Comment

Comment by 陳老頭 on May 20, 2022 at 10:20pm

However potential tourists are lost in options due to the fact that there are variety of destinations in many countries, huge number of holiday types, flexibility of travel, accomodations and timing arrangements. Tourists most possibly favour those holidays which offers the fullest realisations of their expectations between these so many choice. Chon [1990] explains decision-making process as a complex process consisting of the following stages: 1-) the recognition of needs. The tourist believes that a holiday purchase will satisfy his or her needs. The tourist has now tentatively decided to go on holiday. Now she/he must decide where to go. 2-) deciding where to go. This process involves: information searches, the evaluation of alternatives, the choice of a product and post-purchase evaluation

The decision-making process has been conceived in a variety of ways. Buying a holiday is for many individuals and families high-risk decision, the planning stage assumes a major role [Gitelson, Crompton 1983: 222]. On the contrary of retail purchases, a holiday purchase is a highly risky because there is no chance for tourists to observe directly what is being bought nor try it. Also previous experience of holiday-maker does not gurantee the future satisfaction. The degree of planning varies between different types of tourists. The planning of holiday incuding decisions whether to go and where to go generally takes place over a long time as a result of systematic process. Systematic information search of external sources is used much more frequently in making holiday and travel-related decisions to purchase most of other types of product [Gitelson, Crompton 1983: 155].

It should be emphasized the factors that lead an individual to decide on a holiday, variables that may suppress or heighten such factors, and the roles that family members or others may play in the holiday decision process [Hall and Page, 1999]. Howard and Sheth [1969] also drew attention to the infuence of socio-environmental variables, on the other hand Crompton [1993] explored the importance of imagery and marketing. Ryan [1997] has attempted to conceptualize the whole decision- making process in terms of a model of ‘the tourist experience’. In addition, a linear model of tourism decision-making process which is adapted from Wahab, Crampton and Rothfield [1976] suggested that all decision making goes through the same process and goes through the same steps.

The theory of perceived risk assumes that consumer perceive risk in their purchasing behaviour and generally they tend to utilize risk reduction strategies. Perceived risk is defined as ‘a consumer’s perception of the overall negativitiy of a course of action based upon an assessment of the possible negative outcomes and the likelihood that those outcomes will occur’ [Mowen, Minor 1998: 176]. As soon as consumers have experienced a certain level of risk, their behaviour changes, from delaying the purchase to using strategies designed to reduce the risk level to a ‘tolerable’ one [Mowen, Minor 1998, Roselius 1971].

Perceived risk also could be used in part as a variable in explaining decision-making processes of tourists [Maser, Weiermair 1998: 195]: the higher the perceived risk, the more information tourists seem to seek and the more rational the decision process becomes. Researchs supports correlation between the sensation-seeking personality trait and perceptions of risk. Some individuals, namely high sensation seekers, engage in risky experiences fort the stimulation involved in the experience [Zuckerman 1994: 98].

Comment by 陳老頭 on May 20, 2022 at 9:36pm

Tourism products are highly risky because of their intangible characteristics. Intangibility makes it difficult to evaluate the product before purchase since tourism products are essentially produced and consumed simultaneously [Mitchell, Greatorex 1993: 147]. Tourism products are therefore assumed to be associated with a higher risk when purchasing than tangible products. In high risk situations, consumers’ need to search for external information is higher than in low-risk situations [Dowling, Staelin 1994, Beatty, Smith 1987].

Moutinho [1987] refers to five risk components for tourism services. They are:

1) functional risk-the risk that the product will not perform as expected,

2) physical risk-the risk that the product will be harmful,

3) financial risk-the risk that the product will not be worth its cost, either in time or money,

4) social risk-the risk that a poor product choice may result in embarressment before others, and

5) psychological risk-the risk that a poor product choice will harm the consumers’ ego.

In tourism context, Roehl and Fesenmaier [1992] also identified three basic dimensions of perceived risks: physical-equipment risk, vacation risk and destination risk. Tsaur, Tzeng, and Wang [1997] focused on two main types of risk: which refers to the possibility that an individual’s health is likely to be exposed to injury and sickness because of conditions such as law and order, weather and hygiene, as well as equipment risk, which refers to the dangers arising from the malfunctioning of equipment, such as insufficient telecommunication facilities, unsafe transportation and breakdown of vehicles.

