An Exploration of the Effects of Photograph Content,Photograph Source,and Price on Consumers’ Online Travel Booking Intentions

Abstract

This research employed two experimental studies to examine the relationship of photograph content with consumers’ online travel booking intentions, the role of photograph source in this relationship, and the impact of photograph content on consumer reaction to price. Study 1’s findings suggest that perceived information value mediates the effect of photograph content on consumers’ booking intentions, with product-focused photographs perceived as being higher in information value than experience-focused photographs. Further, perceived photograph credibility was found to influence consumer reaction to photograph content, with photograph source moderating the photograph content-perceived photograph credibility relationship. Study 2’s findings suggest that photograph content moderates the price–booking intentions relationship. When the price is higher than the average in the market, consumers are likely to rely more heavily on product-focused photographs than on experience-focused photographs to inform the booking decision. Together, the findings of these studies can guide travel marketers in developing cost-effective, photograph-based online content.

Keywords

photograph content photograph source credibility information value price

Introduction

The prevalence of online search for travel-related purchases requires firms to place significant emphasis on making the right online content available to consumers in order to encourage purchase. Firm-controlled websites have traditionally featured firm-generated content, including descriptions and professional photographs of the products, services, and amenities on offer, as well as price information. However, there has been a growing trend toward providing consumers with user-generated content in the form of reviews, aggregate ratings, and/or photographs to complement professionally generated content. For example, consumers viewing the websites of Hyatt Hotels will see postings of guests’ reviews, aggregate ratings, and guest photographs; Kimpton Hotels frequently retweets guest photographs on Twitter; and United Airlines’ loyalty program, Mileage Plus, solicits members’ travel photographs to include in its print and online publications.

The movement toward augmenting firm-generated content with user-generated content reflects growing evidence in the literature that user-generated content influences travel firms’ reputation and performance (Duverger 2013; Phillips et al. 2017; Yacouel and Fleischer 2012), as well as consumers’ online travel purchase decisions and their intentions to visit travel destinations (Book, Tanford, and Chen 2016; King, Racherla, and Bush 2014; Liu, Wu, and Lee 2019; Marder et al. 2019; Noone and McGuire 2013, 2016; Tanford and Montgomery 2015; Ye, Law, and Gu 2009). Prior research suggests that photographs influence consumers’ inferences about lodging experiences (Noone and Robson 2014, 2016), and their purchase behavior (Phelan et al. 2011). However, what is not yet clear from the literature is the potential impact that different types of photographic content may have on consumers’ online purchase behavior, the role that photograph source may play in consumers’ reactions to photograph content, or how consumers use photographs to inform hotel choice when other cues to quality are available in the online environment. This research aims to address these gaps in the literature.

In the first of two studies examining photographs’ role in the online purchase of hotel accommodation, we investigate the relationship between photograph content and consumers’ booking intentions, and explore the role of photograph source in this relationship. In line with prevailing characterizations of “functional” and “experiential” advertising claims (Samuelsen and Olsen 2010; Zarantonello, Jedidi, and Schmitt 2013), we distinguish two categories of photograph content in this research: product focused and experience focused. We define product-focused photographs as those that emphasize the functional and tangible elements of a service environment, including its physical facilities and its tangible product and service offerings. We define experience-focused photographs as those that feature consumers interacting with the hotel environment such that the more intangible, experiential elements of a service experience are highlighted. Further, we distinguish three categories of photograph source: photographs generated by the firm, photographs generated by the user, and a mix of firm- and user-generated photographs. We contend that, regardless of photograph source, consumers will perceive product-focused photographs as being richer in information value than experience-focused photographs, and further propose that perceived information value has a positive effect on consumers’ booking intentions. We also posit that photograph source moderates the effect of photograph content on consumers’ perceptions of photograph credibility, and that perceived photograph credibility has a direct and positive effect on both consumers’ perceptions of the information value of photograph content and their booking intentions. In study 2, we address how consumers use photographs to inform booking intention in the presence of other quality cues by examining the role of photograph content in consumers’ response to price.

For both study 1 and study 2, we have elected to focus solely on high-quality (i.e., high-resolution), positively valenced photographs. While it can be expected that the professional photographs provided by the firm will be of high quality and will present both the environment and service experience in a positive light, user-generated photographs can be of variable quality and do not always present a favorable image of the service environment or experience. Prior consumer research indicates that high-quality photographs are more aesthetically appealing and stimulating than those of lower quality (Bhattacharya, Sukthankar, and Shah 2010). Research on consumer reviews also points to the enhanced impact that positive (vs. negative) user-generated content can have on consumer choice (Noone and McGuire 2013). If high-quality, positively valenced user-generated photography is as effective as, if not better than, firm-generated photography in influencing consumers’ booking decisions, the financial implications for travel marketers could be significant, as might be the potential to build stronger relationships between travel firms and their users.

Literature Review

Photographs in Consumer Behavior Research

Prior research in the domains of advertising, marketing, and consumer behavior points to the powerful effect that photographs can have on consumers’ evaluations of a given product or service. It has been suggested that photographs are more powerful than text in terms of memorability and recall (Childers and Houston 1984; Edell and Staelin 1983; Kisielius 1982). This superiority of photographs over text has been attributed to their ability to elicit mental imagery (Childers and Houston 1984), defined as a mental event that entails visualization of a concept or relationship (Lutz and Lutz 1978). Mental imagery functions as a mnemonic device that aids the recall and learnability of material better than sentence elaboration or rote repetition (Morris and Stevens 1974). The enhanced memorability associated with images has been shown to attract attention (Pieters and Wedel 2004), generate emotional responses (Chowdhury, Olsen, and Pracejus 2008), increase advertisement effectiveness (Starch 1966), and create beliefs about product attributes (A. A. Mitchell and Olson 1981).

Within the tourism literature, photographs have been effectively utilized to analyze tourists’ travel demand and behaviors (Önder, Koerbitz, and Hubmann-Haidvogel 2016; Vu et al. 2015), study consumers’ perceptions of travel products and/or destinations (Dewar, Li, and Davis 2007; Pullman and Robson 2007; Y. Wang and Sparks 2016), and investigate destination image formation and marketing (Garrod 2009; Litvin and Mouri 2009; Mackay and Couldwell 2004; Michaelidou et al. 2013; Stepchenkova, Kim, and Kirilenko 2015). Researchers have emphasized the impact of photographs on attitude formation and behavioral intentions (Pan, Zhang, and Law 2013; Sparks and Wang 2014). For example, Kaplanidou and Vogt (2006) found that the presence of motivating visuals, such as photographs, on travel websites has a significant impact on website usefulness and consumers’ intentions to travel to a destination, while Jeong and Choi (2004) found that the content and realism of a hotel website’s photographs play a key role in influencing consumers’ attitudes toward the website. In a similar vein, Noone and Robson (2014) demonstrated that photographs play an important role in consumers’ decisions during both the browsing and deliberation phases of online hotel choice.

Together, this work illustrates the role of photographs in strengthening the persuasive power of marketing messages, and as influencers of consumers’ attitudes and booking decisions. We extend this literature by first examining the nature of the relationship between photograph content and consumers’ booking intentions, and the role of photograph source in this relationship. In the next section, we introduce the dimensions of perceived information value, and follow by examining the role that perceived information value plays in the photograph content–booking intentions relationship.

Dimensions of Perceived Information Value

Perceived information value refers to the utility that consumers feel they can derive from information presented to them (Vogt and Fesenmaier 1998). Prior research has demonstrated that the extent to which information is value-added (i.e., the extent to which information is beneficial and provides advantages from their use) can have a significant impact on travelers’ information adoption (Filieri and McLeay 2014). During online search, consumers must navigate and interpret a substantial amount of information. Thus, it is critical that marketers provide high-value content that efficiently satisfies consumers’ information needs in order to encourage purchase (Cho and Jang 2008; Diehl and Zauberman 2005; Goossens 2000; James and Vanden Bergh 1990).

Cho and Jang (2008) distinguish five dimensions of travel-related information value—utilitarian, risk-avoidance, hedonic, sensation seeking, and social—and suggest that consumers assess travel-related information in terms of how effectively it provides them with both functional (utilitarian and risk-avoidance information) and experiential (hedonic, sensation seeking, and social) information value. For example, information in relation to the situational risks at a given vacation destination (e.g., crime, or environmental danger) may be rated as high in risk-avoidance value, while information that enables an individual to exchange opinions with others about a vacation destination may be perceived as high in social value. In our exploration of consumer reaction to photographic content, we focus on the two dimensions of perceived information value that are most readily obtained from viewing photographs: utilitarian information value (the extent to which photograph content provides useful, relevant details that are beneficial to decision making) and hedonic information value (the extent to which photographs elicit excitement and pleasure, and enable the consumer to envision escaping their ordinary experiences).

