tourist satisfaction with a destination: antecedents and ... · single product during the vacation,...

Tourist Satisfaction with a Destination: Antecedents and Consequences

By

Nina K. Prebensen,

Finnmark College

Department of Hospitality and Tourism

Follumsvei 31,

N-9509 Alta

Norway

Tel: (++ 47) 78 45 04 27

Fax: (++ 47) 78 43 44 38

E-mail: [email protected]

All Correspondence to:

Nina K. Prebensen Finnmark College

Follumsvei 31 N-9509 Alta

Norway Nina K. Prebensen is a senior lecturer in the Department of Tourism at Finnmark College in

Alta, Norway, and a doctoral student at the Norwegian School of Economics, Bergen, Norway

mailto:[email protected]

Tourist Satisfaction with a Destination:

Antecedents and Consequences

ABSTRACT

People travel to fulfil initial needs satisfactorily. This process of action or consumer

behaviour is of importance to understand, especially for the tourism industry striving to

enhance businesses economy by attracting customers in the future.

The present article focuses on tourist satisfaction with a destination as a state, which is

influenced by the process of buying behaviour, which further materialises in intentional

behaviour (intention to re-buy and recommend). Thus, the article examines the prediction of

tourist satisfaction and consequences of tourist satisfaction, an area of key importance for the

actors of the industry. Here satisfaction with the destination is conceived as the resultant

outcome of tourist motivations, their goal directed choices (activities) and perceptions of

product elements. Based on a review of the past literature, a set of interrelated hypotheses is

derived and tested among a sample of tourists visiting different Southern European

destinations. The findings show that the experience of the service/organising side of the

journey explained about 50 percent of the variance in overall tourist satisfaction with the

destination. Further, the results reveal that tourists behave fairly rationally while choosing

activities in line with their inner motives. They also become highly satisfied, which

materialises primarily from positive word of mouth. Even so, the relationship between tourist

motivation and satisfaction, and behaviour and satisfaction, was not as strong as expected.

Theoretical and managerial implications are also highlighted.

Keywords: Tourist satisfaction, activities, motives, word of mouth, repeat-purchase

2

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Understanding tourist satisfaction is of utmost importance for the tourism industry, especially

because of its effect on their future economy (e.g. Petrick 2003). Satisfied tourists tend to

communicate their positive experience to others (word of mouth) and they tend to buy the

product repeatedly (re-buy) (e.g. Barsky 1992; Beeho and Prentice 1997; Hallowell 1996;

Kozak and Rimmington 2000; Pizam 1994; Ross 1993). The major question then is “What

makes tourists satisfied?” or “What important constructs should be considered when analysing

tourist satisfaction?” Subsequently, the following question of interest is “how does tourist

satisfaction materialize?” The antecedents and consequences of tourist satisfaction is thus the

focal point.

Tourists’ satisfaction with a trip or a destination is a result of many aspects, such as

their perception of product elements experienced as well as their expectations before- and

during the trip. People go on holiday to satisfy one or several of their needs, whatever these

needs are. To achieve satisfaction people try to behave in a rational way. They choose, for

instance, activities that they expect will fulfil their needs satisfactorily. This tendency of

rational behaviour, illustrates that there are relationships between motives for travelling,

choices made and satisfaction. The literature often portrays the potential distance between

expectations and experience, e.g. “expectation-experience gaps” or “expectation-perception

gaps” (e.g. Zeithaml, Parasuraman and Berry 1988), as result of customers evaluation of

product elements (including those of service). As a substitute of discussing tourist

expectation-experience gaps, the present article explores several antecedents of tourist

satisfaction with a destination (overall) such as tourist motives for travelling and their choices

of activities at the destination as well as tourists perception of product elements (single item

3

satisfaction). The idea is to analyse overall satisfaction and following consequences as

predictions of the consumers buying process.

Acknowledging important constructs effecting on tourist satisfaction and subsequent

on tourist intention to re-buy and recommend the product, the tourism businesses will receive

better information of what product elements to focus on in their attempts to improve their

offerings and performing goal directed marketing communication. Some important drives of

sound business economy are as such outlined.

The purpose of the article is thus to analyse the effect of antecedents such as motives

for travelling, activities joined at destination, and perception of single items related to the trip,

upon overall tourist satisfaction and subsequent on tourist intention to re-buy and recommend

the trip.

The remainder of the paper is organised as follows: In the next section, central parts of

past literature are reviewed. A presentation of the theoretical perspective that builds on the

arguments concerning the relationship between motives, activities, perception and satisfaction

as well as consequences of satisfaction is carried out. The theoretical perspective will help

focus on the current problem and further, add to understanding the relationships between the

concepts. To analyse the relationships between the concepts several multivariate techniques

(such as factor analysis and regression analysis) are conducted. Finally, theoretical and

practical implications are presented.

4

LITERATURE REVIEW

This section review relevant literature for the present research. The purpose is to develop

hypotheses regarding the drives of tourist satisfaction and subsequently tourist intentional

behaviour as result of tourist satisfaction.

Tourist Satisfaction as a Concept

Traditional literature within consumer behaviour pinpoints that customer satisfaction

is the result or the final step of a psychological process from need recognition to evaluation of

experienced products (e.g. Peter and Olson 1996). Despite this recognition of a motivational

based process, researchers within the area of satisfaction including tourist satisfaction tend to

solely focusing on perception of products and product elements, by focusing on the level of

satisfaction received. Satisfaction is then defined as “a judgement that a product or service

feature, or the product or service itself, provides a pleasurable level of consumption-related

fulfilment” Oliver (1997: 13) or as an overall evaluation of a purchase (Fornell 1992).

MacKay and Crompton (1990: 48) define satisfaction in a similar way by focusing on the

“psychological outcome which emerges from experiencing the service” (MacKey and

Crompton 1990: 48). The overall satisfaction is then the result- or the sum of the relative

importance- and the level of satisfaction experienced of all the single attributes (e.g. Ajzen

and Fishbein 1980). Multiattribute attitude (Fishbein and Azjen 1975) and means-end models

assume that consumers judge products based on the ability of attributes to provide positive

outcomes.

Satisfaction has been analysed by tourism researchers within a variety of dimensions

of tourist trips. The main goals of these studies are to develop instruments or measures of

satisfaction with tourist product-elements, often with the purpose of suggesting tourists’

5

perceived importance regarding overall satisfaction and, to a certain extent, making

suggestions for the industry as what to focus on regarding product developments. Ross and

Iso-Ahola (1991), for instance, study satisfaction with cultural tours, while Hsieh, O`Leary

and Morrison (1994) study differences among packaged and non-packaged tours. Other

researchers focus on satisfaction with certain aspects of a tour, e.g. hotels (e.g. Saleh and

Ryan 1992; Heide, Grønhaug and Engset 1999). Tourists’ shopping satisfaction is studied by

Reisinger and Turner (2002). Toy, Kerstetter and Rager (2002) evaluate customer satisfaction

with a leisure activity. Several researchers (Chon and Olsen 1991; Danaher and Arweiler

1996; Kozak and Rimmington 2000; Joppe, Martin and Waalen 2001) investigate tourists’

satisfaction with destinations.

While the customer satisfaction literature including those within tourism has been

dominated by measurement of how customers perceive products and services (Barsky 1992;

Bojanic 1996; Bojanic and Rosen 1994; Chadee and Mattson 1995; 1996; Saleh and Ryan

1992), less has been done with regard to the assessment of what causes the level of

satisfaction in addition to the product and service encountered. Since satisfaction may also

relate directly to the consumer’s needs and motives than do attributes, they should also be

highly relevant, despite the recognition that evaluations are expected to be subjective in nature

(e.g. “smiling hosts makes me happy”) and often difficult to determine prior to purchase

(Nelson 1970).

By including tourist travel motives and choices of activities at the destination as well

as perception of products into the concept of satisfaction, a better understanding of why

people become satisfied in addition to how satisfied they are is possible to identify, which

further includes a better understanding concerning why people intent to recommend and re-

buy the trip.

6

The Tourism Product

One of the most important features of tourist products is the so-called “bundle

purchase concept” (Lewis and Chambers 1989: 300), where consumers do not buy individual

elements of the offering, rather a bundle or a unified whole. Often the tourist product is

divided in three parts: the formal product, the core product and the augmented product (e.g.

Lewis and Chambers 1989). The formal product is described as what tourists think they are

buying (e.g. a bed or a meal). The core product usually consists of abstract and intangible

attributes, such as atmosphere, relaxation and convenience (often referred to as customer

benefits). An augmented product is the totality of all benefits received or experienced by the

customer (e.g. the entire system of service including elements such as the manner in which

things are done, timeliness, personal treatment etc.). Important elements of the tourist

experience (relating to specific contexts) are presented by Bowen (2001) as “the destination,

itinerary, tour operator and/or ground operator, consumer (the tourist self), consumer (tourist)

tour group members, and consumer service personnel – particularly the tour leader”. Bowen

also discusses important service characteristics such as intangibility, inseparability,

heterogeneity, perishability as well as tour operation and type of trip (e.g. long haul tours)

related to general contexts.

