes to the
destination. These assets can either be in financial terms or their value could lie in their
ability to leverage brand equity. A brand audit should be done in order to develop
destination brand equity. A brand audit is a detailed examination of the brand that involves
the various activities that are meant to assess the health of the brand, while uncovering its
sources of equity and suggesting different ways to improve and leverage that equity. A
brand audit requires an understanding of the sources of brand equity from the perspective
of both the destination and the tourist. The true value and future prospects of a destination
brand usually depends upon consumers and their knowledge of the destination (Keller,
1998).
Evans & Berman (1990) emphasized that the key to brand equity is to ensure that tourists
do not form the opinion that all brands in a certain category are the same. For example,
tourists‘ preference for saffron that is produced in Kashmir has been linked to their interest
in travelling to that particular saffron producing region (Heath, 2004). In most of the cases,
tourist destinations have strong brand equity that has been built over time on the basis of
the products and services that they produce. For example, Switzerland has been associated
24
with Rolex watches, while Kentucky is known for its bourbon (Heath, 2004). Therefore,
product association could help in the development of a destination‘s brand equity.
Studies (Aaker, 1999; Hogg, Cox & Keeling, 2000) have revealed that consumers match
their self-concept with consumer goods. Such matching can be in various categories, such
as class, status, age, gender and occupation, with which the customers associate the goods.
Aaker (2002) discussed that brands create value for the company or brand equity. Brand
equity is the value of the brand. It is based on the extent to which the brand is accompanied
by high brand loyalty, name awareness, perceived quality, strong brand associations and
other assets such as patents, trademarks and channel relationships (Vicente, 2004).
Aaker (2002) described brand equity as a set of assets (and liabilities) linked to a brand‘s
name and symbol that adds to (or subtracts from) the value provided by a product or
service to a firm and/or that firm‘s customers. The major asset categories are:
1. Brand name awareness
2. Brand Loyalty
3. Perceived Quality
4. Brand Associations
1.14.1 Brand awareness
Brand awareness is related to the strength of which the consumer is aware of the brand.
Research has shown that a familiar brand is more likely to receive a more positive response
than that of unknown brand even though there is little or no knowledge of the quality or
even when it is believed that the quality of the unknown brand is perceived as higher
25
(McInnis, Shapiro & Mani, 1999). Awareness of the brand is seen as a basic step towards
knowledge and attitudes of the brand (ibid). According to Aaker (1996), brand awareness
can be viewed from three different aspects i.e. recognition, recall, first recall and dominant
and concerns more than the consumer simply remembering the brand name. According to
Keller (2003), the tourist is aware of a number of similar destinations and may select the
most appealing destination, based on personal reasons. Salience is also closely related to an
association with importance, which is a cardinal aspect of identity. An association is a
direct result of the benefits and attributes of a given holiday destination as perceived by the
customer/tourists.
1.14.2 Brand Loyalty
Brand Loyalty can be represented by word of mouth communication and repeat visits by
tourists, which builds lasting relationships with the destination. This stage is also known as
the resonance, intense, active and/or loyal stage. In the loyal stage, the customer feels a
connection or sense of community with the brand and would miss it if it were no longer
there (Keller,2003).
1.14.3 Perceived Quality
Destination brand which is a totality of perceptions that consumers hold about their
experiences that are associated with a particular place should give rise to effective
management of these perceptions and experiences (De Chernatony, 2006). These
perceptions should secure enduring value for the destination, its partners and customers
(Keller, 2003). Therefore, brand equity should be built at every point of contact between
tourists and the destination.
26
According to Aaker (1996), perceived quality drives the financial performance and is in
essence what a customer is buying. If the perceived quality improves so does the
perception of the brand in its entirety. It can be hard to find out exactly what quality is for a
customer and simply having high quality is not enough, it also needs to be perceived in that
way. Issues regarding perceived quality can be many such as it is hard to wash of an old
image if that image was once perceived as low quality or if quality is promoted in a
product where no one cares about it. The other issues can be that it may be difficult for
consumers to know the difference of all brands, they might not have the time and/or
motivation to process all information and the consumer might not have the knowledge of
knowing how to judge quality (Aaker, 1996).
1.14.4 Brand Associations
Brand associations can include a great variation of associations e.g. product attributes and
non product related attributes such as price or user imagery, benefits such as what can this
product do for me and so on (Keller, 1993). These associations affect the brand equity
greatly and are determined much by the brand identity which is what the organization
wants their brand to be perceived as.
1.14.5 Brand Identity
Brand identity has been used by many scholars (Keller, 2003; De Chernatony, 2006 &
Kaplanidou & Vogt, 2003) and consultants as a concept in branding (Keller, 2003).
According to De Chernatony (2006), brand identity is a unique set of associations that the
brand aspires to create or maintain as well as the manner in which the brand communicates
these ideas to its stakeholders.
27
Aaker (1996) stated that brand identity is aspirational. It is how the brand wants to be
perceived. Aaker was of the view that the brand identity provides direction, purpose and
meaning for the brand. This includes which personality traits the brand should project.
According to Ghodeswar (2008), a strong brand identity that is well understood and
experienced by the customers helps in developing trust .This differentiates the brand from
its competitors. The brand identity includes both core and extended identity .The core
identity contains associations that are not likely to change over time. It is the absolute core
values of the product which is more resistant to change than the extended identity. (Aaker,
1996). The values of the organization and the brand should be in agreement with each
other otherwise they will not be effective (Ghodeswar, 2008). In the core identity there
should be elements that make the brand unique and valuable; (Aaker, 1996). Upshaw
(1995) described the main components of the brand identity as brand positioning and
strategic personality.
Aaker (1996) presented four broad perspectives from which a brand can be viewed. These
perspectives are the brand as a person, brand as a symbol, brand as an organization and
brand as a product. These perspectives can help in clarifying brand identity. Although all
these perspectives cannot be used in destination branding, they should be considered when
developing a brand identity and they should be linked to the brand personality.
1.15 Outline of Thesis
The entire study is discussed in five chapters. Chapter 1 presents the overview of the study,
including the research background which is the basis of this study. Chapter 2 presents an
extended literature review relevant to the proposed study. Chapter 3 focuses on the
research framework. Specifically, a detailed discussion is provided with the research
28
design, the development of the survey instrument, sampling procedure and procedures of
data analysis. Chapter 4 reports the results of the pretest and the analyses of the proposed
hypotheses. Chapter 5 includes the summary and discussions of the hypotheses testing.
Furthermore, both theoretical and managerial implications of the findings are discussed
and suggestions for future research are proposed.
29
References:
Aaker, D. A. (1996). Building strong brands. New York: Free Press.
Aaker, D.A. (1999). Harvard Business Review on Brand Management. Boston: Harvard Business
Review.
Aaker, D. (2002). Building Strong Brands. New York: Free Press.
Aaker, D.A. and Biel, A. (1993). Brand Equity and Advertising (1st edition). New Jersey, USA:
The Free Press.
American Marketing Association.(1960). Marketing Definitions: A Glossary of Marketing Terms.
Chicago: Author.
Anholt, S. (2007). Competitive Identity. The New Brand Management for Nations, Cities and
Regions. New York: Palgrave MacMillan,
Ashworth, G. and Voogt, H. (1990). Nation Brands and Branding. Harlow: Prentice-Hall .
Baloglu, S., and Brindberg, D. (1997). Affective Images of Tourism Destination, Journal of Travel
Research, 35 (4), 11–15.
Bergstrom, A. (1999, May/June). Promises and Expectations: Good Branding Requires Tapping
into Functional and Emotional Needs. Financial Services Marketing Magazine.
Blackett, T. (1991). Brand Valuation (2nd ed.). London, Sydney: Business Books Limited.
Blain, C., Levy, S.E., & Ritchie, J.R.B. (2005). Destination Branding: Insights and Practices from
Destination Management Organizations. Journal of Travel Research, (43)4, 328-338.
Breakenridge, Deirdre (2001). Cyber branding: Brand Building in the Digital Economy. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Financial Times/ Prentice Hall.
30
Boyd, G., & Sutherland, M. (2006). Obtaining employee commitment to living the brand of the
organization. South African Journal of Business Management, 37(1), 9-20.
Brown, S. (2006). Ambi-Brand Culture: On a wing and a swear with Ryanair. In J. Schroeder & M.
Salzer-Morling (Eds.), Brand Culture (pp. 50-66). Great Britain: Rutledge.
Buhalis, D. (2000). Marketing the competitive destination of the future. Tourism Management,
(21)1, 97-116.
Cai, A. L. (2000). Cooperative branding for rural destinations. Annals of Tourism Research, 29 (3),
720-74.
Cai, L. (2002).Cooperative branding for rural country branding, Annals of Tourism Research,
29(3), 720-742.
Chernatony, L. & McDonald, M. (1992). Creating Powerful Brands (1st edition). Oxford, Great
Britain: Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd.
Crockett, S. R., & Wood, L. J. (1999). Brand Western Australia: A Totally Integrated Approach to
Destination Branding. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 5(3), 276-289.
Crockett, S. R., & Wood, L. J. (2002). Brand Western Australia: Holidays of an Entirely Different
Nature. In N. Morgan, A. Pritchard & R. Pride (Eds.), Destination Branding: Creating the Unique
Destination Proposition (pp. 124-147). Oxford: Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Davies, G., & Chun, R. (2003). The Use of Metaphor in the Exploration of the Brand Concept.
Journal of Marketing Management, 19 (1/2), 45-71.
De Chernatony, E. (2006). From brand revision to brand evaluation: The strategic Process of
growing and strengthening brands. 3rd Oxford: Elsevier.
De Chernatony, Leslie and Francesca, Dall‘Olmo Riley (1998).Defining a Brand: Beyond the
literature with experts‘ interpretation. Journal of Marketing Management, 14 (5), 417-443.
31
De Chernatony & Mc Donald, M.(1997). Creating Powerful Brands. Oxford: Reed Educational
& Professional Ltd.
Definition of Tourism.(2012).World Tourism Organization Retrieved from
http://www.linkbc.ca/torc/downs1/WTOdefinitiontourism.pdf on 6 Feb, 2012.
Deighton, John (1992). The consumption of performance. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3),
362-372.
Delgado-Ballestor, E. &Munuera Aleman, J.L. (2005). Does brand trust matters to brand equity.
Journal of Product and Brand Management, 14 (3), 187-197.
Doyle, P. (1990, Spring). Building Successful Brands: The Strategic Options. The Journal of
Consumer Marketing, 7( 2), 5 –20.
Doyle, P. (1998). Marketing Management and Strategy (2nd edition). London, Great Britain:
Prentice Hall Europe.
Ekinci, Y., & Hosany, S. (2006). Destination Personality: An Application of Brand Personality to
Tourism Destinations. Journal of Travel Research, (45)2, 127-139.
Evans, R.J. & Berman, B. (1990). Marketing. New York: McMillan Publishing Company.
Fabricius, M.( 2006). Maximizing the destination brand. UNWTO Conference, Creating
competitive advantage for your destination. Retrieved from:
http://www.destinationmanagement2007budapest.com/pres/ 0209/ 20070209-1.pdf. on 17th of Sep,
2012.
Fakeye, P. C., and Crompton, J. L. (1991). Image Differences Between Prospective, First Time,
and Repeat Visitors to the Lower Rio Grande Valley. Journal of Travel Research, 30 (2), 10–16.
Fan, Y. (2006). Branding the Nation: What is Being Branded? Journal of Vacation Marketing,
12(1), 5-14.
32
Final Report of 20 Year Perspective Plan For Sustainable Development of Tourism in Jammu and
Kashmir. (2012).Background of Jammu and Kashmir. Retrieved from
http://tourism.gov.in/writereaddata/CMSPagePicture/file/Primary%20Content/MR/Pplan/jammu%
20kashmir.pdf on 20th of March, 2012
Ghodeswar, B.M. (2008). Building Brand Identity in Competitive Markets: A Conceptual Model.
Journal of Product and Brand Management, 17(1), 4-12.
Gujarat Infrastructure Development Board. (2012).Current Global Trends. Retrieved from
http://www.gidb.org/cms.aspx?content_id=161 on 2nd
of March, 2012.
Hankinson, G. (2004).Relational network brands: Towards a conceptual mode l of place brands.
Journal of Vacation Marketing, 10(2), 109-121.
Hankinson, G., & Cowking, P. (1993). Branding in Action. Marketing for professionals Series.
Cambridge: Mc Graw-Hill.
Hankinson, G., & Cowking, P. (1997). Branding in Action. Berkshire: McGraw-Hill.
Hankinson, G. (2001). Location branding: A study of the branding practices of 12 English cities.
Journal of Brand Management, 9(2), 127-142.
Harit India.(2012). Tourism place development. Retrieved from
http://www.haritindia.org/home/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=60&Itemid=70
on 24th feb, 2012.
Hart, S., & Murphy, J. (1998). Brands the New Wealth Creators. New York: New York
University Press.
Heath, E. (2004). Strategic Destination Marketing: Principles and Practices. Unpublished Report.
University of Pretoria.
33
Heath, E. (2007). Strategic Destination Marketing. Unpublished Report. University of Pretoria.
Henderson, J.C. (2000). Attracting tourists to Singapore's Chinatown: A case study in conservation
and promotion. Journal of Tourism Management, 21(5), 525-535.
Henkel, S., Tomczak, T., Heitmann, M., Herrmann, A. (2007). Managing brand consistent
employee behavior: relevance and managerial control of behavioral branding. Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 16 (5), 310-320.
Hu, Y., and Ritchie, J. R. B. (1993). Measuring Destination Attractiveness: A Contextual
Approach. Journal of Travel Research, 32, 25–34.
Hogg, M. K., Cox, A.J & Keeling, K. (2000). The impact of self monitoring in image
congruence and product/brand evaluation. European Journal of Marketing, 34(4/5), 641-667.
Hosany, S., Ekinci, Y. and Uysal M. (2006). Destination Image and Destination Personality: An
Application of Branding Theories to Tourism Places. Journal of Business Research, 59, 638-642.
Hosany, S., Ekinci, Y. and Uysal, M. (2007). Destination Image and Destination Personality.
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 1 (1), 62-81.
India Brand Equity Foundation.(2011).Growth Trends. Retrieved from
http://www.indianow.org/artdispview.aspx?in=74&art_id=29511&cat_id=120&page=1on 15th of
March, 2012.
India Brand Equity Foundation.(2012). Indian Economy Overview. Retrieved from
http://www.ibef.org/artdispview.aspx?in=36&art_id=29729&cat_id=140&page=2 on 15th
of
March, 2012.
India Brand Equity Foundation.(2012).Tourism and Hospitality. Retrieved from
http:// www.ibef.org/industry/tourismhospitality.aspx on 8th March, 2012.
34
Jobber, D.(2004). Principles and Practice of Marketing (4th ed.). Berkshire: McGraw-Hill
International (UK) Limited.
Kapferer, J. N. (1997). Strategic Brand Management. London: Kogan Page.
Kaplanidou, K. & Vogt, C. (2003). Destination branding: Concepts and measurement. Department
of Park, Recreation and Tourism Resources: Michigan State University.
Keller, Kevin L. (1993).Conceptualizing, measuring and managing customer-based brand equity.
Journal of Consumer Research, 57(1), 1-22.
Keller, Kevin L. (1998). Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring, and Managing Brand
Equity. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Keller, K.L.(2003). Strategic brand management: Building, measuring and managing brand
equity(ed). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Keller, Kevin L. (2003a).Brand Synthesis: The multidimensionality of brand knowledge. Journal of
Consumer Research, 29(4), 595-600.
Kim, P. (1992). Commentary: A Perspective on Brands. Journal of Product & Brand Management,
1 (4), 35-39.
King, S. (1998).Who am I? Assessing Brand Equity. Retrieved from
www.ashtonadams.com/brandreports/brand_advertising.htn. (000320) on 17th October, 2011.
Kotler, P.(2000). Marketing Management: The Millennium Edition, Tenth Edition, Prentice Hall
International, Inc.
Kotler, P., Bowen, J.T. & Makens, J.C. (2006).Marketing for Hospitality and Tourism. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
35
Kotler, Philip and Keller Kevin L. (2006). Marketing Management (12th ed.). Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Pearson-Prentice Hall.
Kotler, P., Wong, V., Saunders, J. & Armstrong, G., (2005). Principles of Marketing, Fourth
European Edition, Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.
Laws, E. (2002). Tourism marketing, services and quality management perspectives.
London: Stanley Thorns.
Martenson, R. (2007).Corporate Brand Image, Satisfaction and Store Loyalty. A study of a brand,
store brands and manufacturer brands. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management,
35(7), 544-565.
McInnis, D., Shapiro, S. & Mani, G (1999). Enhancing Brand Awareness through Brand Symbols.
Advances in Consumer Research, 26(1), 601-608.
Mill, R.C. & Morrison, A.M. (1992).The tourism system: An introductory text (2nd
ed.). New
Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Miller, J., & Muir, D. (2004). The Business of Brands. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Morgan and Pritchard, (2002) Contextualizing Destination Branding. In N.J. Morgan, A.
Pritchard and R. Pride, (Eds.), Destination Branding: Creating the Unique Destination
Proposition (pp l1-43). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Morgan, N. and Pritchard, A. (2004). Meeting the Destination Branding Challenge. In Morgan, N.,
Pritchard, A. and Pride, R. (Eds.), Destination Branding: Creating the Unique Destination
Proposition (2nd edn). Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
Morgan, N.J., Pritchard, A. and Piggott. (2003). Destination branding and the role of the
stakeholders: The case of New Zealand. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 9, 285-299.
36
Morgan, N., Pritchard, A., & Pride, R. (2004). Destination Branding: Creating the Unique
Destination Proposition (2nd ed). Oxford: Elsevier Ltd.
Morgan, N. Nigel, Pride, R. & Prichard, A. (2002). Destination branding: Creating a Unique
Destination Proposition. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Murphy, P., Benckendorff, P., Moscardo, G. (2007). Linking travel motivation, tourist self image
and destination brand personality. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 22(2), 45-59.
Murphy, L., Moscardo, G., & Benckendorff, P. (2007). Using Brand Personality to Differentiate
Regional Tourism Destinations. Journal of Travel Research, (46)1, 5-14.
Murphy, P., Pritchard, M.P. Y Smith, B. (2000). The destination product and its impact on traveller
perceptions. Journal of Tourism Management, 21, 43-52.
Nickerson, N. and Moisey, R. (1999). Branding a state from features to positioning: Making it
simple? Journal of Vacation Marketing, 5(3), 217-226.
Nworah, U.( 2005). Nigeria as a brand. Retrieved from
http://www.brandchannel.com/papers-review on 18-09-2009.
Olins, W. (2002). Opinion piece: Branding the Nation - the theoretical context. Special Issue of The
Journal of Brand Management, 9 (4/5), 241 - 248.
Ooi, C.(2003). Poetics and politics of destination branding: Denmark . Retrieved from
http:/www.cbs/dk/staff/Ooi on 16th of Oct, 2009.
Ogilvy, David (1985).Ogilvy on Advertising, New York, NY: Random House Vintage Books.
Uggla, H.(2006). Positioning: Trends and Tendencies. Sweden: Liber Ekonomi, Malmo.
Opuku, R. (2006). Towards a methodological design for evaluating online brand positioning.
Lulea: Lulea Tekniska Universitetet.
37
Page, J. Stephen. (2005). Transport and Tourism. Global (Perspectives) 2nd
ed. Essex: Pearson.
Paper camp.(2012).Tourism and Hospitality. Retrieved from
http://www.papercamp.com/essay/35698/Oberoi-Crm on 3rd of March, 2012.
Patterson M. and O‘Malley L. (2006).Brands, consumers and relationships: A review. Irish
Marketing Review,18 (1&2), 10-20.
Pike, S. (2008).Destination marketing. Amsterdam: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Prabhaker, Paul R. and Paul, S. (1994).Hierarchical heuristic‘s in evaluation of competitive brands
based on multiple cues. Journal of Psychology and Marketing, 11(3), 217-235.
Ritchie, J.R.B. & Ritchie, R.J.B. (1998). The branding of tourism destinations: The past
achievements and future challenges. Proceedings of the 1998 Annual congress of the international
association of scientific experts in Tourism, Destination marketing: Scopes and limitations,
Edited by Keller, P. Marrakech, Morocco. International Association of Scientific Experts in
Tourism, 89-116.
Rooney, J. A. (1995). Branding: a trend for today and tomorrow. Journal of Product and Brand
Management. 4 (4), 48-55.
Ryan, C. (1991).Tourism and marketing- a symbiotic relationship? Tourism Management,12(2),
101-111.
Solomon, M.R, Bamossy, G., Askegaard, S., & Hogg, M.K, (2010). Consumer Behaviour: A
European Perspective (Fourth edition). Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited.
Sterne, Jim (1999).World Wide Web Marketing (2nd Ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.
The Ground Report India.(2012). Reliance Industries – EIH Ltd. eye Rs. 700 crore investment for
developing hotels. Retrieved from
38
http://www.groundreport.com/Business/Reliance-Industries-EIH-Ltd-eye-Rs-700-crore-
inves/2940744 on 1st of March, 2012.
Timacheff, S., & Rand, D.E. (2001). From Bricks to Clicks: Five Steps to Creating a Durable
Online Brand (Electronic book). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Upshaw, L. B. (1995). Building Brand Identity - A Strategy for Success in a Hostile Market place.
New York: John Wiley Sons.
Urry. (1990). The Tourist Gaze: Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Societies. London, UK: Sage
Publications.
Vincente, L. (2004). Branded for life. Brand Marketing, 31 (2 February), 29-34.
World of tourism. (2012). World tourism scenario. Retrieved from
http://www.tradewinginstitute.com/world/more.htm on 15th of March, 2012.
Zeithaml, A. Valarie (1988, July).Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value. Journal of
Marketing, 52, (3), 2-22.
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF
LITERATURE
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Page No.
2. Introduction 39
2.1Brand Personality 39
2.2 Meaning of brand personality 45
2.3 Dimensions of brand personality 48
2.4 Implementing the Brand Personality /Brand personality drivers 53
2.5 Why use Brand Personality? 56
2.6 How to create a brand personality 57
2.7 Measurement of brand personality 59
2.8 Brand personality and Brand Equity 59
2.8.1 How a brand personality creates brand equity 60
2.9 Brand Personality and Advertising 61
2.10 Brand Personality and the Internet 63
2.11 Brand Personality and Brand Image 64
2.12Brand Personality and Destination Personality 65
2.13 Brands and Symbols 67
2.14 Relationship of brand personality with other dimensions of brand 68
2.15 Effects of brand personality 72
2.16 Application of Jennifer Aaker‘s Brand Personality Scale (BPS) 77
2.17 Intention to recommend 84
2.18 Destination Personality and Tourists‘ Future Intention 86
2.19 Importance of the study 87
2.20 Difference between Present and Past studies 89
2.21 Formulation of the Problem 89
2.22 Justification of the Problem 90
2.23 Reasons for choosing Jammu and Kashmir as study area 91
39
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2. Introduction
2.1Brand Personality
Nowadays, there are so many things which can be identified as brands. Not only
companies and organizations, even people can be seen as brands, such as politicians but
also the common man might see him or herself as a brand (Solomon et al., 2010).
It is human behavior to see objects as having human characteristics in order to interact and
understand the world around them (Louis & Lombart, 2010).
The idea as to whether brands can be described in terms of a set of traits appears to have
been originally proposed by Martineau in 1958. It was further developed by Plummer
(1984). According to Plummer, a brand might be described by three main dimensions:
physical attributes, functional characteristics or benefits associated to consumption and
personality traits associated to the brand. Plummer (2000) described the characterization
aspects as the brand personality. Sirgy (1985) also argued that many products are assumed
to have personality traits which are not solely determined by the actual physical
characteristics but also by a bundle of other factors such as advertising, price, stereotype of
the generalized users and other marketing and psychological associations. Upshaw (1995)
described brand personality as the outward face of a brand. The purpose of creating a
personality for the brand is to give the brand a spirit. The ―naive psychology‖ perspective
defined brand personality as the specific set of meanings which describe the ―inner‖
40
characteristics of a brand. These meanings are constructed based on behaviors exhibited by
personified brands or brand characteristic (Allen and Olsen, 1995). Aaker (1997) defined
brand personality as the set of human characteristics associated with a brand.
Studies on brand personality began in early 1960s. According to Solomon (2009), brand
personality have been used by companies since the nineteenth century, both to diversify
from competitors and to create loyal customers. The research about brand personality
started from Levi‘s work about brand symbolism in 1959 which concluded that consumer
goods symbolically convey social and personal meanings (Opuku, 2006). Further research
in the area of brand personality showed that consumers often apply human personality
traits to brands as if they were human beings. Hence, they use brands to distinguish
themselves (Aaker, 1997). These personality traits that consumers associate with brands
may be directly connected to the people associated with the brands; the typical user and the
endorsers of the products (Mc Cracken, 1989).
The concept of brand personality has been considered important as it helps in
differentiating brands (Plummer, 1984; Mc Enally and De Chernatony, 1999) and to
increase the personal meaning of a brand for consumers (Levy, 1959; Fournier, 1998). A
distinctive brand personality can create a set of unique and favorable associations in
consumer memory and thus enhance brand equity (Keller, 1993). As a result, brand
personality is an important factor for the success of a brand in terms of preference and
choice (Batra et al., 1993). A well established brand personality can result in consumers
having stronger emotional ties to the brand, greater trust and loyalty (Fournier, 1998). Belk
(1988) was of the view that brand personality traits exists to help consumers to express
their self-concept and to experiment symbolic benefits from their possession or
consumption. A brand which had lively personality could help production (or service, or
41
company) establish its special and right image in the consumers‘ mind and strength brand
equity (Keller, 1993; Johnson et al., 2000; Phau and Lau, 2000). Therefore, in 1993, Biel
pointed out that brand personality was thought as a main factor for successful branding.
Consumers often associate brands with human personalities. Aaker (1997) was also of the
view that the symbolic use of brands is possible because consumers often give brands
human personalities. Those brands which have personality can be more interesting and can
last in the memory of customers more than those brands which don‘t have a personality. It
has been proposed that customers like those brands that have similar personality traits as
themselves. For example, if someone gives a gift to a person, then that person will
associate the personality of that gift with the person giving the gift.
Burke (1994) claimed that brand personality should be at the core of the consumer message
as it has the ability to impact consumers‘ perceptions. According to Gordon & Corr (1990),
it is essential to know what the brand means to consumers and how it is compared with its
competitors.
The brand personality consists of a unique combination of functional attributes and
symbolic values. Functional attributes describe extrinsic, tangible product properties such
as ―hardwearing‖, ―easy to use‖ or ―portability‖, while symbolic values describe intrinsic,
intangible properties such as ―friendliness‖, ―fun‖ and ―care‖. Batra, Lehmann and Singh
(1993) claimed that a brand‘s personality must be created over time through all of the
elements in the marketing mix of the brand; product (form, packaging), price (high, low,
even), place (store location) and promotion (sales promotion and media advertising).
Melin (1997) stated that the reason for building a brand personality is based on the idea
that the choice of consumers about which brands to buy resembles the way that they
42
choose about fellow humans to socialize with. If a brand has an attractive personality then
it is believed that there will be a strong and continuous relation between brand and
consumer. Brand personality acts as personality extensions for consumers. Brands express
themselves and differentiate from others. It helps people to live certain lifestyles and send
signals by driving certain cars or having gold cards with a high level of status. Researchers
have been able to prove that the most important force behind a successful brand is
perceived value. With a superior perceived value, a good market performance will follow
automatically (Rajagopal, 2006). The personality of a brand is the part of the brand which
consumers identify with. A strong brand personality can increase the personal meaning of
a brand for an individual. A consumer will prefer a brand with a personality similar to their
self-perceived personality. The consumer will then use the brand as a symbolic device to
express his/her own personality (Diamantopolus, Smith and Grime, 2005). If a consumer
has to choose between two different brands then it is more probable that he/she will choose
the brand which he or she recognizes. If he or she knows both brands, then consumer will
choose the one with the most perceived positive attributes (Keller, 1993).
These different beliefs about the brand‘s attributes are its brand image (Kotler et al., 2005)
and customers do not interpret brands alike; people have filters such as experience and
perceptions (Plummer, 2000). Brand personality is a dynamic component of a brand. A
relationship develops between the personality of a brand and the personality of the
consumer with each purchase (Berry, 1988). The brand becomes successful by
encouraging customers to perceive the attributes to which they aspire as being strongly
associated with. These attributes may be real and objective (for example quality, value for
money) or abstract and emotional (for example status, youthfulness). The personality of
the brand is a function of its rational characteristics but these characteristics have to be
43
augmented and communicated to consumers through advertising, design, packaging,
effective distribution and display. These position the brand‘s personality in the consumer‘s
mind, generate confidence and create the purchasing environment (Doyle, 1990).
Kim et al. (2001) stated that greater the self-expressive value and the distinctiveness of
brand personality are, greater will be the attractiveness of the brand personality. Also when
similarities occur between brand personality and the consumer‘s self-expression, the
consumer might see the brand as a human or even a companion. Consumers also use
certain brands to express their personality. They explained that consumers have a tendency
to classify themselves as members of a specific group. This is called social identification.
A brand personality is said to be a central driver of consumer preferences and usage which
in turn might help to achieve improved financial performance. In the branding literature,
the terms reputation or image are commonly used as substitutes for brand; what seems to
differ between the terms is mostly the definition of the time perspective (Martensson,
2007).
To establish a brand personality, companies should offer their customers a way to
differentiate themselves by conveying certain desirable human traits (Plummer, 1985).
Ouwersloot and Tudorica (2001) were of the view that when companies are establishing a
brand personality; it must allow the consumers to interpret a brand‘s image in such a way
that it becomes more personally meaningful. For an effective use of a company‘s
marketing tools, the understanding of how brand personality is interpreted by consumers is
essential (Rajagopal, 2006).
Aaker (2002) continued by explaining that the personality of a brand is similar to the one
of a human e.g. it possesses characteristics such as age, gender and human personality
44
traits such as warmth and concern. Haigood (2001) claimed that researchers generally
recognize the use of human descriptors to portray brands and agree that brands, like
people, can acquire distinctive personalities that differentiate them in the minds of
consumers and shape their preferences. Smit, Berger and Franzen (2003) contended that
brand personality is about perception in the consumer‘s views about personality
characteristics attributed to brands, about associations and symbolic values and about
emotional responses on the brand or emotional relationships with brands. Aaker (1997)
defined five dimensions of brand personality as sincerity, excitement, competence,
sophistication and ruggedness. The different dimensions affect people in separate ways e.g.
sincerity, excitement and competence affects the instinctive part of the consumers‘
personality but sophistication and ruggedness might try to fulfill a wish of what the
consumer would like to be, but is not(Aaker, 1997).
In accordance with Arora & Stoner (2009), there are many researchers who have
investigated why brands are associated with personality traits and what functions the
personality of a brand could have for the consumer. The explanation is connected to the
self-congruity theory. Consequently, brands that are congruent with similar personality
characteristics like the self-concept the consumer have established about himself are more
preferred than brands that differ from the self-concept (Graef, 1996). Other studies
revealed that consumers compare and identify themselves with brands and personalize
them, which also lead to a stronger preference for brands (Govers & Schoormans, 2005).
The concept of brand personality is important as it might help to differentiate brands
(Plummer 1984; McEnally and De Chernatony, 1999) and to increase the personal
meaning of a brand for consumers (Levy, 1959; Fournier, 1998).Belk (1988) was of the
view that brand personality traits exists to help consumers to express their self-concept and
45
to experiment symbolic benefits from their possession or consumption. Aaker (1997) also
claimed that the symbolic use of brands is possible because consumers often give brands
human personalities. Keller (1998) added that brand personality reflects how people feel
about a brand, rather than what they think the brand is or does. So the practitioners of
marketing have cognizance of the importance to establish a vivid brand which has lively
personality (Yaverbaum, 2001). All the above authors have discussed the importance of
brand personality to consumers as well as companies.
2.2 Meaning of brand personality
D. Aaker defined brand personality as all personal characters relative to a brand. Also,
Philip Kotler defined brand personality as a combination of all personal characters which
could be vested in human personality to a brand character. In 1997, Jennifer Aaker defined
brand personality as a series of human characters associated to brand. To explain the
definition, she gave an example of the brand Vodka which was described as a cool, turned-
on and twenty-five years old, modern and young. So the brand personality which she
defined included not only brand temperament and brand personality but also other factors
such as age, sex and estate etc. which were excluded vital statistics characters such as
personality and character. She further pointed out that the attributes jointed with
production were apt to provide practical function to consumers but the brand personality
was inclined to provide typical or self-expression function for consumers. Thus, this
definition of brand personality was widely accepted by the academia.
Haigood (2001) claimed that researchers generally recognize the use of human descriptors
to portray brands and agree that brands, like people, can acquire distinctive personalities
that differentiate them in the minds of consumers and shape their preferences. Smit, Berger
46
and Franzen (2003) contended that brand personality is about perception in the consumer‘s
views, about personality characteristics attributed to brands, about associations and
symbolic values and about emotional responses on the brand or emotional relationships
with brands. The one who give direct personality traits to a brand are the people that are
connected with the brand. For example, employees and users of the product, who together
create a user image (Aaker, 1997; Patterson & O‟ Malley, 2006). Endorsers, for example
celebrities are often used in ad campaigns where they represent themselves as users of the
product, who therefore directly give a brand its personality traits (McCracken, 1989).
Upshaw (1995) described brand personality as the outward face of a brand. The purpose of
creating a personality for the brand is to give the brand a spirit. It has a strategic advantage
for companies because it helps the companies to make the message reach out to consumers
easily, especially when the market place becomes highly competitive (Ghodeswar, 2008).