Furthermore, Sönmez and Graefe [1998] examined types of risks associated with international travel and the overall degree of safety felt by the tourists. They identify several types of risk such as equipment/functional risk, financial risk, health risk, physical risk, political instability risk, psychological risk, satisfaction risk, social risk, terrorism and time risk. The results revealed that perceived risks were found to be strong predictors of the likelihood of avoiding destinations. The higher the perceived risk of the foreign destinations, the higher the likelihood that consumers will decide to avoid visiting it [Sönmez, Graefe 1998].

Tourist satisfaction is a critical issue for marketing. First of all, it should be identified the elements that influence the satisfaction experienced by the tourist. Satisfaction is the tourist’s sense that consumption provides outcomes against expectations and a standard of pleasure versus displeasure. Satisfaction has both cognitive nature and, on the other, affective nature. Oliver [1981] defines satisfaction from the cognitive perspective as a consumer’s comparison between performance and expectations. Oliver [1997, 1999] also made definition has an affective nature that ‘satisfaction is defined as pleasurable fulfilment”. In the case of tourism, satisfaction is a function of pre-travel expectations and post-travel experiences. Satisfaction has a one-dimensional construct, which varies along a continuum from dissatisfaction to satisfaction. When experiences compared to expactations results in feelings of gratification, the tourist is satisfied; when they result in feelings of displeasure, the tourist is dissatisfied [Pizam et al. 1978: 125]. Similarly, Hughes [1991] suggested that the tourists whose expectations are fulfilled by their experiences report satisfaction, on the other hand those whose expactations are not fulfilled report dissatisfaction.

Comment by 陳老頭 on May 19, 2022 at 8:18pm

The tourist satisfaction can also be affected by a positive or negative image. Previous experience must be taken into consideration because it causes tourist to have a different perception from those who have never visited it [Baloglu 2001: 45]. Since the image of the tourism destination influences the satisfaction experienced by the tourist. It has been found that the image is associated positively with consumer satisfaction in luxury hotels [Mazanec 1995: 65]. It is therefore necessary to generate studies of image and its relation to the satisfaction obtained in order to know the visitors’ intentions to return and to recommend the destination [Bigne´ et al. 2001: 145]. If the tourists are satisfied with the destination, it is difficult to affect the attraction felt for a place for holiday-making [Vogt, Andereck 2003: 126]. An aspect related to satisfaction is when an attempt is made to establish an emotional bond with tourists through the image of the destination, projecting ‘emotional satisfaction’ [Ekinci 2003: 96] and not only through the basic needs, such as food, rest or enjoyment [Chaudhary 2000, Kandampully and Suartanto 2000: 75].
Satisfaction and Revisit Intention: there is a general consensus that satisfaction brings positive behavioral outcomes and the understanding of satisfaction provides managerial guidance in the tourism industry. Oliver [1997] defined satisfaction as customer judgment about product or servicefulfillment. Similarly, Engel, Blackwell, and Miniard [1990] proposed a definition that satisfaction is the outcome of the subjective evaluation about whether or not the chosenalternative meets or exceeds the expectation.
Many theories are developed to explain satisfaction. The expectation-disconfirmation paradigm and the equity theories are two of these theories. Engel, et al. [1990] defined satisfaction as the most frequently cited one in accounting for satisfaction is expectation-disconfirmation paradigm (EDP) that suggests a comparison between expectation and performance. According to Oliver [1980], EDP suggests confirmation, positive disconfirmation, and negative disconfirmation. If service or product perceptions exactly meet expectations customers’ expectations are confirmed. When performance exceeds expectations positive disconfirmation occurs, on the other hand, if expectations exceed performance negative disconfirmation occurs. Thus, confirmation and positive disconfirmation result in satisfaction, while negative disconfirmation leads to dissatisfaction. Another theory on customer satisfaction is based on the equity theory [Oliver and Swan 1989: 100]. Satisfaction occurs when customers receive more value than what they spent in terms of price, time, and effort. According to Grewal, Monroe, and Krishnan [1998], perceived value is ‘‘the perception of psychological satisfaction obtained from taking advantage of the financial terms of the price deal.’’ The equity theory suggests that value is an appropriate measure to evaluate satisfaction [Heskett, et al. 1994, Kumar 2002, Oliver and Swan 1989, Su 2004].
In addition to satisfaction theories, the relationship between satisfaction and repurchase intention has been explored in various product and service markets. By proposing the existence of manifest satisfaction and latent satisfaction, Bloemer and Kasper [1995] argued that the relationship between consumer satisfaction and repurchase intention is not monotonic because of the disparity of customers’ motivation and capability to evaluate the purchased product/service brand relative to the reference point. Manifest satisfaction occurs when an explicit comparison is made between expectation and performance and when the customers can be conscious of the outcome of their own evaluation and satisfaction.