Millan and Esteban (2003) and Oliver (1997) consider expectations as important

antecedents of satisfaction. When a tourist becomes satisfied or dissatisfied with a trip or a

single product during the vacation, it is a product of how the tourist perceives the actual

obtained result relative to what was expected. Ivancevich and Matteson (1993) define

expectation as the perceived likelihood that a given act will be followed by a particular

outcome. Other researchers consider expectations as “the needs or the desires of the

consumer, identified by what the consumer feels should be delivered by the provider of the

service before receiving it” (Millan and Esteban 2003: 3). By focusing on tourist needs and

7

their need-driven behaviour, it is possible to reveal some of the antecedents that are causing

the level of satisfaction (or any confirmation/disconfirmation of expectations) in addition to

measuring the level of customer satisfaction.

The present study examines tourist satisfaction with different aspects of a vacation and

the overall destination visited. In other words, relevant elements of a tourist journey to

specific destinations are considered. Clawson and Knetsch (1971) present a five-phase model

of travel, where four of the phases are discussed by Neal, Sirgy and Uysal (1999) as relevant

when studying tourist satisfaction due to the high level of interaction with travel/tourism

providers; pre-trip, en route, on-trip and post-trip dimensions.

When consumers recognise the need for a vacation, goal directed behaviour activates.

The time between need recognition and actual travel is important when analysing tourist

satisfaction. It consists of many aspects, such as deciding with whom to travel, what

destination to travel to, where to buy the product, etc. This period includes getting information

about these aspects as well. Planning is crucial. The journey, from leaving home to return,

consists of a series of elements, including infrastructural aspects, activity amenities, as well as

service elements: transportation, hotel, restaurants, types of activity, number of activities,

service level in general, specific activities, the nature/surroundings, travel party, food, etc.

After the journey all these elements are viewed as possible influences on overall satisfaction

(with the destination) and subsequently on the intention to re-visit and communicate via

positive word of mouth.

The fact that people’s choices of certain places to travel to and activities performed

during the vacation affect their felt satisfaction is not surprising. Many studies of tourist

motivation (e.g. Crandall 1980; Crompton 1979; Dann 1981) presume that tourists will

choose activities that they believe will best satisfy their desires and/or needs. These

assumptions build on cognitive social psychology (e.g. Atkinson 1964; Heider 1958; Toleman

8

1959) which holds that motivations are inseparable and related to expected outcomes of

behaviour. According to this line of research, behaviour is basically a function of expectations

about future consequences of behaviour.

In the following pages, overall tourist satisfaction with the visited destination is

presented as “a state” which is affected by antecedents such as inner motivation for travelling,

tourist behaviour and satisfaction with trip-related elements. Tourist satisfaction materialises

as the intention to recommend and re-buy the trip (Figure 1 below). At the end of the

theoretical discussion, hypotheses are presented.

The objective of this study is to ascertain:

1) Tourist satisfaction with a certain type of trip (pre-arranged charter trip),

2) The ability to predict tourist satisfaction with trip related elements from motivation to

travel and activities performed at the destination,

3) The ability to predict tourist overall satisfaction with the destination from motivation to

travel, activities performed at the destination, and satisfaction with trip related elements

(performance).

4) The ability to predict tourists intention to re-buy and recommend the particular trip from

tourist overall satisfaction with the destination and satisfaction with product attributes.

==================

Insert Figure 1 about here

==================

Figure 1 shows tourist satisfaction as a process and as a state, and further show how

overall tourist satisfaction with a destination is affected by antecedents such as inner motives

for travel, activities performed during the journey and satisfaction with single attributes

9

relevant for the trip. Tourist satisfaction with the destination is further considered to effect

tourists’ intention to communicate via word of mouth and intention to repeat purchase.

Need Driven Behaviour

Tourist motivation has often been treated as identical with the purpose of travel

(Cohen 1972; 1974; 1979), despite the general acceptance that motivation is only one of many

variables (e.g. perceptions, cultural conditioning and learning) that contribute to tourist

behaviour (Fodness 1994). Numerous tourist motivation studies utilise the “push”- and “pull”

dichotomy, first presented by Dann (1977:186). Push factors are regarded as dispositions

within the traveller and pull factors are constituted by the correspondingly appealing features

of a destination or attraction. The present study focuses on inner motives for travelling, which

correspond to Dann’s push factors. Travel motivation is defined by Pizam, Neuman and

Reichel (1979) as a "set of needs which predispose a person to participate in a touristic

activity." According to Moutinho (1987: 16) motivation is linked to satisfaction by the

following definition: “motivation is a state of need, a condition that exerts a “push” on the

individual towards a certain types of action that are seen as likely to bring satisfaction”. When

researchers discuss motives in the context of reasons for travelling to certain destinations (e.g.

Crompton 1979) this might reflect the need for “playing golf” as much as the need to “rest

and relax”.

Viewing tourist motives as benefits sought provide a variety of empirical results, e.g.

benefits such as escape from an anomic society (Dann 1977), relaxation (Crompton 1977),

social interaction (Pearce and Caltabiano 1983; Ross and Iso-Ahola 1991), status-

enhancement and prestige (Dann, 1977; McIntosh and Goeldner 1986; Smith 1979),

rejuvenation or arousal (Berlyne 1967; Mannel and Iso-Ahola 1987), education (Crompton

1979; McIntocsh and Goeldner 1986), climatic, scenic or historical attractions (Gray 1970;

10

Turner and Ash 1975). Recent studies reveal a multi-motive approach within tourism and

many of these studies apply a factorial design to describe motive-factors/dimensions of tourist

motivation for travelling (e.g. Cha et al. 2002: Gitelson and Kerstetter; Jang, Morrison and

Leary 2002; Kleiven 1998; 1999).

Relationships between Constructs

Motivation for travelling is shown to effect upon choice of activities among tourists.

Moscardo et al (1995) show in their analysis of Australian outbound travellers a link

between the benefits travellers seek during their vacation and the activities that they pursue.

They pinpoint the role of activities when discussing relationships between motivation and

choice of destination for instance. Relationships between benefits sought at a destination and

activities pursued is further presented in a study among travellers in North Carolina (USA)

(Gitelson and Kerstetter 1990). They reveal that the type of activity engaged in during the trip

is significantly associated with benefits sought. For example, individuals who fish, camp or

hike evaluate the relaxation dimension as more important than those visitors who do not enjoy

these activities. The same results obtain for the social dimension as well. Gitelson and

Kerstetter show that in the case of the “excitement” dimension, those who fish or visit an

amusement park rate this dimension significantly higher than those not enjoying these

activities do. Additionally, tourists playing golf during their vacation rate the “explorer”

motivation dimension as less important than non-golfers, while respondents who visit a

museum, camp, or go hiking during their stay rate the explorer dimension as more important

than tourists who do not enjoy these activities. In a similar vein, Chhetri, Arrowsmith and

Jackson (2003) identify the underlying dimensions (motive related) influencing visitor

behaviour (experiences) among hikers in a national park in Australia. The study recognizes 11

11

factors based upon the hikers’ feelings or emotions related to different experiences. Two

dimensions are extracted: a negative-positive dimension and an intrinsic-extrinsic dimension.

The study further reveals four key components related to the hiking experience: a desirable

experience, an impelling experience, an apprehensive experience and a social interaction

experience. Chhetri et al. also suggest that these four components provide a theoretical

framework for assessing visitor satisfaction with hiking experiences. In a study among

inbound tourists in Norway tourist’s Kleiven (1998; 1999) reveal tourist motives ability to

predict activity, though with some restrictions.

Relationship between motivation and satisfaction is claimed in a study among tourists

going on a sightseeing tour by bus (Dunn-Ross and Iso-Ahola 1991). The Dunn-Ross and Iso-

Ahola study reveal considerable similarities when it comes to motivation and satisfaction

dimensions, regarding knowledge seeking, social interaction and escape. Their study suggests

that the high overall satisfaction (over 90%) among respondents can be explained by the

significant consistency between motivation dimensions and the satisfaction. As a

documentation of the importance of recognising the buying behaviour process regarding

satisfaction, Yoon and Uysal (2003) demonstrate in a study of tourist satisfaction in Cyprus

that certain inner motivations seem to have an effect upon tourist loyalty. They recommend

managers to pay attention to relaxation, family togetherness and safety and fun, in order to

appeal to tourists’ inner motives to travel due to the realisation that internal sources of

motivation affect tourists’ tendency to be loyal to a destination. As shown, people evaluate

positively if their motives are fulfilled and how they are fulfilled after purchasing and

enjoying a product (the journey). Studies on tourist motivation for attending festivals have

discussed potential differences in tourist’s satisfaction (e.g. Lee, Lee and Wicks 2003). The

Lee et al study identified six motivational factors among tourists attending festivals, which

12

materialise into four domestic- and four international segments. The results further show that

visitor satisfaction was influenced by motivation.

Tourist choice of activities then can be viewed as the link between motives for

travelling and perception of satisfaction. In a study among tourists visiting Bornholm situated

in Demark, Johns and Gyimòthy (2003) reveal differences among the tourists concerning the

degree of participation in activities (active versus inactive tourists). The present study then

explores the type- of and number of activities joined at the destination as predictor of tourist’s

satisfaction.