Product-focused photographs can be expected to provide utilitarian information value about the functional and tangible aspects of vacation-related products or services, but they can also provide hedonic information value in that they enable the consumer to envisage what their experience will be like, and therefore may solicit consumer excitement and pleasure. In a similar manner, experience-focused photographs provide consumers with two forms of perceived value: by highlighting consumers’ interaction with the tangible aspects of a given product or service, experience-focused photographs are likely to solicit utilitarian information value about the offering, in addition to the hedonic value derived from the emotional character of the experience being depicted. Prior work supports the notion that these two dimensions of perceived information value are highly and positively correlated; Cho and Jang (2008) found that consumers who held high perceptions of one of these dimensions of information value also tended to perceive the other information value dimension as high. Thus, in this research, we broadly refer to perceived information value to capture these two interrelated dimensions of information value.

Perceived Information Value of Photograph Content

It has been suggested in the literature that vacation decision-making is rarely presented as a habitual process (Decrop and Snelders 2004). Rather, the purchase of a vacation represents a high involvement purchase, requiring high consumer commitment and yielding a complex decision-making process (Moutinho 1987; Swarbrooke and Horner 1999). In this context, we suggest that product-focused photographs will exert a significantly greater influence on consumers’ perceptions of information value than experience-focused photographs. Duality models of information processing can help to explain why this may be the case.

Two well-known dual-processing theories, the elaboration likelihood model (ELM) and the heuristic-systematic model, each suggest that there are two distinct routes to persuasion and attitude change (see, e.g., Chaiken 1980; Petty and Cacioppo 1986). Under the central (systematic) route, consumers process information in a cognitive manner, engaging in careful consideration and the effortful processing of information. In contrast, under the peripheral (heuristic) route, consumers rely more on affective evaluation, with simple cues either eliciting an affective state (e.g., happiness) or triggering a relatively simple inference or heuristic that the individual can use to judge the validity of a given message (Petty, Heesacker, and Hughes 1997). The level of involvement can determine which route is used in information processing, with consumers becoming more motivated to engage in the cognitive evaluation of a product- or issue-relevant argument when level of involvement is high (Petty and Cacioppo 1986; Petty, Cacioppo, and Schumann 1983). Thus, we propose that, given the high involvement associated with nonhabitual vacation purchases, consumers will adopt a central route to information processing when evaluating vacation-related products and services.

Furthermore, research in the domain of advertising claims suggests that functional advertising content targets cognition while experiential content targets affect (Zarantonello, Jedidi, and Schmitt 2013). Thus, when involvement is high and consumers engage in effortful cognitive activity, they are likely to rely more heavily on functional content than experiential content. The work of Samuelsen and Olsen (2010) supports this assertion. They found that when involvement was high, functional benefit claims had a significantly greater effect on consumers’ attitudes toward a given product than did experiential claims, and they attributed this finding to the different cognitive responses that the two types of claims elicit. Drawing on these findings, we expect that consumers will be likely to rely more heavily on functional product-focused photographs than hedonic experience–focused images when evaluating high-involvement, vacation-related products and services.

Prior research also provides insight into how experience with a given product or service can impact how consumers use, and process, different types of information (Zarantonello, Jedidi, and Schmitt 2013). When consumers have little experience of a given product, they respond primarily to functional information because they are most concerned about fulfilling basic rather than higher order needs. Thus, the central (systematic) route largely drives persuasion in this context (Zarantonello, Jedidi, and Schmitt 2013). Consumers’ exposure to products and services in the context of nonhabitual, vacation-related online search can be considered to be novel, in that they likely have no prior experience of these particular products or services. Thus, the findings of Zarantonello, Jedidi, and Schmitt (2013) support our contention that consumers will rely more heavily on product-focused (vs. experience-focused) photographs during nonhabitual vacation-related evaluations.

Given our expectation that consumers will rely more heavily on product-focused photographs during nonhabitual vacation-related evaluations, we suggest that product-focused photographs will be perceived as being higher in information value than experience-focused photographs. Hence, we hypothesize:

Hypothesis 1a: Product-focused photographs will have a significantly greater positive effect on consumers’ perceptions of information value than experience-focused photographs.

There is evidence that when information is of sufficient value to alleviate uncertainty, consumers’ willingness to purchase a product or service will be enhanced (Diehl and Zauberman 2005; Goossens 2000; James and Vanden Bergh 1990). Thus, we hypothesize:

Hypothesis 1b: Perceived information value will have a positive effect on consumers’ hotel booking intentions.

Perceived Photograph Credibility

Credibility refers to the trustworthiness or believability of a source of information. How consumers perceive the credibility of photograph content may depend on who provides the photograph (Jain and Posavac 2001). For example, travel-related information provided by other travelers is considered to be more credible than that presented by firms such as destination marketing organizations (Choi, Hickerson, and Kerstetter 2018). For this reason, we propose that consumers will perceive experience-focused photographs that are provided by the firm as significantly less credible than the firm’s product-focused photographs. By their nature, experience-focused photographs are designed to visually convey consumers’ experience of, and engagement in, a given service experience. To be considered credible, such photographs should communicate an experience that consumers might realistically expect to have themselves rather than depict some idealized experience that has been fabricated for the purposes of marketing (MacCannell 1973; N. Wang 1999). Unlike users’ photographs that illustrate their personal story about their own experiences, firm-generated experience-focused photographs are typically staged using professional models and stylists and thus may not convey a realistic service experience, compromising perceived credibility. Professional product-focused photographs, on the other hand, may provide a more objective view of what guests might expect from their stay because of the tangible nature of what is being depicted. Thus, we expect that consumers will perceive this type of photograph provided by the firm as significantly more credible than firm-generated, experience-focused photographs.

In contrast, we expect that there will be no significant difference in perceived credibility between product- or experience-focused photographs when these photographs are provided by actual users of the hotel. Prior research points to the benefits of user-generated content in terms of its relevance, reliability, and credibility (Bickart and Schindler 2001; Dickinger 2011; Gretzel, Yoo, and Purifoy 2007; Sparks, Perkins, and Buckley 2013). Because they capture the consumer’s own perspective of, and interaction with, a product or service, we propose that all user-generated photographs will be regarded as equally credible, regardless of photograph content.

Similarly, we expect that consumers’ perceptions of photograph credibility will not differ significantly by photograph content when travel consumers are exposed to a combination of user- and firm-generated photographs. Consumers employ different types of cognitive heuristics to assess the credibility of online information (Metzger, Flanagin, and Medders 2010). One such heuristic is the “consistency heuristic” in which consumers validate information by confirming that it is consistent across different sources or channels. If information across channels is consistent, consumers will be more likely to perceive it as credible and will not engage in further investigation. This suggests that if both user- and firm-generated photographs communicate similar information, that information will be viewed as more credible. For this study, we used photographs of uniformly high quality and that communicate a positive image of the service experience, regardless of source. By virtue of this consistency, we expect that consumers exposed to a mix of firm- and user-generated photographs depicting hotel products or experiences will perceive those photographs as being equally credible.

Given the above, we propose:

Hypothesis 2a: Photograph source will moderate the effect of photograph content on consumers’ perceptions of photograph credibility. Specifically, for firm-generated photographs, consumers will perceive product-focused photographs as significantly more credible than experience-focused photographs. Conversely, for user-generated photographs alone or in combination with firm-generated photographs, there will be no significant difference in perceived photograph credibility across product-focused and experience-focused photographs.

Prior research suggests that when consumers perceive higher levels of credibility, they are likely to evaluate available information more favorably and are more likely to act based on that information (Arslanagić, Peštek, and Kadić-Maglajlić 2014). Thus, we can expect that perceived photograph content credibility will be positively related to perceived information value. The more credible consumers perceive the content of a photograph to be, the greater the information value they will derive from that photograph. Image credibility has also been shown to have a direct and positive effect on purchase intentions (Nowak and McGloin 2014). Hence, we propose:

Hypothesis 2b: Perceived photograph credibility will have a positive effect on perceived information value.

Hypothesis 2c: Perceived photograph credibility will have a positive effect on booking intentions.

See Figure 1 for a graphical illustration of the proposed model.

Figure 1.

Model of consumer response to photograph content.

Photograph Content and Price

Thus far we have sought to understand the variables that may explain how photograph content relates to hotel booking intentions, as this understanding is key to leveraging the “right” photograph content to drive consumer purchase. However, from a broader perspective, it is also important to establish the potential impact that photograph content may have on consumer reaction to other cues to quality that are available during online search. It has been demonstrated that price has a positive and significant effect on consumers’ quality perceptions (Johnson and Kellaris 1988). However, this effect can diminish significantly in the presence of other information-rich quality cues (Anderson 2012; Rao and Monroe 1988, 1989). For example, Noone and McGuire (2013) found that user-generated reviews had a more significant effect on leisure consumers’ hotel choice than did price. In this study, we propose that photograph content will moderate the effect of price on consumers’ booking intentions.