A brand personality can be described in the same vocabulary used to characterize a person.
According to E. Boyle (2003) there have been no set of descriptions of the brand
personality yet developed. A brand can be described by various factors such as
demographics (age, gender, social class, race), lifestyle (activities, interests, and opinions),
or human personality traits (such as extroversion, agreeableness and dependability). When
human characteristics are associated to a brand, the product or service is given a
personality that people can relate to on an emotional level. The most effective brands are
charismatic (i.e. has a personality) and provide an advantage over brands that appeal only
to logic (Myron, 1999).
A brand which had lively personality could help production (or service or company)
establish its special and right image in the consumers‘ mind and establish and strength
47
brand equity (Keller, 1993; Johnson et al., 2000; Phau and Lau, 2000). Therefore, in 1993,
Biel pointed out that brand personality was thought a main factor of successful brand. In
fact, the establishment of a successful brand personality could make consumers produce a
strong sentiment tie to brand and produce stronger confidences and faithfulnesses (Siguaw
et al., 1999; Johnson et al., 2000). This also offered several stable foundations for the
differences of brand (Aaker and Fournier, 1995; Halliday, 1996; Haigood, 1999) and that
was very difficult to be copied (Aaker, 1996). Schlagentweith (2008) indicated that brand
personality can be seen as the intersection of brand identity and brand image. He argued
that brand identity has one component that describes the brand as a person whereas brand
image, described as the perceived meaning of a brand from the consumer, can include
personality as an attribute that is associated with the brand.
It has been suggested that a strong brand personality may gain numerous benefits for
brands. For a long time, the brand personality has been accepted as a part of the branding
theory (Plummer, 1985). The brand personality uses the brand-as-person metaphor to
communicate the brand and its relationship to customers (Aaker, 1997). Those brands
which have personality can be more interesting and can last in the memory of customers
more than those brands which don‘t have a personality. It has been proposed that
customers like those brands that have similar personality traits as themselves. For example,
if someone gives a gift to a person, then that person will associate the personality of that
gift with the person giving the gift.
Brand personality acts as personality extensions for consumers. They express themselves
and differentiate it from others. It helps people to live certain lifestyles and send signals by
driving certain cars or having gold cards with a high level of status. Researchers have been
able to prove that the most important force behind a successful brand is perceived value.
48
With a superior perceived value, a good market performance will follow automatically
(Rajagopal, 2006).The personality of a brand is the part of the brand which consumers
identify with. A strong brand personality can increase the personal meaning of a brand for
an individual. A consumer will prefer a brand with a personality similar to their self-
perceived personality. The consumer will then use the brand as a symbolic device to
express his/her own personality (Diamantopolus, Smith and Grime, 2005).
2.3 Dimensions of brand personality
HUMAN PERSONALITY
EXTROVERSION AGREEABLENESS CONSCIENTIOUS NESS
EMOTIONAL STABILITY
OPENNESS TO
EXPREIENCE
ACTIVE COMPETITIVE
ENERGETIC HAPPY
AFFECTIONATE ALTRUISTIC AUTHENTIC
CORDIAL
CONSCIENTIOUS CONSTANT EFFICIENT PRECISE
CALM LEVEL-HEADED
LIGHT-HEARTED PATIENT
CREATIVE FANCIFUL
INFORMED INNOVATIVE
Figure 2.1 “The Big Five” Human Personality Dimensions
Source: Caprara, Barbaranelli and Guido, referred by Opuku, 2006
Aaker (1997) compared the brand personality to the human personality and identified five
personality dimensions called the Big Five (see figure 2.1). According to Rajagopal
(2006), the dimensions of the big-five theory for human personality are
Extroversion/Introversion, Agreeableness, Consciousness, Emotional stability and Culture.
Researchers have replicated the big-five theory numerous times and thereby confirmed its
49
validity. Based on the big-five theory, a new theory was developed by Aaker (1996), with
similar personality dimensions, but this theory involved the personality of a brand. The
dimensions of the big-five theory for brand personality are:
• Sincerity, which means traits like natural, down-to-earth and honest.
• Excitement, which means traits like brave, creative and exciting.
• Competence, which means traits like intelligent, secure and confident.
• Sophistication, which means traits like glamorous, smooth, calm and charming.
• Ruggedness, which means traits like strong, masculine and western.
Figure 2.2 demonstrates Jennifer Aaker‘s (1997) Brand Personality dimensions and their
respective traits.
BRAND PERSONALITY
Sincerity
Excitement
Competence
Sophistication
Ruggedness
Figure 2.2 Brand Personality Framework
Source: Aaker (1997)
Melin (1997) stated that the reason for building a brand personality is based on the idea of
consumers‘ choice about which brands to buy in a similar way that they choose which
Down-to-earth
Honest
Wholesome
Cheerful
Daring
Spirited
Imaginative
Up-to-date
Reliable
Intelligent
Successful
Upper Class
Charming
Outdoorsy
Tough
50
fellow humans to socialize with. If a brand has an attractive personality then it is believed
that there will be a strong and continuous relation between brand and consumer. Aaker
(1997) developed a Brand Personality Scale (BPS) that shows five key dimensions of the
personality of a brand. Each of these dimensions can be described with some adjectives.
The most important aspect of the brand personality framework is that it is generalizable
over different product categories (Aaker, 1997). There are subgroups of each dimension to
clarify the character and structure of the dimensions, as seen in figure2.2
These five different dimensions and 15 facets of the brand personality could as a
framework be used to gain theoretical and practical insight into the antecedents and
consequences of brand personality, which have received a significant amount of attention
but little empirical testing. In addition to the 15 facets, Aaker (1997) has also included 27
personality traits that help further in describing the five dimensions of brand personality.
Figure 2.3 shows each of the five brand personality dimensions with its corresponding
facets. Each facet, in turn, is described by a number of traits.
The sincerity personality has five personality traits: Down to earth (family oriented, small-
town, conventional, and blue-collar), Honest (sincere, real, ethical, thoughtful, and caring),
Wholesome (original, genuine, ageless, classic and old-fashioned) and Cheerful
(sentimental, friendly, warm and happy).
The excitement personality has four broad personality traits: Daring (trendy, exiting, off-
beat, flashy and provocative), Spirited (cool, young, lively, outgoing and adventurous),
Imaginative (unique, humorous, surprising, artistic and fun) and Up-to-date (independent,
contemporary, innovative and aggressive).
51
The competence personality comprises of three personality traits: Reliable (hardworking,
secure, efficient, trustworthy and careful), Intelligent (technical, corporate and serious) and
Successful (leader, confident and influential).
The sophistication personality has two traits: Upper Class (glamorous, good looking,
pretentious and sophisticated) and Charming (feminine, smooth, sexy and gentle).
The ruggedness personality comprises of Outdoorsy (masculine, western, active and
athletic) and Tough (rugged, strong and non-nonsense).
Dimension Facet Traits
Sincerity
Down-to-earth
Down-to-earth
Family- oriented
Small - town
Honest
Honest
Sincere
Real
Wholesome Wholesome
Original
Cheerful
Cheerful
Sentimental
Friendly
Excitement
Daring
Daring
Trendy
Exciting
Spirited
Spirited
Cool
Young
Imaginative Imaginative
Unique
52
Up-to-date
Up-to-date
Independent
Contemporary
Reliable
Reliable
Hard-working
Secure
Competence
Intelligent
Intelligent
Technical
Corporate
Successful
Successful
Leader
Confident
Sophistication
Upper Class
Upper Class
Glamorous
Good-looking
Charming
Charming
Feminine
Smooth
Ruggedness
Outdoorsy
Outdoorsy
Masculine
Western
Tough Tough
Rugged
Figure 2.3 Brand Personality Scale
Source: Aaker (1997)
53
2.4 Implementing the Brand Personality /Brand personality drivers
In his book ―Creating Strong Brands‖ (1996), Aaker stated that the personality of a brand
is affected by everything that is associated with the brand and these associations can be
both product-related as well as product-unrelated. According to Aaker (1996), there are
several brand personality drivers divided into product and non-product related
characteristics. Product related characteristics are the primary drivers of brand personality.
The non-product-related characteristics include, for example, advertising style, country of
origin and the company image (Figure 2.4).
PRODUCT-RELATED
CHARACTERISTICS
NON-PRODUCT-RELATED
CHARACTERISITCS
Product category
Package
Price
Attirbutes
User imagery
Sponsorships
Symbol
Age
Ad style
Country of origin
Company Image
CEO
Celebrity
Figure 2.4: Brand personality Drivers
Source: Aaker, 1996
Product-Related Characteristics
Product related characteristics can be primary drivers of a brand personality and these
characteristics involve product class, package or feature, price and attributes.
54
Product category can affect the personality. For example, Colgate toothpaste has the
personality of being competent, older and reliable.
A package or feature can also influence the brand personality, just like ‗Makemytrip‘ as it
helps consumers to make special customized packages for themselves.
A high priced brand for example Nakshatra diamonds might be considered as wealthy,
stylish and perhaps a bit snobbish.
Brand personality is also affected by product attributes. For example, take the example of a
car or automobile brand. It may have attributes like prestige, cost, reliability, exclusivity,
availability, type (e.g. sporty, family, luxury) and country of origin.
Non product related characteristics
The brand personality might also be influenced by non-product-related characteristic. Non-
product-related characteristics also have an impact on how a brand's personality is
perceived. Non product related characteristics also affect brand personality and there are
several ways of doing this. These factors are user imagery, sponsorship, age, symbol,
country of origin, company image, C.E.O. and celebrity endorsers.
User imagery is an example of developing a personality. It is the set of human characters
associated with the typical user of the brand. For example, Reid and Taylor brand associate
itself with Amitabh Bachhan in its advertisement, which the buyer is supposed to identify
with. According to Aaker, (1996) user imagery can be based on either typical (people you
see using the brand) or idealized users (as portrayed in advertising and elsewhere). User
imagery can be a powerful driver of brand personality in part because the user is already a
person and thus the difficulty of conceptualizing the brand personality is reduced. As an
55
example, companies that wish to market their fairness creams for glowing skin can achieve
this by showing a famous actress using the cream in advertisement as is the case of Olay
cream.
Sponsorship is another way of influencing brand personality. Various events are sponsored
by the brands which influences their personality. For example, Coca Cola sponsors various
matches which help in influencing its personality.
Use of symbols is another way of influencing personality by firms as they can be easily
controlled by them as compared to living people. They have the ability to be registered as
brands/trademarks. Various successful symbols are Ronald McDonald, Monte Carlo and
Woodland etc.
The age or how long a brand has been in the market also has an effect on its personality.
Thus newer entrants such as Apple, MCI and Saturn tend to have younger brand
personalities than brands such IBM, AT&T and Chevrolet.
Country of origin can be important in building a personality. Citroen has in its marketing
deliberately pointed out its national origin, to bring about its pronounced French
personality (Melin, 1997). A German brand such as Audi might capture some perceived
characteristics of German people (such as being precise, serious and hardworking).
Company image such as the company image of The Body Shop might suggest a social
activist working hard to stimulate change (Aaker, 1996).
C.E.O. could also be used to build a brand personality. For example, the personality of a
visible C.E.O. Naina Lal Kidwai can be transferred to the brand.
56
Celebrity endorser also helps in developing a brand personality. The idea behind linking a
brand-product with celebrities or famous persons like models, actors or artists from the
world of music and sports is to create positive brand associations because the
buyers/consumers want to identify with these individuals.
Advertising is another effective media for communication with the consumer. It can
communicate both a personality and a position to the customers. Customers build up a
relationship with them while sitting idle in front of their television. Hankinson and
Cowking (1993) claimed that for mature brand, advertising may seek to reinforce the
existing and hopefully successful brand proposition. For ageing brands, there will be a
need to reposition the brand to make the brand personality more relevant to its target
consumer (who may have changed) or to today‘s life-style (which certainly will have
changed) or both. However, for new brands there will be a need to create an attractive and
distinctive brand proposition from nothing.
2.5 Why use Brand Personality?
According to Aaker (1996), there are several reasons to why companies should develop
personalities for their brands. First, it will help the firm to understand people‘s perceptions
of and attitudes toward the brand Second, the brand personality helps in differentiating the
product. Third, it is also helpful in communication effort because to implement and
communicate a brand that has a personality is easy rather than a brand that is specified only
in terms of attribute associations. Brand personality can also contribute to brand equity.
These reasons are described in detail as follows:
Enriching Understanding: Firms can have an in depth understanding of consumer
perceptions and attitudes toward the brand by using the brand personality metaphor. When
57
people describe a brand personality then their relationships and feelings towards the brand
can be known. The young and cool personality ascribed by some people to Coca Cola
describes the nature of the relationship between Coca Cola and its customers.
Contributing to a Differentiating identity: It can help to differentiate the products when
brands are similar in their product attributes. For example, Pantene versus Sunsilk
shampoo.
Guiding the Communication Effort: It helps to gain an in depth understanding of the
customer‘s perceptions of and attitudes towards the brand. With the help of brand
personality, communication efforts become easy.
Creating Brand Equity: Brand personality can help in creating brand equity in three
ways. First, it helps in creating a self-expressive benefit that becomes a vehicle for the
customer to express his or her own personality. Second, a brand personality can act as a
foundation for the relationship between the customer and the brand. Third, a brand
personality may help in communicating a product attribute.
2.6 How to create a brand personality
There are many ways of creating a brand personality. The brand personality of products
and that of consumers should be matched as closely as possible. Temporal suggested that
the creation of a brand personality is a four-step process.
1. Define the target audience.
2. Find out what they need, want and like.
3. Build a consumer personality profile.
58
4. Create the product personality to match the profile.
While developing brand personality it is important that product related and non product
related factors should also be taken into account because these associations affect the
perceptions of brand personality.
Brand personality is particularly useful for the creation of brand associations. Another way
of personality creation is celebrity endorsement. Public heroes, sports people, pop stars and
movie stars are asked to lend their personality to a brand. Many stars like Amitabh
Bachhan, M.S. Dhoni are seen in advertisements of various products. Some of them are
even made as brand ambassadors of various products. Even though celebrity endorsement
is the most common way to create brand personality, advertising also has an effect upon it
(Rajagopal, 2006).
Brand personality is also created by Communication approach. Researchers have found
that brands are sensitive to communication and anchors which catalyze consumer
behaviors. There are different ways and different tools of creating brand personality. The
process is always characterized by active communications on the side of the firm
(Rajagopal, 2006).
Indirectly, the brand personality is created by all the elements of the marketing mix. Batra
et al. (1993) suggested that the personality of a brand is created over time by the entire
marketing mix of the brand-its price (high or low, odd or even), retail store location
(imagery associations), product formulation (ingredients, benefits), product form
(solid/liquid, etc.), packaging details (colour, size, material, shape), symbol used in all
phases of the brand communication, sales promotion, and media advertising.
59
In sum, a large number of variables have been mentioned in the literature as influencing
brand personality i.e. brand name, brand symbol or logo, celebrity endorser, colour, shape,
country of origin, price, music, packaging, sales promotions etc. (Plummer, 1984; Ogilvy,
1985; Mc Cracken, 1989; Batra et al., 1993; Keller, 1993; Aaker, 1996; Aaker, 1997).
2.7 Measurement of brand personality
At present, there are two research schools for the measurement of brand personality. The
first one is the research measurement of brand personality which is divided by contraries.
The representative researches include the research on US (Aaker,1997), the research on
Japan and Spanish (Aaker et al., 2001). The second one is general research and practical
research of brand personality. The representative research personnel include Hayes(1999),
Wysong (2000), Kim (2000), Kim et al. (2001), Austin et al. (2003) etc.
2.8 Brand personality and Brand Equity
Rajagopal (2006) defined brand equity as the differential effect that brand knowledge has
on consumer response to marketing activity for that brand. In order to build and enhance
brand equity, marketers have to create a distinctive brand personality with a set of unique
and favorable associations in consumer‘s memory (Diamantopolus, Smith & Grime, 2005).
A brand can result in positive or negative brand equity depending on whether consumers
react more or less positive to the marketing mix activity for a brand. Consumer‘s response
to marketing activity for competitive brands can help in determining the uniqueness of
brand associations. The effect of brand equity exists when a consumer is familiar with the
brand and hold unique, favorable and strong brand associations in memory.
A brand image consists of three features:
60
1. Physical attributes (e.g. having a blue colour or a circular shape).
2. Functional characteristics (e.g. fast running or great power).
3. Characterization (e.g. glamorous or youthful).
The last of these three features is also referred to as personality. The brand personality is
an essential part of brand image (Diamantopolus, Smith and Grime, 2005).
Strong brand equity helps companies to gain loyal customers, provide them with the
services they demand and increase their profits. By offering value to customers and
listening to their needs, companies can increase the brand equity. If the brand is strong then
the brand equity will also be high.
2.8.1 How a brand personality creates brand equity
According to Aaker (1996) brand personality can contribute to brand equity in three
different ways. First, it can help create a self-expressive benefit that becomes a vehicle for
the customer to express his or her own personality. Second, a brand personality can work
as a basis for the relationship between the customer and the brand. Third, a brand
personality may help communicate a product attribute and thus contribute to a functional
benefit. These three factors together make the personality a powerful tool to use in order to
affect and influence the purchase decision.
The ability of the personality to reinforce brand attributes will be greater if a visual symbol
or image exists that can create and indicate the brand personality. The Energizer rabbit, for
example, is an upbeat inexhaustible personality who never runs out of energy, just as the
battery it symbolizes runs longer than others do.
61
A country or region of origin can add credibility to an identity. Furthermore, it can also
generate a strong personality that provides not only a quality cue but also an important
point of differentiation that can lead to effective marketing and communication programs.
Saffron, for example, has created a strong Kashmiri personality for the brand. With this
personality as inspiration promotions have been created that provide links to the Kashmir
for producing good quality of saffron.
2.9 Brand Personality and Advertising
Advertising has an important role in the creation of brand personality (Rajagopal, 2006).
The creation of brand personality through advertising can be understood from a semiotic
perspective. An advertisement could be defined as a sign, representing the actual product
image, the meaning of which is dependent on the interpretation of the ad recipient, which
in turn is based on the context in which the ad occurs (Ouwersloot & Tudorica, 2001).
Salomon (2009) added that semiotics helps us to understand how consumers interpret the
meaning of symbols.
By using advertising, the emotional image of the brand and the associated brand
personality establishes a deep relationship between the customer and the brand. Hence, a
brand personality can make a brand more interesting and help consumers to express their
identities. An example of personality creation through advertising is the use of celebrity
endorsers. They alter their personalities to brands in order to establish brand associations
among consumers (Rajagopal, 2006).
Ouwersloot and Tudorica (2001) argued that the creation of brand personality through
advertising depends on the construction of the advertisement. Furthermore, they argued
that its creation also depends on how the consumer processes the advertisement and
62
interprets the message. Hence, the process of brand personality creation is dependent on
the consumer‘s cognitive and affective state during exposure of the advertisement.
Rajagopal (2006) also added that brand personality is influenced in a large way by the
affective and cognitive evaluations of the consumer in the advertising communication.
However, before consumers choose to consume a specific brand, they must link it to
intermediate responses. Intermediate responses are related to brand knowledge and brand
experience is first when the brand personality has been transferred to the advertised
product that brand personality can be transferred to the consumer. Hence, consumers are
able to reap the benefits of brand personality for the achievement of their personal needs
by purchasing the branded product. Personification of a brand though advertising is first
incarnated when there is a match between personality of the product and of the consumer.
Concept of brand personality has become important in destination marketing in recent
years and has gained a noticeable growth in the number of brand personality research.
However, a little is known about how personality is created through indirect experiences
with a destination and how the way a destination depicts itself in an advertisement
influences interactions between motivation, destination personality, affective image, self-
image and belief. Fisun Yuksel & Yasin Bilim (2009) showed that holiday motives played
an important role in the interpretation of the personality and the more similar the
interpreted personality is to the individual‘s needs and the self-image, the more favorable
his/her evaluations of the destination would be. In other words, when the visual
information in an advertisement is similar to the individual‘s holiday motivations and the
self-image, it is more likely that the individual will feel that the destination could fulfill the
experience that he/she seeks. The results showed that the nature of the appeal used in a
destination advertisement exerts an influence on the individual‘s responses to the
63
advertised destination and this suggests that the visual appeals in a destination‘s
advertisement should be selected with great care.
2.10 Brand Personality and the Internet
Dayal et al. (2000) stated that brands, offline, are perceived by the consumer as a sum of
the personality, presence and performance of a specific product or service. They continue
by stating that online, in addition to these three factors, which are still important, the
consumer‘s online experience influence how the product‘s brand is perceived. A successful
online brand is built up using inseparable parts such as the promise, the website design and
the economic model. They were of the view that a brand should be built around the
consumer‘s experience. The main reasons for this are that the manager should pay attention
to the consumer‘s point of view and that all aspects of brand interaction with the
consumers are important.
Lindstrom and Andersen (2000) presented the brand platform, consisting of four brand key
elements. They considered the element of brand personality as the most vital element and it
therefore needs to be clarified before going online.
They were also of the view that personality is created through interaction with users on a
website. The online brand should be seen not only as a person who talks, but also listens,
learns, reacts. Rowley (2004) stated that brands use a number of different elements on the
website to communicate the brand‘s values. She suggested that the text on the website sets
the tone of voice and that it is an element which can help determine the brand‘s
personality. She was also of the view that text is the site talking to the costumer, the words
determine what it says, the typeface determines the style of the communication. Bergstrom
(2004) stated that the brand personality is expressed through emotional attributes.
64
According to Kim et al. (2001), the brand personality can powerfully differentiate a
website from its competitors, even though they might be physically and functionally
similar. They continued by saying that the brand personality can help create a long-term
relationship between customer and website. They also stated that the brand personality can
be used to differentiate brands from the rest in the high competition on the Internet.
The business environment is getting more complicated and competitive in cyberspace
(Park et al., 2005). There has been a lot of research done in the area of e-marketing and the
trend is according to research not showing a decline in branding efforts, on the contrary it
will probably grow and mature (Opoku, 2006). According to Lindstrom and Andersen
(2000) most companies go online for branding reasons and in order to express brand
benefits.
A study made by Park et al. (2005) showed that even though frameworks for brand
personalities exist, only a few of its dimensions have been identified for online use.
Aaker‘s (1997) studies on brand personality focus on brand personality in the physical
world and attempts to adapt her framework to the online world have been made with
varying results (Okazaki, 2006; Park et al., 2005). Okazaki (2006) identified in his study,
three out of Aaker‘s (1997) five personality dimensions and two additional. He found five
personality dimensions i.e. sophistication, excitement, affection, popularity and
competence.
2.11 Brand Personality and Brand Image
Brand image and brand personality are the key to create brand equity (Martineau,
1958; Keller, 1993 & Plummer, 1984). However, although several models exist in the
65
literature to explain the two concepts, much ambiguity surrounds the relationship between
brand image and brand personality (Sameer Hosany,Yuksel Ekinci and Uysal, 2007).
Poor conceptualisations and a lack of empirical studies have hampered progress in
understanding this relationship. In some instances, brand image is defined in terms of
brand personality. Definitions by Hendon and Williams (1985) and Upshaw (1995) are
typical of these inconsistencies. Brand image also known as brand personality or brand
character, involves nothing more than describing a product as if it were a human being.
They further concluded that most studies fail to distinguish between the terms brand
image, brand personality and user image. Still, some scholars attempt to provide some
theoretical explanations to the brand image-brand personality relationship (e.g., Plummer,
1984; Karande et al., 1997; Patterson, 1999).
Biel (1993) viewed brand image as a cluster of attributes and associations that
consumers connect to a brand. In this elaboration, evoked associations can be either hard
(tangible/functional) or soft (emotional attributes). Brand personality is seen as the soft
emotional side of brand image. Similarly, Fournier (1998) argued that when brands are
successful at satisfying consumer needs, consumers develop strong emotions towards
them. Thus, the lack of solid theory development results in confusion and impedes
managerial practices. The relationship between brand image and brand personality
necessitates empirical testing and confirmation.
2.12 Brand Personality and Destination Personality
In theoretical terms, product or brand personality is the set of human characteristics
associated with a brand (Aaker, 1997). It generates emotional links between brands and
consumers. Just as brands can be characterized by personality descriptors, for example,
66
youthful, energetic, extrovert or sophisticated, similarly destinations can also be described
by the personality descriptors. For example, people may use the word young to describe
Pepsi, wealthy to describe Mercedes, athletic to Nike etc. In the same way, destinations can
be described using human personality traits such as Europe is traditional and sophisticated;
Wales is honest, welcoming, romantic, down to earth; Spain is friendly and family
oriented; London is open-minded, unorthodox, vibrant, creative; Paris is romantic (Morgan
and Pritchard, 2002). Accordingly, destination personality is defined as the set of human
characteristics associated with a destination as perceived from a tourist rather than a local
resident viewpoint.
The idea of product or brand personality dates back to its origins through the theory of
symbolism. Sirgy (1982) introduced the self-concept theory that explains why consumers
are motivated to buy certain products due to their similarity between the personality traits
communicated by the product (Plummer, 1985) and the personality they wish to project of
themselves (Zinkhan, Haytko and Ward, 1996). It is argued that consumers view their
preferred products as an extension of themselves and therefore their purchasing behavior is
motivated by the symbolic value of the product (Mowen, 1990).
Consumers seem to have little difficulty in assigning human personality traits to inanimate
objects such as brands and places (Aaker, 1996; Solomon, 1999). To understand how and
why people relate brands and places with human personality qualities, it is helpful to utilise
theories of anthropomorphism (Boyer, 1996). Anthropomorphism is pervasive in culture,
religion and daily life (Barrett and Keil, 1996; Boyer, 1996; Guthrie, 1997). For example,
it is a common experience to encounter people who treat their car, computer or dog as a
friend or family member and it is generally accepted that anthropomorphism appeared with
the first anatomically modern humans (Mithen and Boyer, 1996). Guthrie (1997) explained
67
why anthropomorphism is so natural by means of familiarity and comfort theory.
Familiarity theory is of the view that humans use themselves as models of the world
because of their extensive knowledge of themselves. In other words, people employ their
own self schema as a source of labels and concepts by which to interpret the outside world.
The comfort theory is of the view of prime emotional motives. He further argued that
humans are not comfortable with objects which are non human. They are not sure about the
major factors which influence their fate and finding this unsettling, try to reassure
themselves by projecting the non-human characteristics onto the human domain.
Countless studies have proved that in interpersonal interactions people are attracted
towards those who have similar personality because similarity is considered to be
emotionally rewarding (e.g., Moon, 2002). Emotional needs, along with cognitive ones,
motivate humans to form humanlike models to understand and mitigate events.
Accordingly, Fournier (1998) argued that human anthropomorphise objects in order to
facilitate interactions with the nonmaterial world. Consumers develop relationships with
brands based on their symbolic value. As a result, the brand becomes alive and active
partner in the consumer‘s mind. Blackstone (1993) supported this notion of brands and
consumers being co-equivalent parts of a single system which is similar to interpersonal
relationships.
2.13 Brands and Symbols
James G. Helgeson and Magne Supphellen(2004) studied that the symbolic effect of
brands has often been studied via two constructs i.e. self-congruity and brand personality.
Based on a study of Swedish female consumers, it was found that self congruity and brand
personality are empirically discriminant and have positive, independent effects on retail.
68
Yongjun Sung and Spencer F. Tinkham(2005) described that the symbolic meaning of
commercial brands (often called brand personality) can represent the values and beliefs of
a culture. When a set of global brands were rated on the same personality attributes in the
United States and Korea, 6 common dimensions of brand personality and 2 factors unique
to each culture were observed. The 2 culture-specific factors in Korea (Passive
Likeableness and Ascendancy) revealed that Korean brand personality structure carries
cultural meaning, reflecting the importance of Confucian values in Korea's social and
economic systems. Another research on the symbolic use of commercial brands by
Michael Bosnjak, Valerie Bochmann, Tanja Hufschmidt (2007) showed that individuals
prefer those brands which matches their own personality. While the Big Five model of
human personality is universal, brand personality attributions are partly culture-specific.
2.14 Relationship of brand personality with other dimensions of brand
Several authors tried to explain the concept of brand personality. Relationship is a very
popular topic in branding literature according to Patterson and O‟ Malley (2006) due to the
increasing importance of relationship marketing and of the anthropomorphisation of
brands, which means the attribution of human characteristics, behavior, motivations,
qualities and personalities to nonhuman objects like brands. They determined that the
brand personality concept is also one of the reasons which facilitated the conception of
brand-consumer relationships because with brands having personality, consumers are able
to build a relationship, the same like with people. Brands receive a special meaning for
consumers, additionally to their functional abilities.
Many studies have shown the relationship of brand personality with other dimensions of
brand. For example, Mathew D. Shank, Lynn Langmeyer (1994) explored the relationship
69
between human personality using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and product
personality. The results of this study provided minimal support for using information on
consumer personality as a strategic marketing tool. Ramesh Kumar, Amit Luthra and
Gaurav Datta(2006) described that brand personality and brand loyalty are of great interest
to marketers. Brand associations/brand personality and brand loyalty may be linked with
one another and may have important implications for marketers. The study used a focus
group among the buyers of toothpastes and cars and suggested a framework linking brand
loyalty and brand personality after qualitatively analyzing the responses obtained. Abdul
Waheed and Neeti Yadav(2007) also made an attempt to understand the relationship
between brand personality dimensions and brand loyalty. The conceptual model proposed
in this study examined the determinants of brand loyalty with respect to brand personality
dimensions such as sincerity, excitement, competence and ruggedness and an important
brand-consumer relationship variable relationship length, for a popular clothing brand in
India. Ben Webb and John Gountas (2008) tested the triangular relationships between the
constructs of self-concept and consumer and brand personality traits. Findings suggested
that there is a link between consumer‘s personality, brand personality and consumer‘s self-
concept. Xuehua Wang and Zhilin Yang (2008) investigated the relationship between
brand personality, country-of-origin (COO) image and purchase intention. Specifically, it
was suggested that country-of-origin (COO) image exerts both main and interaction impact
on purchase intention. Riza Casidy Mulyanegara, Yelena Tsarenko and Alastair Anderson
(2009) explored the relationship between consumer personality and brand personality as
measured by constructs reflecting The Big Five dimensions in the context of fashion
products. The findings of the study showed that some dimensions of The Big Five
constructs are significantly related to preferences on particular dimensions of brand
70
personality. It was found that consumers who have a conscientious personality shows
preferences towards ‗trusted‘ brands and those who are extrovert prefer ‗sociable‘ brands.
Findings related to gender suggested that male and female consumers differ while
assigning personality traits to the objects. There are various studies on brand image and
brand personality but application of branding theories to tourism destinations is a new
concept. Hosany, Ekinci and Uysal (2006; 2007) tried to investigate the relationship
between destination image and destination personality as most studies fail to distinguish
between these two concepts. Using the first sample mentioned in their first study (Ekinci &
Hosany, 2006), they found that destination image and destination personality are related to
each other but both are distinct concepts. The affective and accessibility scales of
destination image were significantly correlated with the three destination personality
factors (sincerity, excitement, and conviviality). It was also found that destination image
seems to be an encompassing concept, while destination personality is more related to the
affective component of destination image. Sameer Hosany, Yuksel Ekinci and Muzaffer
Uysal (2006) investigated the relationship between destination image and destination
personality. Results indicated that destination image and destination personality are related
concepts. Canonical correlation analysis revealed that the emotional component of
destination image captures the majority of variance on destination personality dimensions.
Another effort of applying destination personality was made by Ekinci and his colleagues
(Ekinci, Sirakaya-Turk and Baloglu, 2007). They developed a path analytical model to test
multiple direct and indirect relationships involving tourists‘ perception of host image,
destination personality and behavioral intentions (intention to return and to
recommend).The results revealed that host image has a positive impact on all three
destination personality dimensions but only the dimension of conviviality of destination
71
personality was found to influence intent to return and word of mouth positively. It was
also found that only the dimension of conviviality showed to mediate the relationship
between host image and intent to return and word of mouth. Laurie Murphy, Pierre
Benckendorff and Gianna Moscardo (2007) explored the link among tourist needs,
destination brand personality, self-congruity, and intentions to visit and satisfaction with a
visit. The results indicated that where tourists can make an association between a
destination and a destination brand personality and where this association is consistent
with their desired holiday experience, a high level of congruity will exist between the
tourist‘s self-image and their perceptions of the destination. In turn, this self-congruity was
related to satisfaction with a visit to the destination but not to intention to travel to the
destination. Murphy, Moscardo and Benckendorff (2007) determined the application of
destination personality to differentiate between two tourism destinations, Cairns and the
Whitsunday Islands, Australia, from tourists‘ perspective. It revealed that the Whitsundays
was perceived to be more wholesome, cheerful, exciting, imaginative and that tourists were
able to differentiate between destinations on the basis of brand personality. To further test
the relationships between destination personality and self-congruity, travel motivations and
tourist visit behavior, Murphy and his colleagues (2007) developed a preliminary
conceptual model. In this study, they only used the sample of 277 respondents who rated
the Whitsunday Islands. Findings suggested that only excitement dimension of brand
personality positively influence travel motivation. It was also found that
sophistication+competence, sincerity, and excitement were found to have significant
relationships with the four measures of self-congruity (actual, ideal, social, and ideal
social). The dimension of ruggedness only influenced ideal and ideal social self-
congruence in terms of the relationship between destination personality and visitation. The
72
study also suggested that there might be an indirect relationship between destination
personality and visitation through self-congruence. Smith et al. (2003) found that there is a
positive relationship between brand personality and brand attitude in developing a Brand
Personality Scale for Dutch practitioners.