Most studies on tourist satisfaction focus on measurement techniques and types of

variables related to customer satisfaction (e.g. Noe and Uysal 1997; Zeithaml, Berry and

Parasuraman 1993). The distinction between overall satisfaction and attribute satisfaction is

discussed as important, given that overall satisfaction is based on the overall experience, not

just a single feature of the product (Spreng, Mackenzie, and Olashavsky 1996). Tourists`

satisfaction with a destination may reflect a type of tourist overall satisfaction with a journey,

while satisfaction with transport, travelling party, accommodation, activities performed while

staying at the destination, etc., could impact upon the total judgement of a trip to a particular

destination..

Reisinger and Turner (2002) show in their study of the shopping satisfaction of

Japanese tourists visiting Hawaii and Australia, a significant relationship between different

dimensions of product importance, attribute importance and satisfaction. Their study reveals

that there is strong evidence that Japanese tourists follow a shopping pattern of product choice

determining the importance of product attributes. Even so, the study shows that the

relationship between product attribute importance and satisfaction holds only for those

visiting Hawaii. The results demonstrate that tourist satisfaction with their shopping is a

product of it if they perceive the product attributes as important.

13

Tourist satisfaction is demonstrated, as in the general satisfaction literature, to be

linked to the customer’s intention to re-buy as well as the tendency to communicate via

positive word of mouth (e.g. Anderson and Sullivan 1990; Barsky 1992; Beeho and Prentice

1997; Hallowell 1996; Cronin and Taylor 1992; Fornell 1992; Hallowell 1996; Kozak and

Rimmington 2000; Oliver 1980; Oliver and Swan 1989; Pizam 1994; Ross 1993). Studies also

show the opposite relationship (dissatisfaction leads to negative word of mouth and

willingness to travel to alternative destinations increases) (e.g. Peter and Olson 1986; Pizam

1994). These consequences of experienced satisfaction are also discussed in relationship to

the business economy, as a way of reducing marketing costs (e.g. Peter and Olson 1986). It

should be noted, however, that possible differences among different industries (Fornell 1992),

as well as different destinations (Kozak and Rimmington 1998), exist. Kozak and

Rimmington (2000) study reveal empirical evidence showing that satisfaction result in repeat

business and word of mouth communication, however in various ways by different

satisfaction factors. Respondents’ intention to repeat their visits to Mallorca in the future is

influenced by destination attractiveness (factor 1), facilities and services at the destination

airport (factor 4), the level of overall satisfaction and tourists’ previous experience. The

intention to recommend holidays in Mallorca to their friends and relatives is shown to be

influenced by destination attractiveness (factor 1), availability of English language (factor 3 )

and facilities and services at the destination airport (factor 4 ). In a related study, Kozak

(2001) reveals that repeat tourists are loyal to destinations in Mallorca and Turkey, in the

sense that first-timers are more likely to switch to alternative destinations than repeaters.

Mallorca also possesses more repeat tourists than Turkey. The three most important

satisfaction attributes relating to intention to re-visit are the level of overall satisfaction,

satisfaction with destination airport services and satisfaction with local transport services,

respectively. Kozak (2003) measures tourist satisfaction with multiple destination attributes

14

and subsequent intention to repeat visitation and recommend to others among four different

groups of tourists visiting two different destinations: Mallorca, Spain and Mugla, Turkey.

The results of the Kozak (2003) study show 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. This implies further empirical

testing of tourists with different nationalities visiting a variety of destinations.

These empirical studies reveal relationships between motives for travelling, activities

pursued during the trip, and tourist satisfaction, and further on the effects on tourists

behavioural intention after the trip. Of central concern in this study is how motivation,

activities and attribute experience predict overall satisfaction with a destination, and further

how satisfaction predicts tourist’s intention to re-buy and recommend the product. The

following hypotheses are therefore formulated:

H1: Motives for travel have a positive influence on tourist activities performed during a

vacation.

H2: Motives for travel have a positive influence on tourist satisfaction.

H3: Activities performed during a vacation have a positive influence on tourist satisfaction.

H4: Tourist satisfaction with various aspects of a trip will have a positive effect upon overall

satisfaction with the destination.

H5: Tourist satisfaction with a variety of aspects of the trip and the overall satisfaction with

the destination effect positively upon the intention to communicate via positive word

of mouth.

H6: Tourist satisfaction with a variety of aspects of a trip and tourist satisfaction with a

destination will have a positive effect upon the intention to re-purchase a package tour.

15

Thus, the aim of the present study is to determine if tourists’ satisfaction with a

destination can be explained by their motives for travelling, activities performed during the

journey and satisfaction of trip-relevant attributes. Further, the consequences of tourist

satisfaction, tourist intention to recommend and re-buy the product, is tested on a specific type

of tourist (buying a pre-arranged charter tour).

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This part repeats the research methodology underlying the empirical part of the study. First,

the design requirement is addressed, and then the data collection procedure and measurements

are described.

Design

A charter product from Norway to warmer countries was selected, mainly because of

its complexity. The need for experiencing a warmer climate during a vacation is well known

among Norwegian tourists, on which these tours mostly are based. Countries with a good

climate and coastlines, e.g. Mediterranean in Europe, appear to be very attractive for both the

British and German markets as well (Witt 1980), which correspond to parts of the Norwegian

tourism market, heading for warmer weather. A charter product consists of a number of

different aspects of single-products such as transport, accommodation, restaurants, attractions,

etc., and is often described in the context of a package tour. Middleton (1994: 292) defines a

package tour as “Standardised, quality controlled, repeatable offers comprising two or more

16

elements of transport, accommodation, food, destination attractions, other facilities, and

services (such as insurance)”. Tour operators in Norway offer the customers a variety of

packages to destinations all over the world. However, most of the charter trips from Norway

go to Spain and Greece, Turkey, Portugal and Italy. Other warm southern European countries

as well as some Asian destinations (e.g. Thailand) are experiencing increasing demand among

Norwegian tourists.

Data collection

A field survey was selected as the research method. There are several reasons for the

performing a cross-sectional field survey. First, one of the purposes is to examine tourist

satisfaction among outbound group tourists. Second, the dimensionality of tourist motivation,

activities, and satisfaction constructs are also to be explored in a new tourism context to prior

research. Third, most earlier research has been based on cross-sectional studies. Thus, to get

comparable results, the same approach should be followed.

A questionnaire was designed to measure tourists motivation, activities, satisfaction

and intention to re-buy and recommend the journey. Subjects who had taken a charter-flight

within the last 12 months were asked to answer the questionnaire. In total 5,000

questionnaires were mailed to respondents in Norway based on a list from one of the largest

tour-operators in the country. The questionnaires were mailed during August 2002, and the

return of the finished questionnaires was September/October the same year. Twelve hundred

and twenty-two charter-flight tourists from Norway to different destinations responded by

mail questionnaire after they had returned from their trips. Seventy-eight questionnaires were

returned unanswered for a variety of reasons ranging from wrong address to death. The

response-rate was 24.8 % (1,222/4,922). The number of outbound tourists from Norway,

17

travelling by charter-flight was estimated in 2001 to be 967,000 passengers (Startour 2002).

No systematic differences in responses across demographic variables were observed.

Measurements

Below is reported how the constructs; satisfaction (overall and attribute), activities,

motivation, intention to re-buy, and intention to recommend are measured.

Overall satisfaction Further, an overall satisfaction question linked to the destination

was asked, “How satisfied are you with the destination?” This overall satisfaction variable

was measured on a five-point Likert scale: from not important (1) to very important (5).

Questions concerning the satisfaction attributes items were chosen by dividing a pre-

planned packaged trip from the phase of planning through important aspects of the journey,

and then representatives from the tourism industry were asked to comment on the relevance of

the items. The following 22 items where chosen: “your own planning, the tour operator,

transportation, hotel, restaurants, number of activities available, type of activities available,

sightseeing tours, service, destination, beach and swimming facilities, possibilities for play,

active play/training facilities, possibilities for getting to know new people, cultural amenities,

shopping facilities, theatre/opera/ballet, concerts/festivals, walking opportunities,

nature/surroundings, travel party, food at the destination.” Responses to these questions were

given on a five-point scale, ranging from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied). The results

of the factor analysis of the satisfaction items is presented in Appendix 1.

Activity items were mainly based upon products offered in Norwegian tour-operators’

catalogues and brochures. A discussion was also held with representatives from the tourism

industry about the most common activities on outbound charter tours. The following 24

specified activities were chosen: “sunbathing, swimming in the sea, swimming in the pool,

playing on the beach, visiting restaurants, shopping, playing/being together with children in

18

the family, family trip by car, sightseeing tour, sailing at sea, boat trip, sightseeing alone,

going for a slow walk, going for a hard walk, reading about attractions, reading about the

culture and history of the destination, learning about the culture of the destination, attending

the theatre/opera/ballet, attending concerts/festivals, fishing, playing football/handball,

golf/tennis/squash/water-ski..” The participation in activities was measured on a six-point

scale from not at all (1) to more than 6 hours per day (6). The factor analysis of the activity

items is presented in Appendix 2.