Consumers can perceive many different types of risks when purchasing a product or service including performance, social, physical, financial, psychological, and time risk (Dowling 1986). Most relevant to examining the role of photograph content in consumers’ reactions to price is the idea of perceived financial risk. Perceived financial risk represents consumers’ perceptions of economic loss that may occur because of the unsatisfactory performance of a product or service (Aqueveque 2006). Perceptions of financial risk increase as price increases (Agarwal and Teas 2004).

A number of researchers have pointed to the important role that information processing can play in reducing risk (Mitchell and Boustani 1994). The higher the perceived risk, the more motivated the consumer is to attend to, and process, available information (Cox 1967). Thus, when perceived risk is high, consumers are likely to engage in systematic processing, while heuristic processing is more typical in circumstances of lower risk (Trumbo 2002). Building on this, we suggest that when presented with a price that is above the average in the market, consumers will perceive the financial risk as high, and thus will be motivated to engage in systematic processing and will attend carefully to the information provided by nonprice cues to inform their booking decision. Given the idea that consumers who are engaged in effortful cognitive activity are likely to rely more heavily on functional content than experiential content (Samuelsen and Olsen 2010), we expect that in higher price conditions, consumers will rely more heavily on product-focused photographs than experience-focused photographs in their evaluations. Conversely, we expect that, when presented with a price that is lower than the average in the market, consumers will not be as motivated to engage in effortful processing because they have reduced financial risk at this lower price. Rather, we expect that consumers will engage in heuristic processing and will use a simpler decision rule to help them arrive at a booking decision. In this context, high-quality photographs that depict the service experience in a favorable light may, regardless of their content, provide sufficient reassurance that the quality of the experience will be acceptable. Since a low price can negatively affect consumers’ perceptions of the quality of a given product or service (Raghubir and Corfman 1999), simple confirmation that the photographs make the offering look “good enough” provides a mental shortcut that assures consumers that they are not compromising quality in exchange for a low price.

Thus, we hypothesize:

Hypothesis 3: Photograph content moderates the effect of price on consumers’ booking intentions. Specifically, when the price is higher than the average in the market, product-focused photographs will have a significantly greater effect on consumers’ booking intentions than experience-focused photographs. When the price is lower than the average in the market, there will be no significant difference in consumers’ booking intentions for product- and experience-focused photographs.

Method

Overview of Research Design

We conducted two studies to test our hypotheses. In study 1, we tested hypotheses 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b, and 2c regarding the variables that explain the photograph content–booking intentions relationship. In study 2, we tested hypothesis 3 concerning the moderating effect of photograph content on consumers’ reaction to price. The online booking of accommodation at a resort hotel was employed as the context for both studies, and the same sets of photographs were used for both studies.

We selected product-focused photographs that depicted the physical facilities and tangible elements of a hotel stay, while the experience-focused photographs chosen for the study featured people experiencing their stay at a hotel, thus highlighting the experiential aspect, and intangible elements of a service experience. Based on our observation that the majority of experience-focused photographs available online tend to depict either a romantic or family-based hotel stay, we selected a family-oriented beach resort as the study context to eliminate any possible gender biases that might arise from the use of experience-focused photographs associated with a romantic hotel stay. The beach resort context also allowed us to expose participants to a wide range of hotel features (i.e., photographs of guestrooms, food and beverage outlets, exterior facilities, and interior public spaces).

We selected firm-generated photographs from the official website of a well-known, global hotel brand, while the user-generated photographs were obtained from guest photograph galleries on that brand’s website as well as from travel websites and social media networks (e.g., TripAdvisor and Pinterest). To control for the potential impact that differences in photograph content and angle may have on consumers’ reactions to photographs, we carefully selected firm-generated and user-generated photographs for a specific beach resort property, matching them as closely as possible in terms of the content and angle of each pair of photographs. Further, since it was important for both studies to use high quality, positively valenced photographs, we took great care to ensure that all of the selected photographs were similar in terms of brightness, sharpness, composition, and resolution, and that they all presented the hotel environment in a positive light. Photographs were not altered in any way from their original form.

Prior research suggests that providing personal identifying information positively affects the information value and credibility of user-generated content (Forman, Ghose, and Wiesenfeld 2008; Xie et al. 2011). Therefore, each user-generated photograph was accompanied by a statement that the given photograph was “taken by our valued guest [name] in [month, year].” We used gender-neutral guest names in these statements in order to eliminate any possible gender biases that might arise from the use of gender-specific names (Van Fleet and Atwater 1997).

In each of the experimental conditions tested in study 1 and study 2, the photograph set comprised eight photographs, with two photographs depicting each of the four aspects of the hotel environment: guestrooms, food and beverage outlets, exterior facilities, and interior public spaces. For experimental conditions with a combination of firm- and user-generated photographs, one firm-generated photograph and one user-generated photograph were presented per aspect of the hotel environment, and we employed a counterbalanced design to control for order effects (i.e., an equal number of participants was exposed to the firm- and user-generated photographs in a different order).

A pre-test of the photographs we selected for this study used an undergraduate student sample (n = 261) and indicated that the manipulation of photograph content was successful: pretest participants recognized the differences between product- and experience-focused photographs and perceived all images to be of high quality and to represent the hotel in a positive light.

Participants for both studies were recruited using the online survey platform, Amazon Mechanical Turk, and were each paid $0.50 for their participation. Participants were screened to ensure that they typically travel for leisure with children under the age of 16, had taken a beach vacation with children under the age of 16 during the two years prior to survey completion, and had personally made an online booking for the hotel for that vacation.

Study 1: Consumer Response to Photograph Content

Procedure

We employed a 2 (photograph content: product-focused and experience-focused) × 3 (photograph source: firm, user, and a mix of firm and user) between-subjects experimental design in this study. Recruited participants were directed to a link to an online survey, and those who appropriately answered the screening questions were randomly assigned to one of the six experimental conditions. In each condition, participants read a scenario that asked them to imagine that they were planning a four-night beach vacation for themselves and their family at a well-known US beach resort. The scenario further informed them that they had done an online search and had come across an upscale family resort hotel that was close to the beach, attractions, and dining. They were then presented with a simulated online travel agent (OTA) website, designed to mimic the user experience of a typical OTA site (e.g., Expedia) (see Appendix A). This simulated webpage depicted an individual hotel page as it would be displayed on an OTA website, including a description of the hotel’s amenities, the aggregate consumer ratings for the hotel, a sampling of consumer reviews, and the nightly rate ($249) that reflected the rate for the subject property advertised on major third-party online travel agency websites (Expedia.com, Booking.com, and Hotels.com) at the time of the study. To reduce the potential for participants’ booking intentions to be affected by a lack of information about competing rates, the study scenario indicated that similar upscale resort hotels in this market had posted rates of around $249 per night. Given that aggregate consumer ratings and review volume affect consumers’ hotel choice (Noone and McGuire 2013, 2016; Park, Lee, and Han 2007), a fictional aggregate guest rating of 4.5 (out of 5), from 3705 reviews, was applied across all experimental conditions. Participants in each experimental condition were then presented with the photograph set relevant to their condition. A statement was provided to indicate the source(s) of the photographs. User-generated photograph were also accompanied by the statement that the given photograph was “taken by our valued guest [name] in [month, year].”

After reading the scenario and perusing the simulated OTA site, participants completed an online questionnaire that contained items used as manipulation checks, attention checks, and measures for the dependent and control variables.

Measures

Perceived information value was measured using a nine-item, seven-point Likert-type scale adapted from Cho and Jang (2008) and Tang and Jang (2008). Exploratory factor analysis (principal components, varimax rotation) resulted in the identification of one component that included all items with 63.89% of the explained variance and an eigenvalue of 5.75 (Cronbach’s α = .93). Perceived photograph credibility was measured using a three-item, seven-point bipolar scale (Appelman and Sundar 2016; Cronbach’s α = .91). Booking intentions were measured using a three-item, seven-point Likert-type scale adapted from Grewal, Monroe, and Krishnan (1998) (Cronbach’s α = .96).

To confirm that the type of vacation purchase examined in this research constitutes a relatively high involvement purchase, and to control for potential effects of involvement on participants’ reactions to the stimuli presented to them, we measured participants’ level of involvement regarding beach resorts using a three-item, seven-point Likert-type scale adapted from Mittal and Lee (1989) (Cronbach’s α = .79; M = 5.2).

We used four items to ensure that our manipulation for photograph content was perceived as expected. We used a single item as a manipulation check for photograph source. To ensure that participants viewed the photographs as both high-quality and positive in nature, we used a single item to measure perceived quality of the photographs, and two items to measure perceived positivity of the photographs (r = 0.72). Finally, a single-item measure was used to assess the realism of the scenarios presented to the study’s participants (seven-point Likert-type scale, anchored by highly unrealistic and highly realistic: M = 5.71). See Table 1 for all scale items.

Table 1.

Scale Items.