Comment by 陳老頭 on May 19, 2022 at 8:17pm

When there is no explicit comparison made because of a lack of motivation and/or capability of the customers to evaluate their own choice, customers cannot be fully aware of their own satisfaction, which is called latent satisfaction.

An empirical test by Bloemer and Kasper [1995] indicated that the positive influence of manifest satisfaction on repurchase intention is greater than that of latent satisfaction, so the general idea that satisfaction has a positive relationship with repurchase intention is still valid. Similarly, many researches show that the positive relationship between satisfaction and revisit intention has been found in tourism destination choice settings.
Loyalty is also critical issue for tourism as many sectors. Rundle-Thiele and Lockshin [2000] defines loyalty as the future behaviour commitment to purchase a product or service, or the link with a provider on all occasions when other alternatives are possible. Equivalencely, customer loyalty is defined by Backman and Compton [1991] thus involves a positive attitude towards the firm’s product or service, followed by favourable behavior that leads to purchasing it and reccomending to others. Gaining the loyalty of customers today takes place in both product and services markets and is identified frequently with the retention of customers because both concepts refer to the repetition of the purchase of products or services from a single firm by customers over a prolonged period of time [Petrick 2004, Tsaur et al. 2002: 233]. Reid and Reid [1993] also pointed out the importance of customer loyalty because it is also a stable source of revenue for firms, serving at the same time as an information channel that acts informally by recommending the product or service to family and friends.
In addition, Yim and Kannan [1999] argued that the definition of loyalty should include both exclusive and reinforcing loyalties. Exclusive loyalty was further termed as hardcore loyalty, for those consumers who have been won over by a particular alternative over time. Reinforcing loyalties are potential switchers that tend to purchase more than one alternative, exhibit divided loyalties among a few alternatives, and have an increased tendency to repurchase the alternative after their initial purchase. Yim and Kannan’s study [1999] pointed out that the reinforcing loyalty was associated with variety seeking, which is similarly based on the optimum levels of stimulation [Zuckerman 1971: 66].
Enlightened by the findings of Gyte and Phelps [1989] and the reinforcing loyalty of Yim and Kannan [1999], Feng and Jang [2004] argued a trichotomous TDRI tourist segmentation with a 5-year time frame: continuous repeater (travelers with consistently high revisit intentions over time), deferred repeater (travelers with low revisit intentions in the short-term but high revisit intentions in the long- term), and continuous switcher (travelers with consistently low revisit intentions over time). Among the three segments, deferred repeaters tend to reinforce visit intentions. Thus, they are also potential switchers who tend to visit more than one destination, showing divided loyalties and displaying an increased tendency to revisit the destination after their initial visit. Therefore, focusing on the deferred repeaters, this study is based on the idea that tourists’ visit intentions vary depending on time and that the intention could be split from a temporal perspective into short-term, mid-term, and long-term revisit intentions.