Motivation was measured by asking the respondents to consider different statements

on a five-point scale ranging from not important (1) to very important (5). The questionnaire

items for motivation were mostly adapted from Kleiven (1998; 1999) and adjusted to

outbound charter tours from Norway after discussing the items with representatives from the

industry. Kleiven (1998; 1999) bases his studies of motivational factors on Norwegians

travelling in Norway on different qualitative studies as well as on some quantitative

investigations (e.g. Beard and Ragheb 1983; Jamrozy and Uysal 1994). The Beard and

Ragheb (1983) study reveals a four motive factor solution among students: intellectual, social,

competency/mastery, and stimulus/avoidance, while Jamrozy and Uysal (1994) present eight

different factor groupings among German tourists: escape, novelty/experience, family/friends

togetherness, sports activities, adventure/excitement, luxury/doing nothing, and prestige. The

result of Kleiven’s analysis represents eight factors: sun/warmth, accomplishment, family,

friends, culture, nature, peace/quite and fitness. In the present study, the items for analysing

Norwegian outbound charter tourists were chosen after a presentation and a discussion of the

different scales appropriateness with representatives from the industry. The following thirty-

five motivation items were chosen: Enjoying the sun, Having time to do what you please,

Swimming in the sea, Swimming in the pool, Enjoying the beach and sea, Having time for the

family, Getting away from stress, Getting new strength, Avoiding stress concerning the

19

transfer, Letting the kids have a good time, Getting away from noise and pollution, Learning

about another country and culture, Visiting known places and attractions, Experiencing nature

and its surroundings, Enjoying cultural experiences, Learning something new, Going on

organised sightseeing trips, Practising language skills, Keeping in touch with friends, Getting

to know new people, Demonstrating what you can do, Keeping in contact with the family,

Using your capabilities, Developing your personality/hobby, Not being lonely on holiday,

Taking exercise, Getting new energy, Taking care of your health, Working out hard -getting

tired, Travelling around, Experiencing the atmosphere, Eating and drinking in good company,

Being romantic, Having fun, and Changing your lifestyle. The factor analysis of the motive

items is presented in Appendix 3.

Consequences of tourist satisfaction are viewed as a result of tourist satisfaction..

Tourists post-tour behavioural intention (intention to re-buy- and recommend the product)

were adapted from Oliver (1997) and adjusted to Norwegian outbound charter trips: “Would

you use charter tour at the next holiday?” and “would you recommend the trip to other

people?” These two overall satisfaction variables, which also might be considered to be a

result of satisfaction, were measured on a 3 point scale from 1 (quite sure I will) to 3 (quite

sure I will not). A category for “don’t know” was also available for the respondents. Here, it

is important to realise that the intention scales had opposite values (positive=1, negative=3).

For data analyses, the programs SPSS (Norusis, 1994) were used. Factor analysis,

ANOVA analysis, a two-stage least squares regression analysis, and linear regression analysis

were applied.

20

FINDINGS

This section reports the results. First the responses of factor analysis of satisfaction items,

activity items, and motive items are presented (the factor analysis is provided in the

appendices). Then there are the findings from the regression analysis of motivation on choice

of activity, the activities’ effects on satisfaction, and motives’ impacts on satisfaction, which

are demonstrated separately. Finally, the regression analysis of tourist satisfaction upon

intention to recommend and re-buy is presented.

Tourist Satisfaction, Activity, and Motivation

In order to examine the dimensionality of the constructs: satisfaction, activities, and

motives (to assess the discriminant validity of the items), factor analyses were conducted.

Factor analysis was chosen because the intention was to examine whether a set of indicators

could be reduced to a more limited set of underlying dimensions. It should be noted that

explorative factor analysis was performed for the motive scales as well as for the two other

scales. The reason for this was that, despite the use of the Kleiven scale as basis for the

motive scale, many motive items were changed and thus called for a procedure of discovery.

First, an unrotated factor analysis was performed in order to decide the number of factors.

Varimax rotated analyses were conducted for all three scales, and four satisfaction factors,

six activity factors and four motive factors were extracted. A reason for using factor scores

was also to avoid the muliticollinearity effect of the model due to possibilities of high inter-

correlations among variables.

Some of the findings from the factor analyses are presented in the appendices. The

factor analysis of the 22 satisfaction items shows four factors explaining 51.43% of the

21

variance (Appendix 1). In Appendix 2 the factor analysis of the 24 activity items is presented.

Six activity factors explained 51.25% of the variance. The factor analysis of the 35

motivational items shows four factors explaining 51% of the variance.

==================

Insert Table 1 about here

==================

Based on the factor solutions reported in the appendices, the dimensions for the scales

were extracted (mean scores for factors). Part a) in table 1 shows the number of items, mean,

standard deviation and Cronbach’s alpha for each of the computed scales for the three

variables (satisfaction, activities and motives).

To assess the reliability of the scales, Cronbach`s alpha was applied. Carmines and

Zeller (1979) suggest that Cronbach’s alpha should not be lower than 0.80 for widely used

scales. In the present study, the coefficients in the satisfaction-scale ranged from 0.72 to 0.84,

in the activity-scale from 0.52 to 0.77, and in the motive-scale from 0.82 to 0.87. The alpha

values for some of the factors seemed a bit low, but the intention in this study was to look for

tendencies regarding relationships and ability to predict satisfaction for charter trips and not to

develop the scales per se. The factor loadings and factor communalities are presented in the

appendix. Analysing the communalities (h2), some of them seemed rather low which might be

explained by possible skewness along the various indicators used. The factor loadings in the

appendix show that in most cases these captured a substantial part of the extracted variance.

For example, regarding satisfaction with service/organising, the factor score accounted for

(0.70)2/0.58=0.844; i.e. 84.4% of the extracted variance. Nevertheless, none of the indictors

was found to load only on one factor.

22

Part b) in table 1 shows the inter-correlations between the constructed scales for the

three variables. The relative high correlation scores for the satisfaction scale indicate that the

scales used as substitute measures for the extracted dimensions to some degree were inter-

correlated, i.e., the dimensions to some extent overlapped. This can be explained by the fact

that an individual feeling of satisfaction (negative or positive) was transferred from one

experience to the next. For the activity scale the correlations score seemed low, which

indicated a reliable scale. Even so, the low correlations might as well be explained by the fact

that the time spent on one activity reduced the time available to perform another. Personal

interests could also explain the low correlation. Further, the inter-correlations between the

factors on the motive scale seemed rather low for relax/sun and fitness. However, the other

factors were more inter-correlated. The fact that these variables inter-correlated, implied that

the scales should be treated with care. For example, viewing the highest reported inter-

correlation for the satisfaction scale (between service/organising and activities in general), the

two variables shared 0.512 < 26% of the variance. Both of the two variables, independently,

added to the captured variance. Even so, the fact that the factors added to the total captured

variance, all of the factors described were of relevance for analysing tourists’ satisfaction,

activities and motives.

Motives and Activities

This section reports the findings regarding tourist motivation and their effect upon

tourist activities.

Table 2 shows how motives, such as relax/sun impacted positively on traditional

charter/sun activities, while motives such as learning and fitness, negatively affected these

types of activities (F=231.360 R2 = 0.50, p<0.001). The learning/culture motive factor

impacted positively- and relax/sun, lifestyle/social, and fitness motives had a negative effect

23

24

upon activities related to learning about the destination (F=185.261, R2 = 0.44, p<0.001).

Motive such as relax/sun had a positive effect and the learning/culture motive a negative

effect upon play activities (F=30.980, R2 = 0.116, p<0.001).

The learning motive had a positive effect upon water activities, but the explained

variance was rather low (F=4.465, R2 = 0.019, p<0.005). Learning/culture, as well as the

fitness motive had a positive effect on trips (F=28.830, R2 = 0.109, p<0.001). Concerning

cultual activities, relax/sun motives had a negative effect. The explained variance, however,

was rather low (F=10.538, R2 = 0.043, p<0.001).

==================


==================

Motives and Satisfaction

This section reports the findings regarding tourist motivation and their effect upon

tourist satisfaction (shown in table 3).

The results presented comprise only the significant relationships explaining more than

5 percent of the variance. The relax/sun motive had a negative effect upon special activities

and the learning/culture motive had a positive effect upon special activities (F=19.895, R2 =

0.088, p<0.001). Concerning tourist satisfaction with culture, the relax/sun motive and fitness

motive had a negative effect, and the learning/culture motive had a positive effect (F=33.562,

R2 = 0.146, p<0.001). Motives explained very little of the variance in satisfaction related to

the service/organising side of the trip, activities in general, and overall satisfaction with the

destination.

25

==================


==================

Activities and Satisfaction

This section reports the findings regarding activities and their effect upon tourist’s

satisfaction.

The results mentioned here are only the significant relationships that explained more

than 5 percent of the variance. Table 4 shows that the traditional charter/sun activities had a

negative effect on satisfaction with specific activities and learning about destination activities

had a positive effects on satisfaction with specific activities (F= 20.76, R2 = 0.11, p<0.05).

Viewing tourists` satisfaction with culture, traditional charter/sun and trips had a negative

influence and learning about the destination and performing cultural activities had a positive

effect (F= 27.55, R2 = 0.15, p<0.01).

==================


==================

Tourist Satisfaction and Intentional Behaviour

This section reports the findings regarding how tourist satisfaction with product

element predict overall satisfaction (with destination), and further how tourist satisfaction

with the destination (overall) and attributes materialises as intention to re-buy the product and

intention to perform positive word of mouth.