Perceived information value (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree) [study 1]
The photographs currently on my screen:
Enhance my excitement about my stay at the hotel.
Provide relevant details about the hotel.
Contribute to my fantasies about my stay at the hotel.
Help me imagine new adventures I can experience at the hotel.
Are beneficial in making choices about the hotel.
Help me visualize unfamiliar or novel experiences at the hotel.
Take me away from it all.
Are useful in helping me plan my vacation.
Make me feel like I am in another world.
Perceived photograph credibility (1 = describes very poorly; 7 = describes very well) [study 1]
Please rate how well the following items describe the photographs on your screen:
Accurate
Believable
Authentic
Booking intentions (1 = very low; 7 = very high) [studies 1 & 2]
If I were going to book a hotel room, the probability of booking this hotel room is
The probability that I would consider booking this hotel room is
The likelihood that I would book this hotel room is
Product involvement (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree) [studies 1 and 2]
I have a strong interest in staying at beach resorts.
Staying at a beach resort is very important to me.
For me, staying at a beach resort does not matter.
Manipulation Checks:
Photograph content (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree) [studies 1 and 2]
The photographs currently on your screen mainly show:
The physical features of the hotel and the products it offers (product-focused)
The products and facilities that the hotel provides (product-focused)
People experiencing their stay at the hotel (experience-focused)
People during their stay at the hotel (experience-focused)
Photograph source (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree)^a [studies 1 and 2]
The photographs currently on your screen are taken by the hotel company
The photographs currently on your screen are taken by other guests
Some of the photographs currently on your screen are taken by the hotel company, and some are taken by other guests
Price [study 2]
Compared to the average room rate advertised by other upscale hotels in the location that I want to visit, the price of a room at this hotel is (1 = much lower; 7 = much higher)
The price of a hotel room at this hotel appears to be higher than the average room rate advertised by other upscale hotels in the location (1= strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree)

A single item was used in each photograph source condition and matched that condition.

Results

Sample Characteristics

In total, 423 individuals participated in the study. Participants who failed any of the three attention checks included in the survey were excluded from the sample (n = 15). Also, all participants that provided the same numeric response across scales (i.e., straightlining) were excluded (n = 10), resulting in a final sample size of 398. The distribution of valid cases across experimental conditions was approximately equal (n = 67 for all conditions with the exception of one condition: experience-focused, user-generated with 63 observations). Approximately 59% (n = 235) of participants were female, with 78.1% (n = 311) of all participants between 25 and 44 years old. The majority of participants (69.1%, n = 275) had stayed once or twice at a beach resort with family in the two years prior to participating in the study, with a further 26.1% (n = 104) staying three to four times. See Table 2 for the full characteristics of the sample.

Table 2.

Study 1: Sample Characteristics.

Variable	n	%
Gender
Male	163	41.0
Female	235	59.0
Age
18–24	26	6.5
25–34	182	45.7
35–44	129	32.4
45–54	44	11.1
55–64	13	3.3
65 or older	4	1.0
Ethnicity
African American	29	7.3
Asian	27	6.8
Caucasian	304	76.4
Hispanic	31	7.8
Native American	3	.8
Other	4	1.0
Education
High school	28	7.0
Some college	109	27.4
Undergraduate	149	37.4
Graduate	112	28.1
Frequency of stay at beach resort with family^a
1–2	275	69.1
3–4	104	26.1
5–6	16	4.0
More than 6	3	.8

Last two years.

Manipulation Checks

Product-focused photographs were perceived as different from experience-focused photographs: the means for the two product-focused items were significantly higher for product-focused photographs than for experience-focused photographs (6.20 vs. 4.05, p < .0001, and 6.08 vs. 4.17, p < .0001, respectively). Conversely, the means for the two experience-focused items were significantly lower for product-focused photographs than for experience-focused photographs (2.63 vs. 5.88, p < .0001, and 2.60 vs. 5.75, p < .0001, respectively). Participants appropriately recognized the sources of the photographs provided to them in each of the source conditions (firm-generated: 5.73, user-generated: 5.71, mix of firm- and user-generated: 6.05; p > .1). Finally, the photographs in all conditions were perceived as portraying the hotel in a positive light (M = 6.10, σ = .97) and being of high quality (M = 6.04, σ = 1.01).

Hypotheses Tests

The cell means for perceived information value, perceived photograph credibility, and booking intentions by experimental condition are reported in Table 3. Overall, the means for the perceived information value of photograph content suggest that product-focused photographs were perceived as richer in information value than experience-focused photographs, lending initial support for hypothesis 1a (M_PF = 5.50, M_EF = 4.85; p < .0001). This gap in perceived information value by photograph content was similar across source conditions (Firm: M_PF = 5.58, M_EF = 4.51, p < .0001; User: M_PF = 5.57, M_EF = 5.24, p < .05; Mix: M_PF = 5.34, M_EF = 4.82, p < .01). In terms of perceived photograph credibility, the credibility gap between product-focused and experience-focused photographs was greater for firm-generated photographs than for user-generated or a mix of user- and firm-generated photographs (Firm: M_PF = 5.37, M_EF = 4.61, p < .005; User: M_PF = 5.35, M_EF = 5.16, p > .05; Mix: M_PF = 5.53, M_EF = 5.32, p > .05). This suggests that photograph source may moderate the photograph content–perceived photograph credibility relationship as hypothesized in hypothesis 2a. Booking intentions ratings did not differ significantly by photograph source within photograph content (Product-focused: Firm = 5.61, User = 5.22, Mix = 5.54 [p > .1]; Experience-focused: Firm = 5.01, User = 5.44, Mix = 5.21 [p > .1]). However, the gap in booking intentions between product-focused and experience-focused photographs was greater for firm-generated photographs (p < .005) than for user-generated (p > .1) or a mix of user- and firm-generated photographs (p > .1).

Table 3.

Study 1: Cell Means by Experimental Condition.

Photograph Content	Photograph Source	Information Value	Photograph Credibility	Booking Intentions
Product-focused	Firm	5.58	5.37	5.61
	User	5.57	5.35	5.22
	Mix	5.34	5.53	5.54
Experience-focused	Firm	4.51	4.61	5.01
	User	5.24	5.16	5.44
	Mix	4.82	5.32	5.21

We employed the PROCESS Model 6 macro in SPSS to formally test hypotheses 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b, and 2c (Hayes 2013). We ran the model using three data subsets—one per photograph source (firm, user, and mix of firm and user)—to allow us to test the hypothesized moderating effect of photograph source on the photograph content–perceived photograph credibility relationship. This procedure used an ordinary least squares path analysis to estimate the coefficients in the model in order to determine the direct and indirect effects of photograph content on booking intentions. Bootstrapping was implemented in these analyses to obtain bias-corrected 95% confidence intervals for making statistical inference about specific and total indirect effects (see Preacher and Hayes 2008). All paths for the full process model are illustrated in Figure 2, and their corresponding coefficients are provided in Table 4.

Figure 2.

Paths for serial mediation.

Table 4.

Study 1: Path Coefficients, Indirect Effects, and 95% Bias-Corrected Confidence Interval Predicting Booking Intentions.

	Firm-GeneratedPhotographs		User-GeneratedPhotographs		Mix of Firm- and User-Generated Photographs
	Coefficient	95% CI	Coefficient	95% CI	Coefficient	95% CI
Direct effect (c’)	−0.09	−0.23, 0.40	0.39	0.03, 0.75	0.01	−0.32, 0.33
a₁	−0.66	−1.10, –0.21	−0.19	−0.62, 0.24	−0.25	−0.63, 0.14
a₂	−0.69	−1.00, –0.38	−0.29	−0.53, –0.06	−0.44	−0.72, –0.15
a₃	0.39	0.27, 0.51	0.20	0.10, 0.30	0.52	0.39, 0.64
b₁	0.27	0.15, 0.40	0.32	0.17, 0.47	0.30	0.13, 0.47
b₂	0.40	0.23, 0.56	0.33	0.07, 0.59	0.58	0.39, 0.77

Indirect effects
Total indirect effect	−0.55	−0.86, –0.30	−0.17	−0.44, 0.02	−0.40	−0.75, –0.13
a₁ b₁	−0.18	−0.37, –0.06	−0.06	−0.27, 0.05	−0.08	−0.25, 0.03
a₂ b₂	−0.27	−0.46, –0.14	−0.10	−0.27, –0.003	−0.26	−0.53, –0.09
a₁ a₃ b₂	−0.10	−0.25, –0.03	−0.01	−0.10, 0.01	−0.07	−0.23, 0.02

Because of its potential effect on consumers’ reactions to photograph content, product involvement was included as a control variable in all analyses. A positive and significant effect on consumers’ booking intentions was observed (Firm-generated photograph subset: βˆ = 0.21, t = 2.98, p < .005; User-generated photograph subset: βˆ = 0.26, t = 3.27, p < .005; Mix of firm- and user-generated photograph subset: βˆ = 0.20, t = 2.88, p < .005).