There are some authors who use brand image in the same way and with the same meaning
as brand personality (Graeff, 1997), or in some cases, brand personality is described as one
element of brand image, which differentiate the brands from others and attach meaning to
them (Aaker, 1997). Azoulay and Kapferer (2003) referred to brand personality as one part
of brand identity. Heylen, Dawson and Sampson (1995) identified brand personality and
brand identity as antecedents of brand image. This is in contrast to Kapferer (1997) who
decided that personality, self-image, physical, relationship, reflection and culture
dimensions are antecedents of brand identity, which results in Kapferer‘s ―Brand identity
prism‖.
2.15 Effects of brand personality
Countless studies have been conducted on the various effects of brand personality. Chung
K. Kim, Dongchul Han and Seung-Bae Park (2001) investigated the effect of brand
personality on brand asset management by using the concept of consumers‘ identification
with a brand by focusing on a high-technology product, the cellular phone. The authors
developed a conceptual framework to explain the effect of brand identification on brand
loyalty. The important variables included in this framework were the attractiveness of the
brand personality, the distinctiveness of the brand personality, the self-expressive value of
the brand personality, positive word of- mouth reports of the brand and brand loyalty. The
results indicated that there are positive relationships between attractiveness, distinctiveness
73
and self-expressive value of brand personality and that these relationships had a
statistically significant effect on consumers‘ identification with a brand. Also, brand
identification had a direct effect on word-of mouth reports and an indirect effect on brand
loyalty. In examining the effect of brand personality on brand preference over two brands
in Russia, Supphellen and Gronhaug (2003) found that such an effect exist for the brand
personalities of Ford and Levi‘s also. Only two dimensions of brand personality effects the
attitudes for both brands. Ruggedness and Sophistication exerts a positive impact on the
attitudes towards Ford. Sincerity exerts a negative effect and Sophistication a positive
effect on brand preference for Levi‘s. Helgeson and Supphellen (2004) tested whether
brand personality has an impact on brand attitudes. An idiographic Brand Personality scale
was developed for the purpose. The authors took brand personality characteristics of five
major Swedish retail brands in the clothing industry by means of open-ended questions.
Nine characteristics were generated and these were classic, modern, youthful, cool, stylish,
elegant, formal and hip. Factor analysis of the nine brand personality items resulted in two
dimensions: Modern (modern, youthful, cool, stylish, hip) and Classic (classic, elegant,
formal). It also suggested that both characteristics of brand personality, modern and classic
were significantly positively related to brand attitude. The concept of brand personality and
its influence on consumer behavior has become an important research topic. Freling
and Forbes (2005) suggested that brand personality is connected to many other brand
associations in consumer memory and accessed through spreading activation. Also,
consumers embrace brands with strong, positive personalities because of a natural human
tendency to anthropomorphise non human objects. Swee Hoon Ang and Elison Ali Ching
Lim(2006) investigated whether metaphors in advertising had an effect on brand
personality perceptions of utilitarian and symbolic products. In general, brands which used
74
metaphors in advertisements were perceived to be more sophisticated and exciting but less
sincere and competent than those which used literal headlines or pictures. Symbolic
products were perceived to be more sophisticated and exciting but less sincere and
competent in comparison to utilitarian products. Also when metaphors were used for
utilitarian products, perceptions of sophistication and excitement were enhanced, whereas
sincerity was diluted. Findings suggested that metaphors can be strategically used to
influence brand personality perceptions, particularly for utilitarian products. Zhang
Mengxia (2007) examined the role of the perception of brand personality in consumer‘s
brand preference, attitude, loyalty, and buying intent (PALI). A survey was carried out to
measure, through a comparative approach, the opinion of 230 consumers of two brands:
Nike and Sony. After validating the brand personality inventory in China, a positive
connotation was discovered. The results showed that these two brands had different brand
personalities which indicated that consumers perceived these two brands differently.
Zentes et al. (2008) also examined the differential power of brand personality among
different retail brands and its influence on store loyalty both attitudinal (intention to
recommend and commitment to the brand) and behavioral loyalty (frequency of shopping
and percentage of budget allocation in a category to a store). It revealed that all retail brand
personality dimensions had a significant influence on the attitudinal loyalty. All
dimensions exerted an influence on attitudinal loyalty positively except for the dimension
of ruggedness. Perceived sincerity exerted the strongest effect followed by competence and
excitement. Only two dimensions, sincerity and excitement, exerted a positive impact on
actual behavior. In short, perceived retail brand sincerity and excitement are strong drivers
of store loyalty, both in terms of attitude and actual behavior. Freling and Forbes (2005)
tried to explore the concept of brand personality and its effect using both qualitative and
75
quantitative methods. They (2005) indicated that brand personality will have a positive
influence on product evaluations and that subjects exposed to a brand's personality will
have a significantly greater number of brand associations, significantly greater proportion
of brand associations, significantly greater unique brand associations, significantly greater
proportion of congruent brand associations and significantly greater proportion of strong
brand associations. Karen Miller (2008) examined the effects of brand personality on
brand-aroused feelings across the product categories of sport shoes, mobile phones and
surf wear. Results indicated that consumers perceive brand personality and brand aroused
feelings as two separate constructs and that brand personality has a substantial effect on
brand-aroused feelings. Haythem Guizani, Pierre Valette Florence and Imene Becheur
(2009) examined the relative impact of brand personality dimensions and perceived
marketing actions on brand equity formation.The exploratory results indicated that brand
equity management should be adapted to specific consumer segments according to brand
personality dimensions and marketing mix elements. Nguyen Dinh Tho, Nguyen Thi Mai
Trang, Nguyen Dong Phong (2008) examined the impact of brand personality impressions
on brand relationship quality in a transition market, Vietnam. It also explored the role of
consumer attitudes toward advertising public relations in brand personality impressions
and brand relationship quality. Findings revealed that brand personality impressions have a
positive impact on brand relationship quality. It was found that attitude toward public
relations has positive impact on both brand personality impressions and brand relationship
quality. Also, attitude toward advertising has a positive impact on brand personality
impressions but not on brand relationship quality. These findings suggested that brand
personality impressions play an important role in building brand-customer relationships.
Joachim Zentes, Dirk Morschettb and Hanna Schramm Klein (2007) found that the
76
dimensions of the brand personality directly influence the store loyalty of consumers. O.
Bouhlel, N. Mzoughi, D. Hadiji and I. Ben Slimane (2009) assessed the value of the brand
personality and its influence on consumer‘s decision making, through relational variables,
after receiving a text message advertisement. The study confirmed that brand personality
does actually influence the brand trust as well as the attachment and commitment. The
levels of sensitivity and involvement have an impact on the brand personality and its
related variables.
Gianluigi Guido, Alessandro M. Peluso and Mariarosaria Provenzano (2010) were of the
view that marketing researchers employ the Five-Factor Model to describe branded
products using attributes of human personality. ―Marker attributes‖ which were used to
elicit these brand personality attributes may be related to consumers' intention to purchase.
Two connected studies were carried out on two samples of 91 and 557 participants,
respectively, which indicated that brand personality-marker attributes predict intention to
purchase, but only to the extent that such attributes are ―vivid‖ and, in particular, when
they elicit emotional responses (i.e., when they are emotionally interesting). These findings
have several implications for people involved in developing strategies for advertising.
Vanitha Swaminathan, Karen M. Stilley and Rohini Ahluwalia(2009) examined the
moderating role of consumer's attachment style in the impact of brand personality. Results
showed that anxiously attached individuals are more likely to be differentially influenced
by brand personalities. Further, the results indicated that the level of avoidance predicts the
types of brand personality that are most relevant to anxious individuals.
77
2.16 Application of Jennifer Aaker‟s Brand Personality Scale (BPS)
Since BPS‘s inception, it has received great attention and extensive application in different
cultures. One of the first applications is by Ferrandi, Valette-Florence and Fine-Falcy
(2000) in French context. They tested whether human personality scale (Saucier, 1994)
could be applied to brands. The test was conducted by means of both confirmatory factor
analysis and congruence analysis between human and brand personality structures. Results
showed congruence between the two scales for a reduced scale and revealed that brands
exhibit contrasting profiles on the reduced scale uncovered. Kim, Han and Park (2001)
investigated the applicability of brand personality scale in Korean cellular phone market.
The result was quite consistent with Aaker‘s six variables (down-to-earth, family-oriented,
real, independent, cool, and cheerful) that were not related to any factor were excluded and
a total of five factors were extracted from remaining items. The factors were named after
Aaker‘s dimensions as ‗sincerity‘, ‗excitement‘, ‗competence‘, ‗sophistication‘, and
‗ruggedness‘. Alvarez-Ortiz and Harris (2002) employed an etic approach to test the
stability of Aaker‘s scale in Mexico. The 42 items were translated into Spanish. Brand
personality measures were collected on a set of twenty brands: ten global brands popular in
Mexico and ten well-known Mexican brands. The analysis indicated that the items forming
the Ruggedness factor obtained in the United States were not internally consistent. In
addition, among Mexican consumers, the traits of masculinity and femininity represented
one bipolar dimension. This suggested that the Mexican data did not fit well using the five-
dimension structure. Modification of the model resulted in a six-dimension structure:
Sincerity, Excitement, Competence, Sophistication, Ruggedness and Genders. In
attempting to replicate Aaker‘s scale in restaurant setting, Austin, Siguaw and Mattila
(2003) employed nine restaurants: three well-known quick service brands, three well-
78
known casual dining brands and three local upscale restaurants. Using a five-point scale,
247 college students were asked to evaluate the 42 personality traits identified by Aaker. A
series of confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were run to verify the five-dimension model
for each individual brand as well as aggregated brands. All the CFA resulted in poor fit of
the models and a number of items cross-loaded in the restaurant context. Murase and
Bojanic (2004) used the brand personality scale to examine the differences in perceptions
of brand personalities of three quick service restaurants between Japanese and American
consumers. They found that while there was a little cultural difference in the perceptions of
the three brands, there were significant differences in personality ratings across brands.
Aaker, Benet-Martinez and Garolera (2001) conducted four studies to examine how the
symbolic and expressive attributes associated with commercial brands are structured and
how this structure varies across three cultures. Studies 1 and 2 revealed a set of brand
personality dimensions which were common to both Japan and the United States
(Sincerity, Excitement, Competence and Sophistication) as well as culture-specific
Japanese (Peacefulness) and American (Ruggedness) dimensions. Studies 3 and 4, which
extended this set of findings to Spain, yielded brand personality dimensions common to
both Spain and the United States (Sincerity, Excitement and Sophistication), plus non-
shared Spanish (Passion) and American (Competence and Ruggedness) dimensions.
Davies et al. (2001) attempted to apply brand personality scale to find the identity and
image of three companies in retailing, financial services and business-to-business sectors
respectively. They sought to extend the applicability of the scale to employees as well as
customers. It was found that except the Ruggedness factor, the reliability levels from the
employee data are higher than for the customer data. In terms of reliability, Ruggedness is
the weakest factor. They confirmed that this scale is applicable from both the customers‘
79
and employees‘ views as there were high correlations between customers‘ and employees‘
dimension scores. Davies et al. (2003) developed a Corporate Personality Scale, which was
intended to measure how different stake-holders see an organization as a whole rather than
looking at each of the specific products/services it could offer to the market. Based on
empirical work covering 15 organizations and over 4,600 respondents, they proposed a
seven dimension scale with a total of 49 items from 93 items. The dimensions of the
Corporate Personality Scale, which also included several facets within them are
agreeableness (12 items), enterprise (nine items), competence (eight items), chic (eight
items), ruthlessness (six items), informality (three items) and machismo (three items).
These dimensions were identified as relevant to both customers and employees. All
dimensions but two (i.e. machismo and informality), showed reliability coefficients above
the baseline of 0.7. Duarte and Davies (2002) used such a scale to measure the Ford brand
image in the United Kingdom. They measured the image of the brand, the respondents‘
attitudinal affinity to it, the satisfaction and commitment to the brand by respondents
owning a Ford and three potentially moderating variables: product involvement, product
knowledge and brand parity. They found that the more functional dimensions of
‗agreeableness‘ and ‗competence‘ scored higher than the others and at the same time these
two dimensions correlated most strongly with positive attitudes toward the Ford brand.
Supphellen and Gronhaug (2003) endeavored to apply brand personality scale to two
foreign brands in Russia. They found differences in the dimensionality of brand personality
in Russia and United States. It was also revealed that there are similarities and differences
between American and Russian brand personality perceptions. Also, only low-ethnocentric
consumers are influenced by foreign brand personalities. Rojas Mendez, Erenchun Podlech
and Silva Olave (2004) conducted a study in which they applied the brand personality
80
scale developed by Aaker (1997) to empirically measure the Ford Brand Personality in
Chile. It was shown that the ‗ruggedness‘ dimension proposed by Aaker (1997) was not
reliable nor was it valid. Among respondents, three segments are identified: the
antagonists, the admirers and the cold-blooded. Various marketing suggestions were
offered to position the Ford brand in Chile. Venable et al. (2005) conducted many studies
to evaluate brand personality‘s role in nonprofit organizations. They developed and refined
a parsimonious measure of brand personality specifically for the nonprofit context. There
were four dimensions of brand personality for nonprofits: integrity, nurturance,
sophistication and ruggedness. The study showed that current and potential donors ascribe
personality traits to nonprofit organizations and differentiate between nonprofits on the
basis of the organizations‘ personality. They also suggested that nonprofit organizations‘
brand personality may exert an influence on potential donors‘ likelihood to contribute.
Sung and Tinkham (2005) tested the hypothesis that different cultures are likely to have
somewhat unique organizations of brand personality dimensions that are reflective of
cultural differences in basic values using American and Korean samples. In addition to
Aaker‘s scale, additional items were generated from a pretest. A combined 80 items were
subjected to rate a set of 13 global brands. Several factor analyses were carried over with
the pooled sample, American sample and Korean sample. Factor analysis of the pooled
sample identified eight dimensions: Competence (reliable, successful, confident, popular,
well made and efficient), Trendiness (different, new, innovative, trendy, up-to-date,
imaginative and contemporary), Likeableness (funny, warm, easy, bubbly, smooth,
cheerful and honest), Western (Western, free, technical, outdoorsy and professional),
Sophistication (elegant, glamorous, upper class, charming and feminine), Ruggedness
(tough, rugged and masculine), Tradition (traditional, typical, small-town and original) and
81
Ascendancy (strict, intelligent, busy, daring, heavy and big). The second factor analysis
with American sample also produced eight dimensions, six of which are consistent with
those of the pooled data analysis: Likeableness, Trendiness, Competence, Sophistication,
Traditionalism and Ruggedness. Two new components emerged: White Collar (corporate,
technical, and professional) and Androgyny (masculine, feminine and expensive). The
third factor analysis with Korean sample created eight dimensions too. The first factor was
Competence and was fairly consistent with that of the American sample. Primary markers
of the second factor were suggestive of those of Trendiness in the U.S. sample. Factor 3,
Likeableness seemed to capture a somewhat narrower view of the Likeableness factor than
was observed for the American sample. Factor 4, Passive Likeableness (funny, small-town,
easy, smooth, family-oriented, warm, playful and sentimental) appeared to be unique to the
Korean sample. Dimension 5 was clearly Sophistication and included terms consistent with
the markers of this factor in the United States but with the added attribute of feminine.
Factor 6, Ascendancy (strict, heavy, intelligent, big and daring) seemed unique to the
Korean sample, although it was observed and reported earlier as a part of the pooled
analysis. The seventh factor clearly represented Ruggedness, as observed in the U.S.
sample and Factor 8, Traditionalism, was defined by markers in line with that found in the
United States. To summarize, six brand personality dimensions had similar meaning in
both Korea and the United States, whereas other dimensions were culture-specific. Two
culture-specific brand personality dimensions, Passive Likeableness and Ascendancy, were
identified from the Korean data; while factors of White Collar and Androgyny suggested
that professional status and gender roles were separated more strongly from other
dimensions of brand perception in the United States than they were in Korea. Smit, Berger
and Franzen (2003) made an effort to develop a Brand Personality Scale for Dutch
82
practitioners. Aaker‘s 42 personality scale was adopted and an additional list of 60 items
was borrowed from Brokken‘s Dutch Personality Scale. Aaker‘s BPS scale was also tested
with 230 Chinese non-student samples in Beijing (Zhang, 2007). Two brands, Nike and
Sony, were used. Respondents were asked to rate the extent to which that 42 personality
traits described the Sony and Nike respectively with a five-point Likert scale (1=extremely
descriptive, 5=completely non-descriptive). To investigate whether the same dimensions
would appear, two exploratory factor analyses were run. Both factor analyses extracted
four factors. However, the four factors for the two brands differed from each other except
for the last factor: Small-Town Ruggedness. For Nike, the four factors consisted of
Brightness and Trustworthiness (intelligent, tough, independent, imaginative, honest,
cheerful, secure), Fashion and Charm (good looking, fashionable, charming, daring,
friendly), Realism and Smoothness (down-to-earth, smooth, real), and Small-Town
Ruggedness (rugged, small-town). For Sony, on the other hand, the four factors included
Charm of Youth (fashionable, good looking, contemporary, imaginative, unique, young,
charming, daring), Trustworthiness (down-to-earth, secure, real, honest, tough, confident,
wholesome), Masculinity (masculine, Western, exciting) and Small-Town Ruggedness
(rugged, small-town). In addition, the last factors of both brands did not show significant
difference.
Philip J. Rosenberger III and Brett Donahay(2008) applied Aaker‘s (1997) brand
personality (BP) construct in the Formula One (F1) motor racing market. They investigated
the potential for detecting differences in the brand personality profiles of four F1 team
brands (Ferrari, Williams, B.A.R., Jaguar). They also investigated the influence of fan
identification and a F1 team‘s winning performance on brand personality. Based on survey
results from 160 Australian F1 motorsport fans, it was found that Aaker‘s (1997) brand
83
personality construct was effective in profiling the four F1 team brands and was able to
determine significant brand personality profile differences amongst the F1 team brands. It
was also found that Fan identification and the team‘s winning performance also had
significant brand personality effects.
In recent years, marketing research has paid considerable attention to the symbolic
meaning that consumers attribute to brands. One important symbolic brand association is
brand personality. While the brand personality scale that Aaker has proposed in her well-
known article has been applied to different products and product groups in different
countries, an application to retailing is rare. Based on the data of an empirical study in
Germany (n = 1337), Zentes, Morschett and Schramm Klein (2008) demonstrated that the
scale is applicable for retail brands in Germany, that it serves well to clearly differentiate
between retailers and that the dimensions of the brand personality directly influence the
store loyalty of consumers. Different brand personality scales (BPS) have been created in
the literature. Yun Jie, Ting Jui Chou and Fang-fang Li (2009) made a comparison of two
brand personality scales, namely American brand personality scale (USBPS) and Japanese
brand personality scale (JPBPS), to measure three brands in a Chinese context. These
scales were used to measure both the brand personality and respondent‘s own personality
(human personality). Results revealed that American brand personality scale (USPBS)
yielded better fit indices than Japanese brand personality scale (JPBPS). They also
compared the predictive validity of traditional measure and new measure of self-congruity.
Although the Aaker‘s brand personality scale has received the most academic attention in
its field, unchallenged on its validity, Azoulay and Kapferer (2003) raised the question
whether the brand personality scale really measure brand personality. They argued that the
current brand personality scales do not measure brand personality, but a number of
84
dimensions of brand identity with personality being only one of them. They supported their
argument by questioning the scale‘s concept validity. It was pointed out that the definition
used by Aaker not only includes personality aspect, but also intellectual abilities, gender or
social class. It creates a conceptual confusion. To overcome this, they gave a more precise
definition of brand personality as ―a set of human personality traits that are both applicable
to and relevant for brands‖. They were also of the view that some dimensions and items
under the scale are conceptually distinct from the pure concept of personality, such as
dimension ―competence‖ which is a cognitive ability; item ―feminine‖ which is a value
judgment.
In applying Aaker‘s scale in the restaurant industry, Siguaw, Mattila and Austin( 1999).
Provided empirical evidence regarding the extent to which the restaurant brands such as
Wendy‘s, McDonald‘s, Burger King, and others, have established clear and distinct brand
personalities in the minds of consumers. It had been shown that a well-established brand
personality result in increased preference and patronage, higher emotional ties to the brand,
and trust and loyalty.
2.17 Intention to recommend
Intentions are indications of the willingness and commitment of tourists to perform
particular behavior or actions. The behavior intentions involve intention to returning to the
destination and intentions to recommend to friends and relatives and colleague‘s back
home. The construct of ‗future behavioral intention‘, Intention to recommend or to revisit
are both indicators of loyalty (Bigne, Sanchez & Sanchez, 2001).
Tourist satisfaction has become increasingly important for various marketing organizations
because if tourists are satisfied then they will results in word-of-mouth publicity and will
85
also recommend other people or potential tourists to visit the destination. Furthermore, the
relationship between overall satisfaction and tourist‘s intention to recommend to others
was strong. The more tourist groups are satisfied, the more they are likely to return and
recommend to others. Research shows that service and quality lead to perceived value,
while both satisfaction and perceived value are direct antecedents of behavior intentions
like revisit intention or intention to recommend (Baker & Crompton, 2000; Cronin, Brady
& Hult, 2000). Hui et al (2007) revealed that tourists who were satisfied from the whole
trip were likely to recommend the destinations to others rather than to revisit it in the
future. Oppermann (1999, 2000) found that less satisfied visitors might revisit the same
destination. Therefore, asking tourists only about their intention to return would refer by
the way to their willingness to recommend it.
Kozak (2003) revealed that overall tourist satisfaction, the intention to recommend and the
intention to repeat visit are affected by multiple attributes and differ from one customer
group and from one destination to another. Bosque and Martin (2008) revealed that
tourism satisfaction comprises of attitudes and prior beliefs, post-experience assessments
and future behavioral intentions. Kozak and Rimmington (2000) mentioned that intention
to return behaviors are significant for destinations image study. Word of mouth
recommendations and repeat visitation results if the tourists are satisfied. Peng-Yao Wang
(2007) suggested in his research, there has been increased attention given in the tourism
study to the relationship between consumer behavioral intention and consumption
experience, and experiential value etc. Most of these empirical studies suggested that if the
tourism industry tries to improve the lack or insufficiency of experiential factors which
represented unsatisfactory, it could be able to enhance the tourist‘s satisfaction, intention to
return and willingness to recommend the destination.
86
Scott (1995) developed a tourism satisfaction model that is based on the cumulative nearer
of tourism experience. He found that overall satisfaction and intentions to recommend and
revisit are largely a function of the types of benefits tourists experience during their visit.
A word of mouth recommendation starts soon after the trip and can strongly influence
visitors. When visitors‘ intention to revisit a destination is quite high, their intention to
recommend mostly is positive as well, since visitors have favorable perceptions about their
experience and felt satisfied.
2.18 Destination Personality and Tourists‟ Future Intention
As places seek to become distinctive, destination personality is viewed as a viable
metaphor for understanding tourists‘ perception of places and for crafting a unique
destination identity (Caprara, Barbarnelli & Guido, 2001; Crask & Henry, 1990; Morgan,
Pritchard & Piggott, 2002, Triplett, 1994). Adopting Aaker‘s (1997) terminology of brand
personality, destination personality is defined as ―the set of human characteristics
associated with a destination‖.
A well established brand personality influences consumer preference and patronage (Sirgy,
1982; Malhotra, 1988), develops stronger emotional ties (Biel, 1993), trust and loyalty
with the brand (Fournier, 1998). Likewise, Fournier (1998) argues that when brands are
successful at satisfying consumer needs, consumers develop strong emotions towards
them. Accordingly, brand personality has been shown positively influence consumer
choice (Sirgy, 1982; Malhotra, 1988), intention to purchase and intention to recommend
behaviour (Biel, 1993; Fournier, 1998; Olson & Allen, 1995). Similarly, a distinctive and
emotionally attractive destination personality would leverage perceived image of a place
and influence tourist choice behavior (Yuksel Ekinci & Sameer Hosany, 2006).
87
Moreover, Bigne, Sanchez and Sanchez (2001) also stated that, the destination personality
would influence tourists‘ choice processes, the evaluation of that destination and future
behavioral intention.
2.19 Importance of the study
Baloglu and Brindberg (1997) stated that tourism can be defined as short-term leisure
and business travel activities away from the normal place of residence and work. It
involves particular destinations and both domestic and international travelers.
The study is justified by the fact that the tourist‘s intention to recommend is higher when
destination brand personality of a tourism destination is higher. Attaching brand
personalities to destinations will contribute to a differentiated destination which will make
the tourists to remember the destination more easily and it will result in their stronger
intention to recommend to other people to visit the destination. As a result, the tourist
inflow to the destination will increase.
When tourists visit a destination, this results in increased job opportunities and tax
revenues. In other words, the economy of that destination is increased. Hence, in some
locations, tourism is the major sector of the economy. Therefore, research of this
destination brand personality topic will definitely be an important contribution to
destination pursuers, place marketers, government agencies and stakeholders. In today‘s
competitive climate, creating and managing an appropriate destination personality has
become vital for effective positioning and differentiation. Destination marketers should
concentrate on developing efficient communication methods to launch a distinctive and
attractive personality for their places. Destination marketers should concern themselves
with both the personality and the image of the destinations under their charge if they are to
88
differentiate themselves in today‘s competitive holiday market and influence tourist‘s
intention to recommend. They may improve the positive impact of destination image on
intention to recommend by developing strong destination personality characteristics via
advertising and destination management tactics. Moreover, as mentioned previously, there
is a dearth of research on the relationship between destination personality and tourists‘
future intention. Hence, this research is innovative in identifying the relationship between
destination brand personality and intention to recommend. Hereby, the study carried out an
in-depth review on destination brand personality in trying to have a clear picture on this
concept.
This study enabled the researcher to collect information from the respondents who have
visited national and international destinations as well as consumed national services and
belonged to different parts of the country. The present study focused on the three regions
of Jammu and Kashmir i.e Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh.
This study will add knowledge by showing how destination personality concept is applied
in Jammu and Kashmir. By illustrating the importance of destination brand personality, it
hopes to provide a basis for Jammu and Kashmir to re-design its tourism strategies. The
research findings will assist place marketers and government agencies or other
stakeholders as a reference when they plan to have a research task.
89
2.20 Difference between Present and Past studies
The present study is different from past studies as reviewed in this chapter in the following
respects:
1. It attempts to clarify the concept of Destination Brand Personality by surveying the
available relevant literature.
2. It investigates the strategies adopted by various tourism companies and destination
marketing organizations in personifying the brand personality of the destinations.
3. It throws light on the underlying factors that form the basis on which tourist‘s
perceptions are developed.
4. It makes use of Correlation and regression analysis to study the relationship
between destination brand personality and Intention to recommend.
It also tries to determine the difference in tourist‘s perception on the destination brand
personality characteristics with the three regions of Jammu and Kashmir.
It further consolidates the scarce research available in the field of destination brand
personality.
2.21 Formulation of the Problem
In light of what has been said, the following problem is formulated for further
investigation. It is as follows:
“An Assessment of Destination Brand Personality
and its relationship with Intention to Recommend”
90
2.22 Justification of the problem
The basic rationale behind this research stems from the fact that, although the destination
personality concept has received considerable attention and acceptance by both tourism
marketing scholars and practitioners, there is:
1. Limited empirical research of Destination Brand Personality within the domain of
tourism marketing. As the preceding Literature has illustrated most of the work is
purely inductive and lacks empirical validation.
2. Since we have no clear appreciation of the way that the concept of destination
brand personality is actually managed within the tourism marketing domain we
approach the subject from the premise that whether or not destination brand
personality is part of conscious and proactive tourism management activities.
3. Ekinci and Hosany (2006) were of the view that although most studies todate have
been limited to comparing, classifying and evaluating destinations on the basis of
their images only, differentiation based on personality traits has as yet been under
explored.
4. Murrphy, Benckendorff and Moscardo (2007) stated that future research can be
conducted exploring the role of destination brand personality and its associated
constructs in achieving destination differentiation.
5. Hosany, Ekinci and Uysal (2006) examined the contentious relationship between
brand image and brand personality in the context of tourism destination. They were
of the view that investigations along the same lines in different fields can be done.
91
6. Since this study is an exploratory study, it is hoped that other studies will follow
soon which may build up on this study and help the mangers to better understand
the destination brand personality being adopted by different destination marketing
organizations.
2.23 Reasons for choosing Jammu and Kashmir as study area
1. Jammu and Kashmir has a great potential for tourism. Every year the number of
tourists coming to this state has been increasing. Here, there is always something
stored for every type of tourist e.g. an adventure tourist will find various
destinations suitable for adventurous sports; a pilgrimage tourist will find various
pilgrimage sites such as Vaishno Devi, Amarnath, Shahdara Sharif etc.
2. Jammu and Kashmir is a state which has a mixture of three cultures and yet all are
united as one. Jammu has a different culture from that of Kashmir and Ladakh.
Thus, tourists coming to this state have a change to know about three different
cultures.
3. Since it is my native state, so I think it was the better option to choose this
destination as my study area for the present study.
4. Research shows that no or very less research has been done in the field of
destination brand personality in this particular brand personality. Keeping in view
the above reasons, the state of Jammu and Kashmir has been chosen as the study
area.
92
References
Aaker, D. A. (1996). Building Strong Brands. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research,
34(3), 347-356.
Aaker, D. (2002). Building Strong Brands. New York: Free Press.
Aaker, J. L., Benet-Martinez, V., & Garolera, J. (2001). Consumption symbols as carriers
of culture: a study of Japanese and Spanish brand personality constructs. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 81(3), 492-508.
Aaker, J., & Fournier, S. (1995). A brand as a character, a partner and a person: three
perspectives on the question of brand personality. Advances in Consumer Research, 22,
391-395.
Allen, D. E., & Olson, J.(1995).Conceptualizing and Creating Brand Personality: A
Narrative Theory Approach. In J. Aaker and S. Fournier (Eds.), A Brand as a Character, a
Partner and a Person: Three Perspectives on the Question of Brand Personality ( pp. 392-
393). Advances in Consumer Research, 22 .
Alvarez-Ortiz, C., & Harris, J. (2002). Assessing the Structure of Brand Personality among
Global and Local Mexican Brands. Paper presented at the Ameri00can Marketing
Association Educators' Conference: Enhancing Knowledge Development in Marketing,
Chicago, Illinois.
Austin, Jon R., Siguaw, Judy A., & Mattila, Anna S. (2003). A re-examination of the
generalization of the Aaker‘s brand personality measurement framework. Journal of
Strategic Marketing, 11(2) (June), 77-92.
93
Azoulay, A., & Kapferer, J.N. (2003). Do Brand Personality Scales Really Measure Brand
Personality? Journal of Brand Management, 11(2), 143-155.
Baker, D. A. & Crompton, J.L. ( 2000). Quality, satisfaction and behavioural variables.
Annals of Tourism Research, 27 (3), 785-804.
Barrett, J. L., & Keil, F. C. (1996).Conceptualising a Non natural Entity:
Anthropomorphism in God Concepts. Cognitive Psychology, 31, 219-247.
Batra, R., Lehmann, D., & Singh, D. (1993). The Brand Personality Component of Brand
Goodwill: Some Antecedents and Consequences. In Aaker & Biel (Eds.), Brand Equity &
Advertising: Advertising’s Role in Building Strong Brands (pp. 83-95). Hillsdale:
Lawrence Earlbaum Associates Publisher.
Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the Extended Self. The Journal of Consumer
Research, 15(2), 139-168.
Biel, A. L. (1993). Converting Image into Equity. In Aaker, D. A. and Biel, A. L. (Eds.),
Brand Equity and Advertising: Advertising’s Role in Building Strong Brands (pp 67-82).
New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum, Associates Inc, Hilsdale.
Breakenridge, Deirdre (2001). Cyberbranding: Brand Building in the Digital Economy.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Financial Times/ Prentice Hall.
Berry, N.C. (1988, Summer). Revitalizing Brands. The Journal of Consumer Research,
5(3), 15–20.
Blackstone, M. (1993). Beyond Brand Personality: Building Brand Relationships. In D. A.
Aaker and A. Biel(Eds.), Brand Equity and Advertising (pp113-124). New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
94
Boyle, E. (2003). A study of entrepreneurial brand building in the manufacturing sector in
the UK. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 12 (2), 79-93.
Bigne, J.E., Sanchez, M.I. and Sanchez, J.(2001). Tourism Image, Evaluation Variables
and After Purchase Behaviour: Inter-relationship. Tourism Management, 22(6), 607-616.
Bosnjak, M., Bochmann,V. & Hufschmidt,T.(2007). Dimensions of Brand Personality
Attributions: A Person-Centric Approach in the German Cultural Context. Social Behavior
and Personality: An International Journal, 35(3), 303-16.
Bosque, I.R., Martín, H. S. ((2008).Tourist satisfaction a cognitive-affective model. Annals
of Tourism Research, 35(2), 551-573.
Bouhlel, O., Mzoughi, N., Hadiji, D., & Slimane, I. B. (2009). Brand Personality and
Mobile Marketing: An Empirical Investigation World Academy of Science, Engineering
and Technology. Retrieved from http://www.waset.org/journals/waset/v53/v53-113.pdf on
6th Dec, 2011.
Boyer, P.(1996).What Makes Anthropomorphism Natural: Intuitive Ontology and
Cultural Representations. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 2 (1), 83-97.