26

To assess the ability to predict tourist overall satisfaction as result of attribute

satisfaction, a regression analysis was performed (part a in table 5). Further, regression

analysis was performed to assess consequences of tourist satisfaction (intention to re-buy- and

recommend) as result of overall satisfaction with the destination and attribute satisfaction

(respective part b and part c in table 6).

Table 5 shows how the independent variables influenced the level of respondents`

overall satisfaction with the particular destination and next their intention to recommend and

re-buy the trip. Standardized estimates (beta coefficients) of each variable reflected the

relative importance of the variables in the model.

The first model (part a in table 5) examined overall satisfaction with the destination in

relation to the four satisfaction factors (based on single attributes). It was observed that only

two independent variables, factor 1 (service/organising) and factor 3 (specific activities) had

beta coefficients that were statistically significant (p< 0.001), R2 = 0.503. The total variance

explained was thus 50.3% in the model. Items loaded on factor 2 (activities in general) and

factor 4 (culture) did not have any impact on the level of overall satisfaction of the destination

visited, when analysing all respondents to all destinations (n=1.222).

The result from the model (part b in table 5) showed that factor 1 (service/organising)

had a positive effect upon tourists` intention to re-buy a charter tour (F=106.891, R2 = 0.041,

p<0.01), but the explained variance were low. Surprisingly, satisfaction with the destination

did not influence significantly the intention to re-buy.

The results further provide information on tourists` intention to recommend the destination to

family and friends (part c in table 5) (F=55.58, R2 = 0.3075, p<0.001). Factor 1

(service/organising) and “satisfaction with the destination” impact positively upon the

“intention to recommend the destination to others” and the total variance explained in the

model was 30.8 percent.

27

==================


==================

DISCUSSION

The present study has focused on explaining tourist overall satisfaction of a destination as

result of motivation for taking a vacation trip, activities performed (behaviour), and

perception of the tourist product (attributes). It further tested the results of tourist satisfaction

in terms of intention to recommend and re-buy the trip. Tourist satisfaction was regarded as

overall satisfaction with the destination, which in turn was influenced by various aspects of

the journey (e.g. transport, accommodation, restaurants, activities offered, etc.).

Norwegian outbound charter tourists` seemed to be generally satisfied with the

destination (overall satisfaction) as well as specific satisfaction factors. The fact that tourists

make positive judgments (they claim to be satisfied) are in line with results with other studies

showing a positive skewed evaluation of satisfaction (Fornell et. al. 1996).

Satisfaction with the destination was primarily affected by the tourists` satisfaction

with the service/organising side of the trip. The other antecedents that were tested showed

some interesting results. Tourist would recommend the trip to others and that intention was

mainly affected by the service/organising side of the journey and overall satisfaction with the

destination.

The results confirmed the expectation that activities performed at a destination were

explained by motives for travelling. As anticipated, the relax/sun motive-factor explained the

variance in a positive way for the traditional-charter sun activities. Interestingly, tourists

28

motivated by learning and fitness seemed to engage in fewer traditional charter/sun activities,

which implied that staying on the beach was seen as a more relaxing and slower form of

vacation. In the same line of reasoning, the learning factor had a positive effect and relax/sun,

lifestyle/social, and fitness had a negative effect upon activities related to learning about the

destination, which indicated a duality among the “beach-lifers” and “learners”. It could also

be speculated that the negative effect of relax/sun and friend motive upon the learning about

the destination, probably explained that beach activities and learning activities were

substitutes. The more a tourist engaged in sunbathing activities, for instance, the less time

he/she had to undertake learning activities. The same argument held for activities such as

trips and culture. People went on different day-trips etc. during their vacation in order to

become fit or stay in shape, and they in turn gave them less time for beach activities.

The variance explained when it came to the effect of activities on satisfaction was

rather low (highest explained variance for the activities’ effect on satisfaction with specific

activities (11%) and culture (14%). Some interesting tendencies seemed, however, to appear.

Activities concerning learning about the destination, as well as play, had a positive effect on

satisfaction with activities in general. Charter/sun activities had a negative effect upon

satisfaction with activities and culture, which implied that those tourists engaged in sun-

bathing did not carry out a lot of other activities. These results show that it is possible to

improve satisfaction with certain aspects of a trip for certain groups of tourists: e.g. focusing

on activities related to learning about the destination and culture towards those motivated by-

and engaged in learning- and culture.

Motives for travelling explained to some degree the variance on tourist satisfaction

(highest explained variance was found for satisfaction with the culture: 15%). Some

interesting tendencies should be considered. The stronger the learning/culture motive and the

weaker the relax/bathing motive the more satisfied the tourists seemed to be about activities in

29

general. Considering satisfaction with culture, relax/sun, as well as fitness motives, had a

negative effect, and the learning/culture motive had a positive effect, which seemed eminently

reasonable. Surprisingly the relax/sun motive did not influence positively on satisfaction. This

could be explained by adopting the well-known Hertzberg's et. al’s. dual-factor theory

(Hertzberg, Mausner and Snyderman 1959). The relax/sun motive could be viewed, in this

context, as a “hygiene factor”, regarding sun as a “must” which would make tourists’

disappointed if it did not feature. According to the dual-factor theory, two main sets of

motivating factors might emerge. Hygiene factors might be described as “dissatisfiers”, and

could be seen as a necessity and thus relevant for the tourists in situations only when it was

deficient.

Tourist satisfaction with the destination was primarily explained by satisfaction factors

such as the service/organising side of the journey and specific activities performed

(explaining over 50% of the variance). The service/organising factor seemed to provide the

major effect upon overall satisfaction and intention to recommend. These results indicated

that improvement in the service/organising attributes of the journey would contribute to an

increased overall satisfaction with the journey as well as increased positive word of mouth for

Norwegian outbound charter tourists. Further, an improvement on tourists’ satisfaction with

specific activities would influence traditional charter tourists’ overall satisfaction and their

intention to communicate via positive word of mouth. Tourist satisfaction materialised, as

many other tourist studies reveal (e.g. Kozak and Rimmington 2000), primarily as the

intention to communicate via positive word of mouth..

The explained variance of tourist satisfaction upon the intention to re-buy was found

to be weaker, and thus had to be regarded simultaneously with the need for visiting new

destinations (novelty seeking), a well-known issue within tourism (e.g. Basala and Klenosky

2001). Many tourists search for new places to visit, not necessarily for the reason of

30

disappointment with previous destinations, but as a drive for learning and experiencing new

places. The low explained variance concerning tourist satisfaction upon intention to re-buy

the charter-tour did not support the results concerning the tourists’ relatively high degree of

intention to take repeat visits to Mallorca in the Kozak and Rimington (2000) study. The

difference in the two studies might be explained by the fact that in the Kozak and

Rimmington study the focus was on the off-seasons, while in the present study the time for

vacation was unknown (within a year).

The present study supports the Kozak and Rimmington (2000) study regarding the

importance of performing further empirical tests of the effects or consequences of tourists’

satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

Based on the findings in the present study, it must be concluded that Norwegian outbound

charter tourists to a certain degree act in a rational way. They choose activities, which are

consistent with their initial motives for taking a vacation, and they become satisfied. Their

overall satisfaction with the destination is primarily explained by the service/organising side

of the trip. However, the relationships between motivation, choice of activity and satisfaction

are not that simple.

The weakest links in the study seem to be the expected relationship regarding the

tourists’ motives and activities effect on satisfaction. The result reveals that activities explain

11 percent of the variance of tourist satisfaction with specific activities and almost 15 percent

of the explained variance in satisfaction with culture. Further, tourist motives explain 15

percent of the variance in tourist satisfaction with culture. The other relationships tested for

31

explain less than 10 percent of the variance. This might reflect that people do not always act

as initially aimed for and that unexpected things happen. One explanation for this can be what

Crompton and McKay (1989) discuss as variables outside the individual’s control (e.g.

weather and other tangible or intangible conditions of a social situation). Further, it might be

explained by the fact that most people learn when they travel. They meet new people, new

places, and enter new relationships which give them information and new knowledge (which

often reflects important motives). The unexpected is probably expected in a way, since the

tourists judge the trip as satisfactorily as they did despite the various motives for travelling

and activities while being there. Researchers (Gardial et al 1994; Henke 1995 in Oliver 1997)

discuss this observable fact by expressing the possible differences between choice drivers and

satisfaction drivers (Gardial et al 1994; Henke 1995 in Oliver 1997). The possible difference

between the two sets of criteria might reflect 1) that on tour, incidents happen that are not

possible to plan for and, 2) that people during their vacation try to avoid being dissatisfied

(which probably did not attract the tourist in the first place) and 3) The learning side of a

journey gives new competence and new drives for satisfaction. It could even be speculated

that producing a vacation during the trip is rational behavior undertaken in order to become

satisfied.

It could also be assumed that some important motives (e.g. nice weather) are important

for satisfaction even if the weather conditions are bad; otherwise it will to a lesser extent

affect tourist satisfaction (c.f. Hertzberg, Mausner and Snyderman 1959).

The charter tourists are satisfied with the destination and with the elements of the trip.