Firm-generated Photograph Subset

The direct path from photograph content to perceived photograph credibility was significant, indicating that experience-focused photographs yielded significantly lower perceptions of photograph credibility than product-focused photographs (a1 = −0.66, t = −2.9; p < .005). Also the direct path from photograph content to perceived information value was significant, indicating that experience-focused photographs yielded significantly lower perceptions of information value than product-focused photographs (a2 = −0.69; t = −4.39; p < .0001). The total indirect effect was also significant, with a point estimate of −0.55 and a 95% confidence interval between −0.86 and −0.30. The indirect effect of photograph content on booking intentions through perceived photograph credibility was significant (a1, b1 = −0.18; CI: –0.37, –0.06), as was the indirect effect of photograph content on booking intentions through perceived information value (a2, b2 = −0.27; CI: –0.46, –0.14). The indirect effect of photograph content on booking intentions through perceived photograph credibility and perceived information value was also significant (a1, a3, b2 = −0.10; CI: –0.25, –0.03). The direct effect of photograph content on booking intentions after controlling for perceived photograph credibility, perceived information value, and involvement was not statistically significant (c’ = −0.09, CI: –0.23, 0.40).

User-generated Photograph Subset

The direct path from photograph content to perceived photograph credibility was not significant, indicating that there was no significant difference in perceived photograph credibility by photograph content (product-focused vs. experience-focused) (a1 = −0.19; t = −0.88; p > .1). Consequently, the indirect effects of photograph content on booking intentions through perceived photograph credibility, and through perceived photograph credibility and perceived information value were not significant (a1, b1 = −0.06; CI: –0.27, 0.05; a1, a3, b2 = −0.01; CI: –0.10, 0.01). However, the direct paths from credibility to perceived information value and booking intentions were significant (a3 = 0.20; CI: 0.10, 0.30; b1 = 0.32; CI: 0.17, 0.47).

The direct path from photograph content to perceived information value was significant, indicating that experience-focused photographs yielded significantly lower perceptions of information value than product-focused photographs (a2 = −0.29; t = −2.43; p < .05). The indirect effect of photograph content on booking intentions through perceived information value was also significant (a2, b2 = −0.10; CI: –0.27, –0.003). The direct effect of photograph content on booking intentions after controlling for perceived photograph credibility, perceived information value, and involvement was statistically significant (c’ = 0.39, CI: 0.03, 0.75). This suggests that user-generated experience-focused photographs have a significantly greater direct and positive effect on booking intentions than user-generated product-focused photographs.

Mix of Firm- and User-generated Photograph Subset

The direct path from photograph content to perceived photograph credibility was not significant, indicating that there was no significant difference in perceived photograph credibility by photograph content (product-focused vs. experience-focused) (a1 = −0.25, t = −1.27; p > .1). Consequently, the indirect effects of photograph content on booking intentions through perceived photograph credibility, and through perceived photograph credibility and perceived information value, were not significant (a1, b1 = −0.08, CI: –0.25, 0.03; a1, a3, b2 = −0.07, CI: –0.23, 0.02). However, the direct paths from credibility to perceived information value and booking intentions were significant (a3 = 0.52; CI: 0.39, 0.64; b1 = 0.30; CI: 0.13, 0.47).

The direct path from photograph content to perceived information value was significant, indicating that experience-focused photographs yielded significantly lower perceptions of information value than product-focused photographs (a2 = −0.44, t = −3.04; p < .005). The indirect effect of photograph content on booking intentions through perceived information value was also significant (a2, b2 = −0.26, CI: –0.53, –0.09). The direct effect of photograph content on booking intentions after controlling for perceived photograph credibility, perceived information value, and involvement was not statistically significant (c’ = 0.01, CI: –0.32, 0.33).

Taking these results together, we conclude that hypotheses 1a and 1b were supported. Regardless of photograph source, product-focused photographs had a significantly greater effect on perceived information value than experience-focused photographs, with perceived information value mediating the effect of photograph content on booking intentions for all three categories of photograph source. Hypothesis 2a was supported. As hypothesized, photograph source moderated the effect of photograph content on perceived photograph credibility. Photograph content did not yield significant differences in perceived photograph credibility for user-generated, or a mix of user- and firm-generated, photographs. However, for firm-generated photographs, consumers perceived product-focused photographs as significantly more credible than experience-focused photographs. This interaction is visualized in Figure 3. Hypotheses 2b and 2c were also supported. Perceived photograph credibility is significantly and positively related to perceived information value and to booking intentions.

Figure 3.

Interaction effect of photograph content and photograph source on perceived photograph credibility.

Study 2: Moderating Effect of Photograph Content on the Price–booking intentions Relationship

Procedure

We employed a 2 (photograph content: product-focused and experience-focused) × 3 (photograph source: firm, user, and a mix of firm and user) × 2 (price: higher than average in the market and lower than average in the market) between-subjects experimental design in this study. Given the demonstrated effect of photograph source on the nature of the relationship between photograph content and booking intentions in study 1, we included photograph source in study 2 to rule out the possibility that the source of a photograph influences how consumers use photograph content with price to inform booking intentions.

For study 2, we employed the same photograph sets as used in study 1. We manipulated price at two levels: higher than average for the market and lower than average for the market. We set the higher than average nightly rate condition at $289 and the lower than average rate condition at $209 to reflect the spread in nightly rates for the resort hotel represented in the photograph sets and for hotels similar to it advertised on major OTAs at the time of the study. As with study 1, to reduce the potential for a lack of information about competing rates to affect participants’ booking intentions, the study scenario indicated that similar upscale resort hotels in this market had posted rates of around $249 per night.

Participants were directed to a link to an online survey, and those who satisfied the screening questions were randomly assigned to one of the 12 experimental conditions. As with study 1, participants were given a scenario that asked them to imagine that they were planning a 4-night beach vacation for themselves and their family at a well-known US beach resort. They were informed that they have done an online search and had come across an upscale family resort hotel that was close to the beach, attractions, and dining. The simulated OTA website, and associated photographs, presented to participants were identical to those used in study 1. After reading the scenario and perusing the simulated OTA site, participants completed a questionnaire that contained items used as manipulation and attention checks, and measures for the dependent and control variables.

Measures

Booking intentions were measured using a three-item, seven-point Likert-type scale adapted from Grewal, Monroe, and Krishnan (1998; Cronbach’s α = .96). As with study 1, we measured participants’ perceived involvement in relation to beach resorts using the three-item, seven-point Likert-type scale adapted from Mittal and Lee (1989; Cronbach’s α = 0.79; M = 5.3).

In addition to manipulation checks for photograph content, positivity, and quality, and photograph source (as per study 1), we used two items as manipulation checks for price. Finally, a single-item measure was used to assess the realism of the scenarios presented to the study’s participants (seven-point Likert-type scale, anchored by highly unrealistic and highly realistic: M = 5.91). All scale items are listed in Table 1.

Results

Sample Characteristics

In total, 619 individuals participated in the study. Participants who failed any of the three attention checks included in the survey were excluded from the sample (n = 6). Also, all participants that provided the same numeric response across scales (i.e., straightlining) were excluded (n = 15), resulting in a final sample size of 598. The distribution of valid cases across experimental conditions was approximately equal (n= 50 for all conditions with the exception of two conditions: [1] product-focused, firm-generated, low price, and [2] experience-focused, firm-generated, low price, each with 49 observations per cell). Approximately 62% (n = 371) of participants were female, with 76.2% (n = 456) of all participants between 25 and 44 years old. The majority of participants (66.7%, n = 399) had stayed once or twice at a beach resort with family in the two years prior to participating in the study, with a further 27.6% (n = 165) staying three to four times. See Table 5 for the full characteristics of the sample.

Table 5.

Study 2: Sample Characteristics.

Variable	N	%
Gender
Male	227	38.0
Female	371	62.0
Age
18–24	68	11.4
25–34	265	44.3
35–44	191	31.9
45–54	57	9.5
55–64	14	2.3
65 or older	3	.5
Ethnicity
African American	52	8.7
Asian	51	8.5
Caucasian	438	73.2
Hispanic	47	7.9
Native American	5	.8
Other	5	.8
Education
High school	50	8.4
Some college	169	28.3
Undergraduate	220	36.8
Graduate	159	26.6
Frequency of stay at beach resort with family^a
1 or 2	399	66.7
3 or 4	165	27.6
5 or 6	25	4.2
More than 6	9	1.5

Last two years.

Manipulation Checks

Product-focused photographs were perceived as different from experience-focused photographs: the means for the two product-focused items were significantly higher for product-focused photographs than for experience-focused photographs (6.09 vs. 4.08, p < .0001, and 6.05 vs. 4.18, p < .0001, respectively). Conversely, the means for the two experience-focused items were significantly lower for product-focused photographs than for experience-focused photographs (2.42 vs. 6.03, p < .0001, and 2.47 vs. 5.97, p < .0001, respectively). All participants responded appropriately to the item regarding the photograph source (firm-generated: 6.21, user-generated: 6.33, mix of firm- and user-generated: 6.37, p > .1). The price manipulations were also effective. For the first item, the mean for the higher than average price conditions was higher than for the lower than average price conditions (5.07 vs. 2.92, p < .0001). Similarly, the mean for the higher than average price conditions was higher than for the lower than average price conditions for the second item (5.34 vs. 2.15, p < .0001). Finally, the photographs in all conditions were perceived as portraying the hotel in a positive light (M = 6.21, σ = .91) and being of high quality (M = 6.14, σ = .82).