Comment by 陳老頭 on May 19, 2022 at 8:17pm

According to Oppermann [2000] there are various alternatives for measuring a tourist’s loyalty. First, loyalty can be measured through behaviour, by considering repeat purchasing. Secondly, it can be measured through attitude, analysing the tourist’s predisposition towards the tourism destination. Finally a composite measure is proposed, which integrates behaviour and attitude, considering that the tourist must have positive attitude and behaviour towards a destination for it to be considered true loyalty.
Loyalty is a concept related closely to customer satisfaction, and there is even a consensus that a high degree of satisfaction results in loyal customers. This makes loyalty the central concept of marketing and any discussion of it must take into account the elements involved in the process of its formation, such as customer satisfaction [Petrick and Backman 2002, Baker and Crompton 2000: 178] and brand image [Bigne’ et al. 2001: 68].
For marketing implications, the model of Fishbein and Ajzen [1975] suggests that attitudinal loyalty towards the tourism destination is directly and positively affected by the the image of the tourism destination. According to this model, a particular behaviour is determined by a single attitude. An attitude towards an object may determine different behaviours, such as the repetition of the visit, word of mouth or complaints. The attitude, in turn, is determined by beliefs, are image and satisfaction. Image and satisfaction indirectly influence behavioural loyalty through attitudinal loyalty.
The Effect of Service Quality on Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty: in tourism context there is a strong relationship between the customer satisfaction, loyalty and service quality. According to Dimanche and Havitz [1994] , quality of service is generally assumed to affect business performance and loyalty in a positive way. Hurley and Hooman [1998] point out that perception of service quality affect feelings of satisfaction, which will then affect loyalty and future buying decisions.
Service quality is linked to six performance indicators according to PIMS (Profit Impact of Marketing Strategies) database which contains information about strategy and performance on 2600 business worldwide: (1) customer loyalty, (2) repeat purchases, (3) reduced vulnerability to price wars, (4) ability to command high relative price without affecting market share, (5) lower marketing costs, and (6) market share improvements.
Some people prefer repeat visitation to the same destination, whereas others prefer to try some new place every time however, repeat purchase is crucial component for contemprary marketing in order to be successful. According to Markin [1969] prior satisfaction with a vacation destination may lead to repeat purchases. Also Cronin and Taylor [1992] suggested that customer satisfaction affected repurchase intent significantly. Reichheld and Sasser [1990] and Shoemaker and Lewis [1999] arrange the benefits of repeat purchase as (1) attracting previous customers is more cost-effective than gaining new ones; (2) 5% increase in customer retention could increase profit by 25–85%; and (3) customer retention tends to yield positive word-of-mouth referral.

Comment by 陳老頭 on April 17, 2022 at 6:10pm

（Con't）Also, Jones and Sasser [1995] used the customers’ stated intent to repurchase a product as a measure of the behavioural component of loyalty. They argued that intent to repurchase is a very strong indicator of future behaviour. Assael [1995] reported on a range of studies that were conducted which supported the view that intentions could be used to predict overt behaviour. In addition, Gitelson and Crompton [1984] pointed out that although satisfaction with a particular destination appears to be a necessary condition for explaining much repeat visitation, it is not sufficient to explain the phenomenon since many respondents reported satisfactory experiences and yet did not return to the same destination.They also suggested that there were five factors that can motivate repeat visitation:

1. it reduces the risk of an unsatisfactory experience;
2. there is an assurance that they would find their ‘kind of people’;
3. an emotional childhood attachment;
4. to experience some aspects of the destination which had been omitted on a previous occasion;
5. to expose others to the satisfactory experiences that tourists had previously.

As parallel with these explanations Witt and Witt [1995] suggested why people paid repeat visit to a destination: once people have been on holiday to a particular country and liked it, they tend to return to that destination. Similarly, Oppermann [1998] argued, ‘if tourists were happy with the previous (or even the immediate past) destination choice, they may not even look for information on other destinations for their next destination selections’. These arguments suggest that previous experience with a destination may affect the intention and the actual decision to revisit it.

Comment by 陳老頭 on April 17, 2022 at 6:10pm

At the level of the economy as a whole and for the individual attraction, repeat visits in tourism have also been accepted as an important phenomenon [Darnell and Johnson 2001: 122]. In addition, many travel destinations rely heavily on repeat visitors [Darnell and Johnson 2001, Gitelson and Crompton 1984: 158]. Many studies in recent years have focused on the antecedents of destination revisit intention to understand why travelers make repeat visits. As a result of these studies, major antecedents of revisit intention are satisfaction, quality related constructs, perceived value, past vacation experience, safety, image, attachment, and cultural difference.