Burke, B. (1994, September). Positioning, Personality, Not Price, Should Frame Consumer
Message. Brandweek, 35(36).
Caprara, Gian V., Claudio, Barbaranelli., & Gianluigi, G .(2001). Brand Personality: How
to make the metaphor fit. Journal of Economic Psychology, 22(3), 377-395.
Crask, M.R. and Henry, A.L. (1990). A positioning-based decision model for selecting
advertising messages. Journal of Advertising Research, 30(4), 32-38.
95
Cronin, J. Joseph, Brady, M. & Hult, G. Tomas M. (2000). Assessing the Effects of
Quality, Value, and Customer Satisfaction on Consumer Behavioral Intentions in Service
Environments. Journal of Retailing, 76 (2), 193-218.
Davies, G., Rosa, Chun., Rui, V. da Silva., & Stuart, R.(2001).The personification
metaphor as a measurement approach for corporate reputation. Corporate Reputation
Review, 4 ( 2), 113-127.
Davies,G., Chun,R., Da Silva, R.V., & Roper, S. (2003). Corporate Reputation and
Competitiveness. London, UK : Routledge.
Dayal, S., Landesberg, H., & Zeisser, M.(2000). Building Digital Brands. McKinsey
Quarterly, 2, 42-51.
Diamantopolus, A., Smith, G., & Grime, I. (2005). The impact of brand extensions on
brand personality: experimental evidence. European Journal of Marketing, 39 (1/2), 129-
149.
Doyle, P. (1990, Spring). Building Successful Brands: The Strategic Options. The Journal
of Consumer Marketing, 7(2), 5 –20.
Duarte, M., & Davies, G. (2002).The anatomy of the Ford brand. Paper presented at the
6th International Conference on Corporate Reputation, Boston, MA.
Ekinci, Y., & Hosany, S. (2006). Destination personality: An application of brand
personality to tourism destinations. Journal of Travel Research, 45(2), 127-139.
Ekinci, Yuksel., Sirakaya-Turk, E., & Baloglu, S. (2007). Host Image and Destination
Personality. Tourism Analysis, 12, (5-6), 433-446.
96
Ferrandi, Jean-Marc., Pierre, Valette-Florence., and Sandrine, Fine-Falcy. (2000). Aaker's
Brand Personality Scale in a French Context: A Replication and Preliminary Test of
Validity. In Charles H. Noble (Eds.), Developments in Marketing Science (pp. 7-13) Vol.
23.
Freling, T.H., Forbes, L.P.( 2005). An empirical analysis of the brand personality effect.
Journal of Product & Brand Management, 14(7), 404-413.
Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: developing relationship theory in
consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 343–373.
Ghodeswar, B.M. (2008). Building Brand Identity in Competitive Markets: A Conceptual
Model, Journal of Product and Brand Management, 17(1), 4-12.
Graeff, T. R. (1996). Using Promotional Messages to Manage the Effects of Brand and
Self-Image on Brand Evaluations. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 13 (3), 4-18.
Graeff, T. R. (1997). Consumption Situations and the Effects of Brand Image on
Consumers' Brand Evaluations. Psychology & Marketing, 14(1), 49-70.
Gordon, W., & Corr, D. (1990, July). The…Space…Between…Words: The Application of
A New Model of Communication to Quantitative Brand Image Measurement. Journal of
the Market Research Society, 32(3), 409–43.
Guido, Gianluigi., Peluso, Alessandro M., and Provenzano, M. (2010). Influence of Brand
Personality-Marker Attributes on Purchasing Intention: The Role of Emotionality.
Psychological Reports, 106, 737-751.
97
Guthrie,S.E.(1997).Anthropomorphism: A Definition and a Theory. In R.W. Mitchell, N.S.
Thompson, and H. L. Miles (Eds.), Anthropomorphism, Anecdotes and Animals. NY: State
University of New York Press.
Govers, P.C.M., & Schoormans, J. P. L. (2005).Product Personality and Its Influence on
Consumer Preference. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22 (4), 189-197.
Haigood, T.L. (1999). The brand personality effect: an empirical investigation.
Proceedings of the American Marketing Association Winter Educators‘ Conference. Vol.
10. pp149-50.
Haigood, T. L. (2001). Deconstructing Brand Personality. Paper presented at the
American Marketing Association. Conference Proceedings: 2001 AMA Educators'
Proceedings.
Halliday, J. (1996). Chrysler brings out brand personalities with ‗97 ads. Advertising
Age,67(40).
Hankinson, G., & Cowking, P. (1993). Branding in Action. McGraw-Hill Marketing for
professionals Series, Cambridge: McGraw-Hill.
Hayes, J. (1999). Antecedents and consequences of brand personality. Dissertation,
Mississippi State University.
Helgeson, J.G., & Supphellen, M. (2004). A Conceptual and Measurement Comparison of
Self-Congruity and Brand Personality. International Journal of Market Research, 46(2),
205-236.
98
Hendon, D.W., & Williams, E.L. (1985). Winning the battle for your customers. Journal of
Consumer Marketing, 2 (4), 65-75.
Heylen, J.P., Dawson, B., & Sampson, P.(1995).An implicit model of consumer behavior.
Journal of the Market Research Society, Special issue: practical issues in modeling, 37 (1),
51-67.
Hosany, S., Ekinci, Y., and Uysal, M. (2006). Destination Image and Destination
Personality: An Application of Branding Theories to Tourism Places. Journal of Business
Research, 59, 638-642.
Hosany, S., Ekinci, Y., and Uysal, M. (2007). Destination Image and Destination
Personality. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 1 (1), 62-
81.
Hui,T., Wan, D., and Ho, A. (2007). Tourists' satisfaction, recommendation and revisiting
Singapore. Tourism Management, 28, 965-75.
Guizani, Haythem., Florence, Pierre Valette.,and Becheur, I .(2009). The Impact of Brand
Personality and Marketing Communications on Brand Equity: An Exploratory
Segmentation Approach. Retrieved from
http://www.duplication.net.au/ANZMAC09/papers/ANZMAC2009-668.pdf on 6th
Dec,2011.
Kapferer, J. N. (1997). Strategic Brand Management. London: Kogan Page.
Johnson, L.W., Soutar, G.N. and Sweeney, J.C. (2000). Moderators of the brand
image/perceived product quality relationship. The Journal of Brand Management, 7(6),
425-33.
99
Karande, K., Zinkhan, G. M., & Lum, A. B. (1997). Brand Personality and Self-concept:
A Replication and Extension. Paper presented at the American Marketing Association
Summer Marketing Educators' Conference.
Miller, K. (2008). The impact of brand personality on brand-aroused feelings. In ANZAM
2008: Managing in the Pacific Century, 2-5 Dec 2008, Auckland, New Zealand.
Retrieved from http://wms-soros.mngt.waikato.ac.nz/NR/exeres/3F23F6E5-DC03-4FD0-
A610-C54F3FB933A4.htm on 15th of July, 2011.
Keller, K. L.(1993). Conceptualizing, measuring and managing customer-based brand
equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1-22.
Keller, Kevin L. (1998). Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring, and
Managing Brand Equity. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kim, P. (1992). Commentary: A Perspective on Brands. Journal of Product & Brand
Management, 1 (4), 35-39.
Kim, C.K., Dongchul, H., and Park, S.B.(2001). The effect of brand personality and brand
identification on brand loyalty: applying the theory of social identification. Japanese
Psychological Research, 43(4), 195–206.
Kotler, P., Wong, V., Saunders, J. & Armstrong, G., (2005). Principles of Marketing
(Fourth European Edition). Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.
Kozak, M.(2003). Measurıng Tourıst Satısfactıon Wıth Multıple Destınatıon Attrıbutes
.Tourism Analysis, 7 (3/4), 229-240.
100
Kozak M., & M., R. (2000). Tourist satisfaction with Mallorca, Spain, as an Off-season
holiday destination. Journal of Travel Research, 38(3), 260-269.
Kumar, S.R., Luthra, A., & Datta, G. (2006). Linkages between brand personality and
brand loyalty: a qualitative study in an emerging market in the Indian context. In S.R.
Kumar (Eds.), Consumer Behaviour and Branding: Concepts, Readings and Cases (pp.
423-450). India: Dorling Kindersley.
Lau, K. C., & Phau,I.(2004). Antecedents to Brand Personality Fit: Some Research
Propositions for Symbolic Brands. Retrieved from
http://smib.vuw.ac.nz:8081/WWW/ANZMAC2004/CDsite/papers/KongChe1.PDF on 6th
Dec, 2011.
Levy, S.J. (1959). Symbols for sale. Harvard Business Review, 37(July-August), 117-24.
Lindstrom, M. & Andersen, T.F. (2000). Brand Building on the Internet. London: Kogan
Page.
Louis, D., & Lombart, C. (2010). Impact of brand personality on three major relational
consequences (trust, attachment, and commitment to the brand). Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 19 (2), 114-130.
Martenson, R. (2007). Corporate Brand Image, Satisfaction and Store Loyalty. A study of
a brand, store brands and manufacturer brands. International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, 35(7), 544-565.
Martineau, Pierre (1958). The Personality of the retail store. Harvard Business Review,
36(1), 47-55.
101
Malhotra, N. K. (1988). Self Concept and Product Choice: An Integrated Perspective.
Journal of Economic Psychology, 9(1), 1-28.
Mazursky D. (1989). Past Experience and Future Tourism Decisions. Annals of Tourism
Research, 16(3), 333-344.
Mc Cracken, G. (1989). Who is the celebrity endorser? Cultural foundations of
endorsement process. Journal of consumer research, 16(3), 310-321.
Mc Enally, M. R., & De Chernatony, L. (1999). The Evolving Nature of Branding:
Consumer and Managerial Considerations. Academy of Marketing Science Review,
1999(1).
Melin, F. (1997). Varumarket som Strategiskt Konkurrensmedel. Lund, Lund university
press.
Miller, K.(2008). The impact of brand personality on brand-aroused feelings. In: ANZAM
2008: Managing in the Pacific Century, 2-5 Dec 2008, Auckland, New Zealand.
Mithen, Steven J., and Boyer,P. (1996). Comment: Anthropomorphism and the Evolution
of Cognition. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 2/4, 717-721.
Moon, Y. (2002).Personalization and Personality: Some Effects of Customizing Message
Style Based on Consumer Personality. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12 (4), 313-326.
Morgan and Pritchard, (2002), Contextualizing Destination Branding. In N.J. Morgan, A.
Pritchard and R. Pride (Eds.), Destination Branding: Creating the Unique Destination
Proposition (pp11-43). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann..
102
Morgan, N., Pritchard, A., & Piggott, R. (2002).New Zealand, 100% pure: the creation of a
powerful niche destination brand. Journal of Brand Management, 9 (4/5), 335-54.
Mowen, J. C. (1990). Consumer Behaviour (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan Publishing
Company.
Mulyanegara, Riza Casidy., Tsarenko, Yelena., Anderson, A.(2009). The Big Five and
brand personality: Investigating the impact of consumer personality on preferences towards
particular brand personality. The Journal of Brand Management, 16(4), 234-247.
Murase, H., & Bosjanic, D. (2004). An examination of the differences in restaurant brand
personality across cultures. Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing, 11 (2/3), 97–113.
Murphy, P., Benckendorff, P., Moscardo, G. (2007).Linking travel motivation, tourist self
image and destination brand personality. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 22(2),
45-59.
Murphy, L., Moscardo, G., Benckendorff, P. (2007).Using brand personality to
differentiate regional tourism destinations. Journal of Travel Research, 46(1), 5-14.
Myron, M. R. (1999, July). Brand Identity Crucial to Solid Product Image. The Denver
Business Journal.
Ogilvy, David (1985). Ogilvy on Advertising, New York, NY: Random House Vintage
Books.
Okazaki, S. (2006). Excitement or Sophistication? A Preliminary Exploration of Online
Brand Personality. International Marketing Review, 23 (3), 279-303.
103
Olson, J., and Allen, D. E. (1995).Building Bonds Between the Brand and the Customer:
Creating and Managing Brand Personality. Proceedings of Marketing Science Institute
Conference on Brand Equity and the Marketing Mix: Creating Customer Value, March(11-
12).
Oppermann, M. (1999). Predicting destination choice: a discussion of destination loyalty.
Journal of Vacation Marketing, 5, 51-65.
Oppermann, M. (2000). Tourism destination loyalty. Journal of Travel Research, 39, 78-
84.
Opuku, R. (2006). Towards a methodological design for evaluating online brand
positioning. Doctoral Thesis. Lulea, University of Tecchnology.
Ouwersloot, H. and Tudorica, A. (2001). Brand Personality Creation Through Advertising.
Working Paper, University of Maastricht. Maastricht :Maxx.
Park, Su-e., Dongsung, C., & Jinwoo, K.(2005).Visualizing e-brand personality:
Exploratory studies on visual attributes and e-brand personalities in Korea. International
Journal of human-Computer Interaction, 19(1), 7-34.
Patterson M. (1999).Re-appraising the concept of brand image. Journal of Brand
Management, 6(6), 409-426.
Patterson M., & O‘Malley L.(2006).Brands, consumers and relationships: A review. Irish
Marketing Review, 18 (1&2), 10-20.
Phau, I., & Lau, K. C.(2000). Conceptualising brand personality: a review and research
propositions. Journal of Targeting Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 9(1), 52-69.
104
Plummer, J. T. (1984).How Personality Makes a Difference. Journal of Advertising
Research, 24(6), 27-31.
Plummer, J. T. (1985). Brand personality: a strategic concept for multinational advertising.
Paper Presented at Marketing Educators' Conference. New York: Young & Rubicam, 1-31.
Plummer, J.T.(2000). How Personality Makes a Different. Journal of Advertising
Research, 40(6), 79-83.
Rajagopal, A. (2006). Insights from research - Brand excellence: measuring the impact of
advertising and brand personality on buying decisions. Measuring Business Excellence. 10
(3), 56-65.
Rojas-Méndez, J. I., Erenchun-Podlech, I., & Silva-Olave, E. (2004). The Ford Brand
Personality in Chile. Corporate Reputation Review, 7(3), 232-251.
Rosenberger III, Philip J., & Donahay, B.(2008). Brand Personality Differentiation in
Formula One Motor Racing: An Australian View. Marketing Bulletin, 19(2), 1-14.
Rowley, J. (2004). Online branding. Online Information Review, 28 (2), 131-138.
Saucier, G.(1994). Mini-markers: A brief version of Goldberg‘s unipolar big –five
markers. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63 (3), 506-516.
Scott, A.(1995). Tourism satisfaction and the cumulative nature of tourists. Paper
presented at the Leisure Research Symposium San Antonio Taxas.
Salomon, M. R.(2009).Consumer Behavior. New Jersey: Pearson Education.
105
Siguaw, J. A., Mattila, A. S., & Austin, J. R. (1999).The Brand Personality Scale: An
Application for Restaurants. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly,
40(3), 48-55.
Sirgy, M.J. (1982, December). Self-concept in consumer behaviour: a critical review.
Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 287-300.
Sirgy, M. J. (1985). Self-Image/Product-Image Congruity and Consumer Decision-
Making. International Journal of Management, 2(4), 49-63.
Shank, Mathew D., & Langmeyer, Lynn (1994). Does Personality Influence Brand Image?
Journal of Psychology, 128(2), 157-160.
Smit, E. G., Berger, E. V. D., & Franzen, G. (2003). Brands Are Just Like Real People!
The Development of SWOCC's Brand Personality Scale. In F. Hansen & L. B. Christensen
(Eds.), Branding and Advertising (pp. 22-43). Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School
Press.
Solomon, S. R. (1999). Consumer Behaviour (4th Ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Stoner, C. R., & Arora, R. (2009). A Mixed Method Approach to Understanding Brand
Personality. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 18(4), 272-283.
Sung, Y., & Tinkham, S.F.( 2005). Brand personality structures in the United States and
Korea: Common and culture-specific factors. Journal of Consumer Psychology 15(4),
334–350.
106
Supphellen, M., & Gronhaug, K. (2003). Building foreign brand personalities in Russia:
the moderating effect of consumer ethnocentrism. International Journal of Advertising,
22(2), 203-26.
Swaminathan,V., Stilley, K. M., & Ahluwalia, R.(2008). When Brand Personality Matters:
The Moderating Role of Attachment Styles. Retrieved from
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/593948 on 6th Dec, 2011.
Swee-Hoon, A. & Ai-Ching, L. E. (2006). The Influence of Metaphors and Product Type
on Brand Personality Perceptions and Attitudes. Journal of Advertising, 35 (2), 39-53.
Temporal, Paul. (1999). Strategic Positioning (1st edition). Oxford, Great Britain: Oxford
University Press.
Tho, Nguyen Dinh., Trang, Nguyen Thi Mai.,& Phong, Nguyen D.(2008). Brand
Personality Impressions and Brand Relationship Quality in Vietnam. Retrieved from
http://www.anzmac2008.org/_Proceedings/PDF/S02/Tho%20Trang%20&%20Phong%20S
5%20JM%20P1%20.pdf on 6th
dec,2011.
Triplett, T. (1994). Brand Personality Must Be Managed or It Will Assume a Life of Its
Own. Marketing News, 28 (10), 9.
Upshaw, L. B. (1995). Building Brand Identity - A Strategy for Success in a Hostile Market
place. New York: John Wiley Sons.
Venable, B.T., Rose, G.M., Bush, V.D., & Gilbert, F.W.(2005). The role of brand
personality in charitable giving: An assessment and validation. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 33(3), 295-312.
107
Villegas, J., Earnhart, K., & Burns, N. (2000). The brand personality scale: an application
for the personal computer industry. In Proceedings of the 108th Annual Convention for the
American Psychological Association. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Waheed and Yadav , N.( 2007). A study on brand personality orientation to brand loyalty.
The Icfai Journal of Brand Management, 4(20), 25-34.
Wang, Peng-Yao.(2007). Effects of Tourist Experience, Novelty Seeking and Satisfaction
on Behavioral Intention: Case of Amusement Parks. Retrieved from
http://www.iot.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=192682&ctNode=1964&mp=2 on 6th
dec,2011.
Wysong, W. (2000). This brand’s for you: a conceptualization and investigation of brand
personality as a process with implications for brand management. Dissertation, University
of Texas, Arlington.
Xuehua, W., & Zhilin Y. (2008). Does country-of-origin matter in the relationship between
brand personality and purchase intention in emerging economies?: Evidence from China‘s
auto industry. International Marketing Review, 25 (4), 458-474.
Yaverbaum, E.(2001).The right touch.Adweek,42(4),20.
Yuksel, Fisun and Bilim, Y.(2009). Interactions Between Visual Appeals, Holiday
Motivations, Destination Personality and the Self-Image: Implications for Destination
Advertising. Journal of Travel and Tourism Research, 9(1),75-104.
Jie, Yun., Chou, Ting-Jui., & Li, Fang-fang .(2009). Assessing the fit of two brand
personality scales in a Chinese context and revisiting the predictive validity of two
methods of measuring self-congruity. Retrieved from
108
http://www.duplication.net.akselu/ANZMAC09/papers/ANZMAC2009-285.pdf on 6th
Dec, 2011.
Zentes, J., Morschett, D., & Schramm-Klein, H. (2008). Brand Personality of Retailers –
An Analysis of Its Applicability and Its Effect on Store Loyalty. The International Review
of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 18(2), 167-184.
Zhang, M. (2007). Impact of Brand Personality on PALI: A Comparative Research
between Two Different Brands. International Management Review, 3(3), 36-44.
Zinkhan, G. D., Haytko, D., & Ward, A. (1996). Self-Concept Theory. Journal of
Marketing Communication, 2 (1), 1-19.
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Page No.
3.1 Introduction 109
3.2 Objectives of the present study 109
3.3 Hypothesis of the present study 110
3.4 Scope 110
3.4.1 Phase 1 110
3.4.2 Phase 2 113
3.5 Research Design 113
3.6 Sampling Design 114
3.6.1 Sampling Profile 114
3.6.2 Sample size recommendations 116
3.6.3 Acceptable Margin of Error. 117
3.7 Data collection Sources 118
3.8 Instrument Development / Questionnaire Design 119
3.9 Selection of measurements 126
3.10 Data Analysis Technique 126
3.10.1 Average 127
3.10.2 Standard deviation 127
3.10.3 ANOVA 128
3.10.4 Correlation 129
3.10.5 Regression 130
3.10.6 Frequency Test 131
3.10.7 Reliability Test (Cronbach Alpha) 131
3.10.8 Data Purification through factor analysis 132
3.11 Summary 133
109
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
This chapter focuses on the methods used in conducting the research which consists of the
formulation of objectives, hypothesis development, research design, sampling design,
questionnaire design, selection of measurement and techniques used for data analysis. The
related data was primary data in order to achieve the aims and objectives of this study.
3.2 Objectives of the present study
1. To assess destination personality of Jammu and Kashmir.
2. To determine whether respondents could associate destination brand personality
characteristics with the three regions of Jammu and Kashmir i.e. Jammu, Kashmir
and Ladakh.
3. To examine the relationship between the destination brand personality and
intention to recommend.
4. To find the personality of tourists visiting Jammu and Kashmir.
5. To find the relationship between respondents‘ perception on how a holiday at
Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel and intention to recommend.
110
3.3 Hypothesis of the present study
It was proposed to set up and test the following hypothesis. These hypotheses have been
proposed in the ―Null Form‖ as follows:
H01: There is a significant difference about the perception of respondents on the
destination brand personality characteristics associated with the three regions of Jammu
and Kashmir.
H02: Greater the destination personality, greater will be the propensity to recommend.
H03: There is a relationship between respondents‘ perception on how a holiday at Jammu
and Kashmir would make them feel and intention to recommend.
3.4 Scope
A pilot survey was conducted by the researcher to identify the scope of present study. The
Pilot Survey was primarily done to identify the destinations whose brand personality
characteristics/ attributes needed to be studied. Through the Pilot Survey the different
regions of Jammu and Kashmir to be studied were identified. Pilot Survey was also used to
pre-test the questionnaire and the suggestions received from the respondents (i.e. tourists)
were incorporated in the questionnaire. This Pilot Survey was divided into two phases:
3.4.1 Phase I
The Phase I of Pilot survey was undertaken to identify and select the destinations that need
to be taken into consideration for the research as well as to identify their brand personality
characteristics. The Phase I of Pilot Survey was divided into three steps:
111
Step 1: Identification of Various destinations
In step 1 the researcher identified various destinations in three different regions of Jammu
and Kashmir. They were:
1. Patnitop
2. Sanasar
3. Vaishno Devi
4. Bagh-e-Bahu
5. Raghunath Temple
6. Shiv Khori
7. Gulmarg
8. Pahalgam
9. Shankracharya Temple
10. Dal Lake
11. Hazratbal Shrine
12. Amarnath
13. Hemis Gumpa
14. Sindu Darshan
15. Pathar Saheb
112
16. Spituk Monastery
17. Thiksey Monastry
18. Lama yuru monastry
Step 2: Selection of Destinations
After the destinations had been identified by the tourists in the three regions of Jammu and
Kashmir, the step 2 of the Phase I was implemented. In the second step the tourists were
asked to put these destinations under three different categories on the basis of the region in
which they were included. These three regions were named as Jammu, Kashmir and
Ladakh. Thus, the three regions Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh were selected as study area
for our research. The total number of tourists interviewed was 100. These destinations
were ranked by tourists in the following order:
Table 3.1 Selection of Destinations
S. No. Jammu Kashmir Ladakh
1 Patnitop Gulmarg Hemis Gumpa
2 Sanasar Pahalgam Sindu Darshan
3 Vaishno Devi Shankracharya Temple Pathar Saheb
4 Bagh-e-Bahu Dal Lake Spituk Monastery
5 Raghunath Temple Hazratbal Shrine Thiksey Monastry
6 Shiv Khori Amarnath Lama yuru monastry
The respondents were approached randomly at these destinations of the three regions for
data collection.
113
Step 3: Identification of Brand Personality Traits with the destinations
During the selection of the destinations, the 100 respondents/ tourists who were
interviewed by the researcher were asked to recall the destinations of the three categories
chosen by them. Then, the tourists were asked to associate personality traits with these
destinations. It was found that most of the tourists were able to associate brand personality
dimensions with these destinations. It was also found that maximum destination personality was of
Kashmir region.
3.4.2 Phase 2
The second phase of the pilot survey concentrated on the questionnaire development. In
this phase questionnaire development and its pre-testing were done. The questionnaire was
divided into five parts.
3.5 Research Design
The research involves a descriptive study to assess the destination personality of Jammu
and Kashmir and also to find the relationship between destination personality and tourists‘
intention to recommend.
In the data collection effort, respondents have been given a five paged questionnaire
containing measurements of how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel,
measurements of destination personality, tourist‘s personality, tourist‘s intention to
recommend as well as the measurements for demographic variables.
114
3.6 Sampling Design
3.6.1 Sampling Profile
There are various formulas for calculating the required sample size depending upon
whether the data collected is of categorical or quantitative nature. These formulas require
knowledge of the variance or proportion in the population and a determination as to the
maximum desirable error as well as the acceptable Type I error risk (e.g. confidence level).
It is possible to use one of the formulas to construct a table that suggests the optimal
sample size given a population size, a specific margin of error, and a desired confidence
interval. This can help researchers avoid the formulas altogether. The table below (Table
3.2) presents the results of one set of these calculations. It may be used to determine the
appropriate sample size for almost any study. All of the sample estimates discussed present
figures for the largest possible sample size for the desired level of confidence. Should the
proportion of the sample with the desired characteristic be substantially different than 50%,
then the desired level of accuracy can be established with a smaller sample. However,
since we can‘t know what this percentage is until we actually ask a sample, it is wisest to
assume that it will be 50% and use the listed larger sample size.
When Population Size Known, the formula used for these calculations is:
Size= X2
NP(1-P)
d2
(N-1) +X2P(1-P)
X2=
table value of Chi- Square @ d.f. =1 for desired confidence level
.10= 2.71 .05=3.84 .01=6.64 .001=10.83
N=population size
P= population proportion (assumed to be .50)
d= degree of accuracy (assumed as proportion)
115
This formula is the one used by Krejcie & Morgan in their 1970 article ―Determining
Sample Size for Research Activities‖.
Table 3.2
116
3.6.2 Sample size recommendations
A wide range of recommendations regarding sample size have been made. These are
usually stated in terms of either the minimum sample size (N) for a particular analysis or
the minimum ratio of N to the number of variables, p i.e. the number of survey items being
subjected to factor analysis (Mac Callum et. al., 1999). Gorsuch (1983) recommended five
subjects per item, with a minimum of 100 subjects, regardless of the number of items.
Guilford (1954) argued that N should be at least 200, while Cattell (1978) recommended
that there should be three to six subjects per item, with a minimum of 250. Comrey and
Lee (1992) revealed the determination of the adequacy of sample size: 100= poor, 200 =
fair, 300 = good, 500 = very good, 1,000 or more = excellent. More demanding
recommendations for sample size require a minimum of 10 subjects per item (Everitt,
1975) or just a large sample, ideally several hundred (Cureton & D‘Agostino, 1983).
However, since many educational and social research studies often use data collection
methods such as surveys and other voluntary participation methods, the response rates are
typically well below 100%. Salkind (1997) recommended oversampling by saying that if
one has to mailing out surveys or questionnaires, then one should count on increasing
one‘s sample size by 40%-50% to account for lost mail and uncooperative subjects . Fink
(1995) viewed oversampling as an added cost to the survey but is often necessary. Cochran
(1977) revealed that there are instances when the variances of estimates are increased
because the sample actually obtained is smaller than the target sample size. This factor can
be allowed for, at least approximately, in selecting the size of the sample.
Increasing the sample size is one means of overcoming these problems. As the sample size
increases, sampling error is reduced, factor analysis solutions become more stable and
more reliably produce the factorial structure of the population (Mac Callum et. al., 1999).
117
3.6.3 Acceptable Margin of Error.
The general rule for acceptable margins of error in educational and social research is as
follows: For categorical data, 5% margin of error is acceptable and for continuous data, 3%
margin of error is acceptable (Krejcie & Morgan, 1970). For example, a 3% margin of
error would result in the researcher being confident that the true mean of a seven point
scale is within ±.21 (.03 times seven points on the scale) of the mean calculated from the
research sample. In this study, the researcher is using 3% of margin of error since the data
included in the study is continuous.
Sample features tourists that have been to the destination at least once in order to
determine the destination personality of that place. In this context, Schneider and Sonmez
(1999) concluded that investigating and attending to current tourists provides a baseline of
information from which to build and tailor marketing and service promotions.
Based on above comment, the current tourists to the destinations at that time were the
target respondents for this research. Thus, the respondents of the research were the tourists
visiting Jammu and Kashmir
The geographical area for data collection was restricted to the state of Jammu and
Kashmir. However, the respondents represented tourists from all across the country. In
2009, no. of visitors visited Jammu and Kashmir. 102.80 lakhs visitors visited Jammu in
2009 from all across the country and abroad. 6.1 lakhs visitors visited Kashmir in 2009
from all across the country and abroad. 79,000 visitors visited Ladakh in 2009 from all
across the country and abroad.
Sampling Unit: Tourists
Sampling Method: Random sampling
118
Sampling Size: 2345
Therefore, 2700 questionnaires were distributed, 2345 were received and used for the final
analysis. The available response rate was 86.8 %.
Table 3.3 Total sample size taken
Selected location Sample size Number of responses %age response rate(approx.)
Jammu 900 784 87.1%
Kashmir 900 783 87%
Ladakh 900 778 86.44%
2700 2345 86.8%
3.7 Data collection Sources
The researcher collected the data from both primary as well as secondary sources as per
the need of the study. The present study was primarily based on primary data which was
collected from the target population by the use of questionnaires. The whole primary data
was collected through a structured questionnaire divided into five parts. The first part of
the questionnaire examined demographic and socio economic variables such as age,
gender, marital status, occupation, income etc. The second part of the questionnaire studied
the respondent‘s brand personality ratings for the three destinations under study. The third
part dealt with the tourist‘s intention to recommend the destination to others. The fourth
119
part examined the tourist‘s personality. The fifth part consisted of questions on how a
holiday at Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh would make tourists feel.
However, the secondary data was collected from various international as well as the
national journals like Journal of Travel Research, Journal of Tourism Recreation Research,
Journal of Tourism Management, Indian Journal of Marketing etc. It was also obtained by
reviewing the articles published on the internet and various business magazines and also
the information collected from the tourists. Finally, all the collected information was
analyzed by the use of certain appropriate statistical tools and techniques.
3.8 Instrument Development / Questionnaire Design
Questionnaire survey has been chosen as the main method to collect the necessary
information. The survey instrument was designed as a five paged questionnaire.
The present study, on the assessment of destination brand personality and its relationship
with intention to recommend, was based on the first hand data gathered from 2345 tourists
selected through random sampling from Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh.
After pursuing the relevant literature, a questionnaire was prepared for collecting the data
regarding destination brand personality and its relationship with intention to recommend.
This questionnaire was a structured questionnaire. The questions regarding ‗respondent‘s
perception of how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel‘, ‗destination
personality‘, ‗tourist‘s personality‘ were taken from the research paper by Murphy,
Moscardo and Benckendorff (2006). The questions regarding tourist‘s intention to
recommend were taken from a Master in Business Administration Thesis by Zhou JingJing
(2008).
120
The survey instrument consisted of five sections. The questions in the first section are
about the demographic profile of the tourists like gender, marital status, location, age,
income level, occupation, qualification etc.
The second section is about respondents‘ brand personality ratings for the destinations -
Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. The various parameters were sincere, down to earth, honest,
wholesome, cheerful, daring, exciting, spirited, imaginative, up to date, competent,
reliable, intelligent, successful, sophisticated, upper class, charming, rugged, outdoorsy,
tough. For the response, tourists used 5-point Likert scale to respond to their opinion i. e 1
being ―strongly disagree‖ to 5 being ―strongly agree‖.
Table 3.4
Respondents Brand Personality Ratings for Destinations-Jammu, Kashmir and
Ladakh)
Variables of Destination Personality JAMMU KASHMIR LADAKH
Sincere
Down to Earth
Honest
Wholesome
Cheerful
Daring
121
Exciting
Spirited
Imaginative
Up to date
Competent
Reliable
Intelligent
Successful
Sophisticated
Upper class
Charming
Rugged
Outdoorsy
Tough
The third section studied tourist‘s intention to recommend. This part consisted of six
statements related to it .The various statements included- This is my last time visit to the
destination, I will visit the destination again, I will visit the destination more often in the
future, I will visit destination and also will recommend destination to my friends and
122
relatives, I will try to move to the destination, My overall evaluation of the destination is
so powerful that I have built the resistance to counter persuasions when faced with other
holiday destination offers, When I return home, I will positively promote the destination as
a fantastic holiday destination. A 5-point Likert scale was used for the tourists‘ response
wherein 1 signifies ―strongly disagree‖ to 5 signifies ―strongly agree‖.
Table 3.5
Tourists‟ Intention to recommend the destination to others
Variables of Intention to recommend JAMMU KASHMIR LADAKH
This is my last time visit to the destination
I will visit the destination again.
I will visit the destination more often in the
future.
I will visit destination and also will recommend
destination to my friends and relatives.
My overall evaluation of the destination is so
powerful that I have built the resistance to
counter persuasions when faced with other
holiday destination offers
When I return home, I will positively promote
the destination as a fantastic holiday destination
123
The fourth section dealt with adjectives that best describe tourist‘s personality. The various
parameters included sincere, down to earth, honest, wholesome, cheerful, daring, exciting,
spirited, imaginative, up to date, competent, reliable, intelligent, successful, sophisticated,
upper class, charming, rugged, outdoorsy, tough. For the response, tourists used 5-point
Likert scale to respond to their opinion i.e 1 being ―strongly disagree‖ to 5 being ―strongly
agree‖.