Hypotheses Tests

The overall mean for booking intentions was higher when the price was below the market average than when it was above (M_LP = 5.76; M_HP = 5.16, p < .0001). The gap in booking intentions ratings between product-focused and experience-focused photographs was greater when the price was higher than the market average than when it was below, lending some initial support for hypothesis 3 (High price: M_PF = 5.44, M_EF = 4.88, p < .0001; Low price: M_PF = 5.82, M_EF = 5.70, p > .05). See Table 6 for the cell means for booking intentions by experimental condition.

Table 6.

Study 2: Cell Means by Experimental Condition.

Photograph Content	Photograph Source	Price	Booking Intentions
Product-focused	Firm	High	5.50
	User		5.70
	Mix		5.13
	Firm	Low	5.79
	User		5.98
	Mix		5.69
Experience-focused	Firm	High	4.27
	User		5.21
	Mix		5.17
	Firm	Low	5.34
	User		5.99
	Mix		5.77

To test hypothesis 3 regarding the moderating effect of photograph content on the price–booking intentions relationship, we conducted a three-way between-subjects analysis of covariance (see Table 7). Booking intentions were the dependent variable, with price, photograph content, and photograph source as the independent variables, and product involvement as a covariate in the analysis. The results indicated a significant main effect for the control variable, product involvement (F = 73.30, p < .0001), and for the other main effects (Photograph content: F = 15.36, p < .0001; Photograph source: F = 10.94, p < .0001; Price: F = 38.06, p < .0001). The two-way interaction between photograph content and photograph source was significant (F = 7.61, p < .005), as was the two-way interaction between photograph content and price (F = 4.15, p < .05). The two-way interaction between photograph source and price, and the three-way interaction between photograph content, photograph source, and price, were not significant (F = 0.46, p > .1 and F = 0.67, p > .1 respectively). Booking intentions ratings were highest when price was lower than the market average regardless of photograph content, with a planned contrast indicating that the means across photograph content conditions were not significantly different (Product-focused: 5.82, Experience-focused: 5.70, t = 0.94, p > .1). Conversely, the means across photograph content conditions were significantly different in the higher than market average price condition (Product-focused: 5.44, Experience-focused: 4.88, t = 3.65, p < .000) (see Figure 4). Together these results provide support for hypothesis 3.

Table 7.

Study 2: ANCOVA Results for Test of Main Effects, Interaction Effects, and Covariate on Booking Intentions.

Source of Variation	df	Sum of Squares	Mean Square	F	Significance (p)
Covariate
Product involvement	1	91.96	91.96	73.30	<.0001
Main effects
Photograph content	1	19.27	19.27	15.36	<.0001
Photograph source	2	27.45	13.73	10.94	<.0001
Price	1	47.74	47.74	38.06	<.0001
Interaction effects
Photograph content × Photograph source	2	19.09	9.55	7.61	<.005
Photograph content × Price	1	5.20	5.20	4.15	<.05
Photograph source × Price	2	1.16	0.58	0.46	ns
Photograph content × Photograph source × Price	2	1.68	0.84	0.67	ns

Error	585	733.89	1.26
Total	598	18,794.56

Note: ANCOVA = analysis of covariance.

Figure 4.

Interaction effect of photograph content and price on booking intentions.

Discussion

Photographs constitute an important component of online content for travel-related services, with photographs influencing destination image formation, consumers’ inferences about lodging experiences, and eventual purchase behavior (e.g., Noone and Robson 2016; Phelan et al. 2011; Ring, Tkaczynski, and Dolnicar 2016). Study 1 augments this stream of photography-related research by providing insights into the elements underlying consumers’ response to photographs used in online marketing, while study 2 expands our understanding of how photograph content influences consumers’ responses to other quality cues in the online environment.

Study 1’s findings suggest that regardless of photograph source, consumers considering a relatively high-involvement, nonhabitual purchase such as a family vacation tend to perceive product-focused photographs as being richer in information value than experience-focused photographs. This finding is consistent with the advertising literature that suggests that consumers making a high-involvement decision about a product or service with which they have little experience are more likely to engage in effortful, cognitive activity, and thus rely more on functional content than experiential content in their evaluations (Samuelsen and Olsen 2010; Zarantonello, Jedidi, and Schmitt 2013). This reliance on product-focused photographs in consumers’ evaluations enhances the perceived information value of this type of photograph content. Further, study 1’s findings support the idea that perceived information value has a positive effect on consumers’ booking intentions (Diehl and Zauberman 2005; Goossens 2000).

Our findings also provide insight into the role of perceived photograph credibility in consumers’ responses to photograph content. We observed that firm-generated, product-focused photographs were perceived as significantly more credible than firm-generated, experience-focused photographs. This finding is consistent with the idea that professional product-focused photographs may provide a more objective view of what guests might expect from their stay than staged experience-focused photographs, which by their nature may not convey a realistic service experience, and thus compromise perceived credibility. In contrast, both product-focused and experience-focused user-generated photographs were considered to be equally credible. This finding underscores the notion that user-generated content provides other consumers with reliable and, by extension, credible insights (e.g., Gretzel, Yoo, and Purifoy 2007; Sparks, Perkins, and Buckley 2013). We observed a similar result when participants were presented with a mix of firm- and user-generated photographs, indicating that consumers may be employing a consistency heuristic to assess the credibility of information provided from multiple sources (Metzger, Flanagin, and Medders 2010).

We found that perceived photograph credibility had a positive effect on perceived information value, suggesting that, when consumers perceive higher levels of photograph credibility, they are likely to evaluate the information value of photograph content more favorably (Arslanagić, Peštek, and Kadić-Maglajlić 2014). In addition, the observed direct effect of perceived photograph credibility on booking intentions across all photograph source conditions demonstrates the importance of perceived photograph credibility to consumers’ online booking intentions.

Firm-generated product-focused photographs yielded significantly higher booking intentions ratings than firm-generated experience-focused photographs, reflecting the significantly greater perceptions in photograph credibility and information value associated with product-focused (vs. experience-focused) firm-generated photographs. In contrast, there were no significant differences in booking intentions ratings across product- and experience-focused photographs for user-generated, or a mix of firm- and user-generated, photographs. This finding suggests that the equivalence in perceived photograph credibility across the two types of photographic content, coupled with the direct effect of perceived photograph credibility on perceived information value and booking intentions, offset the superior effect of product- (vs. experience-) focused photographs on booking intentions through perceived information value. In the case of user-generated photographs, the superior indirect effect of product-focused photographs on booking intentions through perceived information value was further offset by the direct effect of photograph content on booking intentions, a finding we had not hypothesized. This finding suggests that, in line with prior research (e.g., Black and Kelley 2009; Green and Brock 2000; Hamby, Daniloski, and Brinberg 2015), the presence of story elements in experience-focused photographs can facilitate persuasion among consumers and, in turn, can positively impact booking intentions.

Study 2’s findings provide insights into the role that photograph content plays in consumers’ reaction to price. When price is higher than the market average, consumers are likely to rely more on product-focused photographs than experience-focused photographs. This finding is in line with the idea that, when perceived financial risk is high, consumers will engage in systematic information processing, drawing on functional content more so than experiential content. Conversely, when the price is below market and therefore financial risk is lower, consumers are more likely to engage in heuristic processing: they will use photographs to ensure that what they are getting for the price is adequate for their needs. High-quality, positively valenced photographs, regardless of content, provide a confirmatory signal that the service experience is going to be acceptable.

Managerial Implications

In 2016, global online travel sales totaled US$564.87 billion, and this figure is expected to grow to US$755.94 billion by 2019 (Cowen 2016). Given the size of the online travel market, it is essential to design cost-efficient online content that encourages the consumer to engage with the brand, and ultimately promotes purchase behavior. Thus, when creating online photograph galleries, firms need to understand how different types of photograph content influence consumers’ booking intentions. Further, the increasing prevalence of user-generated photographs in the online environment, whether on brand websites, TripAdvisor, or social media sites such as Instagram and Facebook, raises the question of whether user-generated photographs should be used to augment, or even replace, firm-generated photographs on the firm’s website. Professional photography requires a substantial investment. For example, according to Marriott Corporation’s marketing materials for hotel owners, the cost of a portfolio of professional photographs of a hotel property can run from $7,000 to in excess of $20,000, depending on the number and types of photographs required. Thus, the potential cost savings associated with leveraging high-quality, positively valenced user-generated photographs could be significant. Incorporating user-generated content into a brand’s own marketing can also build community, empower customers, and increase customer-based brand equity (Christodoulides, Jevons, and Bonhomme 2012), suggesting that using user-generated photography on hotel websites could have positive effects well beyond cost savings.