Satisfaction with the service/organising side of the journey explains overall satisfaction with

the destination and positive word of mouth. These results indicate that improvement in the

service/organising attributes of the journey contributes to an increased overall satisfaction

32

with the journey as well as increased positive word of mouth for Norwegian outbound charter

tourists.

The main conclusion in the present study is, therefore, that people act in a rational way

due to the fact that they become satisfied (which indicates that their needs are met). To better

understand the tourist experience it should probably to a greater extent be viewed as a

production process. Understanding how consumers consume or actually engage in the

production process while consuming has been given an exciting interpretation (Holt 1995).

Holt presents a typology of consumption practices, based on the purpose of the action and the

structure of the action. The Holt model is based on spectator consumption practices on

professional baseball games. The Holt model can be applied to other empirical settings such

as eating out at a restaurant or joining a sightseeing tour.

The findings in the present study should be of interest for the industry considering

product-development and marketing communication. To assure positive word of mouth, the

industry should focus on improving the service/organising side of the charter product. The

rest of the tourist experience seems, to a certain degree, to be provided by the tourists

themselves.

33

Figure 1 Overall Model of Tourist Satisfaction with a Destination:

Antecedents and Consequences

Overall Consequences Antecedents Satisfaction of tourist Satisfaction - motives - overall satisfaction - Word of mouth - activities with the destination - Repeat business - satisfaction attributes (with single items)

34

Table 1

Consistency in- and Interaction among Scales: Satisfaction, Activities and Motives

(a) Scale (b) Scales

# of items

Mean SD Alpha 2 3 4

Satisfaction* 1. Service/organising 2. Activities (in general) 3. Activities

(specific) 4. Culture

9 3 7 3

3.91 3.87 3.67 3.37

0.479 0.517 0.728 0.52

0.75 0.84 0.72 0.78

0.507 --- --- ---

0.447 0.442 --- ---

0.389 0.440 0.446 ---

# of items

Mean SD Alpha ****

2 3 4 5 6

Activities** 1. Learning about

destination 2. Traditional

charter-sun activities

3. Water activities 4. Play 5. Trips 6. Culture

4 6 4 3 4 2

2.19 2.79 1.18 1.35 2.13 1.10

0.801 0.634 0.383 0.562 0.755 1.110

--- --- --- --- --- ---

0.161 --- --- --- --- ---

0.162 0.119 --- --- --- ---

0.094 0.456 0.132 --- --- ---

0.253 0.050 0.065 0.014 --- ---

0.261 0.006 0.042 0.078 0.138 ---

# of items

Mean SD Alpha 2 3 4

Motives*** 1. Relax/sun 2. Learning/culture 3. Lifestyle/social 4. Fitness

12 9 10 4

3.66 3.46 2.72 3.09

0.787 0.768 0.745 0.996

0.87 0.86 0.83 0.88

-0.47 --- --- ---

0.294 0.455 --- ---

0.199 0.310 0.479 ---

* The measurement scale ranges from 1 to 5, where 1=very dissatisfied, 3 = neutral and 5 = very satisfied ** The measurement scale ranges from 1 to 6, where 1=did not perform, 6= more than 6 hours per day ***The measurement scale ranges from 1 to 5, where 1= not important at all, 3 = neutral and 5 = very important **** Alpha values are not relevant given that activities are regarded as formative measures

35

Table 2

Motives Prediction of Activities

Variables Standardized Beta t-Statistic Sig. Dependent variable: Activity -Traditional charter/sun Independent variables: Motivation

- Relax/sun - Learning/culture - Lifestyle/social - Fitness

Total Explained variance R2 = 0.495 (49.5%)

0.703 -0.079 -0.003 -0.115

28.363 -2.949 -0.086 -4.274

0.000 0.003 0.931 0.000

Dependent variable: Activities - Learning about destination Independent variables: Motivation



-0.249 0.640 -0.125 -0.081

-9.500 22.572 -3.993 -2.868

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004

Dependent variable: Activities - Play Independent variables: Motivation


Total Explained variance R2 = 0.116 = (11.6%)

0.305 -0.096 0.062 0.014

9.256 -2.708 1.570 0.396

0.000 0.007 0.117 0.693

Dependent variable: Activities - Water activities Independent variables: Motivation



0.031 0.103 0.069 -0.056

0.884 2.746 1.657 -1.488

0.377 0.006 0.098 0.137

Dependent variable: Activities - Trips Independent variables: Motivation



-0.048 0.134 -0.020 0.276

-1.467 3.749 -0.504 7.724

0.143 0.000 0.614 0.000

Dependent variable: Activities - Culture Independent variables: Motivation



-0.178 0.077 0.076 0.006

-5.191 2.085 1.856 0.157

0.000 0.037 0.064 0.875

36

Table 3

Motives Prediction of Satisfaction Variables Standardized Beta t-Statistic Sig. Dependent variable: Satisfaction with service/organising Independent variables: Motivation


Total Explained variance R2 = 0.032 0 (3.2%)

0.017 0.172 0.017 -0.003

0.493 4.647 0.426 -0.069

0.622 0.000 0.671 0.945

Dependent variable: Satisfaction with activities in general Independent variables: Motivation



0.076 0.005 0.013 0.029

2.214 0.141 0.327 0.781

0.027 0.888 0.744 0.435

Dependent variable: Satisfaction with specific activities Independent variables: Motivation



-0.104 0.278 -0.037 -0.036

-2.876 7.097 -0.863 -0.930

0.004 0.000 0.388 0.352

Dependent variable: Satisfaction with the culture Independent variables: Motivation



-0.263 0.223 0.065 -0.149

-7.328 5.959 1.566 -3.871

0.000 0.000 0.118 0.000

Dependent variable: Overall Satisfaction with The destination Independent variables: Motivation



0.027 0.080 0.029 0.008

0.765 2.103 0.699 0.218

0.444 0.036 0.484 0.828

37

Table 4 Activities Prediction of Satisfaction

Variables Standardized Beta t-Statistic Sig. Dependent variable: Satisfaction – service/org Independent variables: Activities

- Traditional sun/charter - Learning about destination - Play - Water - Trips - Culture

Total Explained variance R2 = 0.027 = (2,7%)

0.060 0.118 -0.105 -0.024 0.042 0.022

1.798 3.753 -3.188 -0.809 1.408 0.731

0.072 0.000 0.001 0.419 0.159 0.465

Dependent variable: Satisfaction – with activities (in general) Independent variables: Activities



0.053 0.040 0.038 -0.016 0.079 0.013

1.565 1.261 1.144 -0.519 2.619 0.436

0.118 0.208 0.253 0.604 0.009 0.663

Dependent variable: Satisfaction – with specific activities Independent variables: Activities



-0.101 0.309 0.071 0.016 -0.043 -0.005

-2.933 9.469 2.102 0.508 -1.410 -0.175

0.003 0.000 0.036 0.612 0.159 0.861

Dependent variable: Satisfaction – with culture Independent variables: Activities



-0.214 0.234 -0.101 0.021 -0.28 0.097

-6.082 7.154 -0.290 0.666 -0.906 3.122

0.000 0.000 0.772 0.506 0.365 0.002

Dependent variable: Overall Satisfaction – with the destination Independent variables: Activities



0.079 0.071 -0.056 -0.047 0.035 0.024

2.309 2.239 -1.659 -1.542 1.168 0.785

0.021 0.025 0.097 0.123 0.243 0.433

38

Table 5 Satisfaction and Subsequent Consequences: Factors Affecting Overall Satisfaction with

the Destination, Word of Mouth and Intention to Re-buy the Trip

Variable

Part a) Dependent variable: overall satisfaction with the destination Independent variables: Factor 1 (service/organising) Factor 2 (activities in general) Factor 3 (specific activities) Factor 4 (culture) Total explained variance (R2) = 0.5016 = (50,3%) Part b) Dependent variable: Intention to re-buy a charter product Independent variable Factor 1 (service/organising) Factor 2 (activities in general) Factor 3 (specific activities) Factor 4 (culture) Sat. with Destination Total explained variance (R2) = R2 = 0.041 (4.1%) Part c) Dependent variable: Intention to perform positive word of mouth Independent variable Factor 1 (service/organising) Factor 2 (activities in general) Factor 3 (specific activities) Factor 4 (culture) Satisfaction with Destination Total explained variance (R2) = 0.3075 = (30.75%)