Table 3.6 Tourist‟s Personality
Variables of tourist‟s personality Tourist‟s personality
Sincere
Down to Earth
Honest
Wholesome
Cheerful
Daring
Exciting
Spirited
Imaginative
Up to date
Competent
124
Reliable
Intelligent
Successful
Sophisticated
Upper class
Charming
Rugged
Outdoorsy
Tough
The fifth part consisted of statements about the respondents‘ perceptions about how a
holiday at Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh would make them feel. The various items in this
part included relaxed, happy, busy/tired/stressed, rested/rejuvenated, excited,
rejuvenated/refreshed, broke/poor, peaceful exhilarated, bored, lucky, satisfied,
calm/tranquil, fun and free. For each item, tourists used 5-point Likert scale to respond to
their opinion i.e 1 being ―strongly disagree‖, 2 being ―disagree‖, 3 being ―neutral‖, 4 being
―agree‖ and 5 being ―strongly agree‖.
Table 3.7
Respondent‟s perceptions about how a holiday at Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh
would make them feel
125
JAMMU KASHMIR LADAKH
Relaxed
Happy
Busy/tired/stressed
Rested/rejuvenated
Excited
Rejuvenated/refreshed
Broke/poor
Peaceful Exhilarated
Bored
Lucky
Satisfied
Calm/tranquil
Fun
Free
A pilot study entitled “an assessment of destination brand personality and its
relationship with intention to recommend” was conducted to find out the reliability and
validity of the questionnaire. The sample size of the pilot study was 100.The coefficient
alpha of 0.85 was recorded that showed that the questionnaire was reliable to conduct the
research work further.
3.9 Selection of measurements
Destination Personality
126
Destination personality was measured using Aaker‘s brand personality scale having five
dimensions: sincerity, excitement, competence, sophistication and ruggedness.
Intention to recommend
Intention to recommend was operationalized using a 5- point Likert scale
3.10 Data Analysis Technique
Computer program/ Software ―Statistical Package for the Social Sciences Programs‖
(SPSS) version 19.0 was used to analyze the data. Questionnaires which were completely
filled or answered were accepted. However, the unfilled questions in these questionnaires
were filled in based on the mean of the total questionnaires. The data was later keyed into
the software based on the specified coding. Results generated by the software were then
analyzed.
To analyze the data, various techniques were used.
The use of various statistical tools was made to analyse the data on SPSS package.
Percentage Analysis was applied to find the percentage of the demographic profile of the
respondents. Average and Standard Deviation were applied to assess destination
personality.
3.10.1 Average
Average is a single term that represents a group of values. Such a value has great
significance because it represents the characteristics of the whole group. The process of
calculating average is very simple. Add together the various values of the variable and
divide the total by the no. of items. Mathematically,
127
X=X1+X2+X3+X4+…………..Xn/N
Or X=X/N
Where X=Arithmetic Mean
X=Sum of all the values of the variable X i.e.,X1,X2,X3,X4…………Xn
N=No. of observations
3.10.2 Standard deviation
The standard deviation measures the absolute dispersion, the greater the standard
deviation, for the greater will be the magnitude of the deviations of the values from their
mean. A small standard deviation means a high degree of uniformity of the observation as
well as homogeneity of a series (Standard deviation calculator, 2011).
Standard Deviation formula:
128
Population Standard Deviation
where Σ = Sum of
X = Individual score
M = Mean of all scores
n = Sample size (Number of scores)
3.10.3 ANOVA
ANOVA was applied to find out if there exists a significant difference about the perception
of respondents on the association of destination brand personality characteristics with the
different regions of Jammu and Kashmir under study.
The Analysis Of Variance (or ANOVA) is a powerful and common statistical technique
specially designed to test whether the means of more than two quantitative populations are
equal.
The formula for One way ANOVA is
F=Between –Column Variance/Within – Column Variance
The formula for two way ANOVA is
F (for columns) = MSC/MSE
F (for rows) =MSR/MSE
Where MSC=Mean sum of squares between columns
129
MSE= Mean sum of squares of residual/error
MSR= Mean sum of squares between rows
3.10.4 Correlation
Correlation analysis attempts to determine the degree of relationship between variables
when the relationship is quantitative in nature. It, therefore, is directed towards measuring
the degree of association of two variables. That was why, it was used in the present study
to examine that there is a positive relation between the destination brand personality and
intention to recommend (Correlation calculator, 2011).The following formula is used to
calculate coefficient of correlation:
Correlation(r) =[ NΣXY - (ΣX)(ΣY) / Sqrt ([NΣX2 - (ΣX)
2][NΣY
2 - (ΣY)
2])]
where r= coefficient of correlation
N = Number of values or elements
X = First Score
Y = Second Score
ΣXY = Sum of the product of first and Second Scores
ΣX = Sum of First Scores
ΣY = Sum of Second Scores
ΣX2 = Sum of square First Scores
ΣY2 = Sum of square Second Scores
130
3.10.5 Regression
Regression analysis is a statistical device with the help of which the estimates of the
dependent variable are desired from values of the two or more independent variable
(Regression calculator, 2011).
Multiple regressions are the collection of statistical technique designed to explore
the relationship between dependent variable (destination personality) with a number of
predictors like intention to recommend.
Regression Formula:
Regression Equation(y) = a + bx
Slope(b) = (NΣXY - (ΣX)(ΣY)) / (NΣX2 - (ΣX)
2)
Intercept(a) = (ΣY - b(ΣX)) / N
where
x and y are the variables.
b = The slope of the regression line
a = The intercept point of the regression line and the y axis.
N = Number of values or elements
X = First Score
Y = Second Score
ΣXY = Sum of the product of first and Second Scores
ΣX = Sum of First Scores
ΣY = Sum of Second Scores
ΣX2 = Sum of square First Scores
131
The basis of this analysis was to find out the correlation between the variables and
also include the inter-relationship among the dependent and independent variables.
Therefore, Bivariate Correlation were used to test Hypothesis two and three.
3.10.6 Frequency Test
The study took the frequency test as the first testing tool in this research. This test was
used to verify the number of valid responses and all data concerning the tourists‘ profile
was discussed.
3.10.7 Reliability Test (Cronbach Alpha)
Reliability can be expressed in terms of stability, equivalence, and consistency. A popular
method for consistency check can be commonly expressed in the form of Cronbach
Coefficient Alpha (Cronbach, 1951).According to Chong Ho Yu (2011), Cronbach
coefficient Alpha is a measure of squared correlation between observed scores and true
scores. In other words, reliability is measured in terms of the ratio of true score variance to
observed score variance. Cronbach‘s alpha is a test reliability technique that requires only a
single test administration to provide a unique estimate of the reliability for a given test.
Cronbach‘s alpha is the average value of the reliability coefficients one would obtained for
all possible combinations of items when split into two half-tests (Joseph A. Gliem &
Rosemary R. Gliem, 2003).
This was to test the reliability of the questions set in the questionnaire. This is an important
analysis that the scale used for this research is both reliable and able to explain the
phenomena. The test has been done on Part A: Destination Personality (DP), Part B:
Intention to recommend, Part C: Tourist‘ personality and Part D: How a holiday at the
destination would make the tourists feel.
132
3.10.8 Data Purification through factor analysis
This test was used in all items under Part A: Destination Personality (DP), to analyze the
ability of each factor to explain the variance in the model. It was done by summarizing the
underlying patterns of correlation where the items were grouped together based on its
relation with each other.
For determining the destination brand personality, tourist‘s personality, respondent‘s
perception on how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel, dimensionality
of the items of the scale, data reduction technique of exploratory factor analysis was used.
This technique used through SPSS(19.0 version) was most appropriate for the present
study as it involved the examination of inter relationship among variables so as to reduce
large number of dimensions into few manageable and meaningful sets (Stewart, 1981). The
study has used R mode principal component analysis with Varimax rotation (Kakati and
Dhar, 2002) as the number of subjects was greater than the number of variables. Varimax
rotation is the best orthogonal rotation procedure (Stewart, 1981) as it minimizes the
number of variables with high loadings on one factor, thereby enhancing the
interpretability of the factor (Malhotra, 2002). For the purpose of describing the underlying
factor structure, the eigen value greater than one criterion‘ has been used to determine the
number of components to be extracted for further analysis (Stewart, 1981). The test of
appropriateness of a factor analysis is KMO measure of sampling adequacy where high
values (i.e. b/w 0.5 and 1.00) indicate its relevance for further analysis. Further, Bartlett
test of sphericity has been used to determine correlation among the variables (Hair et.al.,
1995).
133
3.11 Summary
The attempt in the study was made in this chapter to determine possible links between
destination personality and the final outcome—tourists‘ future intention. Furthermore,
discussion on the research design and sampling design of the study were presented in this
chapter. Then, the tables showed the measurements in the study. Finally, data analysis
techniques SPSS 19.0 were also discussed in order to successfully make a further analysis
and discussion in the next chapter
After discussing the research methodology, the next chapter will analyze the empirical data
collected, through the use of the presented methodology.
134
References
Aaker, D.A., & Day, G.S.(1990). Marketing Research (4th
Ed.). New York: John Wiley &
Sons Inc.
Cattell, R. B. (1978). The Scientific Use of Factor Analysis. New York: Plenum.
Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Comrey, A. L. and Lee, H. B.(1992). A first course in factor analysis. Hillsdale, New
Jersey: Erlbaum.
Correlation - Calculator .(2011). Correlation Co-efficient Tutorial. Retrieved from
http://easycalculation.com/statistics/learn-correlation.php on 6th dec, 2011.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of the tests.
Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.
Cureton, E. E. & D'Agostino, R. B. (1983). Factor Analysis: An Applied Approach.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Everitt, B. S. (1975). Multivariate analysis: the need for data and other problems. British
Journal of Psychiatry, 126, 237-240.
Fink, A. (1995). The survey handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Gliem, J A., Gliem, R. R. (2003). Calculating, Interpreting, and Reporting Cronbach’s
Alpha Reliability Coefficient for Likert-Type Scales. Retrieved from
https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/.../Gliem% 20&%20Gliem. on 18th
Nov, 2011.
Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor Analysis (2nd. Ed). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Guilford, J. P.(1954). Psychometric methods, 2nd
edition, New York: McGraw Hill.
135
Hair, J., Anderson, R., Tatham, R., & Black, W.(1995). Multivariate data analysis (4th
ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
JingJing, Z.(2008). The Relationship of Destination Image, Destination Personality and
Tourist Future Intention: An Exploratory Study of Beijing.MBA Thesis, University of
Malaya,Malaysia.
Kakati, Rinalini P., & Dhar, U.R. (2002).Competitive Strategies and New Venture
Performance. Vikalpa, 27(3), 13-24.
Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610.
Mac Callum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor
analysis. Psychological Methods, 4, 84-99.
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, M.A. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis( 2nd Ed.). London:
Saga Publications.
Regression Calculator.(2011).Statistics Calculator - Calculate Simple/Linear Regression
online. Retrieved from easycalculation.com/statistics/regression.php on 6th
Dec, 2011.
Salkind, N. J. (1997). Exploring research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Schneider & Sonmez (1999). Exploring the touristic image of Jordan. Tourism
Management, 20 (4), 539–542.
Standard Deviation Calculator (2011). Standard Deviation Tutorial. Retrieved from
http://easycalculation.com/statistics/standard-deviation.php on 6th Dec, 2011.
Stewart, D. W. (1981).The Application and Misapplication of Factor Analysis in
Marketing Research. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 51–62.
136
Malhotra, N. K., Hall, J., Shaw, M., & Oppenheim, P. (2002). Marketing Research: an
applied orientation. Sydney: Prentice Hall.
Murphy, L., Moscardo, G., & Benckendorff,P.(2006). Can regional destinations really
have a brand personality? Cutting Edge Research in Tourism - New Directions, Challenges
and Applications. 1-16.
The Research Advisors.(2011). Retrieved from http://research-
advisors.com/tools/SampleSize.htm on 21st of Oct, 2011.
Yu, Chong Ho.(2011). An introduction to computing and interpreting Cronbach
Coefficient Alpha in SAS. Retrieved from www2.sas.com/proceedings/sugi26/p246-26.pdf
on 18th
Nov, 2011.
CHAPTER 4
DATA ANALYSIS
CHAPTER 4
ANALYISIS AND INTERPRETATIONS
Page No.
4.1 Introduction 137
4.2 Demographic Profile of the Respondents 137
4.3 Destination Brand Personality 140
4.4 Intention to recommend 142
4.5 Tourists Brand Personality 143
4.6 Respondents Perception on How A Holiday At Jammu And
Kashmir Would Make Them Feel 145
4.7 Adequacy and scale purification 146
4.8 Factor analysis 147
4.9 Scree Plot 149
4.10 Comparative analysis of Destination personality in
Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh 153
4.11 Reliability Test 156
4.12 Hypothesis Testing 157
4.12.1 Hypothesis 1 157
4.12.2 Hypothesis 2 161
4.12.3 Hypothesis 3 174
4.13 Summary 181
137
CHAPTER 4
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATIONS
4.1 Introduction
Chapter 4 illustrates the findings and results through the analysis of responded
questionnaires. There are various segments such as descriptive statistics, reliability test,
factor analysis, hypothesis testing and summary. The data collected was checked and
analyzed by using the statistical software named SPSS version 19.0.
4.2 Demographic Profile of the Respondents
The demographic profile of respondents is reflected in table 4.1. It is clear from the table
that out of total 2345 respondents, 784 (33.43%) were from Jammu, 783 (33.90%) were
from Kashmir, 778 (33.17%) were from Ladakh. Majority of the respondents were males
i.e. 1293 (55.45%) whereas 1052 (44.867%) were females. Maximum of the respondents
were unmarried i.e. 1321 (56.37 %) and 1024 were married (43.66%). Majority of the
respondents were in the age group of 20-25 years i.e. 1006 constituting 42.89 % followed
by 26 – 35 years i.e. 718 (30.61 %). The respondents in the age group of 36- 45 years were
301 constituting 12.83 % and the respondents above 45 years were 320 constituting
13.64%.
As far as the monthly income of the respondents is concerned, most of the respondents fell
in the income range of 20,000 – 30,000 i.e. 953 (40.63%) followed by the respondents
whose monthly income lied in the range of 10,000 – 20,000 are 688 (29.33%). There were
354 (15.09%) respondents whose monthly family income was above 40 thousand followed
138
by 350 (14.92%) respondents whose monthly family income was in the range of 30,000 –
40,000.
As far as qualification of respondents is concerned, maximum respondents were
postgraduates i.e. 983 constituting 41.91% followed by graduates i.e. 518 constituting
22.08%. 339 respondents had done professional course constituting 14.45% followed by
undergraduate respondents i.e. 326 constituting 13.90 % followed by 179 respondents who
fell in other category constituting 7.63 %.
Demographic profile of respondents also indicates that most of the respondents under
study were students i.e. 956 constituting 40.76% followed by respondents who were
corporates i.e. 556 constituting 23.71%. 457 (19.48%) respondents were government
employees whereas 314 (13.39%) were self employed followed by 62 (2.64%) followed by
respondents who fell in other category.
Table 4.1 Demographic profile of respondents
N= 2345
S.No Variable Sub Variable No. of
respondents
%age
1 Location Jammu 784 33.43
Kashmir 783 33.90
Ladakh 778 33.17
2 Gender Male 1293 55.45
Female 1052 44.86
139
3 Marital Status Married 1024 43.66
Unmarried 1321 56.37
4 Age 20-25 yrs 1006 42.89
26-35 yrs 718 30.61
36-45 yrs 301 12.83
Above 45 yrs 320 13.64
5 Income 10000- 20000 688 29.33
20000- 30000 953 40.63
30000- 40000 350 14.92
Above 40000 354 15.09
6 Qualification Under graduates 326 13.90
Graduates 518 22.08
Post Graduates 983 41.91
Professionals 339 14.45
Others 180 7.67
7 Occupation Students 956 40.76
Self employed 314 13.39
Govt. Employee 457 19.48
Corporates 556 23.71
Others 62 2.64
140
4.3 Destination Brand Personality
To study the brand personality of destinations under study, a 26 item brand personality
index was developed by the researcher by consulting the past studies and various factors of
the study area. The table consists of the variables of destination brand personality and the
mean score of overall destination brand personality. For each item, respondents, used 5
point Likert scale to respond their opinion i.e. 1 being strongly disagree, 2 being disagree,
3 being neutral, 4 being agree and 5 being strongly agree.
141
Table 4.2 Destination Brand Personality
N=2345
S.No Variables of Destination Brand Personality Mean ( ) S.D
1 Sincere 4.3451 .82823
2 Down to Earth 4.3707 .81762
3 Honest 4.4700 .82985
4 Wholesome 4.3873 .91592
5 Cheerful 4.5168 .64182
6 Daring 4.4504 .83861
7 Exciting 3.9838 1.36139
8 Spirited 4.3707 .85737
9 Imaginative 3.9702 1.11264
10 Up to date 4.3191 .85737
11 Competent 4.2740 .84199
12 Reliable 4.1760 .91340
13 Intelligent 4.1389 .98408
14 Successful 4.2919 .92373
15 Sophisticated 4.1832 .92230
16 Upper class 4.3153 .68632
17 Charming 4.0464 .85985
18 Rugged 4.0503 .86236
19 Outdoorsy 3.9207 1.07645
20 Tough 3.1461 1.24287
142
1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree
Table 4.2 provides information on the destination brand personality variables. It has been
found that the destination brand personality mean score was found highest with ‗Cheerful‘
( =4.5168). The mean score of destination brand personality with other variables are
‗Honest‘ ( =4.4700) followed by ‗Daring‘ ( =4.4504), ‗Wholesome‘ ( =4.3873), ‗Down
to Earth ( =4.3707), ‗Spirited‘ ( =4.3707), ‗Sincere‘ ( =4.3451), ‗Up to Date‘ (
=4.3191), ‗Successful‘ ( =4.2919), ‗Competent‘ ( =4.2740), ‗Sophisticated‘ ( =4.1832),
‗Reliable‘ ( =4.1760), ‗Intelligent‘ ( =4.1389), ‗Rugged‘ ( =4.0503), ‗Charming‘ (
=4.0464), ‗Exciting‘ ( =3.9838), ‗Imaginative‘ ( =3.9702), ‗Outdoorsy‘ ( =3.9207),
‗Tough‘ ( =3.1461).
4.4 Intention to recommend
Table 4.3 Intention to recommend N=2345
S.No. Variables of Intention to recommend Mean S.D
1 This is my last time visit to the destination 1.6908 .83105
2 I will visit the destination again. 4.3296 .83395
3 I will visit the destination more often in the future. 4.3181 .84978
4 I will visit destination and also will recommend destination to
my friends and relatives.
4.3203 .84974
5 I will try to move to the destination. 4.3484 .83960
6 My overall evaluation of the destination is so powerful that I
have built the resistance to counter persuasions when faced with
other holiday destination offers.
4.4026 .86158
7 When I return home, I will positively promote the destination as 4.38 .85023
143
a fantastic holiday destination.
1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree
The mean score of the variables for intention to recommend was found highest for the
variable- My overall evaluation of the destination is so powerful that I have built the
resistance to counter persuasions when faced with other holiday destination offers
( =4.4026). The mean score with other variables are - When I return home, I will
positively promote the destination as a fantastic holiday destination( =4.38), I will try to
move to the destination ( =4.3484), I will visit the destination again( =4.3296), I will visit
destination and also will recommend destination to my friends and relatives(4.3203), I will
visit the destination more often in the future( =4.3181), This is my last time visit to the
destination( =1.6908).
4.5 Tourists Brand Personality
Table 4.4 Tourists Brand Personality N=2345
S.No Variables of Tourists Brand Personality Mean S.D
1 Sincere 3.8409 1.09446
2 Down to Earth 4.0588 .78322
3 Honest 3.8891 .95888
4 Wholesome 3.6559 1.10793
5 Cheerful 3.9126 .88191
6 Daring 3.9497 .90034
7 Exciting 3.9446 .79857
144
8 Spirited 3.8175 .93653
9 Imaginative 3.7923 1.13955
10 Up to date 3.9032 .77201
11 Competent 3.9471 .90303
12 Reliable 3.7075 1.49933
13 Intelligent 4.4375 .81922
14 Successful 3.2264 1.11627
15 Sophisticated 4.1757 .78749
16 Upper class 4.1437 .76522
17 Charming 4.1484 .78335
18 Rugged 4.1416 .83108
19 Outdoorsy 4.1531 .78435
20 Tough 4.0495 .81900
1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree
Table 4.4 provides information on the Tourist‘s brand personality. It has been found that
the Tourist‘s brand personality mean score was found highest with ‗Intelligent‘
( =4.4375). The mean score of Tourist‘s brand personality with other variables are
‗Sophisticated‘ ( =4.1757) followed by ‗Outdoorsy‘ ( =4.1531), ‗Charming‘ ( =4.1484),
‗Upper Class‘ ( =4.1437), ‗Rugged‘ ( =4.1416), ‗Down to Earth‘ ( =4.0588), ‗Tough‘ (
=4.0495), ‗Daring‘ ( =3.9497), ‗Competent‘ ( =3.9471), ‗Exciting‘ ( =3.9446),
‗Cheerful‘ ( =3.9126), ‗Up to Date‘ ( =3.9032), ‗Honest‘ ( =3.8891), ‗Sincere‘ (
145
=3.8409), ‗Spirited‘ ( =3.8175), ‗Imaginative‘ ( =3. 7923), ‗Reliable‘ ( =3.7075),
‗Wholesome‘ ( =3.6559), ‗Successful‘ ( =3.2264).
4.6 Respondents Perception on How A Holiday At Jammu And Kashmir
Would Make Them Feel
Respondent‘s perception on how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel
is reflected in table 4.5.The various parameters taken under study are shown in column 2.
For the response, the respondents used 5-point Likert scale to rate their opinion i.e. 1 being
―strongly disagree to 5 being strongly agree and 3 explains ―neutral‖.
Table 4.5 Respondent‟s perception on how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would
make them feel N=2345
S.No.
Variables for Respondent‟s perception on Brand
Personality
Mean
( )
S.D
1 Relax 4.3791 .83441
2 Happy 4.3181 .81336
3 Busy 4.4631 .82647
4 Rested 4.3748 .87522
5 Excited 4.3505 .82925
6 Rejuvenated 4.3288 .82348
7 Broken 1.5966 .78498
8 Peaceful 3.9011 .83876
9 Bore 1.4704 .69315
10 Lucky 4.0751 1.74662
11 Satisfied 4.3386 .84031
146
12 Calm 4.2094 .78058
13 Fun 4.3211 .83472
14 Free 3.8495 1.15849
1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree
Table 4.5 provides information on the respondent‘s perception on how a holiday at Jammu
and Kashmir would make them feel. It has been found that the mean score of respondent‘s
perception on how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel was found
highest with ‗Busy‘ ( =4.4631). The mean score of destination brand personality with
other variables are ‗Relax‘ ( =4.3791) followed by ‗Rested‘ ( =4.3748), ‗Excited‘ (
=4.3505), ‗Satisfied‘ ( =4.3386), ‗Rejuvenated‘ ( =4.3288), ‗Fun‘ ( =4.3211), ‗Happy‘
( =4.3181), ‗Calm‘ ( =4.2094), ‗Lucky‘ ( =4.0751), ‗Peaceful‘ ( =3.9011), ‗Free‘ (
=3.8495), ‗Broken‘ ( =1.5966), ‗Bore‘ ( =1.4704).
4.7 Adequacy and scale purification
Table 4.6 summarizes the initial result of the factor analysis. The face and content validity
of the constructed instrument was duly tested. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin values for the
variables of Destination Brand Personality as depicted in the table is 0.917 which indicates
the high degree of construct validity. This value close to 1 indicated that patterns of
correlations are relatively compact and so factor analysis should yield distinct and
reliable factors. Kaiser (1974) recommends values more than 0.5 are acceptable. Hence,
we are confident that factor analysis is appropriate for these data.
Bartlett‘s Test of Sphericity tests the null hypothesis that the original correlation matrix is an
147
identity matrix. For factor analysis to work we need some relationships between variables
and if the R-matrix were an identity matrix then all correlation coefficients would be zero.
Therefore, we want this test to be significant (p<0.05). For these data, Bartlett‘s Test is
highly significant (p<0.001), and therefore we are confident again that factor analysis is
appropriate.
Table 4.6 KMO and Bartlett's Test for Destination Brand Personality
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .917
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 28002.493
Df 120
Sig. .000
Objective 1: To assess the destination personality of Jammu and
Kashmir.
4.8 Factor analysis
Factor analysis is a data reduction technique used to reduce a large number of variables to
a smaller set of underlying factors that summarize the essential information contained in
the variables. More frequently, factor analysis is used as an exploratory technique when the
researcher wishes to summarize the structure of a set of variables. However, for testing a
theory about the structure of a particular domain, confirmatory factor analysis is
appropriate. When the research goal is to construct a reliable test, factor analysis is an
additional means of determining whether items are tapping into the same construct
(Coakes and Steed, 2003).
148
A factor analysis was performed on the 20 item variables to determine the possible
underline factors. Table 4.7 summarises the 20 destination brand personality related
variables into 2 factors that determine the destination brand personality of Jammu and
Kashmir which explains. From the analysis of these results, it can be said that out of 20
variables, 16 factor loadings are statistically significant and show a higher value than the
recommended 0.4 level(Hair et al, 1998).
Table 4.7 Summary of results from scale purification
Name of
the factor
Factor wise
dimension
Mean brand
Personality
Factor
loading
values
Communaliti
es
Eigen
values
% of
variance
Cronbach
Alpha
Sincerity
Daring 4.4503 0.886 0.796 7.686 48.036 0.943
Honest 4.4704 0.871 0.763 2.541 15.88
Sincere 4.345 0.859 0.741 1.031 6.441
Up to date 4.3186 0.855 0.756 0.757 4.734
Down to
Earth
4.3706 0.855 0.742 0.7 4.376
Spirited 4.371 0.847 0.728 0.465 2.908
Competent 4.2733 0.844 0.727 0.438 2.736
Intelligent 4.1386 0.718 0.516 0.414 2.587
Reliable 4.1756 0.716 0.515 0.396 2.477
Rugged 4.0499 0.713 0.511 0.34 2.123
Charming 4.0461 0.666 0.468 0.311 1.943
Imaginative 3.9693 0.643 0.461 0.262 1.638
149
Successf
ul
Sophisticat
ed
4.1825 0.876 0.767 0.212 1.328 0.799
Successful 4.2913 0.873 0.762 0.193 1.206
Outdoorsy 3.9203 0.769 0.596 0.151 0.945
Wholesome 4.3872 0.636 0.452 0.103 0.642
The first factor ‗Sincerity‘ comprises of 12 parameters against expected brand personality
out of total 20 (16 after refining). Variables ‗Daring‘, ‗Honest‘, ‗Sincere‘, ‗Up to date‘,
‗Down to earth‘, ‗Spirited‘, ‗Competent‘ , ‗Intelligent‘, ‗Reliable‘, ‗Rugged‘, ‗Charming‘,
‗Imaginative‘ are most important with factor loading values of .886, .871, .859, .855, .855,
.847, .844, .718, .716, .713, .666, .643. This factor identified 95.8 % of variance and has
Cronbach alpha of 0.943.
The second factor ‗Successful‘ identified 4 variables ‗Sophisticated‘, ‗Successful‘,
‗Outdoorsy‘, ‗Wholesome‘ with factor loading values of .876, .873, .769, .636
respectively. This factor identified 4.121% of variance and has Cronbach alpha of 0.799.
Thus, the destination personality of Jammu and Kashmir consists of two dimensions i.e.
Sincerity and Successful. Thus our 1st objective is fulfilled i.e. to assess the destination
personality of Jammu and Kashmir.
4.9 Scree Plot
After the systematic evaluation of the contents of the data, SPSS was used to simplify the
data by reducing a large no. of variables to smaller manageable figures through a scree test/
plot under factor analysis. Therefore, the factors finally emerged were put under scree test
so as to know which of them are contributing significantly to the total variance in the
150
results obtained. This test examines the graph of eigen values which stop factoring at the
point where these values begin to for a straight line with an horizontal slope (figure 4.1).
The findings are on the basis of data gathered with as many as 20 variables of destination
brand personality among tourist of Jammu and Kashmir.
151
figure 4.1
152
153
Objective 2: To determine whether respondents could associate
destination brand personality characteristics with the three regions of
Jammu and Kashmir i.e. Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh.
4.10 Comparative analysis of Destination personality in Jammu, Kashmir
and Ladakh
This section shows the comparison of destination personality in Jammu, Kashmir and
Ladakh.
Table 4.8 Comparative analysis of Destination personality in Jammu, Kashmir and
Ladakh
Factor
Name
Sub
Factors
Jammu Kashmir Ladakh
Mean S.D Overall
Factor
Mean
Mean S.D Overall
Factor
Mean
Mean S.D Overall
Factor
Mean
Sincerity Daring 4.2334 1.05184
3.8291
4.5300 .68697
4.4725
4.5887 .67725
4.3889
Honest 4.2717 1.06081 4.5734 .66664 4.5668 .66055
Sincere 4.0612 1.01273 4.4406 .68505 4.5347 .66107
Up to date 4.0230 1.04043 4.5530 .71480 4.3805 .68198
Down to
earth
4.1237 1.01772 4.5338 .66982 4.4550 .65261
154
Spirited 4.0944 1.09160 4.4738 .68712 4.5463 .64058
Competent 4.0000 1.01206 4.5849 .66142 3.5656 1.01922
Intelligent 3.4337 1.14946 4.5785 3.00 4.4062 .63535
Reliable 3.5842 1.04340 4.4674 .67936 4.4781 .65183
Rugged 3.6747 .96030 4.0281 .73754 4.4499 .68119
Charming 3.5995 .96440 4.3014 .79228 4.2391 .59765
Imaginative 2.8508 .99394 4.6054 .64473 4.4563 .64276
Success
ful
Sophisticat
ed
4.3929 .70303 4.334 4.5849 .66142 4.50 3.5656 1.01922 3.739
Successful 4.4209 .70493 4.5837 .69917 3.8663 1.13904
Outdoorsy 4.1441 .78027 4.3129 .79024 3.2995 1.28911
Wholesome 4.3801 .80447 4.5517 .68567 4.2288 1.16318
Overall
Mean
3.9555 0.961 4.081 4.481 1.0761 4.486 4.226 0.800 4.063
Jammu- Out of total sample, Jammu constituted 33.43% of respondents.
Factor 1 i.e. Sincerity: From table 4.8, it is seen that the mean value of this factor has
come out to be 3.8291 which shows that tourists agree to some extent to associate this
characteristic to the Jammu region of Jammu and Kashmir.
155
Factor 2 i.e. Successful: It is clear from the table that the mean score for the factor –
‗successful‘ is 4.334 which shows that tourists very much agree to associate this
characteristic to the Jammu region of Jammu and Kashmir.
Kashmir - Out of total sample, Kashmir constituted 33.90% of respondents.
Factor 1 i.e. Sincerity: From table 4.8, it is seen that the mean value of this factor has
come out to be 4.4725 which shows that tourists strongly agree in associating this
characteristic to the Kashmir region of Jammu and Kashmir.
Factor 2 i.e. Successful: It is clear from the table that the mean score for the factor –
‗successful‘ is 4.50 which shows that tourists very much agree to associate this
characteristic to the Jammu region of Jammu and Kashmir
Ladakh - Out of total sample, Ladakh constituted 33.17% of respondents.
Factor 1 i.e. Sincerity: From table 4.8, it is seen that the mean value of this factor has
come out to be 4.3889 which shows that tourists very much agree to associate this
characteristic to the Jammu region of Jammu and Kashmir.
Factor 2 i.e. Successful: It is clear from the table that the mean score for the factor –
‗successful‘ is 3.739 which shows that tourists averagely agree to associate this
characteristic to the Jammu region of Jammu and Kashmir
It has also been found that Kashmir has the highest destination personality followed by
Jammu and Ladakh as the overall mean score for these regions is 4.486, 4.081 and 4.063
respectively.
156
4.11 Reliability Test
In reliability test, coefficient alpha are used. There are a number of difference
coefficients. One of the most commonly used is Cronbach‘s alpha, which is based on
the average correlation of items within a test if the items are standardized. If the
items are not standardized, it is based on the average covariance among the items.
Because Cronbach‘s alpha can be interpreted as a correlation coefficient, it ranges in value
from 0 to 1. Cronbach‘s coefficient alpha has the most utility for multi-scales at interval
level of measurement. Generally, a value above 0.7 is considered adequate for internal
consistency (Grant, 1996).
Table 4.9 Summary of Cronbach‟s Alpha Reliability Analysis for Destination
Personality
Cronbach's Alpha N of Items
0.877 20
Table 4.10 Summary of Cronbach‟s Alpha Reliability Analysis for Intention to
recommend
Cronbach's Alpha N of Items
0.836 7
157
Table 4.9 and 4.10 summarized the Cronbach‘s Alpha score for each variable used for the
research. From the table presented above, it is clearly stated that all the variables used in
this research were reliable since it obtained the Cronbach‘s Alpha more than 0.7.
4.12 Hypothesis Testing
The study used One way ANOVA to test the hypothesis 1(H1) and correlation and regression
to test the hypothesis 2 (H2) and hypothesis 3 (H3). The test will be able to tell how the
destination personality as a whole can have an impact on the intention to
recommend the destination to other people.