According to Oppermann [1999], time is significant in tourist retention and loyalty because “time firstly plays a role in identifying appropriate time intervals during which a purchase may or may not take place’’. Darnell and Johnson [2001] also noted the significance of temporal viewpoint to destination management, indicating, ‘‘the time profile of repeat visiting has important implications for visit flows.’’ The study of Baloğlu and Erickson [1998] also showed that most international travelers to one destination are more likely to switch to another destination for their next trip, but many of them hope to revisit the same destinations in the future. However, their explanation on revisit intentions reflects the two implicit assumptions of former rerearches [Highes 1995, Schmidhauser 1976, Woodside and MacDonald 1994: 96]: (1) revisit intention lapses over time; and (2) the strength of revisit intention tends to be constant once it is created. The first assumption which argues revisit intention lapses over time is implied by the recency-frequency-monetary value (RFM) paradigm. It is one of the essential operational principles for many loyalty building programs [Hughes 1995: 75]. According to RFM paradigm individuals who buy one’s product more recently, more frequently, and spend more money are more likely to repurchase or respond to an incentive to repurchase. Furthermore, the notion of recency indicates that recent customers tend to repurchase and that the strength of their repurchasing intention will decrease over time.

The second assumption is closely related with tourist typologies. There are two distinct tourist segments according to Woodside and MacDonald [1994]: first one is visitors returning to a destination due to familiarity and the other one is visitors not returning due to familiarity. Schmidhauser [1976] argued that there are, at least, two different types of tourists: continuous repeaters who choose the same destination over and over again and continuous switchers who do not come back even though they are satisfied with the destination in their current visit.

Comment by 陳老頭 on December 29, 2021 at 11:15am

（Con't）On the other hand, Gitelson and Crompton [1984] categorized repeat visitors into three subgroups: infrequent, frequent, and very frequent, however they did not specify the frequency of visits for each group. Oppermann [1999] discussed a conceptual typology as a function of multiple visits, based on a New Zealand resident data: somewhat loyal (infrequent), loyal (regular), and very loyal (annual and biannual); and further extended this typology to cover the entire population by introducing four other traveler types: non-purchasers, disillusioned, unstable, and disloyal.

According to Jones and Sasser [1995], in non-competitive markets, satisfaction has little impact on loyalty as the customers are captive customers without having choice. On the other hand, in competitive markets, there is great difference between the loyalty of “satisfied” and “completely satisfied” customers. Totally satisfied customers are more likely to repurchase products than merely satisfied customers [Jones and Sasser 1995: 129].

The Effect of Word-of Mouth Communication on Repurchase Intention: Word-of-communication is a powerful force on consumer behaviour in tourism. In tourism research, loyalty has been measured using two main indicators: willingness to recommend or word-of-mouth, and likelihood of return [Bigne’ et al. 2001, Chen and Gursoy 2001, Baloglu et al. 2003, Petrick 2004: 157]. Word-of-communication is defined by Anderson [1998] as informal communication between private parties concerning evaluations of goods and services. It is likely that satisfied visitors will come back and will tell others about their favourable or unfavourable experiences [Kozak 2001: 169]. Ashworth and Goodall [1988] observed that if a tourist is dissatisfied they will not recommend the destination to others. Word-of-mouth has more significant impact on tourist perceptions than other forms of mass communication since, it is the most effective communication for the tourism industry. When making purchase decision for services, consumers generally rely more heavily on verbal messages [Davis, Guiltman and Jones, 1979: 147]. According to Bateson [1995], consumers believe that personal sources provide the most adequate and up-to-date information. Moreover, word-of-mouth techniques are perceived as more credible and less biased [Lovelock 1991: 152]. Payne [1993] also suggested that dissatisfied customers tell more than two times as many people about their poor experiences than those who are satisfied.

CONCLUSIONS

Word-of-mouth communication behavior of customers is positively affected by high service quality [Bone 1992, Helm 2000, Harrison-Walker 2001: 136]. Positive word-of-mouth communication will attract new customers and, hence, lead to higher revenues. Therefore customer satisfaction is central for realizing profits. Moreover, extremely dissatisfied customers are even more likely to engage in word-of-mouth than satisfied customers [Anderson 1998, Harrison-Walker 2001: 114]. Negative word-of-mouth will probably lead to lower customer loyalty and negative consequences for the attraction of new customers. Past research further revealed that customer loyalty is positively related to word-of-mouth communication [Zeithaml et al. 1996, Harrison-Walker 2001: 133]. Not only loyal customers are satisfied with the service but also they feel attached to the service provider.