The findings of this research suggest that travel marketers should focus on using product-focused photographs to promote products and services in the online environment. Given that this type of photographic content is seen as being relatively high in information value and is generally perceived as credible, photographs that emphasize the product being offered can exert a more positive influence on booking behavior than experience-focused photographs might. This is particularly pertinent when the firm’s prices are above the market average, in which case consumers rely more heavily on product-focused photographs in their evaluations. Furthermore, our work suggests that firms may have the opportunity to replace professionally taken product-focused photographs with user-generated product-focused photographs. Study 1’s findings indicate that there were no significant differences in the perceived information value, perceived credibility, or booking intentions ratings for product-focused photographs across the three photograph source conditions. This suggests that firms may only need to spend money on professional product-focused photographs if they are unable to source user-generated product-focused photographs that are of sufficiently high quality.

With regard to experience-focused photographs, the study’s findings suggest that there is little merit in paying for professionally taken experience-focused photographs. The lack of realism in highly staged photographs negatively affects their credibility and information value. As with product-focused photographs, the focus should be on acquiring high-quality, positively valenced user-generated experience-focused photographs to share with prospective consumers. Including user-generated experience-focused photographs in online content is likely to be most valuable when marketing less-expensive offerings, where prospective guests may seek reassurance that a lower-than-market price is not a reflection of lower-than-market quality.

Leveraging user-generated photographs to illustrate travel-related products and services requires consideration of two key issues: the ethical use of the content, and gaining access to suitable content. Under the Federal Copyright Act of 1976, photographs are protected by copyright from the moment of creation. Thus, travel brands choosing to supplement or replace firm-generated photographs with user-generated photographs should ensure that they obtain express or implied consent from the users, as well as any other individuals that are featured in the photographs (Holmes and Ganley 2007).

There is evidence that consumers will willingly post their own content on firm websites to convey their expertise with the firm’s product, or to show their personal connection with a valued brand (Wilson, Murphy, and Fierro 2012). Engaging customers to contribute content directly to the firm alleviates the challenges of identifying appropriate user generated content to include in a firm’s marketing effort, and enables firms to obtain implied consent for the use of this content. A firm could run an online competition (accompanied by appropriate incentives, such as credit toward a future purchase) to encourage consumers to upload relevant product-focused and experience-focused photographs to the firm’s website. In keeping with current US Federal Trade Commission guidelines, a firm must fully disclose any consideration advanced to users who provide photographs for marketing materials, whether that consideration is in the form of cash, loyalty points, goods, or services. Firms should also recognize that using compensated user-generated photographs in its marketing materials may affect the credibility of that content (Forrest and Cao 2010). But if users freely provide the firm with photographs without any material consideration, the credibility of those photographs is likely to be viewed much more positively by other consumers (Christodoulides, Jevons, and Bonhomme 2012).

Opportunities also exist to source firm-specific user-generated photographs using companies such as Snapwire or Olapic. Snapwire connects mobile, social photographers with firms looking to purchase photographs that they cannot find through traditional stock photo services, while Olapic collects firm-specific user-generated photographs and uses algorithms and human moderation to surface the best content (Nagy 2014). Having a presence on social media outlets like Instagram also allows travel brands to engage with consumers by posting, with consumers’ permission, the best of these photographs on their other online platforms.

Limitations and Directions for Future Research

There are a number of limitations to this research. First, while conducting a controlled, survey-based experiment allowed us to test our hypotheses while holding all else constant (Calder, Phillips, and Tybout 1981), one limitation of this kind of experimental research is that it limits the potential to generalize across populations and settings. Stimuli were presented to participants in a manner that mimicked the user experience of a hotel page on an OTA website, with participants’ scores on the realism check suggesting that the scenarios were perceived as realistic. Further, the theory of reasoned action (Ajzen and Fishbein 1980) strongly supports a link between intended and actual behavior. However, additional research, such as A/B testing on a given firm’s website, should be conducted to examine the effects of different combinations of photograph content and source on actual booking behavior.

Second, we limited our examination of consumers’ use of photographs to the online purchase of hotel accommodation, and to one travel purpose (i.e., a family-oriented leisure trip). Further research is merited to explore how consumers use photograph content to inform purchase decisions in different travel contexts and with other travel purposes. On a related note, our examination of perceived information value was restricted to two dimensions: utilitarian and hedonic. The literature reflects additional dimensions of perceived information value that may play a role in how consumers use photography when making online travel-related purchases. For example, how might the sensation-seeking dimension of information value contribute to consumers’ perceptions of information utility when evaluating a river rafting vacation? Further, while this study examined the influence of photograph source, perceived information value, and photograph credibility on consumers’ reactions to photograph content, there may be other mediators and moderators of the photograph content–booking intentions relationship. For example, the role of brand familiarity in consumers’ use of photography to inform booking intentions merits investigation. We sought insight into how consumers use photograph content to make a booking decision when they have little or no experience of a given property or brand but it is possible that experienced consumers of a given brand and/or brand-loyal consumers will not rely on photograph content to the same extent as novice consumers.

Finally, we limited our examination of consumers’ use of photographs with other readily available cues to quality in the online environment to the role of photograph content in consumers’ reaction to price. Additional research is needed to develop our understanding of how consumers use other user-generated content such as reviews or aggregate consumer ratings in conjunction with photographs to inform their booking decisions.

Footnotes

Appendix

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no external financial support for the research, nor any compensation for the authorship and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Yoojin Shin is an independent researcher and a Revenue Management Analyst at Marriott International. She holds a MS in revenue management from the Pennsylvania State University. Her research interests focus on revenue management, strategic pricing, and market analysis.

Breffni M. Noone is an Associate Professor in the School of Hospitality Management at the Pennsylvania State University. She holds a Ph.D. in revenue management from Cornell University. Her research interests focus on revenue management, in particular pricing for revenue management, and service operations management.

Stephani K. A. Robson is a Senior Lecturer and Director of Undergraduate Studies in the School of Hotel Administration at Cornell University. She holds a Ph.D. from Cornell University with a focus on consumer behavior . Her research interests center on how the design of environments affect consumer intentions, satisfaction, and behavior.

References

Agarwal

Sanjeev

Teas

R. Kenneth

. 2004. “Cross-national Applicability of a Perceived Risk-Value Model.” Journal of Product & Brand Management 13 (4): 242–56.

Ajzen

Icek

Fishbein

Martin

. 1980. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Anderson

Chris K.

2012. “The Impact of Social Media on Lodging Performance.” Cornell Hospitality Report 12 (15): 6–11.

Appelman

Alyssa

Sundar

S. Shyam

. 2016. “Measuring Message Credibility: Construction and Validation of an Exclusive Scale.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 93 (1): 59–79.

Aqueveque

Claudio

. 2006. “Extrinsic Cues and Perceived Risk: The Influence of Consumption Situation.” Journal of Consumer Marketing 23 (5): 237–47.

Arslanagić

Maja

Peštek

Almir

Kadić-Maglajlić

Selma

. 2014. “Perceptions of Healthy Food Packaging Information: Do Men and Women Perceive Differently?” Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 109:78–82.

Bhattacharya

Subhabrata

Sukthankar

Rahul

Shah

Mubarak

. 2010. “A Framework for Photo-quality Assessment and Enhancement Based on Visual Aesthetics.” Paper presented at the 18th ACM International Conference on Multimedia, Firenze, Italy, October 25-29.

Bickart

Barbara

Schindler

Robert M.

2001. “Internet Forums as Influential Sources of Consumer Information.” Journal of Interactive Marketing 15 (3): 31–40.

Black

Hulda G.

Kelley

Scott W.

2009. “A Storytelling Perspective on Online Customer Reviews Reporting Service Failure and Recovery.” Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 26 (2): 169–79.

10.

Book

Laura A.

Tanford

Sarah

Chen

Yang-Su

. 2016. “Understanding the Impact of Negative and Positive Traveler Reviews: Social Influence and Price Anchoring Effects.” Journal of Travel Research 55 (8): 993–1007.

11.

Calder

Bobby J.

Phillips

Lynn W.

Tybout

Alice M.

1981. “Designing Research for Application.” Journal of Consumer Research 8 (2): 197–207.

12.

Chaiken

Shelly

. 1980. “Heuristic versus Systematic Information Processing and the Use of Source versus Message Cues in Persuasion.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39 (5): 752–766.

13.

Childers

Terry L.

Houston

Michael J.

1984. “Conditions for a Picture-Superiority Effect on Consumer Memory.” Journal of Consumer Research 11 (2): 643–54.

14.

Cho

Mi-Hea

Jang

Soocheong

. 2008. “Information Value Structure for Vacation Travel.” Journal of Travel Research 47 (1): 72–83.

15.

Choi

Youngjoon

Hickerson

Benjamin

Kerstetter

Deborah

. 2018. “Understanding the Sources of Online Travel Information.” Journal of Travel Research 57 (1): 116–28.