4.12.1 Hypothesis 1:
H1: There is a significant difference about the perception of respondents on the
association of destination brand personality characteristics with the different regions
of Jammu and Kashmir state under study.
Table 4.11 shows the results for one way analysis of variance. A one-way Anova was used
to test that there is a significant difference about the perception of respondents on the
destination brand personality characteristics associated with the three regions of Jammu
and Kashmir. From the table, it is clear that the significant level is less than .005 in all the
variables. Thus, we reject our null hypothesis and accept the first hypothesis which
signifies that there is a significant difference about the perception of respondents on the
destination brand personality characteristics associated with the three regions of Jammu
and Kashmir.
158
Table 4.11
ANOVA
Sum of
Squares df
Mean
Square F Sig.
Sincere Between Groups 98.291 2 49.145 76.244 .000
Within Groups 1509.613 2342 .645
Total 1607.904 2344
Down Between Groups 74.192 2 37.096 58.200 .000
Within Groups 1492.777 2342 .637
Total 1566.970 2344
Honest Between Groups 46.507 2 23.253 34.739 .000
Within Groups 1567.683 2342 .669
Total 1614.190 2344
Wholesome Between Groups 40.756 2 20.378 24.784 .000
Within Groups 1925.660 2342 .822
Total 1966.416 2344
Cheerful Between Groups 8.096 2 4.048 9.902 .000
Within Groups 957.488 2342 .409
Total 965.585 2344
Daring Between Groups 56.753 2 28.376 41.752 .000
Within Groups 1591.710 2342 .680
Total 1648.462 2344
Exciting Between Groups 1897.894 2 948.947 908.430 .000
159
Within Groups 2446.457 2342 1.045
Total 4344.351 2344
Spirited Between Groups 92.165 2 46.083 66.577 .000
Within Groups 1621.063 2342 .692
Total 1713.228 2344
Imaginative Between Groups 1482.178 2 741.089 1222.610 .000
Within Groups 1419.611 2342 .606
Total 2901.789 2344
Up to date Between Groups 114.523 2 57.261 83.372 .000
Within Groups 1608.520 2342 .687
Total 1723.043 2344
competent Between Groups 97.372 2 48.686 72.885 .000
Within Groups 1564.412 2342 .668
Total 1661.784 2344
Reliable Between Groups 412.123 2 206.061 312.665 .000
Within Groups 1543.492 2342 .659
Total 1955.614 2344
intelligent Between Groups 596.836 2 298.418 417.720 .000
Within Groups 1673.121 2342 .714
Total 2269.957 2344
successful Between Groups 220.605 2 110.303 145.172 .000
Within Groups 1779.465 2342 .760
Total 2000.071 2344
160
sophisticated Between Groups 457.624 2 228.812 348.820 .000
Within Groups 1536.259 2342 .656
Total 1993.883 2344
Upperclass Between Groups 25.710 2 12.855 27.918 .000
Within Groups 1078.402 2342 .460
Total 1104.113 2344
Charming Between Groups 236.386 2 118.193 184.953 .000
Within Groups 1496.640 2342 .639
Total 1733.026 2344
Rugged Between Groups 235.176 2 117.588 182.621 .000
Within Groups 1507.987 2342 .644
Total 1743.162 2344
Outdoorsy Between Groups 459.815 2 229.908 238.643 .000
Within Groups 2256.273 2342 .963
Total 2716.088 2344
Tough Between Groups 1786.563 2 893.282 1140.546 .000
Within Groups 1834.267 2342 .783
Total 3620.830 2344
161
4.12.2 Hypothesis 2
H2: Greater the destination personality, greater is the propensity to recommend
others.
Objective 3: To examine the relationship between the destination brand personality
and intention to recommend.
The study looked at the result of Pearson Correlation and Coefficient generated from
Bivariate Analysis to check the correlation between each of the destination personality
variables to the intention to recommend others of Jammu and Kashmir. Tabachnick
and Fidell (1996) suggested that a construct can significantly predict an independent
variable if it has a correlation value of more than 0.3 but not more than 0.7 and a
coefficient significance value of less than 0.005.
In the table 4.12, destination personality is positively related to all the variables of intention to
recommend except one variable i.e. this is my last time visit to the destination which is
negatively correlated with destination personality.
From table 4.12, it is clear that positive correlation exists between destination personality
and intention to recommend as the correlation value lies between 0.3 and 0.7 and all have
coefficient significance value less than 0.005.
162
Table 4.12 Correlation Analysis for Destination personality and Intention to
recommend
Destination
Personality
Destination Personality Pearson Correlation 1
Sig. (2-tailed)
N 2345
This is my last visit to the
destination
Pearson Correlation -.432
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 2345
I will visit again the
destination
Pearson Correlation .540
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 2345
I will visit the destination
more often in near future
Pearson Correlation .553
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 2345
I will visit destination and
also will recommend
destination to my friends
and relatives.
Pearson Correlation .565
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 2345
I will move to the
destination
Pearson Correlation .554
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 2345
163
My overall evaluation of
the destination is so
powerful that I have built
the resistance to counter
persuasions when faced
with other holiday
destination offers
Pearson Correlation .537
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 2345
When I return home, I will
positively promote the
destination as a fantastic
holiday destination
Pearson Correlation .575
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 2345
Impact of Destination Brand Personality on Intention to Recommend
Table 4.13 Model summary
Model R
R
Square
Adjusted
R Square
Std.
Error
of the
Estima
te
Change Statistics
R
Square
Change
F
Change df1 df2
Sig. F
Chan
ge
1 .608a .370 .368 .42856 .370 196.065 7 2337 .000
a. Predictors: (Constant), This is my last visit to the destination, I will visit the
destination again, I will visit the destination more often in near future, I will visit
destination and also will recommend destination to my friends and relatives, I will move
to the destination, My overall evaluation of the destination is so powerful that I have built
164
the resistance to counter persuasions when faced with other holiday destination offers,
When I return home, I will positively promote the destination as a fantastic holiday
destination.
b. Dependent Variable: Destination Personality
The multiple regression analysis was used to test the strength of the relationship
between the model (Intention to recommend.) The result showed the value of R square =
0.370 which revealed that 37 % of the variance in destination personality can be
explained by nine independent variables (Table 4.13). This result seems to make sense
that the model is quite respectable because the value is more than the acceptance value of
0.3 or 30 percent (Tabachnick and Fidell, 1996).
R is the multiple correlation coefficients between the observed and model predicted
values of the dependent variable. If the value is 1, it tells that the dependent variables can
be perfectly predicted form the independent variables. A value closed to 0 tells that the
independent variables are not linearly related to the dependent variable (Norusis, 2005).
The observed value of R=0.608 is near to 1, indicating that the linear regression model
predicts quite adequate.
Table 4.14 ANOVAb
Model
Sum of
Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 252.075 7 36.011 196.065 .000a
Residual 429.231 2337 .184
Total 681.306 2344
165
a. Predictors: (Constant), This is my last visit to the destination, I will visit the
destination again, I will visit the destination more often in near future, I will visit
destination and also will recommend destination to my friends and relatives, I will move
to the destination, My overall evaluation of the destination is so powerful that I have
built the resistance to counter persuasions when faced with other holiday destination
offers, When I return home, I will positively promote the destination as a fantastic
holiday destination.
b. Dependent Variable: Destination Personality
The analysis of variance table at Table 4.14 is used to test the relationship between the
dependent variable and independent variables. The observed significance level is less
than0.005. As a result, there is a significant relationship between destination personality
and intention to recommend.
Table 4.15 Model summary
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig. B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 2.665 .082 32.492 .000
This is my last visit to the destination. -.054 .014 -.082 -3.837 .000
I will visit the destination
again.
.039 .023 .061 1.713 .000
166
I will visit the destination more often
in near future.
.028 .024 .044 1.171 .004
I will visit destination and also will
recommend destination to my friends and
relatives.
.097 .024 .219 4.124 .000
I will move to the destination. .054 .025 .084 2.201 .003
My overall evaluation of the destination is
so powerful that I have built the resistance
to counter persuasions when faced with
other holiday destination offers.
.021 .022 .034 .974 .001
When I return home, I will positively
promote the destination as a fantastic
holiday destination,
.139 .022 .153 6.242 .000
The study explored the standardized Coefficients when comparing different
variables, because it allows the convert of values for each of the different variables
into the same scale and thus compare them equally (Table 4.15). Therefore, beta values
have been used to compare the distribution of each independent variable. The largest
beta coefficient is- I will visit destination and also will recommend destination to my
friends and relatives (0.219), followed by -When I return home, I will positively promote
the destination as a fantastic holiday destination(0.153), I will move to the
destination(0.084), I will the destination again(0.061), I will the destination more often in
167
near future(0.044), My overall evaluation of the destination is so powerful that I have built
the resistance to counter persuasions when faced with other holiday destination
offers(0.034).
The result showed the destination personality is positively related to all the
dimensions of intention to recommend except for the variable- This is my last visit to the
destination(-0.82). A positive coefficient means that the predicted value of the intention to
recommend increases when the value of the destination personality variables increases.
That makes sense, if a destination has a positive or even excellent personality which when
perceived by tourists, then their intention to recommend will be strong and may attract
more tourists to that destination. It appeared that the variable - I will visit destination
and also will recommend destination to my friends and relatives (0.219) scored the most
positive effect on intention to recommend in Jammu and Kashmir.
168
Objective 4
To find the personality of tourists visiting Jammu and Kashmir.
Table 4.16 Result after scale purification
Name of
the factor
Factor
wise
dimension
Mean
brand
Personality
Factor
loading
values
Communaliti
es
Eigen
values
% of
variance
Cronbach
Alpha
Sincerity
Honest 3.889 .730 .562 1.286 7.556 .853
Spirited 3.817 .702 .552 .691 4.065
Sincere 3.84 .685 .52 6.838 40.223
Intelligent 4.437 .636 .567 .492 2.896
Cheerful 3.912 .615 .480 .967 5.690
Up to date 3.903 .579 .592 .563 3.313
Tough 4.049 .574 .471 4.58 2.697
Wholesome 3.655 .564 .462 1.136 6.684
Daring 3.949 .525 .461 .875 5.146
Imaginative 3.792 .498 .460 .600 3.529
Successf
ul
Charming 4.148 .734 .569 2.43 1.430 .810
Upper
class
4.143 .716 .516 3.33 1.958
Down to
earth
4.0588 .697 .629 1.622 2.023
Competent 3.947 .696 .540 3.46 2.036
Rugged 4.141 .573 .459 2.06 1.213
Outdoorsy 4.153 .453 .494 1.91 1.123
169
figure 4.2
170
171
The first factor ‗Sincerity‘ comprises of 10 parameters against expected brand personality
out of total 20 (16 after refining). Variables ‗Honest‘, ‗Spirited‘, ‗Sincere‘, ‗Intelligent‘,
‗Cheerful‘, ‗Up to date‘, ‗Tough‘, ‗Wholesome‘, ‗Daring‘ and ‗Imaginative‘ are most
important with factor loading values .730, .702, .685, .636, .615, .579, .574, .564, .525,
.498 respectively. This factor identified 81.799% of variance and has Cronbach alpha of
.853.
The second factor ‗ Successful‘ identified 6 variables- ‗Charming‘, ‗Upper class‘, ‗Down
to earth‘, ‗Competent‘, ‗Rugged‘ and ‗Outdoorsy‘ with factor loading values of .734, .716,
.697, .696, .573, .453respectively. This factor identified 9.783% of variance and has
Cronbach alpha of 0.810.
Thus, the personality of tourists visiting Jammu and Kashmir consists of two dimensions
i.e. Sincerity and Successful. Thus our 4th objective is fulfilled i.e. to find the personality
of tourists visiting Jammu and Kashmir.
Table 4.17
KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .825
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 21090.304
Df 136
Sig. .000
172
Table 4.18 Comparative analysis of Personality of tourists visiting Jammu
and Kashmir
Factor
Name
Sub
Factors
Jammu Kashmir Ladakh
Mean S.D Overa
ll
Facto
r
Mean
Mea
n
S.D Overa
ll
Facto
r
Mean
Mea
n
S.D Overa
ll
Facto
r
Mean
Sincerity Daring 3.8227 .94710 3.8362 3.8991 .91941 3.8808 4.1285 .79989 4.1908
Honest 3.7054 1.07861 3.8097 1.03559 4.1542 .64124
Sincere 3.5357 1.0254 3.6130 1.02759 4.3522 .75380
Up to date 3.7487 .74235 3.8250 .74414 4.1375 .77467
Down
to earth
3.9056 .79992 3.9349 .80414 4.3380 .66159
Spirited 3.6582
.96184 3.7241 .96513 4.0720 .82275
Competent 3.8253 .96890 3.8914 .97656 4.1260 .70997
Intelligent 4.3929 .91741 4.4227 .87963 4.4974 .62601
Reliable 3.4974 1.6174 3.3142 1.65531 4.3149 .91452
Rugged 4.1122 .83055 4.1596 .83333 4.1530 .82963
Charming 4.1276 .78723 4.1839 .77651 4.1337 .78606
Imaginative 3.7028 1.20543 3.7918 1.17250 3.8830 1.02627
Successf
ul
Sophisticat
ed
4.1467 .79761 3.6597 4.1558 .78100 3.6503 4.2249 .78240 4.1002
Successful 3.0217 1.18237 2.8582 1.21650 3.8033 .59048
Outdoorsy 4.1314 .77926 4.1660 .79353 4.1620 .78071
Wholesome 3.3393 1.14679 3.4215 1.15151 4.2108 .76054
Overall
Mean
3.7916 3.7479 3.8227 3.7655 4.1678 4.1455
173
Jammu- Out of total sample, Jammu constituted 33.43% of respondents.
Factor 1 i.e. Sincerity: From table 4.18, it is seen that the mean value of this factor has come
out to be 3.8362 which shows that tourists agree to some extent to associate this characteristic
to the Jammu region of Jammu and Kashmir.
Factor 2 i.e. Successful: It is clear from the table that the mean score for the factor –
‗successful‘ is 3.6597 which shows that tourists averagely agree to associate this characteristic
to the Jammu region of Jammu and Kashmir.
Kashmir - Out of total sample, Kashmir constituted 33.90% of respondents.
Factor 1 i.e. Sincerity: From table 4.18, it is seen that the mean value of this factor has come
out to be 3.8808 which shows that tourists agree to some extent in associating this
characteristic to the Kashmir region of Jammu and Kashmir.
Factor 2 i.e. Successful: It is clear from the table that the mean score for the factor –
‗successful‘ is 3.6503 which again shows that tourists are neutral to associate this
characteristic to the Jammu region of Jammu and Kashmir.
Ladakh - Out of total sample, Ladakh constituted 33.17% of respondents.
Factor 1 i.e. Sincerity: From table 4.18, it is seen that the mean value of this factor has come
out to be 4.1908 which shows that tourists very much agree to associate this characteristic to
the Jammu region of Jammu and Kashmir.
Factor 2 i.e. Successful: It is clear from the table that the mean score for the factor –
‗successful‘ is 4.1002 which shows that tourists agree to associate this characteristic to the
Jammu region of Jammu and Kashmir.
174
4.12.3 Hypothesis 3:
H3: There is a relationship between respondent‟s perception on how a holiday at
Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel and intention to recommend.
Objective 5: To find the relationship between respondents‟ perception on how a
holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel and intention to recommend.
KMO and Bartlett's Test for respondents‟ perception on how a holiday at Jammu
and Kashmir would make them feel
Table 4.19
KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .913
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 18031.417
Df 55
Sig. .000
Table 4.19 shows Bartlett test of sphericity.
175
Table 4.20 Respondents‟ perception of how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would
make them feel
Name of
the factor
Factor wise
dimension
Mean
brand
Personality
Factor
loading
values
Communalities Eigen
values
% of
variance
Cronbach
Alpha
Relax Rejuvenated 4.3288 .889 .789 .427 3.885 .947
Excited 4.3505 .864 .795 .543 4.932
Rested 4.3748 .852 .769 .593 5.395
Happy 4.3181 .839 .780 1.293 11.756
Busy 4.4631 .830 .751 .805 7.317
Relax 4.3791 .827 .789 6.201 56.371
Peaceful
Peace 3.9011 .786 .634 .298 2.7110 .764
Free 3.8494 .772 .605 .142 1.293
Calm 4.2094 .641 .606 .241 2.194
Fun 4.3211 .601 .506 .178 1.614
Satisfied 4.3386 .473 .420 .279 2.532
From the table 4.20 in the study, factor analysis shows that ‗respondents‘ perception of
how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel‘ can be reduced to 2 factors.
The first factor- ‗Relax‘ consists of 6 factors i.e. ‗Rejuvenated‘ , ‗Excited‘, ‗Rested‘,
‗Happy‘, ‗Busy‘, ‗Relax‘ with factor loadings . 889, .864, .852, .839, .830, .827
respectively. This factor accounted for 56.371% of variance. The second factor-‗Peaceful‘
consists of 5 factors i.e. ‗Peaceful‘, ‗Free‘, ‗Calm‘, ‗Fun‘, ‗Satisfied‘, with factor loadings
of .786, .772, .641, .601, .473 respectively. This factor accounted for 11.756% of variance.
176
Then a constant value for these two factors was obtained. Thus, a constant variable was
calculated for the respondents‘ perception of how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would
make them feel.
Relationship between respondents‟ perception on how a holiday at Jammu and
Kashmir would make them feel and Intention to recommend
Table 4.21 Relationship between respondents‟ perception on how a holiday at Jammu
and Kashmir would make them feel and Intention to recommend
Respondents‘
perception on how a
holiday at Jammu and
Kashmir would make
them feel
Respondents‘ perception on how a holiday
at Jammu and Kashmir would make them
feel
Pearson Correlation 1
Sig. (2-tailed)
N 2345
This is my last visit to the destination Pearson Correlation -.607**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 2345
177
I will visit the destination again Pearson Correlation .685**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 2345
I will visit the destination more often in
near future
Pearson Correlation .691**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 2345
I will visit destination and also will
recommend destination to my friends and
relatives.
Pearson Correlation .693**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 2345
I will move to the destination Pearson Correlation .715**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 2345
My overall evaluation of the destination is
so powerful that I have built the resistance
to counter persuasions when faced with
other holiday destination offers.
Pearson Correlation .673**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 2345
When I return home, I will positively Pearson Correlation .709**
178
promote the destination as a fantastic
holiday destination.
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 2345
The study looked at the result of Pearson Correlation and Coefficient generated from
Bivariate Analysis to check the correlation between each of the variables of respondents‘
perception of how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel and the
variables of intention to recommend others (Table 4.21).
From table 4.21 in the study, it is clear that positive correlation exists between destination
personality and intention to recommend as the correlation value lies between 0.3 and 0.7
and all have coefficient significance value less than 0.005.
Impact of „respondents‟ perception on how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would
make them feel‟ on Intention to recommend
Table 4.22
Model Summary
Model R
R
Square
Adjusted
R
Square
Std. Error
of the
Estimate
Change Statistics
R Square
Change F Change df1 df2
Sig. F
Change
1 .774a .600 .599 .39566 .600 500.392 7 2337 .000
a. Predictors: (Constant), This is my last visit to the destination, I will visit the
destination again, My overall evaluation of the destination is so powerful that I
have built the resistance to counter persuasions when faced with other holiday
destination offers, I will visit the destination more often in near future, I will visit
179
destination and also will recommend destination to my friends and relatives, I will
move to the destination.
b. Multiple regression analysis was used to test the strength of the relationship
between the respondents‘ perception about how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir
would make them feel and Intention to recommend. The result showed the value of
R square = 0.600 which revealed that 60% of the variance in the ‗respondents‘
perception of how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel‘ can be
explained by nine independent variables (Table 4.22). This result seems to make
sense that the model is quite respectable because the value is more than the
acceptance value of 0.3 or 30 percent (Tabachnick and Fidell, 1996). Also, in table
4.22, the observed value of R=0.774 is near to 1, indicating that the linear
regression model predicts quite adequate.
Table 4.23 Model summary
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig. B
Std.
Error Beta
1 (Constant) 0.076 31.21 0
This is my last visit to the destination. 0.013 -0.213 -12.405 0
I will visit the destination again. 0.021 0.094 3.331 0.001
I will visit the destination more often
in near future.
0.022 0.021 0.702 0.002
180
I will visit destination and also will
recommend destination to my friends
and relatives.
0.022 0.125 4.201 0
I will move to the destination. 0.023 0.202 6.635 0
My overall evaluation of the
destination is so powerful that I have
built the resistance to counter
persuasions when faced with other
holiday destination offers.
0.02 0.017 0.629 0.003
When I return home, I will positively
promote the destination as a fantastic
holiday destination.
0.021 0.211 7.527 0
The study explored the standardized Coefficients when comparing different variables,
because it allows the convert of values for each of the different variables into the same
scale and thus compare them equally (Table 4.23). Therefore, beta values have been used
to compare the distribution of each independent variable. The largest beta coefficient is for
the variable- When I return home, I will positively promote the destination as a fantastic
holiday destination(0.211), I will move to the destination(0.202), followed by I will visit
destination and also will recommend destination to my friends and relatives (0.125), I will
visit the destination again(0.094), I will the destination more often in near future(0.021),
My overall evaluation of the destination is so powerful that I have built the resistance to
counter persuasions when faced with other holiday destination offers(0.017).
181
4.13 Summary
The descriptive statistic of respondents has been discussed at the earlier part of this
chapter. Next, Cronbach‘s Coefficient Alpha is used to test the reliability of the newly
construct research framework. Then, hypothesis testing was preceded after the factor analysis
and reliability test. The results showed that there is a significant difference about the
perception of respondents on the destination brand personality characteristics associated
with the three regions of Jammu and Kashmir. Also, greater the destination personality,
greater will be the propensity to recommend.
182
References
Coakes, S.J., & Steed, L.G. (2003). SPSS: Analysis Without Anguish: Version 11.0 For
Windows. Queensland. Australia: John Wiley & Sons.
Hair, J.F. Jr., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., & Black, W.C. (1998). Multivariate Data
Analysis (5th
Edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kaiser, H.F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31-36.
Norusis, M. J. (2005). SPSS 14.0: Statistical Procures Companion. Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (3rd Ed.). NY:
Harper Collins.
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Page No.
5.1 Introduction 183
5.2 Summary of Findings 183
5.3 Discussions and conclusions 195
5.4 Practical Implications 196
5.5 Managerial implications 197
5.6 Limitations and Future Research Areas 198
5.7 Summary 200
183
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction
This chapter clarifies the findings of the research in terms of the relationship of
destination personality and tourists‘ intention to recommend, the practical implications, the
limitations and recommendations for the future research.
5.2 Summary of Findings
A total of 2345 questionnaires were taken into account in the analysis. The research sample
consisted of domestic tourists who were visiting Jammu and Kashmir during that period.
Out of total 2345 respondents, 784 (33.43%) were from Jammu, 783 (33.90 %) were from
Kashmir, 778 (33.17%) were from Ladakh. Majority of the respondents were in the age
group of 20-25 followed by respondents whose age was between 26 – 35 years. Rest of the
respondents were in the age group of above 45 years followed by the respondents whose
age was between36- 45 years. Majority of the respondents were males. Maximum of the
respondents are unmarried. As far as qualification of respondents is concerned, maximum
respondents were postgraduates followed by graduates. Rests of the respondents have done
professional courses followed by undergraduate respondents followed by respondents who
were in other category. As far as the monthly income of the respondents is concerned, most
of the respondents‘ monthly family income was in the income range of Rs 20,000 – 30,000
followed by the respondents whose monthly family income was in the range of Rs 10,000
– 20,000. Rest of the respondents were those whose monthly family income was above Rs
40 thousand followed by respondents whose monthly family income was in the range of Rs
184
30,000 – 40,000.
Demographic profile of respondents also indicated that most of the respondents under
study were students followed by respondents who were corporates. Rest of the respondents
were government employees followed by self employed respondents and respondents who
were in other category.
It has been found that the destination brand personality mean score was found highest with
‗Cheerful‘ ( =4.5168). The mean score of destination brand personality with other
variables are ‗Honest‘ ( =4.4700) followed by ‗Daring‘ ( =4.4504), ‗Wholesome‘
( =4.3873), ‗Down to Earth ( =4.3707), ‗Spirited‘ ( =4.3707), ‗Sincere‘ ( =4.3451),
‗Up to Date‘ ( =4.3191), ‗Successful‘ ( =4.2919), ‗Competent‘ ( =4.2740),
‗Sophisticated‘ ( =4.1832), ‗Reliable‘( =4.1760), ‗Intelligent‘ ( =4.1389), ‗Rugged‘
( =4.0503), ‗Charming‘ ( =4.0464), ‗Exciting‘ ( =3.9838), ‗Imaginative‘ ( =3.9702),
‗Outdoorsy‘ ( =3.9207), ‗Tough‘ ( =3.1461).
The mean score of the variables for intention to recommend was found highest for the
variable-My overall evaluation of the destination is so powerful that I have built the
resistance to counter persuasions when faced with other holiday destination offers
( =4.4026). This means that if they are given a choice of spending a holiday at Jammu and
Kashmir and other destination, they will opt for Jammu and Kashmir only. They will not
be persuaded by anybody‘s offer. The mean score of other variables are - When I return
home, I will positively promote the destination as a fantastic holiday destination( =4.38), I
will try to move to the destination ( =4.3484), I will visit the destination again( =4.3296),
I will visit destination and also will recommend destination to my friends and
relatives(4.3203), I will visit the destination more often in the future( =4.3181), This is my
last time visit to the destination( =1.6908). This implies that after going from this
185
destination, they will have positive feeling towards the destination. They will tell other
people that it is fantastic to visit it. They are so much influenced by this destination that
they will try to come back again to visit this destination. Not only this, they will also
recommend their friends and relatives to visit it. They will spread positive word of mouth
publicity for it. They strongly disagree that it is their last visit to the destination instead
they will visit it in near future.
It is also found that the tourist‘s personality mean score was found highest with
‗Intelligent‘ ( =4.4375). The mean score of Tourist‘s personality with other variables are
‗Sophisticated‘ ( =4.1757) followed by ‗Outdoorsy‘ ( =4.1531), ‗Charming‘ ( =4.1484),
‗Upper Class‘ ( =4.1437), ‗Rugged‘ ( =4.1416), ‗Down to Earth‘ ( =4.0588), ‗Tough‘ (
=4.0495), ‗Daring‘ ( =3.9497), ‗Competent‘ ( =3.9471), ‗Exciting‘ ( =3.9446),
‗Cheerful‘ ( =3.9126), ‗Up to Date‘ ( =3.9032), ‗Honest‘ ( =3.8891), ‗Sincere‘ (
=3.8495, ‗Spirited‘ ( =3.8175), ‗Imaginative‘ ( =3. 7923), ‗Reliable‘ ( =3.7075),
‗Wholesome‘ ( =3.6559), ‗Successful‘ ( =3.2264). Thus, tourists think that they are
intelligent enough to choose this destination to visit. They have chosen this destination
after getting detailed information about it. Most of them are sophisticated as they are
stylish. They are outdoorsy as they love going out and visit various destinations. They are
charming as they feel relaxed and are free from the worries of their offices, home etc. They
also think they are upper class tourists as they are not poor people but have the capacity to
come to such a destination. They are also rugged as they can visit such destinations which
lie in the rugged regions. Tourists to Jammu and Kashmir are ‗Down to earth‘ as they
abide themselves with the rules and regulations prevailing in the state. Tourists coming to
this destination are also tough as they can adjust themselves with the conditions prevailing
in the state. They also agree to some extent that they are daring people as they love doing
186
various adventure sports at the destination. They are also competent because they have
reached at this stage after facing a lot of competition. They are averagely excited while
visiting these destinations. They also feel excited while interacting with local people,
knowing about the culture of the people of the state etc. They also become cheerful when
they visit ecotourism destinations of the area. They keep themselves updated with the latest
information about this destination. They are averagely honest in being loyal to this
destination as they have chosen this destination inspite of offers from other destinations.
They are neutral about whether they are sincere since nobody is sincere in today‘s time.
Tourists are also averagely spirited as they are busy in their day to day work and other
worldly tensions. They think that they are averagely imaginative as majority of people are
imaginative at average only. They are averagely reliable. They are averagely wholesome as
no one is perfect in everything. A person may be good in one excellent but poor in other
field. Also, they think that they are successful at average. They may not be satisfied with
their career and life. They want to achieve more and more in life. When they get one thing,
they aspire for other.
It has been found that the mean score of respondent‘s perception of how a holiday at
Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel was found highest with ‗Busy‘ ( =4.4631).
The mean score of other variables were ‗Relax‘ ( =4.3791) followed by ‗Rested‘ (
=4.3748), ‗Excited‘ ( =4.3505), ‗Satisfied‘( =4.3386), ‗Rejuvenated‘ ( =4.3288), ‗Fun‘
( =4.3211), ‗Happy‘ ( =4.3181), ‗Calm‘ ( =4.2094), ‗Lucky‘ ( =4.0751), ‗Peaceful‘
( =3.9011), ‗Free‘ ( =3.8495), ‗Broken‘ ( =1.5966), ‗Bore‘ ( =1.4704). Thus, in the
opinion of tourists, a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would keep them busy i.e. they have
lot many things to see. This holiday will also provide relaxation to them as they will be
free from tension of homely affairs, office etc. Tourists are excited in coming to Jammu
187
and Kashmir. They have a lot of plans for spending their holiday in Jammu and Kashmir.
The hospitality of the state will make them satisfied. They also feel rejuvenated by the
homely atmosphere of the state. They find great fun in visiting various parks, gardens e.g.
Bag-e- Bahu, Nishat and Shalimar gardens and are happy to visit the place for which it is
said that it is heaven on earth. The climate of the destination Jammu and Kashmir is quite
calm. The climate of Jammu is quite good. It is colder in Ladakh as compared to Kashmir.
Tourists feel themselves lucky by visiting various sites such as Vaishno Devi, Bawe wali
Mata, Shankaracharya temple, Martand temple, various Gompas etc.
They also agree to some extent that the place is peaceful and that they can roam here and
there freely. This is due to the actions that the Govt. is taking against terrorism since few
years, tourism in Kashmir has been worst hit by terrorism. From the mean score of the
variables- broken and bore, it is clear that the tourists will not feel broken and bore at the
destination.
The face and content validity of the constructed instrument was duly tested. The Kaiser-
Meyer-Olkin values for the aforesaid variables as depicted in the table is 0.917 which
indicates the high degree of construct validity. All the variables used in this research were
reliable since they obtained the Cronbach‘s Alpha more than 0.7. The Cronbach‘s Alpha
for destination brand personality was 0.877 and for intention to recommend it was 0.836.
Objective 1: Assessment of Destination Personality
After performing factor analysis on the 20 destination brand personality related variable, 2
factors were extracted that determined the destination brand personality of Jammu and
Kashmir. Out of 20 variables, 16 factor loadings were statistically significant. The first
factor ‗Sincerity‘ comprised of 12 parameters against expected brand personality out of
total 20 (16 after refining). Variables ‗Daring‘, ‗Honest‘, ‗Sincere‘, ‗Up to date‘, ‗Down to
188
earth‘, ‗Spirited‘, ‗Competent‘ , ‗Intelligent‘, ‗Reliable‘, ‗Rugged‘, ‗Charming‘,
‗Imaginative‘ are most important with factor loading values of .886, .871, .859, .855, .855,
.847, .844, .718, .716, .713, .666, .643. This factor identified 95.8 % of variance and has
Cronbach alpha of 0.943. This shows that the destination has various adventurous spots in
all the three regions where daring games can be performed. The destination is honest as it
delivers for which it is famous e.g. Jammu is known as ‗city of temples‘ and when tourists
visit this region they find temple almost in every market. Similarly, Kashmir is known as
‗Switzerland of Asia‘. It is heaven on earth. Tourists find the scenic beauty of this region
awesome. Also, Ladakh is the land of Gompas and one find a Gompa at almost every
tourist spot of the region. This destination is ‗sincere‘ as the tourists are not deceived here.
The price is same for tourists as well as local people. Although at some places, bargaining
occurs but there are many fixed price shops also. The state of Jammu and Kashmir is also
‗Up to date‘ as it keeps on maintaining itself according to the present technology and
demands of the tourists. There are water facilities, telephone booths, and accommodation
facilities at few distances apart at most of the tourist destinations. Tourists also call it
‗Down to earth‘ because although it is a popular destination yet it is not so much costly
here. Both rich and poor people can avail the facilities according to their pocket e.g. one
can find accommodation in hotels like White Orchid, Hotel Asia and even in small guest
houses also.
Another destination brand personality characteristic which tourists choose for this place is
‗spirited‘. Tourists at this destination are in full spirits. They have zest for life. This place
is also called as ‗sincere‘ by tourists as the tourists are not deceived here. The price is same
for tourists as well as local people. Although at some places, bargaining occurs but there
are many fixed price shops also. This destination is giving competition to many
189
destinations all over India as well as world. The economic condition of the state is
improved due to tourism. This destination is ‗intelligent‘ also. It makes optimum use of its
tourism resources to give best results. It makes use of various strategies to increase the
tourist inflow. ‗Reliable‘ is another brand personality descriptive used for this destination
as one can trust upon it e.g. Due to the terrorism in Kashmir, tourists think that there is
terrorism in Jammu also due to which many tourists avoid visiting the state. But on coming
to the destination, they realize that it is not the case. It is safe to visit not only Jammu but
Kashmir and Ladakh also. . It makes use of various strategies to increase the tourist inflow.