39

References Ajzen, I. and M. Fishbein (1980) Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs. Anderson, E.W. and M.W. Sullivan (1990) “Customer Satisfaction and Retention Across Firms.” In Zeithaml, Berry and Parsuraman (Eds.) Presentation in TIMS college of marketing special interest conference on service marketing. Nashville, T.N. September, 1996. Atkinson, J.W. (1964) An Introduction to Motivation. Princenton NJ: Van Nostrand. Barsky, J.D. (1992) “Customer Satisfaction in the Hotel Industry: Meaning and Measurement.” Hospitality Research Journal. Vol. 16 (1): 51-73. Basala, S.L. and D.B. Klenosky (2001) “Travel-Style Preferences for Visiting a Novel Destination: A Conjoint Investigation across the Novelty-Familiarity Continuum.” Journal of Travel Research. Vol. 40 (November): 172-182. Beard, J.G. and M.G. Ragheb (1983) “Measuring Leisure Motivation.” Journal of Leisure Research. Vol. 15 (3): 219-228. Beeho, A.J. and R.C. Prentice (1997) Conceptualizing the Experiences of Heritage Tourists: A Case Study of New Lanark World Heritage Village. Tourism Management. Vol. 18(2): 75-87. Bieger, T. and C. Laesser (2002) “Market Segmentation by Motivation: The Case of Switzerland.” Journal of Travel Research. Vol. 41 (August): 68-76. Berlyne, D.E. (1967) Arousal and Reinforcement. In: D. Levine, Ed. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. Bojanic, D.C. (1996) Consumer Perception of Price, Value, and Satisfaction in the Hotel Industry: An Explorative Study. Journal of Hospitality and Leisure Marketing. Vol. 14 (1): 5-22. Bojanic, D.C. and L.D. Rosen (1996) “Measuring Service Quality in Restaurants: An Application of the Servqual Instrument.” Hospitality Research Journal. Vol. 18 (1): 3 14. Bowen, D. (2002) Research through Participant Observation in Tourism: A Creative Solution to the Measurement of Consumer Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction (CS/D) among Tourists. Journal of Travel Research. Vol. 41 (August): 4-14. Cha, S., McCleary, K., and Uysal, M. (1995). Travel Motivation of Japanese Overseas Travellers. A Factor-Cluster Approach. Journal of Travel Research. Vol. 33(3): 33-39. Chadee, D. and J. Mattsson (1995) “An Empirical Assessment of Customer Satisfaction in Tourism.” The Service Industry Journal. Vol. 16(3): 305-320. Chadee, D. and J. Mattsson (1996) Measuring Customer Satisfaction with Tourist Service Encounters. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing . Vol 4(4): 97-107. Chhetri, P., C. Arrowsmith and M. Jackson (2003, in press) “Determining Hiking Experience in Nature-Based Tourist Destinations.” Tourism Management. Chon, K.S. and M.D. Olsen (1991) “Functional and Symbolic Approaches to Consumer Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction in Tourism.” Journal of International Academy of Hospitality Research. Vol. 28: 1-20. Clawson, M. and J.L. Knetsch (1971) Economics of Outdoor Recreation. The Johns Hopkins Press: Baltimore and London. Crandall R. (1980) ”Motivation for Leisure.” Journal of Leisure Research. First Quarter. Cronin, J.J. and S.A. Taylor (1992) “Measuring Service Quality: A Re-examination and Extension.” Journal of Marketing. Vol. 56: 55-68.

40

Crompton, J.L. (1979) "Motivation for pleasure vacations." Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 6: 408-424. Crompton, J.L. and S.L. MacKay (1997). Motivations of Pleasure Vacation. Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 24(2), 73-86. Danaher, P.J. and N. Arweiler (1996) “Customer Satisfaction in the Tourist Industry: A Case Study of Visitors to New Zealand.” Journal of Travel Research. Vol. 34: 89-93. Dann, G. (1977) “Anomie, Ego-Enhancement and Tourism.” Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 4 (2): 184-194. Dann, G. (1981) “Tourist Motivation: An Appraisal.” Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 8 (2): 187 – 194. Dunn-Ross, E.I.. and S.E. Iso-Ahola (1991) Sightseeing Tourists’ Motivation and Satisfaction.” Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 18 (430-448). Fishebein, M. and I. Ajzek (1975) Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introductio to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Westley. Fodness, D. (1994) “Measuring Tourist Motivation.” Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 21(3): 555-581. Fornell, C. (1992) "A National Customer Satisfaction Barometer: The Swedish Experience". Fornell, C., M.D. Johnson, E.W. Anderson, J. Cha, and B.E. Bryant (1996) “The American Customer Satisfaction Index. Nature, Purpose and Findings.” Journal of Marketing. Vol. 60: 7-18. Gardial, S.F., D.S. Clemonts, R.B. Woodroff, D.W.Shumann, and M.J. Burns (1994). “Comparing Consumers` Recall of Prepurchase and Postpurchase Evaluation Experiences.” Journal of Consumer Research. Vol. 24 (March): 109-121. Gitelson, R.J., and D.L. Kerstetter (1998) “The Relationship Between Sociodemographic Variables, Benefits Sought and Subsequent Vacation Behavior: A Case Study.” Journal of Travel Research. Vol. 28 (Winter): 24-29. Gray, J.P. (1970) International Travel – International Trade. Lexington Heath: Lexington Books. Hallowell, R. (1996) “The Relationship of Customer Satisfaction. Customer Loyalty, Profitability: An Empirical Study.” International Journal of Service Industry Heide, M., K. Gronhaug, and M.G. Engset “Industry Specific measurement of Consumer Satisfaction: Experiences From the Business Travelling Industry.” International Journal of Hospitality Management. Vol. 18: 201-213. Heider, F. (1958) The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. Wiley: New York. Henke, L.L. (1995) “A Longitudinal Analysis of the Ad Agency-Client Relationship: Prediction of an Agency Switch.” Journal of Advertising Research. Vol 35 (March/April): 24-30. In R.L.Oliver, Eds. (1997) Satisfaction. A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer. Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill. Hertzberg Fredric, Bernard Mausner, and Barbara B. Snyderman. 1959. The Motivation to Work. 2nd. Ed. Wiley: New York. Holt, Douglas B. (1997) “How Consumers Consume: A Typology of Consumption Practices” Journal of Consumer Research. Vol. 22. (June): 1-16. Hsieh, S., J.T.O`Leary, and A.M.Morrison (1994) “A Comparison of Packaged and Non Packaged Travelers from the United Kingdom.” In Global Toruist Behaviour. Ed. M. Uysal. New York: International Business Press. Pp. 79-100. Iso-Ahola, S.E. (1982) “Towards a Social Psychological Theory of tourism Motivation: A Rejoinder.” Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 12: 256-262. Ivancevich, J.M. and M.T. Matteson (1993) Organisational Behavior and Management. Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin.

41

Jamrozy, U. and M. Uysal (1994) “Travel Motivation Variations of Overseas Visitors.” Journal of International Consumer Marketing. Vol. 6 (3/4): 135-160. Jang, S.C., A.M. Morrison and J.T.O´Leary (2002) Benefit Segmentation of Japanese Pleasure Travelers to the USA and Canada Selecting Target Markets Based on the Profitability and Risk of Individual Market Segments. Tourism Management. Vol. 23: 367-378 Johns, N. and S. Gyimòthy (2002) “Market Segmentation and the Prediction of Tourist Behavior: The Case of Bornholm, Denmark.” Journal of Travel Research. Vol. 40 (February): 316-327. Joppe, M., D.W. Martin, and J. Waalen (2001) “Toronto’s Image as a Destination: A Comparative Importance-Satisfaction Analysis by Origin of Visitor.” Journal of Travel Research. Vol. 39 (February): 252-260. Kleiven, J. (1998) Skalaer for Måling av Aktivitets- og Motivmønstre i en Norsk Lokalbefolknings ferie og fritid. Lillehammer rapport no. 77: Høgskolen i Lillehammer. Kleiven, J. (1999) Leisure Motives as Predictors of Activities: The Lillehammer Scales in a National Survey. Lillehammer rapport no: 49. Høgskolen i Lillehammer. Kozak, M. and M. Rimmington (1998) Benchmarking: Destination Attractiveness and Small Hospitality Business Performance. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 10th. May:184-189. Kozak, M. and M. Rimmington (2000) ”Tourist Satisfaction with Mallorca, Spain, as of season Holiday Destination.” Journal of Travel Research. Vol. 38 (February): 260 269. Kozak, M. (2001) “Comparative Assessment of Tourist Satisfaction with Destinations Across two Nationalities.” Tourism Management. Vol. 22 (4): 391-401. Kozak (2003) “Measuring Tourist Satisfaction with Multiple Destination Attributes.” Tourism Analysis. Vol. 7: 229-240. Lewis, R.C., R.E. Chambers, and H.E. Chacko (1995) Marketing Leadership in Hospitality. Foundations and Practices. 2nd. Ed. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. MacKay, K. and J. Crompton (1990) “Measuring the Quality of Recreation Services.” Journal of Park and Recreation Administration. Vol. 8 (3): 47-56. Mannel, R. and S.E. Iso-Ahola (1987) “Psychological Nature of Leisure and Tourism Experience.” Annals of tourism Research. Vol. 14: 314-331. McIntosh, R. and C. Goeldner (1986) Tourism Principles, Practices, Philosophies. 5th.ed. Columbus: Grid Publishing: USA. Meyer, W. (1977) Activität im Urlaub. In Fortschritte der Marktpsychologie. K.D. Hartmann and K.F. Koeppler, eds. P. 259-291. Frankfurt: Fachbuchhandlund der Psychologie. Middleton, V.T.C. (1994) Marketing in Travel & Tourism. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Millàn, À. and À. Esteban (2003, in press) Development of a Multiple-item Scale for Measuring Customer Satisfaction in Travel Agencies Services. Tourism Management. October: 1-14. Moscardo, G., A.M. Pearce, P.L. Lang, C. and O’Leary, J.T. (1995) “Understanding Vacation Destination Choice Through Travel Motivation and Activities.” Journal of Vacation Marketing. Vol. 2(2): 109-122. Neal, J.D., M.J. Sirgy and M. Uysal (1999) “The Role of Satisfaction with Leisure Travel/Tourism Services and Experience in Satisfaction with Leisure Life and Overall Life.” Journal of Business Research. Vol. 44: 153-163. Nelson, P. (1970) “Information and Consumer Behaviour.” Journal of Political Economy. Vol. 78 (March/April): 311-329 In S.F. Gardial, D.S. Clemons, R.B. Woodruff, D.W. Schumann and M.J. Burns (1994) Comparing Consumers’ Recall of Prepurchase and