(TYPOLOGY OF TOURISTS AND THEIR SATISFACTION LEVEL，by Dr Renata Grzywacz，Dr Patrycja Żegleń，Wydział Wychowania Fizycznego & Uniwersytet Rzeszowski Source: https://www.researchgate.net)

BIBLIOGRAPHY （Please Refer to the Original Article）

 

Comment by 陳老頭 on December 19, 2021 at 10:16am

Erik Cohen·AUTHENTICITY AND COMMODITIZATION IN TOURISM

Abstract: Three basic assumptions, common in the literature on tourism, regarding "commodi-tization," "staged authenticity," and the inability of tourists to have authentic experiences are re-examined. Authenticity is conceived as a negotiable rather than primitive concept, the rigor of its definition by subjects depending on the mode of their aspired touristic experience. New cultural developments may also acquire the patina of authenticity over time— a process designated at "emergent authenticity." It is also argued that commoditization does not necessarily destroy the meaning of cultural products, although it may change it or add new meanings to old ones.

Conclusions contrary to the deductions following from the above assumptions are spelled out, and a new approach to the study of authenticity and meaning in tourism, which could help the formulation of a more discerning tourism policy, is advocated. Keywords: authenticity, commoditization, cultural tourism, tourist experience, tour-ism policy, tourist arts and crafts. （See next column）

Comment by 陳老頭 on December 19, 2021 at 10:15am

Erik Cohen is the George S. Wise Professor of Sociology (The Hebrew University of Jerusalem 91905, Israel). He has done sociological and anthropological research in Israel and Peru and a series of studies on tourism, urban life, Christianity, and social change in Thailand.

INTRODUCTION： Much of the contemporary literature on the nature of modern tour-ism and its impact upon host societies relies on several important assumptions. In a most general way, these assumptions can be formulated as follows:First, tourism is said to lead to "commoditization" (Greenwood, 1977) of areas in the life of a community which prior to its penetration by tourism have been within the domain of economic relations regulated by criteria of market exchange (cf. Appadurai 1986). Local culture generally serves as the principal example of such commoditization.

In particular, "colorful" local costumes and customs, rituals and feasts, and folk and ethnic arts become touristic services or commodities, as they come to be performed or produced for touristic consumption. Sexual services, in the form of tourist-oriented prostitution, are another major example of commoditization. The critical issue is that corn-moditization allegedly changes the meaning of cultural products and of human relations, making them eventually meaningless: "We already know from world-wide experience that local culture . . . is altered and often destroyed by the treatment of it as a touristic attraction. It is made meaningless to the people who once believed in it . . . ",(Green-wood 1977:131). Furthermore, according to the same sourq, since local culture can be commoditized by anyone, without the consent of the participants (1977:137), it can be expropriated, and the local people exploited.

Second, commoditization is said to destroy the authenticity of local cultural products and human relations; instead a surrogate, covert "staged authenticity" (MacCannell 1973) emerges. As cultural products lose their meaning for the locals, and as the need to present the tourist with ever more spectacular, exotic and titillating attractions grows (Boorstin 1964:103),  contrived  cultural  products  are  increasingly "staged" for tourists and decorated so as to look authentic. Fake "airport art" (Graburn 1967) is sold to tourists as if it were a genuine cultural product. Above all, tourists, who are apparently permitted to penetrate beyond the "front" areas of the visited society into its "back" (MacCannell 1973:597-8), are in fact cheated. Such b ck regions are frequently inauthentic "false backs," insidiously staged  or tourist consumption. Thus, for example, localities may be staged a  being remote, or "non-touristic," in order to induce tourists to "discover' em (MacCannell 1973:594); and native inhabitants of "exotic" places, re taught to "play the native" in order to appear "authentic" to the/tourists (cf. Cohen 1982a:19-21).

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• 12
• Next ›
• Page