Jammu and Kashmir is also ‗rugged‘ e.g. Jammu and Kashmir is famous for its Sapphire
mines which are available in the rugged terrains of Himalayan ranges. There are various
tourist destinations in this state which are located in the rugged regions e.g. Amarnath
Yatra, Shiv Khori etc. Another personality adjective which tourists associate with the
destination is ‗Charming‘. The beauty and climate of the place pleases the mind of tourists.
It gives them delight to be here at this destination. Tourists also agree to some extent in
associating brand personality characteristic ‗Imaginative‘ to this destination. Tourists find
it the right place as for as imagination is concerned. Writers, thinkers, poets find suitable
atmosphere for their creativity. Jammu and Kashmir has few of the most captivating forms
of performing arts in India that has captured the imagination of many people.
The second factor ‗ Successful‘ identified 4 variables ‗Sophisticated‘, ‗Successful‘,
‗Outdoorsy‘, ‗Wholesome‘ with factor loading values of .876, .873, .769, .636
respectively. This factor identified 4.121% of variance and has Cronbach alpha of 0.799.
Tourists associate the personality adjective ‗sophisticated‘ to this destination as the beauty
of the place appeals to the eyes of the tourists. It is rich in culture. ‗The destination Jammu
and Kashmir is a ‗successful‘ destination. Tourists from not only India but all over the
190
world come to see the beauty of the place. In 2009, about 102.6 lakhs tourists visited
Jammu, 6.1 lakhs tourists visited Kashmir and 79,000 tourists visited Ladakh. Tourists also
choose ‗Outdoorsy‘ as its destination brand personality characteristic. There are various
attractions in the area where skiing, horse riding, golfing, trekking, gondola lifting, fishing
etc. can be done. Another adjective which tourists associate with it is wholesome because
this place has something to offer for almost every type of tourist such as religious sites
(e.g. Raghunath temple, Hazrat Bal Shrine) for pilgrimage tourists, places such as Patnitop,
Sanasar for eco tourists, various heritage sites (such as Mubarak Mandi) for heritage
tourists etc.
Thus, the destination personality of Jammu and Kashmir consists of two dimensions i.e.
Sincerity and Successful.
Objective 2: To determine whether respondents could associate destination brand
personality characteristics with the three regions of Jammu and Kashmir i.e. Jammu,
Kashmir and Ladakh
Jammu- Out of total sample, Jammu constituted 33.43% of respondents.
Factor 1 i.e. Sincerity: From table 4.8, it is seen that the mean value of this factor has
come out to be 3.8291 which shows that tourists associate this characteristic to the Jammu
region of Jammu and Kashmir.
Factor 2 i.e. Successful: It is clear from the table that the mean score for the factor –
‗successful‘ is 4.334 which shows that tourists very much agree to associate this
characteristic to the Jammu region of Jammu and Kashmir.
Kashmir - Out of total sample, Kashmir constituted 33.90% of respondents.
191
Factor 1 i.e. Sincerity: From table 4.8, it is seen that the mean value of this factor has
come out to be 4.4725 which shows that tourists strongly agree in associating this
characteristic to the Kashmir region of Jammu and Kashmir.
Factor 2 i.e. Successful: It is clear from the table that the mean score for the factor –
‗successful‘ is 4.50 which shows that tourists very much agree to associate this
characteristic to the Jammu region of Jammu and Kashmir
Ladakh - Out of total sample, Ladakh constituted 33.17% of respondents.
Factor 1 i.e. Sincerity: From table 4.8, it is seen that the mean value of this factor has
come out to be 4.3889 which shows that tourists very much agree to associate this
characteristic to the Jammu region of Jammu and Kashmir.
Factor 2 i.e. Successful: It is clear from the table that the mean score for the factor –
‗successful‘ is 3.739 which shows that tourists averagely agree to associate this
characteristic to the Jammu region of Jammu and Kashmir.
Hypothesis 1 H1: There is a significant difference about the perception of
respondents on the association of destination brand personality characteristics with
the different regions of Jammu and Kashmir state under study.
A one-way ANOVA was used to test hypothesis one (H1) i.e. there is a significant
difference about the perception of respondents on the destination brand personality
characteristics associated with the three regions of Jammu and Kashmir. From the table, it
is clear that the significant level is less than 0.005 in all the variables due to which we
accept our first hypothesis which signifies that there is a significant difference about the
perception of respondents on the destination brand personality characteristics associated
192
with the three regions of Jammu and Kashmir.
Hypothesis 2 H2: More attractive the destination personality, greater is the
propensity to recommend others.
Objective 3: To examine the relationship between the destination brand personality
and intention to recommend.
Correlation was used to test Hypothesis two (H2) i.e. Greater the destination personality,
greater will be the propensity of tourists to recommend it to others. The result proved that
there is a positive correlation between destination personality and Intention to
recommend which proved our second objective. The result indicated that destination
personality was positively related to all the dimensions of intention to recommend
except one variable i.e. This is my last visit to the destination. It shows that the
predicted value of intention to recommend increases when the value of the destination
personality increases. Thus, greater the destination personality, greater will be the tourists‘
intention to recommend. That makes sense, if a destination has a positive or even excellent
personality which when perceived by tourists, then their intention to recommend will be
strong and may attract more tourists to that destination. Regression was used to find
the strength of relationship between Destination personality and intention to
recommend. The results showed that the variable - I will visit destination and also will
recommend destination to my friends and relatives scored the highest beta value (.219). The
second largest beta coefficient is- When I return home, I will positively promote the
destination as a fantastic holiday destination (0.153) followed by I will move to the
destination(0.084), I will the destination again(0.061), I will the destination more often in
near future(0.044), My overall evaluation of the destination is so powerful that I have built
the resistance to counter persuasions when faced with other holiday destination
193
offers(0.034). Thus, if the destination personality is high, then the tourists will visit
destination – Jammu and Kashmir and also will recommend destination to their friends and
relatives.
Thereby, the result is parallel with the findings of Yuksel Ekinci and Sameer Hosany
(2006) who stated a distinctive and emotionally attractive destination personality would
leverage perceived image of a place and influence tourist choice behavior. Moreover, the
result presented as Bigne, Sanchez and Sanchez (2001) stated the destination
personality would influence tourists‘ choice processes, the evaluation of that destination
and future intentions.
Objective 4: To find the personality of tourists visiting Jammu and Kashmir.
The first factor ‗Sincerity‘ comprises of 10 parameters against expected brand personality
out of total 20 (16 after refining). Variables ‗Honest‘, ‗Spirited‘, ‗Sincere‘, ‗Intelligent‘,
‗Cheerful‘, ‗Up to date‘, ‗Tough‘, ‗Wholesome‘, ‗Daring‘ and ‗Imaginative‘ are most
important with factor loading values .730, .702, .685, .636, .615, .579, .574, .564, .525,
.498 respectively. This factor identified 81.799% of variance and has Cronbach alpha of
.853.
The second factor ‗ Successful‘ identified 6 variables- ‗Charming‘, ‗Upper class‘, ‗Down
to earth‘, ‗Competent‘, ‗Rugged‘ and ‗Outdoorsy‘ with factor loading values of .734, .716,
.697, .696, .573, .453respectively. This factor identified 9.783% of variance and has
Cronbach alpha of 0.810.
Thus, the personality of tourists visiting Jammu and Kashmir consists of two dimensions
i.e. Sincerity and Successful. Thus our 4th objective is fulfilled i.e. to find the personality
of tourists visiting Jammu and Kashmir.
Hypothesis 3:
194
H3: There is a relationship between respondent‟s perception on how a holiday at
Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel and intention to recommend.
Objective 5: To find the relationship between respondents‟ perception on how a
holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel and intention to recommend
The study looked at the result of Pearson Correlation and Coefficient generated from
Bivariate Analysis to check the correlation between each of the variables of respondents‘
perception of how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel and the
variables of intention to recommend others (Table 4.21).
From table 4.21 in the study, it is clear that positive correlation exists between destination
personality and intention to recommend as the correlation value lies between 0.3 and 0.7
and all have coefficient significance value less than 0.005.
Multiple regression analysis was used to test the strength of the relationship between the
respondents‘ perception about how a holiday at Jammu and Kashmir would make them
feel and Intention to recommend. The result showed the value of R square = 0.600 which
revealed that 60% of the variance in the ‗respondents‘ perception of how a holiday at
Jammu and Kashmir would make them feel‘ can be explained by nine independent
variables (Table 4.22). This result seems to make sense that the model is quite respectable
because the value is more than the acceptance value of 0.3 or 30 percent (Tabachnick and
Fidell, 1996). Also, in table 4.22, the observed value of R=0.774 is near to 1, indicating
that the linear regression model predicts quite adequate.
The studies explored the standardized Coefficients when comparing different variables,
because it allows the convert of values for each of the different variables into the same
scale and thus compare them equally (Table 4.23). Therefore, beta values have been used
195
to compare the distribution of each independent variable. The largest beta coefficient is for
the variable- When I return home, I will positively promote the destination as a fantastic
holiday destination(0.211), I will move to the destination(0.202), followed by I will visit
destination and also will recommend destination to my friends and relatives (0.125), I will
visit the destination again(0.094), I will the destination more often in near future(0.021),
My overall evaluation of the destination is so powerful that I have built the resistance to
counter persuasions when faced with other holiday destination offers(0.017).
5.3 Discussions and conclusions
This study makes an important contribution to the understanding of destination brand
personality and intention to recommend in the context of tourism destinations. In the
literature, there are very few empirical investigations on the relationship between the two
constructs. Results indicated that destination personality and intention to recommend are
positively correlated to each other. However, despite the statistical significance of these
results, further investigations are required, given the limitation of this study to tourism
destinations. Future studies could be conducted having similar approach but in a different
context (for, e.g. retailing) to further substantiate our results.
Our study also makes important theoretical contributions to both the generic
marketing and tourism literature. Academics must pay particular attention at the
relationship between destination brand personality and intention to recommend, since,
failure to do so, will hinder research progress and result in poor conceptual developments.
The present findings of the study supported the application of Aaker‘s (1997) Brand
Personality Scale to tourism places. Previous studies focused on the applicability and
196
validity of the scale to consumer goods and across cultures, but there is a very little
research attempt to test the relevance of brand personality to tourist destinations. The study
results, however, do not fully replicate Aaker‘s (1997) five dimensional structure. Instead, in
this study, destination personality comprised of only two salient dimensions: sincerity and
successful. There is an evidence of a two versus a five dimensional which according to Caprara
et al. (2001) is that brand personalities can comprise of a small number of dimensions.
5.4 Practical Implications
From the practical point of view, the findings offer important implications for the
development of destination marketing strategies. In today‘s competitive climate,
creating and managing an appropriate destination personality has become vital in order to
make a unique identity for the destination. Destination marketers should concentrate on
developing efficient communication methods so that they can launch a distinctive and
attractive personality for their places (Batra, Donald and Singh, 1993; Levy, 1959; Plummer,
1985).
Furthermore, the findings of the study suggest that destination marketers should
concern themselves with both the destination personality and the factors which influence
intention to recommend the destination under their charge, if they are to differentiate
themselves in today‘s competitive holiday market and influence tourists‘ future intention.
In fact, destination personality was found to be positively correlated with tourists‘ intention
to recommend. Destination marketers may improve the positive impact of destination
personality on tourists‘ intention to recommend by developing strong destination
personality characteristics via destination management tactics (Yuksel Ekinci & Sameer
Hosany, 2006). Hence, destination marketers could differentiate their places based on the
personality characteristics as well as perceived images. Also, the findings offer important
197
implications for developing destination marketing strategies. The tourism industry is
increasingly facing competition with destination marketing organizations which are
competing to attract tourists. Therefore, creating and managing destination
personality (or brand personality) have become important in making it a unique
identity for the survival and success of tourist destinations.
This study provides evidence that personality traits are omnipresent in tourists‘
evaluations of tourist destinations. Different destinations could conduct studies for
identifying their own unique personality traits and then use those personality traits to
differentiate themselves from their competitors. Destination marketers should develop
promotional campaigns to emphasize the distinctive personality of their places (Plummer,
1984). In their promotion materials, advertising messages could contain the desirable
personality traits that best position the destination in the competitive markets. Different
promotional tools such as public relations, media advertising etc. can play a vital role in
creating and maintaining a destination‘s distinctive personality.
5.5 Managerial implications
Marketers should be aware of the personality their destination possess since it can in many
ways determine whether the target tourists embrace it or despise it. The personality of a
destination should correlate with the personality or desired personality of its target tourists.
For example, a destination that possesses a feminine name with masculine features might
be perceived as confusing and repelling.
It should be clear that creating a destination brand personality is not a one-way street.
Marketers must look at what they are selling, to whom, what they want, and then create a
destination personality based on that information. The destination has a personality in the
198
mind of the tourists, desired or not desired, which is expensive and time consuming
to change. Therefore, marketers should thoroughly examine what kind of personality they
want their destination to possess.
Marketers can actively control what information they send out to tourists and thereby what
brand personality this information establishes in the mind of the tourists. However, there is
also an external factor which can hurt or boost a destination personality even more and it is
media. They should have good relationship with those who have an influence over the
public opinion concerning the destination in order to take advantage of this channel
to the target audience.
5.6 Limitations and Future Research Areas
This study makes important theoretical contributions to the understanding of destination
personality and its relationship with tourists‘ intention to recommend. Nevertheless, it is
appropriate to indicate the limitations of this research which have to be taken into account
when considering the study findings. Overcoming these limitations will enable the present
work to act as a springboard for future research streams.
In this research, investigation of the relationship between destination personality and
intention to recommend was carried out at the post-consumption behavior stage.
Although statistically significant relationships were found between destination personality
and intention to recommend, the magnitude of the effects may be different at the pre-
purchase evaluation. Thus, further research should investigate whether non-visitors‘
perceptions of destination personality and its effect on post-consumption behavior are
different from that of visitors‘ perceptions.
Next, this study did not take into account the effects of tourists‘ travel motivation.
199
In fact, tourist motive have often been conceptualized in terms of push and pull factors.
(Oh, Uysal &Weaver,1995). Some studies have found that ‗push‘ factors have a direct
positive effect on behavioral intentions (Yoon and Uysal, 2005). Thus travel motivations
may influence the magnitude of destination personality impact on intention to recommend.
Accordingly, future research should replicate the study under different travel
motivations.
Moreover, People may travel because they want to experience something new and different
(Echtner and Ritchie, 1993). Therefore, the ―exploratory intention‖ might exist and
compared with intention to visit again and willingness to recommend, exploratory
intention perhaps can explain the destination decision even more. Despite a wonderful travel
experience can increase one‘s satisfaction and intention to return, ―exploratory intention‖
also stimulates people to visit another destination by the same way to fulfill the desire of next
travel.
In this study, destination personality was measured using Aaker‘s (1997) Brand
Personality Scale, which was originally developed to measure brand personality in
consumer good settings. As a result, personality traits used in this study might not
reflect the full gamut of personality traits associated with destinations. To provide a
comprehensive picture of the destination personality construct, future research could use
qualitative research in the forms of focus groups or projective techniques to elicit
destination specific personality characteristics. For example, participants could be shown
videos of holiday destinations as a stimulus and then be asked to generate a list of personality
traits that can be attributed to that destination. This would in turn contribute to refine the
destination personality scale validated in this study and it might also enable possible
200
comparisons with our findings.
Finally, the sample size is small and specific to only one state. As a result, the findings
cannot be generalized to the wider tourist population. Despite these limitations, it seems
beyond doubt that the study described in this paper make important theoretical and
empirical contributions to our understanding of the contentious relationship between
destination brand personality and intention to recommend. Further, investigations along the
same lines will certainly contribute to the debate.
While most studies to date have been limited to comparing, classifying, and evaluating
destinations on the basis of their perceived images only, differentiation based on personality
traits has, as yet, been under-explored. Destination marketers could differentiate their places
based on the personality characteristics over and above perceived images. Thus, one area of
future research would be the positioning of tourism destinations using the personality
dimensions found in this study.
Future research can also investigate the influence of destination personality on tourists‘ other
post-purchase evaluations, such as satisfaction, perceived quality, and intention to switch.
5.7 Summary
In response to preceding discussions on destination personality and intention to recommend,
the researcher proposed that the effect of destination personality on intention to
recommend is higher when tourism destinations are perceived to have a stronger
personality. Most of researches paid more attention on the study to explore the relationship of
destination image and tourists‘ decision making rather than the inter-relationship on
destination personality, tourists‘ future intention. Therefore, this study may enable
destination marketers to have a good idea on how to build an effective and efficient
201
destination personality as well as a strong destination personality.
202
References
Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research,
34(3), 347-356.
Batra, R., Lehmann, D., & Singh, D. (1993). The Brand Personality Component of Brand
Goodwill: Some Antecedents and Consequences. In Aaker & Biel (Eds.), Brand Equity &
Advertising: Advertising’s Role in Building Strong Brands (pp. 83-95). Hillsdale:
Lawrence Earlbaum Associates Publisher.
Bigne, J.E., Sanchez, M.I. and Sanchez, J.(2001). Tourism Image, Evaluation Variables
and After Purchase Behaviour: Inter-relationship. Tourism Management, 22(6), 607-616.
Caprara, G.V., Barbaranelli, C. and Guido, G. (2001).Brand personality: how to make the
metaphor fit? Journal of Economic Psychology, 22, 377-95.
Echtner, C. M. & Ritchie, J.R.B. (1993). The measurement of destination image: An
empirical assessment. Journal of Travel Research, 31(4), 3–13.
Ekinci, Y., & Hosany, S. (2006). Destination personality: An application of brand
personality to tourism destinations. Journal of Travel Research, 45(2), 127-139.
Levy, S.J. (1959). Symbols for sale. Harvard Business Review, 37(July-August), 117-24.
Oh, H., Uysal, M., & Weaver, P. (1995). Product Bundles and Market Segments Based on
Travel Motivations: A Canonical Correlation Approach. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 14(2), 123-137.
Plummer, J. T. (1984).How Personality Makes a Difference. Journal of Advertising
Research, 24(6), 27-31.
203
Plummer, J. T. (1985). Brand personality: a strategic concept for multinational advertising.
Paper Presented at Marketing Educators' Conference. New York: Young & Rubicam, 1-31.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (3rd Ed.). NY:
Harper Collins.
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.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
205
References:
Books:
Aaker, D. A. (1991). Managing brand equity. New York: The Free Press.
Aaker, D. & Joachimsthaler, E. (2000). Brand Leadership. New York: Free Press.
Anderson, J. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge MA:Harvard University
Press.
Ashcraft, M. H. (2002). Cognition (3rd Edition). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Belch, G and Belch, A (2001). Advertising and Promotion: An Integrated Marketing
Communication Perspective (Fifth Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Berg, B.L. (2004). Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences (5th Edition).
Boston: Pearson Education, Inc
Biel, A. (1993). Converting Image into Equity. In D. A. Aaker & A. Biel (Eds.), Brand
Equity and Advertising (pp. 67-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic Interactionism; Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs,
N.J: Prentice-Hall.
Brassington, F. and Pettitt, S. (2000). Principles of Marketing (2nd Ed.). Harlow: Prentice
Hall.
Britt, S. H. (1968). Consumer Behavior and the Behavioral Sciences; Theories and
Applications. New York: Wiley.
Callebaut, J. M., Janssens, D., Beeck, O., Lorre, D. and Hendricks, H. (1999).
Motivational Marketing Research Revisited. Leuven: Garant.
Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the
Behavioral Sciences (2nd Ed.). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
206
Cooper, C., Fletcher, J., Gilbert, D., Shepherd, R., & Wanhill, S. (1998). Tourism
Principles and Practice (2nd
Ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Craig, C.S., & Douglas, S.P. (2005). International marketing research. Chichester: John
Wiley & Sons.
Fowler, F. J. (1984). Survey Research Methods, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., & Black, W.C. (1995). Multivariate Data
Analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Keller, K. L. (1998). Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring and Managing
Brand Equity. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Prentice Hall.
Kotler, P., & G. Armstrong. (2001) Principles of marketing. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Morrison, A. M. (1996). Hospitaliy and Travel Marketing (Second Edition). U.S.A:
Thomson Publishing Inc.
Murphy, J. M. (1993). Branding: A Key Marketing Tool (2nd
Ed.). London: The MacMillan
press Ltd.
Murphy, K.R. and Davidshofer, C.O. (1998). Psychological Testing: Principles and
Applications (4th Edition). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Nilson, T. H. (1998). Competitive Branding. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Noe, F. (1999) Tourist Service Satisfaction. Champaign Illinois: Sagamore.
Nunnally, J C & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3rd Ed.). New York:
McGraw- Hill.
Ogilvy, D. (1983). Ogilvy on Advertising (1st American Ed.). New York: Crown.
207
Onkvisit, S., & Shaw, J.J. (2009). International Marketing : Strategy and Theory(5th
Edition). Abingdon: Routledge.
Pizam, A., & Mansfeld, Y. (1999). Consumer behavior in travel and tourism. New York:
Haworth Hospitality Press.
Sirgy, M. J., Johar, J. S., & Claiborne, C. B. (1992). Self-Concept Motivation as Mediator
Between Self-Congruity and Attitude/intention In V. L. Crittenden (Ed.), Developments in
Marketing Science (pp. 402-406). Chestnut Hill, MA: Academy of Marketing Science.
Smit, E. G., Berger, E. V. D., & Franzen, G. (2003). Brands Are Just Like Real People!
The Development of SWOCC's Brand Personality Scale. In F. Hansen & L. B. Christensen
(Eds.), Branding and Advertising (pp. 22-43). Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School
Press.
Stevens, J. (2002). Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences (4th Ed.).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wells, W., Moriarty, S. and Burnett, J. (2006). Advertising Principles and Practice(7th
Ed.). NJ: Prentice Hall.
Wileman, A., and M. Jary.(1997). Retail power plays: from trading to brand leadership.
New York: New York University Press.
208
Research articles
Aaker, D. A. (1992). The value of brand equity. Journal of Business Strategy, 13(4), 27-
32.
Aaker, D. A. (1996). Measuring brand equity across products and markets. California
Management Review, 38(3), 102-120.
Aaker, J.L., Fournier, S.S., & Brasel, S.A.(2004). When good brands do bad. Journal of
Consumer Research, 31, 127–139.
Abdullah, M., Al-Nasser, A., & Husain, N. (2000) .Evaluating functional relationship
between image, customer satisfaction and customer loyalty using general maximum
entropy. Total Quality Management, 11(4/5&6), 2000.
Ahmed, Z. U. (1996) .The need for the identification of the constituents of a destination‘s
tourist image: A promotion segmentation perspective. Journal of Professional Services
Marketing, 14, 37-60.
Ailawadi, K.L., and Keller, K.L. (2004). Understanding retail branding: conceptual
insights and research priorities. Journal of Retailing, 80, 331–342.
Ajzen, I. (2000) .Nature and operation of attitudes. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 27-
58.
Albarracin, D., Johnson, B. T., Fishbein, M., & Muellerleile, P. A. (2001). Theories of
reasoned action and planned behavior as models of condom use: A meta-analysis.
Psychological Bulletin, 127, 142-61.
Alexander, N., and Colgate, M. (2005). Customers‘ responses to retail brand extensions.
Journal of Marketing Management, 21 ,393–419.
Allison, R. I., & Uhl, K. P. (1964). Brand Identification and Perception. Journal of
Marketing Research, 1 (August), 80–85.
209
Alvarez-Ortiz, C., & Harris, J. (2002). Assessifng the Structure of Brand Personality
among Global and Local Mexican Brands. Paper presented at the American Marketing
Association Educators' Conference: Enhancing Knowledge Development in Marketing,
Chicago, Illinois.
Arora, R. & Stoner, C. (2009). A Mixed Method Approach to Understanding Brand
Personality. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 18 (4), 272–283.
Auger, P., Devinney, T., Louviere, J.(2007). Using best-worst scaling methodology to
investigate consumer ethical beliefs across countries. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(3),
299- 326.
Azoulay, A., & Kapferer, J.N. (2003). Do Brand Personality Scales Really Measure Brand
Personality? Journal of Brand Management, 11(2), 143-155.
Babin, B.J., Chebat, J.C., and Michon, R. (2004). Perceived Appropriateness and Its Effect
on Quality, Affect and Behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 11,287-298
Back, K.J. (2005). The Effects of Image Congruence on Customers' Brand Loyalty in the
Upper Middle-Class Hotel Industry. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 29(4),
448-467.
Backman, S.J., & Crompton, J.L. (1991). The usefulness of selected variables for
predicting activity loyalty. Leisure Sciences, 13, 205–20.
Backman, S.J. & Veldkamp, C. (1995) .Examination of the relationship between service
quality and user loyalty. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 13(2), 29–41.
Baloglu, S. (2001) .An investigation of a loyalty typology and the multidestination loyalty
of international travelers. Tourism Analysis, 6(1), 41-52.
210
Baloglu, S., & Mangaloglu, M. (2001) Tourism destination images of Turkey, Egypt,
Greece, and Italy as perceived by US-based tour operators and travel agents. Tourism
Management, 22, 1-9.
Baloglu, S., & McCleary, K. W. (1999) U.S. international pleasure travelers' images of
four Mediterranean destinations: A comparison of visitors and nonvisitors. Journal of
Travel Research, 38, 144-52.
Bauer, H., R. Mader, and T. Keller. (2000). An investigation of the brand personality
scale: assessment of validity and implications with regard to brand policy in European
cultural domains. In Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science Multicultural
Conference, Kowloon, Hong Kong: Academy of Marketing Science.
Bauer, H., Sauer, N. E., & Becker, C. (2006). Investigating the Relationship between
Product Involvement and Consumer Decision-Making Styles. Journal of Consumer
Behaviour, 5(4), 342-354.
Beerli, A., Meneses, G. D., & Gil, S. M. (2007). Self-Congruity and Destination Choice.
Annals of Tourism Research, 34(3), 571-587.
Belen del Rio, A.,Vazquez, R. & Iglesias, V. (2001). The Effects of Brand Associations on
Consumer Response. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(5), 410-425.
Belk, R. (1996). Hyperreality and Globalisation: Culture in the Age of Ronald McDonald.
Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 8(3), 23-37.
Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the Extended Self. The Journal of Consumer
Research,15(2), 139-168.
Belk, R. W., Bahn, K. D., & Mayer, R. N. (1982). Developmental Recognition of
Consumption Symbolism. The Journal of Consumer Research, 9(1), 4-17.
211
Bellenger, D. N., Steinberg, E., & Stanton, W. W. (1976). The Congruence of Store Image
and Self Image. Journal of Retailing, 52(1), 17-32.
Bigne, J.E. and Andreu, L. (2004). Emotions in Segmentation: An Empirical Study.
Annals of Tourism Research, 31 (3), 682-696.
Birdwell, A. E. (1968). A Study of the Influence of Image Congruence on Consumer
Choice. The Journal of Business, 41(1), 76-88.
Biswas, A. (1992).The moderating role of brand familiarity in reference price perceptions.
Journal of Business Research, 25, 251-62.
Bloch, P. H. (1981). An Exploration into the Scaling of Consumers' Involvement with a
Product Class. In K. B. Monroe (Ed.), Advances in Consumer Research (Vol. 8, pp. 61-
65). Ann Abor: Association for Consumer Research.
Bloemer, J., & Ruyter, K. (1998). On the relationship between store image, store
satisfaction and store loyalty. European Journal of Marketing, 32(5/6), 499-513.
Blythe, J. (2007). Advertising Creatives and Brand Personality: A Grounded Theory
Perspective. Journal of Brand Management.14, 284–294.
Bosnjak, M., Bratko, D., Galesic, M., & Tuten, T. (2007). Consumer Personality and
Individual Differences: Revitalizing a Temporarily Abandoned Field. Journal of Business
Research, 60(6), 587-589.
Boyle, E. (2003). A study of entrepreneurial brand building in the manufacturing sector in the
UK. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 12 (2), 79-93
Boyer, P. (1996) What Makes Anthropomorphism Natural: Intuitive Ontology and Cultural
Representations. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 2(1), 83-97.
Brïdson, K., & Evans, J. (2004). The Secret to a Fashion Advantage Is Brand Orientation.
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 32(8), 403-411.
212
Brislin, R. W.(1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research.Journal of Cross
Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185-216.
Broniarczyck, S., & Alba, J. (1994). The Importance of the Brand in Brand Extensions.
Journal of Marketing Research, 31, 229-42.
Burt, S., and L. Sparks.(2002). Corporate branding, retailing, and retail
internationalization. Corporate Reputation Review, 5(2/3), 194–212.
Cai, L., Wu, B., & Bai, X. (2004) Destination Image and Loyalty. Tourism Review
International, 7(3/4), 153-62.
Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., & Guido, G. (1997). Personality as Metaphor: Extension
of the Psycholexical Hypothesis and the Five Factor Model to Brand and Product
Personality Description. European Advances in Consumer Research, 3, 61-69.
Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., & Guido, G. (2001). Brand Personality: How to Make the
Metaphor Fit? Journal of Economic Psychology, 22(3), 377-395.
Chao, P. & Rajendran, K. N. (1993). Consumer Profiles and Perceptions: Country-of-
Origin Effects. International Marketing Review, 10(2), 22-39.
Chen, J. and Uysal, M. (2002). Market positioning analysis: a hybrid approach.Annals of
Tourism Research, 29 (4), 987-1003.
Childres, L. T., Carr, L. C., Peck, J. and Carson, S. (2001). Hedonic and Utilitarian
Motivations for Online Retail Shopping Behaviour. Journal of Retailing, 77, 511-535.
Choi, W.M., Chan, A. and Wu, J. (1999). A qualitative and quantitative assessment of
Hong Kong‘s image as a tourist destination. Tourism Management, 20, 361-365.
Chon, K. S. and Olsen, M. D. (1991). Functional and Symbolic Congruity Approaches to
Consumer Satisfaction / Dissatisfaction in Tourism. Journal of International Academy of
Hospitality Research, 28 (3), 1-11.
213
Chon, K.S. (1992). Self Image/Destination Image Congruity. Annals of Tourism Research,
19, 360.
Cobb-Walgren, C. J., Beal, C., Donthu, N. (1995). Brand equity, brand preferences, and
purchase intent. Journal of Advertising, 24(3), 25-40.
Cohen, E. (2009). Applying best-worst scaling to wine marketing. International Journal of
Wine Business Research, 21(1), 8 - 23
Cohen, J. B., Fishbein, M., & Athola, O. T. (1972). The Nature and Uses of Expectancy –
Value Models in Consumer Attitude Research. Journal of Marketing Research, 9, 456 –
460.
Costa, P.T., and McCrae, R.R.( 1995). Domains and facets: hierarchical personality
assessment using the revised NEO personality inventory. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 64( 1), 1–50.
Craig, C S & Douglas, S. P. (2005). International Marketing Research (3rd Ed.).
Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
Crompton, J. (1992). Structure of Vacation Destination Choice Sets. Annals of Tourism
Research, 19(3), 420-34.
Crompton, J. L. (1979). Motivations for pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research,
6(4), 408-424.
Crotts, J. C. (1993). Personality Correlates of the Novelty Seeking Drive. Journal of
Hospitality & Leisure Marketing, 1(3), 7-29.
D‘Astous, A., & Le‘vesque, M. (2003). A scale for measuring store personality.
Psychology & Marketing, 20(5), 455–469.
214
D‘Astous, A., Boujbel, L.(2007). Positioning countries on personality dimensions: scale
development and implications for country marketing. Journal of Business Research, 60(3),
231-239.
Daly, T. M., Lee, J. A., Soutar, G. N., Rasmi, S.(2010). Conflict-handling style
measurement: A best-worst scaling application. International Journal of Conflict
Management, 21(3), 281-308.
Dann, G. (1996). Tourist images of a destination: An alternative analysis. Journal of
Hospitality and Leisure Marketing, 3(2), 25-34.
Darden, W., & Babin, B.J.(1994). Exploring the concept of affective quality: expanding
the concept of retail personality. Journal of Business Research, 29, 101-109.
Davies, G., Chun, R., Silva, R. V., & Roper, S. (2001). The Personification Metaphor as a
Measurement Approach for Corporate Reputation. Corporate Reputation Review, 4(2),
113-127.
Day, G. S. (1969). A two dimensional concept of brand loyalty. Journal of Advertising
Research, 9, 29-35.
De Mooij, M., & Hofstede, G. (2010). ―The Hofstede Model: Applications to Global
Branding and Advertising Strategy and Research. International Journal of Advertising,
29(1), 85-110.
Decrop, A. (2007). The Influence of Message Format on the Effectiveness of Print
Advertisements for Tourism Destinations. International Journal of Advertising, 26 (4),
505-525.
Decrop, A. & Snelder, D. (2005). A Grounded Typology of Vacation Decision Making.
Tourism Management, 26,121-132.
215
Dennis, C., Murphy, J., Marsland, D., Cockett, T., & Patel, T.(2002). Measuring image:
shopping centre case studies. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and
Consumer Research 12(4), 355–373.
Dick, A. S., & Basu, K. (1994). Customer loyalty: Toward an integrated framework.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 22 (2), 99–113.
Digman, John M. (1990). Personality Structure: Emergence of the Five-Factor Model.
Annual Review of Psychology, 41 (1), 417-40.
Dimanche, F., Havitz, M. E., & Howard, D. R. (1991). Testing the Involvement Profile
(IP) Scale in the Context of Selected Recreational and Touristic Activities. Journal of
Leisure Research, 23(1), 51-66.
Dobni, D. and Zinkhan, G.M. (1990). In search of brand image: a foundation analysis.
Advances in Consumer Research, 17, 110-119.
Dolich, I. J. (1969). Congruence Relationships between Self Images and Product Brands.
Journal of Marketing Research, 6(1), 80-84.