42

Postpurchase Product Evaluation Experiences. Journal of Consumer Research. Vol. 24 (March): 109-121. Noe, F. and M. Uysal (1997) “Evaluation of Outdoor Recreational Settings. A Problem of Measruing User Satisfaction.” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services. Vol. 4 (4): 223-230. Norusis, M. J. (1994). SPSS Advanced Statistics 6.1. Chicago, Illinois: SPSS Inc. Pedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. (1991). Measurement, Design, and Analysis. New Jersey: Erlbaum. Oliver, R.L. (1980) A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decision”. Journal of Marketing Research. Vol. 17: 460-469. Oliver R.L. (1997) Satisfaction. A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer. Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill. Oliver, R.L. (1993) “Cognitive, Affective and Attribute Biases and the Satisfaction Response.” Journal of Consumer Research. Vol. 20 (December): 418-430. Oliver, R.L. and J.E. Swan (1989) “Consumer Perceptions of Interpersonal Equity and Satisfaction in Transactions: A Field Survey Approach.” Journal of Marketing. Vol. 53: 21-35. Pearce, P.L. and M.L. Caltabiano (1983) Inferring Travel Motivation from Travellers`Experiences. Journal of Travel Research. Vol. 22 (20): 16-20. Peter, Paul J., and Jerry C. Olson (1996) Consumer Behavior, 4th ed.: Chicago: Irwin. Petrick, J.F. (2003) Are Loyal Visitors Desired Visitors. Tourism Management (article in Press). Pizam, A. (1994) “Monitoring Customer Satisfaction.” In Food and Beverage Management: A Selection of Readings. Eds. B David and A. Lockwood. Oxford, UK: Butterworth- Heinemann, pp. 231-247. Pizam, A., Y. Neuman and A. Reichel (1979) Tourist Satisfaction: Uses and Misuses. Annals of Tourism Research. Vol.6: 96-107. Reisinger, Y. and L.W. Turner (2002) “The Determination of Shopping Satisfaction of Japanese Tourists Visiting Hawaii and the Gold Coast Compared.” Journal of Travel Research. Vol. 41(November): 167-176. Ross, G. (1993) “Destination Evaluation and Vacation Preferences.” Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 20: 477-489. Saleh, F. and C. Ryan (1992) “Client Perceptions of Hotels.” Tourism Management. Vol. 13 (June): 163-168. Smith, V. (1979) Women-the Taste Makers of Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 6: 49-60. Spreng, R.A.S., R.W. Mackenzie and R.W. Olashavsky (1996) “A Reexamination of the Determinants of Consumer Satisfaction”. Journal of Marketing. Vol. 60: 15-32. Startour. 2003 http://www.startour.no/contact/. Oslo. Toleman, E.C. (1959) “Principles of Purposive Behavior.” In Psychology: A Study of a Science. S. Koch. Ed. Vol. 2: 92 – 157. Toy, D., D. Kerstetter and R. Ragheb (2002) “Evaluating Customer Satisfaction.” Tourism Analysis. Vol. 6: 99-108. Turner, L. and J. Ash (1975) The Golden Hordes: International Tourism and the Pleasure Periphery. London: Constable. Witt, S.F. (1980) “An Econometric Comparison of UK and German Foreign Holiday Behavior.” Managerial and Decision Economics. Vol. 1 (3): 123-131. Yoon, Y. and M. Uysal (2003, in press) “An Examination of the Effects of Motivation and Satisfaction on Destination Loyalty: A Structural Model.” Tourism Management.

http://www.startour.no/contact/

43

Appendix 1: Explorative Factor Analysis of Satisfaction Items

h2 Service/organising Activities (in general)

Activities (specific)

Culture

1. Service 2. Restaurants 3. Tour operator 4. Food 5. Hotel 6. Flight

(transportation) 7. Nature/environment 8. Shopping facilities 9. Your own planning 10. Type of activities 11. Number of activities 12. Sightseeing 13. Active play/training 14. Beach/swim 15. Travelling party 16. Meet new people 17. Boating/sailing 18. Walking facilities 19. Play 20. Theatre 21. Concerts/festivals 22. Culture amenities

0.58 0.49 0.39 0.39 0.45¨ 0.32 0.50 0.37 0.22 0.89 0.81 0.53 0.66 0.41 0.43 0.47 0.32 0.39 0.66 0.78 0.83 0.53

0.70 0.62 0.61 0.59 0.57 0.57 0.49 0.48 0.42

0.87 0.86 0.57

0.67 0.60 0.58 0.49 0.50 0.43 0.70

0.87 0.90 0.51

Percentage of common variance 11.35 3.48 2.89 2.55 2.43

Percentage of trace 100.00 30.7 25.5 22.5 21.40

Eigen value 6.07 2.08 1.67 1.49

Alpha 0.7459 0.8414 0.7161 0.7806

44

Appendix 2: Explorative Factor Analysis of Activities

h2 Learning about the destination

Traditional Charter – sun act.

Water activities

Play Trips Culture activities

1. Read about attractions 2. Read about the culture and

history of the destination 3. Learned about the culture of the

destination 4. Went on organised sightseeing 5. Sunbathing 6. Bathing in the sea 7. Visited restaurants 8. Bathing in the pool 9. Shopping 10. Read newspapers, magazines,

books etc 11. Sailing at sea 12. Boat trip 13. Fishing 14. Waterskiing etc. 15. Playing football/handball etc. 16. Golf/tennis/Squash 17. Played/was together with

children in the family 18. Played at road/beach 19. Sightseeing alone 20. Went for a slow walk 21. Went for a hard walk 22. Trip with family by car 23. Theatre/opera/ballet 24. Concerts/festivals

0.83 0.82 0.78 0.43 0.68 0.58 0.18 0.36 0.16 0.32 0.67 0.57 0.25 0.38 0.56 0.44 0.53 0.59 0.57 0.47 0.45 0.36 0.67 0.68

0.89 0.89 0.87 0.44

0.75 0.68 0.40 0.46 0.35 0.46

0.81 0.71 0.42 0.56

0.73 0.65 0.65 0.54

0.70 0.66 0.65 0.45

0.82 0.80

Percentage of common variance 51.26 14.94 12.09 7.51 6.28 5.65 4.79

Percentage of trace 100.00 29.2 23.6 14.7 12.3 11.0 9.3

Eigen value 3.584 2.902 1.802 1.506 1-355 1.149

Alpha 0.7650 0.6408 0.5344 0.5183 0.5307 0.6490

45

Appendix 3: Explorative Factor Analysis of Motivation

h2 Relax/sun Learning/culture Lifestyle/social Fitness

1. Get away from stress 2. Enjoy beach and sea 3. Get new strength 4. Enjoying the sun 5. To have time to do what you please 6. Swim in the sea 7. Time for the family 8. Avoid stress concerning the transfer 9. Let the kids have a good time 10. Get away from noise and pollution 11. Be romantic 12. Swim in the pool 13. learning about another- country and culture 14. visiting known places and attractions 15. experiencing the nature and the surroundings 16. cultural experiences 17. To learn something new 18. Travel around 19. Experience the atmosphere 20. Go on organised sigh-seeing trips 21. Practicing language skills 22. To keep in touch with friends 23. Get to know new people 24. To demonstrate what you can do 25. Keep in contact with the family 26. To use your capabilities 27. To develop your personality/hobby 28. Not being lonely at holiday 29. Change your lifestyle 30. Eat and drink in good company 31. Have fun 32. To get exercise 33. Get new energy 34. Take care of your health 35. To work out hard -get tired

0.61 0.61 0.58 0.58 0.50 0.50 0.44 0.51 0.44 0.45 0.34 0.30

0.74 0.67 0.74 0.60 0.54 0.40 0.45 0.38 0.41 0.53

0.52 0.53 0.39 0.53 0.53 0.36 0.39 0.36 0.32

0.71 0.58 0.65 0.60

0.76 0.74 0.72 0.69 0.68 0.67 0.65 0.61 0.59 0.55 0.50 0.45

0.86 0.79 0.78 0.75 0.64 0.60 0.58 0.55 0.51 0.40

0.71 0.70 0.65 0.58 0.57 0.54 0.53 0.50 0.44

0.81 0.81 0.75 0.70

Percentage of common variance 51.02 22.28 15.97 7.21 5.62

Percentage of trace 100.0 43.67 31.30 14.13 11.01

Eigenvalue 7.780 5.590 2.522 1.967

Alpha 0.8702 0.8592 0.8256 0.8786

tourist satisfaction with a destination: antecedents and ... · single product during the vacation,...

Documents