Dornoff, R. J., & Tatham, R. L. (1972). Congruence between Personal Image and Store
Image. Journal of the Market Research Society, 14(1), 45-52.
Durgee J.F. (1988). Understanding brand personality. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 5,
21-25.
Echtner, C. M., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (1991). The meaning and measurement of destination
image. Journal of Tourism Studies, 2, 2-12.
Echtner, C. M., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (1993). The measurement of destination image: An
empirical assessment. Journal of Travel Research, 31, 3-13.
Ekinci, Y. (2003). From Destination Image to Destination Branding: An Emerging Area of
Research. e-Review of Tourism Research (eRTR), 1(2), 21-24.
216
Ekinci, Y. (2003). Which Comparison Standard Should be Used for Service Quality and
Customer Satisfaction?.Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality and Tourism, 4 (3/4),
61-66.
Ekinci, Y., & Riley, M. (2003). An Investigation of Self-Concept: Actual and Ideal Self-
Congruence Compared in the Context of Service Evaluation. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, 10(4), 201-214.
Ekinci, Y., Dawes, P. L., & Massey, G. R. (2008). An Extended Model of the Antecedents
and Consequences of Consumer Satisfaction for Hospitality Services. European Journal of
Marketing, 42(1/2), 35-68.
Ekinci, Y., Sirakaya-Turk, E., & Baloglu, S. (2007). Host Image and Destination
Personality Tourism Analysis, 12(5/6), 433-446.
Ericksen, M. K. (1996). Using Self-Congruity and Ideal Congruity to Predict Purchase
Intention: A European Perspective. Journal of Euro - Marketing, 6(1), 41-56.
Ferrandi, J.M., Valette-Florence,P., & Fine-Falcy,S. (2000). Aaker‘s brand personality
scale in a French context: a replication and a preliminary test of its validity. Developments
in Marketing Science 23, 7–13.
Foscht,T., Maloles III, C., Swoboda, B., Morschett, D., & Sinha, I. (2008). The Impact of
Culture on Brand Perceptions: A Six-Nation Study. Journal of Product & Brand
Management, 17(3), 131-142.
Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: developing relationship theory in
consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 343–373.
Freling, T. H., & Forbes, L. P. (2005). An Examination of Brand Personality through
Methodological Triangulation. The Journal of Brand Management, 13, 148-162.
217
Funder, D.C. (1991). Global traits: a neo-Allportian approach to personality.Psychology
Science, 2, 31–39.
Gabbott, M., & Hogg, G. (1999). Consumer Involvement in Services: A Replication and
Extension. Journal of Business Research, 46(2), 159-166.
Gallarza, M. G., Saura, I. G., & Garcia, H. C. (2002). Destination image: Towards a
conceptual framework. Annals of Tourism Research, 29, 56-78.
Gardner, B. B. & Levy, S. J. (1955). The product and the brand. Harvard Business Review,
33, 33–39.
Gartner, W.C. (1993). Image formation process. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing,
2, 191-216.
Garton, P. (1995). Store loyal? A view of ‗differential congruence‘. International Journal
of Retail & Distribution Management, 23(12), 29–35.
Gibson, H. and Yiannakis, A. (2002). Tourist Roles: Needs and Lifecourse. Annals of
Tourism Research, 29, 358-383.
Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An Alternative Description of Personality: The Big-Five Factor
Structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59 (6), 1216-1229.
Goodrich, J. N. (1978). The Relationship between Preferences for and Perceptions of
Vacation Destinations: Application of a Choice Model. Journal of Travel Research, 17(1),
8-13.
Gountas, J. & Gountas, S. (2007). Personality Orientations, Emotional States, Customer
Satisfaction, and Intention to Repurchase. Journal of Business Research, 60(1), 72-75.
Govers, P.C.M. and Schoormans, J.P.L. (2005). Product Personality and its Influence on
Consumer Preference. The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22(4/5), 189-97.
218
Graeff, T. R. (1997). Consumption Situations and the Effects of Brand Image on
Consumers' Brand Evaluations. Psychology & Marketing, 14(1), 49-70.
Green, P. E., Maheshwari, A., & Rao, V. R. (1969). Self-Concept and Brand Preference:
An Empirical Application of Multidimensional Scaling. Journal of the Market Research
Society, 11(4), 343-360.
Gronroos, C. (1994). From marketing mix to relationship marketing: Towards a paradigm
shift in marketing. Asia-Australia Marketing Journal, 2 (1), 9-29.
Gross, M. J., & Brown, G. (2006). Tourism Experiences in a Lifestyle Destination Setting:
The Roles of Involvement and Place Attachment. Journal of Business Research, 59(6),
696-700.
Grubb, E. L., & Grathwohl, H. L. (1967). Consumer Self-Concept, Symbolism and Market
Behavior: A Theoretical Approach. Journal of Marketing, 31(4), 22-27.
Grubb, E. L., & Hupp, G. (1968). Perception of Self, Generalized Stereotypes, and Brand
Selection. Journal of Marketing Research, 5(1), 58-63.
Gursoy, D., & Gavcar, E. (2003). International Leisure Tourists' Involvement Profile.
Annals of Tourism Research, 30(4), 906.
Ha, C. L. (1998). The Theory of Reasoned Action Applied to Brand Loyalty. Journal of
Product and Brand Management, 7 (1), 51 – 57.
Hamm, B. C., & Cundiff, E. W. (1969). Self-Actualization and Product Perception.
Journal of Marketing Research, 6(4), 470-472.
Hankinson, G. (2004). The Brand Images of Tourism Destinations: A Study of the Silency
of Organic Images. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 13 (1), 6-14.
Havitz, M. E., & Dimanche, F. (1990). Propositions for Testing the Involvement Construct
in Recreational and Tourism Contexts. Leisure Sciences, 12, 179-195.
219
Havitz, M. E., & Dimanche, F. (1997). Leisure Involvement Revisited: Conceptual
Conundrums and Measurement Advances. Journal of Leisure Research, 29(3), 245-278.
Helgeson, J. G., & Supphellen, M. (2004). A Conceptual and Measurement Comparison of
Self-Congruity and Brand Personality: The Impact of Socially Desirable Responding.
International Journal of Market Research, 46(2), 205-233.
Henderson, J. (2000). Selling Places: The New Asia-Singapore Brand. The Journal of
Tourism Studies, 11(1), 36-44.
Hogg, M. K., Cox, A. J., & Keeling, K. (2000). The Impact of Self-Monitoring on Image
Congruence and Productbrand Evaluation. European Journal of Marketing, 34, 641-667.
Heslop, L. A. & Papadopoulos, N. (1993). But Who Knows Where or When? Reflections
on the Images of Countries and Their Products. In N. Papadopoulos & L. A. Heslop (Eds.),
Product-Country Images: Impact and Role in International Marketing (pp. 39- 75). New
York: International Business Press.
Heslop, L. A., Papadopoulos, N., Dowdles, M., Wall, M., & Compeau, D. (2004). Who
Controls the Purse Strings: A Study of Consumers' and Retail Buyers' Reactions in an
America's FTA Environment. Journal of Business Research, 57(10), 1177-1188.
Hoe, S. J. (2008). Issues and Procedures in Adopting Structural Equation Modeling
Technique. Journal of Applied Quantitative Methods, 3 (1), 76-83.
Hoeffler S, Keller K. L. (2002) Building brand equity through corporate societal
marketing. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 21 (1), 78-89.
Hoelter, D. R.(1983). The Analysis of Covariance Structures: Goodness-of-Fit Indices.
Sociological Methods and Research, 11, 325-344.
220
Hong, J. W. & Zinkhan, G. M. (1995). Self-concept and Advertising Effectiveness: The
Influence of Congruence, Conspiciousness and Response Mode. Psychology & Marketing,
12, 53-77.
Hong, S., Kim, J., Jang, H., & Lee, S. (2006). The Role of Categorization, Affective Image
and Constraints on Destination Choice: An Application of the NMNL Model. Tourism
Management, 27, 750 - 761.
Hosany, S. and Ekinci, Y. (2003). An Application of the Brand Personality Scale into
Tourist Destinations: Can Destinations be Branded? In Proceedings of the 34th
Annual
Travel and Tourism Research Association Conference, St Louise, USA.
Hunt, J. D. (1975). Image as a Factor in Tourism Development. Journal of Travel
Research, 13(3), 1-7.
Hwang, S.N., Lee, C., & Chen, H.J. (2005). The Relationship among Tourists'
Involvement, Place Attachment and Interpretation Satisfaction in Taiwan's National Parks.
Tourism Management, 26(2), 143-156.
Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1982). Toward a Social Psychological Theory of Tourism Motivation: A
Rejoinder. Annals of Tourism Research, 9(2), 256-262.
Iwasaki, Y. & Havitz, M.E. (1998). A path analytic model of the relationships between
involvement, psychological commitment and loyalty. Journal of Leisure Research, 30(2),
256–280.
Jamal, A., & Goode, M. H. (2001). Consumers and Brands: A Study of the Impact of Self-
Image Congruence on Brand Preference and Satisfaction. Marketing Intelligence &
Planning, 19, 482-492.
Jamrozy, U., Backman, S. J., & Backman, K. F. (1996). Involvement and Opinion
Leadership in Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 23(4), 908-924.
221
Javalgi, R. G., Thomas, E. G., & Rao, S. R. (1992). US Pleasure Travellers' Perceptions of
Selected European Destinations. European Journal of Marketing, 26(7), 45-64.
Kale,S.(1991).Culture-specific Marketing Communications: An Analytical Approach.
International Marketing Review, 8(2), 18-30.
Kassarjian, H. H. (1971). Personality and Consumer Behavior: A Review. Journal of
Marketing Research, 8(4), 409-418.
Kastenholz, E. (2004). Assessment and Role of Destination-Self-Congruity. Annals of
Tourism Research, 31(3), 719-723.
Keaveney, S., and K. Hunt. (1992). Conceptualization and operationalization of retail store
image. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 20(2), 165–175.
Keller, K Aaker, D. A.(1992) The effects of sequential introduction of brand extensions.
Journal of Marketing Research, 29 (1), 35-50.
Keller, K. (1999). Managing brands for the long run: Brand enforcement and revitalization
strategies. California Management Review, 41(3), 102-24.
Keller, K. (2001).Brand research imperatives. Brand Management, 9(1), 4-6.
Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, Measuring, Managing Customer-Based Brand
Equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1-22.
Keller, K.L. (2003). Brand synthesis: the multidimensionality of brand knowledge. Journal
of Consumer Research 29, 595–600.
Kim, C. K., Han, D., & Park, S.B. (2001). The Effect of Brand Personality and Brand
Identification on Brand Loyalty: Applying the Theory of Social Identification. Japanese
Psychological Research, 43(4), 195-206.
Kim, H.S. (2000). Examination of Brand Personality and brand Attitude within the
Apparel Product Category. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 4(3), 243-252.
222
Kneesel, E., Baloglu, S., Millar, M.(2010). Gaming destination images: Implications for
branding. Journal of Travel Research, 49(1), 68-78.
Knight, G. A. & Calantone, R. J. (2000). A Flexible Model of Consumer Country-of-
Origin Perceptions. International Marketing Review, 17(2), 127-145.
Knox, S. & Walker, D. (2001). Measuring and managing brand loyalty. Journal of
Strategic Marketing, 9, 111–28.
Konecnik, M., & Gartner, W. C. (2007). Customer-based brand equity for a destination.
Annals of Tourism Research, 34(2), 400–421
Kotler, P. & Gertner, D. (2002). Country as Brand, Product, and Beyond: A Place
Marketing and Brand Management Perspective. Journal of Brand Management, 9(4-5),
249-261.
Kozak, M. Huan T., & Beaman, J. (2002). A systematic approach to non-repeat and repeat
travel: with measurement and destination loyalty concept implications. Journal of Travel
& Tourism Marketing, 12(4), 19-38.
Kressmann, F., Sirgy, M.J., Herrmann, A., Huber, F., Huber, S., & Lee,D.J. (2006).
Direct and indirect effects of self-image congruence on brand loyalty. Journal of Business
Research, 59, 955– 964.
Krugman, H. E. (1965). The Impact of Television Advertising: Learning Without
Involvement. Public Opinion Quarterly, 29(3), 349-356.
Krugman, H. E.(1966). The Measurement of Advertising Involvement. Public Opinion
Quarterly, 30(4), 583-596.
Ksatenholz, E. (2004). Assessment and Role of Destination-Self-Congruity. Annals of
Tourism Research, 31(3), 719-723.
223
Landon, E. L. (1974). Self-Concept, Ideal Self-Concept and Consumer Purchase
Intentions. Journal of Consumer Research, 1(September), 44-51.
Landon, E. L., Jr. (1974). Self Concept, Ideal Self Concept, and Consumer Purchase
Intentions. The Journal of Consumer Research, 1(2), 44-51.
Laroche, M., Papadopoulos, N., Heslop, L. A., & Mourali, M. (2005). The Influence of
Country Image Structure on Consumer Evaluations of Foreign Products. International
Marketing Review, 22(1), 96-115.
Lee, D. & Ganesh, G. (1999). Effects of Partitioned Country Image in the Context of
Brand Image and Familiarity. International Marketing Review, 16(1), 18-39.
Lee, J. A., Soutar, G. N., Louviere, J. J.(2008). The best-worst scaling approach: an
alternative to Schwartz‘s values survey. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90(4), 335-
347.
Lee, T., & Crompton, J. L. (1992). Measuring novelty seeking in tourism. Annals of
Tourism Research, 19, 732-51.
Lee, W.N., Yun, T., & Lee, B.K. (2005). The Role of Involvement in Country-of-Origin
Effects on Product Evaluation: Situational and Enduring Involvement. Journal of
International Consumer Marketing, 17(2/3), 51-72.
Leisen, B. (2001). Image Segmentation: The Case of Tourism Destination. Journal of
Services Marketing, 15 (1), 49-66.
Lim, K. and O‘Cass, A. (2001).Consumer brand classifications: an assessment of
culture-of-origin versus country-of-origin. Journal of Product & Brand Management,
10(2), 120-36.
Lindquist, J.D. (1974). Meaning of image. Journal of Retailing, 50, 4, 29–38.
224
Litvin, S. W. and Kar, G. H. (2003). Individualism / Collectivism as a Moderating Factor
to the Self-image Congruity. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 10 (1), 23-32.
Litvin, S. W., Goh, H. K., & Goldsmith, R. E. (2001). Travel Innovativeness and Self-
Image Congruity. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 10(4), 33-45.
Long-Yi, L., & Chun-Shuo, C. (2006). The Influence of the Country-Of-Origin Image,
Product Knowledge and Product Involvement on Consumer Purchase Decisions: An
Empirical Study of Insurance and Catering Services in Taiwan. Journal of Consumer
Marketing, 23(4/5), 248-265.
Low, G.S. and Lamb, C.W. (2000).The measurement and dimensionality of brand
associations. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 9 (6), 350-368.
McCrae, R.R., & Paul, T.C.(1987).Validation of the Five-Factor Model of Personality
Across Instruments and Observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81-90.
MacInnis, D. J., & Jaworski, B. J. (1989). Information Processing from Advertisements:
Toward and Integrative Framework. Journal of Marketing, 53, 1-23.
Mackay, K. J. & Fesenmaier, D. R. (1997). Pictorial Element of Destination in Image
Formation. Annals of Tourism Research, 24 (3), 537 – 565.
Mackay, K.J. and Fesenmaier, D.R. (2000).An exploration of cross-cultural destination
image assessment. Journal of Travel Research, 38, 417-23.
Mackay, K. J. and Smith, M. C. (2006). Destination Advertising: Age and Format Effects
on Memory. Annals of Tourism Research, 33 (1), 7-24.
Magin, S., Algesheimer, Huber, F., & Herrmann, A. (2003). The Impact of Brand
Personality and Customer Satisfaction on Customer's Loyalty: Theoretical Approach and
Findings of a Causal Analytical Study in the Sector of Internet Service Providers.
Electronic Markets, 13(4), 294 - 308.
225
Malhotra, N. K. (1988). Self Concept and Product Choice: An Integrated Perspective.
Journal of Economic Psychology, 9, 1-28.
Mansfield, Y. (1992). From Motivation to Actual Travel. Annals of Tourism Research, 19,
399-419.
Markwick, M. (2001). Postcard from Malta: Image, Consumption, Context. Annals of
Tourism Research, 28 (2), 417 – 438.
Marley, A. A. J., Louviere, J. J.(2005). Some probabilistic models of best, worst, and best
worst choices. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 49(6), 464-80.
Martin, W. S., & Bellizzi, J. (1982). An Analysis of Congruous Relationships between
Self-Images and Product Images. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 10(4),
473-489.
Martineau, P. (1958). The Personality of the Retail Store. Harvard Business Review, 36(1),
47-55.
Martinez, E. and Pina, J.A. (2003).The negative impact of brand extensions on parent
brand image. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 12 (7), 432 – 448.
Mattila, A. S. (1999). Do Emotional Appeals Work for Services? International Journal of
Service Industry Management, 10 (3), 292-306.
Matzler, K., Bidmon S., & Grabner-Kruater, S. (2006). Individual determinants of brand
affect: the role of the personality traits of extraversion and openness to experience.
Journal of Product & Brand Management. 15 (7), 427-434.
Meenaghan, T. (1995). The role of advertising in brand image development. Journal of
Product & Brand Management, 4 (4), 23-34.
Milas, G., & Mlacic, B. (2007). Brand Personality and Human Personality: Findings from
Ratings of Familiar Croatian Brands. Journal of Business Research, 60(6), 620-626.
226
Milman, A., & Pizam, A. (1995). The role of awareness and familiarity with a destination:
the Central Florida case. Journal of Travel Research, 33(3), 21-27.
Milman, A., & Pizam, A. (1995). The Role of Awareness and Familiarity with a
Destination: The Central Florida Case. Journal of Travel Research, 33(3), 21-27.
Miniard, P. W., Bhatla, S., & Rose, R. L. (1990). On the Formation and Relationship of Ad
and Brand Attitudes: An Experimental and Casual Analysis. Journal of Marketing
Research, 27 (3), 290-303.
Mittal, B. (1989). Measuring Purchase-Decision Involvement. Psychology & Marketing,
6(2), 147-162.
Mittal, B., Ratchford, B., & Prabhakar, P.(1990). Functional and expressive attributes as
determinants of brand-attitude. Journal of Research in Marketing, 10,135–155.
Morais, D. B., Dorsch, M. J., & Backman, S. J. (2004). Can tourism providers buy their
customers‟ loyalty? Examining the influence of customer-provider investments on
loyalty. Journal of Travel Research, 42, 235-43.
Mortimer, K. (2008). Identifying the Components of Effective Service Advertisements.
Journal of Services Marketing, 22(2), 104-113.
Nebenzahl, I. D., Jaffe, E. D., & Usunier, J.C. (2003). Personifying Country of Origin
Research. Management International Review, 43(4), 383-406.
Niininen, O., & Riley, M. (2003).Towards the conceptualization of tourism destination
loyalty. Tourism Analysis, 8(2), 243-46.
O‘Mally, L. (1998). Can loyalty schemes really build loyalty? Marketing Intelligence and
Planning, 16(1), 47–55.
227
O'Cass, A. (2000). An Assessment of Consumers Product, Purchase Decision, Advertising
and Consumption Involvement in Fashion Clothing. Journal of Economic Psychology,
21(5), 545-576.
Ong, B.S., & Horbunluekit, S. (1997).The impact of a Thai cultural show on
Thailand‘s destination image. American Business Review, 15(2), 97-103.
Oppermann, M. (1998). Travel horizon: A valuable analysis tool? Tourism Management,
19(4), 321-29.
O'Shaughnessy, J., & O'Shaughnessy, N. J. (2000). Treating the Nation as a Brand: Some
Neglected Issues. Journal of Macromarketing, 20(1), 56-64.
Osman, M.Z. (1993). A conceptual model of retail image influences on loyalty patronage
behaviour. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 3(2),
133–148.
Oxenfeldt, A.( 1974). Developing a favorable price–quality image. Journal of Retailing,
50(4), 8–14.
Papadopoulos, N., Heslop, L. A., & Bamossy, G. (1990). A Comparative Image Analysis
of Domestic Versus Imported Products. International Journal of Research in Marketing,
16(7), 283-294.
Parameswaran, R., & Pisharodi, R. M. (2002). Assimilation Effects in Country Image
Research. International Marketing Review, 19(3), 259-278.
Park H., & Rabolt, N. (2009). Cultural Value, Consumption Value, and Global Brand
Image: A Cross-national Study. Psychology and Marketing, 26(8), 714-735.
Park, S. H. (1996). Relationships between involvement and attitudinal loyalty constructs in
adult fitness programs. Journal of Leisure Research, 28, 233-50.
228
Park, S. Y., & Petrick, J. F. (2006). Destinations' Perspectives of Branding. Annals of
Tourism Research, 33(1),262-265.
Pearce, P. L., & Moscardo, G. M. (1984). Making Sense of Tourists‘ Complaints. Tourism
Management, 5 (1), 20-23.
Pearce, P.L., & Lee, U. (2005). Developing the Travel Career Approach to tourist
motivation. Journal of Travel Research, 43, 226-237.
Petrick, J. (2004).Are loyal visitors desired visitors? Tourism Management, 25(4), 463-70.
Phau, I., & Lau,K.C. (2001). Brand personality and consumer self-expression: single or
dual carriageway? Journal of Brand Management, 8(6), 428–444.
Phillips, W., & Jang, S. (2007). Destination Image and Visit Intention: Examining the
Moderating Role of Motivation. Tourism Analysis, 12, 319-326.
Pike, S. (2002). Destination Image Analysis - A review of 142 Papers from 1973-2000.
Tourism Management, 23(5), 541-549.
Pike, S., & Ryan, C. (2004) Destination positioning analysis through a comparison of
cognitive, affective, and conative perceptions. Journal of Travel Research, 42(4), 333-42.
Pike, S.(2005). Tourism destination branding complexity. Journal of Product and Brand
Management, 14(4), 258-259.
Pike, S.(2009). Destination brand positions of a competitive set of near-home destinations.
Tourism Management, 30(6), 857-866.
Pitt, L.F., Opoku, R., Hultman, M., Abratt, R., & Spyropoulo, S. (2007). What I Say About
Myself: Communication of Brand Personality by African Countries. Tourism Management,
28(3), 835-844.
Plog, S. (1974). Why Destination Areas Rise and Fall in Popularity? The Cornell Hotel &
Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 14(4), 55-58.
229
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, N. P., & Lee, J.Y. (2003). Common
Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and
Recommended Remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
Prebensen, N.(2007). Exploring tourists‘ images of a distant destination. Tourism
Management, 28(3), 747-756.
Pritchard, A., & Morgan, N.J. (2001). Culture, Identity and Tourism Representation:
Marketing Cymru or Wales? Tourism Management, 22(2), 167-179.
Pritchard, M. P., Havitz, M. E., & Howard, D. (1999) Analyzing the commitment-loyalty
link in service contexts. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(3), 333-48.
Pritchard, M.P., Howard, D., & Havitz, M.E. (1992). Loyal measurement: A critical
examination and theoretical extension. Leisure Sciences, 14, 155-64.
Pyo, S., Mihalik, B. J., & Uysal, M. (1989). Attraction attributes and motivations: A
canonical correlation analysis. Annals of Tourism Research, 16(2), 277-282.
Quester, P. G., & Smart, J. (1998). The Influence of Consumption Situation and Product
Involvement over Consumers' Use of Product Attribute. Journal of Consumer Marketing,
15, 220-238.
Riefler, P., & Diamantopoulos, A. (2007). Consumer Animosity: A Literature Review and
a Reconsideration of Its Measurement. International Marketing Review, 24(1), 87-119.
Ritchie, J. R. B. (1996). Beacons of light in an expanding universe: An assessment of the
state-of-the-art in tourism marketing/marketing research. Journal of Travel & Tourism
Marketing, 5(4), 49-84.
Ritchie, J. R. B., & Smith, B. H. (1991). The impact of a mega-event on host region
awareness: A longitudinal study. Journal of Travel Research, 30, 3-10.
230
Rooney, J. A. (1995). Branding: a trend for today and tomorrow. Journal of Product
and Brand Management. 4 (4), 48-55.
Ross, I. (1971). Self-Concept and Brand Preference. The Journal of Business, 44(1), 38-
50.
Russel, J. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 39, 1161-78.
Russel, J. A., & Pratt, G. (1980). A description of affective quality attributed to
environment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 311-22.
Russel, J. A., Ward, L. M., & Pratt, G. (1981). Affective quality attributed to
environments: A factor analytic study. Environment and Behavior, 13 (3), 259-88.
Rowley, J. (2004). Online branding. Online Information Review, 28 (2), 131-138.
Sheth, J., & Parvatiyar, A. (1995). Relationship marketing in consumer markets:
Antecedents and consequences. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23 (Fall),
255-71.
Shoemaker, S., & Lewis, R. (1999). Customer loyalty: The future of hospitality marketing.
Hospitality Management, 18, 345-370.
Siguaw, J. A., Mattila, A. S., & Austin, J. R. (1999). The Brand Personality Scale: An
Application for Restaurants. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly,
40(3), 48-55.
Sirakaya, E., & Woodside, A. G. (2005). Building and Testing Theories of Decision
Making by Travellers. Tourism Management, 26, 815-832.
Sirdesmukh, D., Singh, J., & Sabol, B. (2002). Consumer trust, value, and loyalty in
relational exchanges. Journal of Marketing, 66 (1), 15–37.
231
Sirgy, J. M. and Su, C. (2000). Destination Image, Self-Congruity, and Travel Behavior:
Toward an Integrative Model. Journal of Travel Research, 38 (4), 340-352.
Sirgy, J.M. (1982). Self-Concept in Consumer Behavior: A Critical Review. Journal of
Consumer Research, 9, 287-300.
Sirgy, M. J., & Samli, A. C. (1985). A Path Analytic Model of Store Loyalty Involving
Self-Concept, Store Image, Geographic Loyalty, and Socioeconomic Status. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 13(3), 265-291.
Sirgy, M. J., & Su, C. (2000). Destination Image, Self-Congruity, and Travel Behavior:
Toward an Integrative Model. Journal of Travel Research, 38(4), 340-352.
Sirgy, M. J., Johar, J. S., Samli, A. C., & Claiborne, C. B. (1991). Self-Congruity Versus
Functional Congruity: Predictors of Consumer Behavior. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 19(4), 363-375.
Sirgy, M.J., and Samli,A.C. (1985). A path analytic model of store loyalty involving self-
concept, store image, socioeconomic status, and geographic loyalty. The Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 13, 265–291.
Smit, E., Bronner, F., & Tolboom, M. (2007). Brand Relationship Quality and Its Value for
Personal Contact. Journal of Business Research, 60(1), 627-633.
Stern, B., Bush, R.F., & Hair, J.F. (1977). The self-image/store image matching process:
an empirical test. Journal of Business, 50, 63–69.
Suh, J.C., & Yi, Y. (2006). When Brand Attitudes Affect the Customer Satisfaction-
Loyalty Relation: The Moderating Role of Product Involvement. Journal of Consumer
Psychology, 16(2), 145-155.
Swee-Hoon, A. and Ai-Ching, L. E. (2006). The Influence of Metaphors and Product Type
on Brand Personality Perceptions and Attitudes. Journal of Advertising, 35 (2), 39-53.
232
Tan, T.W. (2004). Extending human personality to brands: the stability factor. Brand
Management 11(4), 317–330.
Todd, S. (2001). Self-Concept: A Tourism Application. Journal of Consumer Behaviour,
1(2), 184-196.
Tsiotsou, R. (2006). The Role of Perceived Product Quality and Overall Satisfaction on
Purchase Intentions. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30(2), 207-217.
Tucker, W.T. (1964). The development of brand loyalty. Journal of Marketing Research
1(1), 32– 35.
Turner, W. L. and Reisinger, Y. (2001). Shopping Satisfaction for Domestic Tourists.
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 8, 15-27.
Um, S. & Crompton, J. L. (1990). Attitude Determinants in Tourism Destination Choice.
Annals of Tourism Research, 17(3), 432-448.
Uncles, M., Dowling,G., & Hammond, K. (2003). Customer loyalty and customer loyalty
programs. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 20(40), 294–316.
Uysal, M., & Jurowski, C. (1994). Testing the push and pull factors. Annals of Tourism
Research, 21(4), 844-846.
Walmsley, D.Y. and Young, M. (1998).Evaluative images and tourism: the use of
personalconstructs to describe the structure of destination images. Journal of Travel
Research, 36, 65-69.
Williams, D. (2008). A Little Brand Personality Goes a Long, Long Way. Retrieved from
http://www.articlesbase.com/branding-articles/a-little-brand-personalitygoes-a-long-long-way-
94030.html on 5th
of Jan, 2011.
233
Woodside, A. G., & Carr, J. A. (1988). Consumer decision making and competitive
marketing strategies: applications for tourism planning. Journal of Travel Research, 26(3),
2-7.
Xue, F. (2008). The Moderating Effects of Product Involvement on Situational Brand
Choice. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 25(2), 85-94.
Yoo, B., Donthu, N., & Lee, S. (2000). An Examination of Selected Marketing Mix
Elements and Brand Equity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 195-211.
Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An Examination of Effects of Motivation and Satisfaction
on Destination Loyalty: A Structural Model. Tourism Management, 26, 45-56.
Zentes, J., Morschett, D., & Schramm-Klein, H. (2008). Brand Personality of Retailers –
An Analysis of Its Applicability and Its Effect on Store Loyalty. The International Review
of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 18(2), 167-184.
234
Theses/Dissertation
Aaker, J. L. (1995). Brand Personality: Conceptualization, Measurement and Underlying
Physocological Mechanism. Submitted Doctoral Dissertation, Stanford University.
Chon, K.S.(1990). Consumer Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction in Tourism as Related to
Destination Image Perception Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia.
Tomas, S. R. (2007). The Effects of Selected Visual Cues on Tourists’ Perceptions of
Quality and Satisfaction, and on Their Behavioral Intentions. Submitted Doctoral
Dissertation, Texas A&M University.
APPENDICES
APPENDIX-1
Page No.
Questionnaire 235
235
QUESTIONNAIRE
Dear Sir /Madam,
Here is a set of the questions on your experience with the destination. This part of the
research is being conducted as part of the Ph.D work titled “An Assessment of
Destination Brand Personality and its relationship with Intention to Recommend.” I
am a registered scholar with School of Hospitality and Tourism Management,
University of Jammu, under the supervision of Dr. Parikshat Singh Manhas. The
data / information collected are purely for academic work and shall be kept confidential. I
request you to kindly spare some time and give your responses to the following questions.
I am extremely thankful to you for your cooperation and help in carrying out this research.
Part 1
DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
NAME
GENDER
Male Female
Marital Status
Married Unmarried
Area or Location
Jammu Kashmir Ladakh
236
Age
20-25 26-35 36-45 46 & above
HOUSEHOLD INCOME (Per month)
10,000-20,000 20,000-30,000 30,000-40,000 40,000 & above
OCCUPATION
Student Self employed Govt employee Corporate
QUALIFICATION
Under
graduate
Graduate Post graduate Professional Ph d
YOUR NAME & ADDRESS
E-mail ID:
Ph:
237
Part 2
(RESPONDENTS BRAND PERSONALITY RATINGS FOR DESTINATIONS -
Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh)
Consists of statements about the personality traits that come to your mind when you think
of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh
Give ratings of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 for the three regions of Jammu and Kashmir according to
your level of agreement or disagreement to each statement
Neutral Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
1 2 3 4 5
JAMMU KASHMIR LADAKH
Sincere
Down to Earth
Honest
Wholesome
Cheerful
Daring
Exciting
Spirited
Imaginative
Up to date
Competent
Reliable
Intelligent
Successful
Sophisticated
Upper class
238
Charming
Rugged
Outdoorsy
Tough
Part 3 (Tourists‟ Intention to recommend the destination to others)
Consists of a set of statements related to the tourist‘s intention to recommend the
destination to others.
Give ratings of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 for the three regions of Jammu and Kashmir according to
your level of agreement or disagreement to each statement
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
1 2 3 4 5
After I visited the destination, my future intention will be:
JAMMU KASHMIR LADAKH
This is my last time visit to the destination
I will visit the destination again.
I will visit the destination more often in the future.
I will visit destination and also will recommend
destination to my friends and relatives.
I will try to move to the destination
My overall evaluation of the destination is so
powerful that I have built the resistance to counter
persuasions when faced with other holiday
destination offers
When I return home, I will positively promote the
destination as a fantastic holiday destination
239
Part 4 (Adjectives that best describe your own personality)
Consists of statements about the personality traits that come to your mind when you think
of yourself. Give ratings of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 according to your level of agreement or
disagreement to each statement
Neutral Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
1 2 3 4 5
Tourist‟s personality
Sincere
Down to Earth
Honest
Wholesome
Cheerful
Daring
Exciting
Spirited
Imaginative
Up to date
Competent
Reliable
Intelligent
Successful
Sophisticated
Upper class
Charming
Rugged
Outdoorsy
Tough
240
Part 5
Consists of statements about the respondents perceptions about how a holiday at
Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh would make them feel Give ratings of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 for
the three regions of Jammu and Kashmir according to your level of agreement or
disagreement to each statement Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
1 2 3 4 5
JAMMU KASHMIR LADAKH
Relaxed
Happy
Busy/tired/stressed
Rested/rejuvenated
Excited
Rejuvenated/refreshed
Broke/poor
Peaceful Exhilarated
Bored
Lucky
Satisfied
Calm/tranquil
Fun
Free