16.

Chowdhury

Rafi M. M. I.

Olsen

G. Douglas

Pracejus

John W.

2008. “Affective Responses to Images in Print Advertising: Affect Integration in a Simultaneous Presentation Context.” Journal of Advertising 37 (3): 7–18.

17.

Christodoulides

George

Jevons

Colin

Bonhomme

Jennifer

. 2012. “Memo to Marketers: Quantitative Evidence for Change: How User-Generated Content Really Affects Brands.” Journal of Advertising Research 52 (1): 53–64.

18.

Cowen

Martin

. 2016. “Digital Travel Sales to Break through $800 Billion by 2020.” Tnooz, July 21. https://www.tnooz.com/article/digital-travel-sales-to-break-through-800-billion-by-2020/.

19.

Cox

Donald F.

1967. Risk Taking and Information Handling in Consumer Behavior. Boston, MA: Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University.

20.

Decrop

Alain

Snelders

Dirk

. 2004. “Planning the Summer Vacation: An Adaptable Process.” Annals of Tourism Research 31 (4): 1008–30.

21.

Dewar

Keith

Wen Mei

Davis

Charles H.

2007. “Photographic Images, Culture, and Perception in Tourism Advertising: A Q Methodology Study of Canadian and Chinese University Students.” Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 22 (2): 35–44.

22.

Dickinger

Astrid

. 2011. “The Trustworthiness of Online Channels for Experience- and Goal-Directed Search Tasks.” Journal of Travel Research 50 (4): 378–91.

23.

Diehl

Kristin

Zauberman

Gal

. 2005. “Searching Ordered Sets: Evaluations from Sequences under Search.” Journal of Consumer Research 31 (4): 824–32.

24.

Dowling

G. R.

1986. “Perceived Risk: The Concept and Its Measurement.” Psychology & Marketing 3 (3): 193–210.

25.

Duverger

Philippe

. 2013. “Curvilinear Effects of User-generated Content on Hotels’ Market Share: A Dynamic Panel-Data Analysis.” Journal of Travel Research 52 (4): 465–78.

26.

Edell

Julie A.

Staelin

Richard

. 1983. “The Information Processing of Pictures in Print Advertisements.” Journal of Consumer Research 10 (1): 45–61.

27.

Filieri

Raffaele

McLeay

Fraser

. 2014. “E-WOM and Accommodation: An Analysis of the Factors That Influence Travelers’ Adoption of Information from Online Reviews.” Journal of Travel Research 53 (1): 44–57.

28.

Forman

Chris

Ghose

Anindya

Wiesenfeld

Batia

. 2008. “Examining the Relationship between Reviews and Sales: The Role of Reviewer Identity Disclosure in Electronic Markets.” Information Systems Research 19 (3): 291–313.

29.

Forrest

Cao

Yong

. 2010. “Opinions, Recommendations and Endorsements: The New Regulatory Framework for Social Media.” Journal of Business and Policy Research 5 (2): 88–99.

30.

Garrod

Brian

. 2009. “Understanding the Relationship between Tourism Destination Imagery and Tourist Photography.” Journal of Travel Research 47 (3): 346–58.

31.

Goossens

Cees

. 2000. “Tourism Information and Pleasure Motivation.” Annals of Tourism Research 27 (2): 301–21.

32.

Green

Melanie C.

Brock

Timothy C.

2000. “The Role of Transportation in the Persuasiveness of Public Narratives.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79 (5): 701–21.

33.

Gretzel

Ulrike

Yoo

Kyung Hyan

Purifoy

Melanie

. 2007. “Online Travel Review Study: Role and Impact of Online Travel Reviews.” http://www.tripadvisor.com/pdfs/OnlineTravelReviewReport.pdf (accessed October 2, 2017).

34.

Grewal

Dhruv

Monroe

Kent B.

Krishnan

1998. “The Effects of Price-comparison Advertising on Buyers’ Perceptions of Acquisition Value, Transaction Value, and Behavioral Intentions.” Journal of Marketing 62 (2): 46–59.

35.

Hamby

Anne

Daniloski

Kim

Brinberg

David

. 2015. “How Consumer Reviews Persuade through Narratives.” Journal of Business Research 68 (6): 1242–50.

36.

Hayes

Andrew F.

2013. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-based Approach. New York: Guilford.

37.

Holmes

Steve

Ganley

Paul

. 2007. “User-Generated Content and the Law.” Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 2 (5): 338–44.

38.

Jain

Shailendra Pratap

Posavac

Steven S.

2001. “Prepurchase Attribute Verifiability, Source Credibility, and Persuasion.” Journal of Consumer Psychology 11 (3): 169–80.

39.

James

E. Lincoln

Vanden Bergh

Bruce G.

1990. “An Information Content Comparison of Magazine Ads across a Response Continuum from Direct Response to Institutional Advertising.” Journal of Advertising 19 (2): 23–29.

40.

Jeong

Miyoung

Choi

Jiyoung

. 2004. “Effects of Picture Presentations on Customers’ Behavioral Intentions on the Web.” Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 17 (2/3): 193–204.

41.

Johnson

Rose L.

Kellaris

James J.

1988. “An Exploratory Study of Price/Perceived-Quality Relationships among Consumer Services.” Advances in Consumer Research 15:316–22.

42.

Kaplanidou

Kyriaki

Vogt

Christine

. 2006. “A Structural Analysis of Destination Travel Intentions as a Function of Web Site Features.” Journal of Travel Research 45 (2): 204–16.

43.

King

Robert Allen

Racherla

Pradeep

Bush

Victoria D.

2014. “What We Know and Don’t Know about Online Word-of-Mouth: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature.” Journal of Interactive Marketing 28 (3): 167–83.

44.

Kisielius

Jolita

. 1982. “The Role of Memory in Understanding Advertising Media Effectiveness: The Effect of Imagery on Consumer Decision Making.” Advances in Consumer Research 9:183–86.

45.

Litvin

Stephen W.

Mouri

Nacef

. 2009. “A Comparative Study of the Use of ‘Iconic’ versus ‘Generic’ Advertising Images for Destination Marketing.” Journal of Travel Research 48 (2): 152–61.

46.

Liu

2019. “Social Media Envy: How Experience Sharing on Social Networking Sites Drives Millennials’ Aspirational Tourism Consumption.” Journal of Travel Research 58 (3): 355–69.

47.

Lutz

Kathy A.

Lutz

Richard J.

1978. “Imagery-Eliciting Strategies: Review and Implications of Research.” Advances in Consumer Research 5:611–20.

48.

MacCannell

Dean

. 1973. “Staged Authenticity: Arrangements of Social Space in Tourist Settings.” American Journal of Sociology 79 (3): 589–603.

49.

Mackay

Kelly J.

Couldwell

Christine M.

2004. “Using Visitor-Employed Photography to Investigate Destination Image.” Journal of Travel Research 42 (4): 390–96.

50.

Marder

Ben

Archer-Brown

Chris

Colliander

Jonas

Lambert

Aliette

. 2019. “Vacation Posts on Facebook: A Model for Incidental Vicarious Travel Consumption.” Journal of Travel Research 58 (6): 1014–33.

51.

Metzger

Miriam J.

Flanagin

Andrew J.

Medders

Ryan B.

2010. “Social and Heuristic Approaches to Credibility Evaluation Online.” Journal of Communication 60 (3): 413–39.

52.

Michaelidou

Nina

Siamagka

Nikoletta-Theofania

Moraes

Caroline

Micevski

Milena

. 2013. “Do Marketers Use Visual Representations of Destinations That Tourists Value? Comparing Visitors’ Image of a Destination with Marketer-Controlled Images Online.” Journal of Travel Research 52 (6): 789–804.

53.

Mitchell

Vincent W.

Boustani

Pari

. 1994. “A Preliminary Investigation into Pre- and Post-purchase Risk Perception and Reduction.” European Journal of Marketing 28 (1): 56–71.

54.

Mitchell

Andrew A.

Olson

Jerry C.

1981. “Are Product Attribute Beliefs the Only Mediator of Advertising Effects on Brand Attitude?” Journal of Marketing Research 18 (3): 318–32.

55.

Mittal

Banwari

Lee

Myung-Soo

. 1989. “A Causal Model of Consumer Involvement.” Journal of Economic Psychology 10 (3): 363–89.

56.

Morris

P. E.

Stevens

1974. “Linking Images and Free Recall.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 13 (3): 310–15.

57.

Moutinho

Luiz

. 1987. “Consumer Behavior in Tourism.” European Journal of Marketing 21 (10): 5–44.

58.

Nagy

Evie

. 2014. “How Brands Are Using Your Best Instagram Shots for More Authentic Marketing.” Fast Company, July 9. https://www.fastcompany.com/3032732/how-brands-are-using-your-best-instagram-shots-for-more-authentic-marketing.

59.

Noone

Breffni M.

McGuire

Kelly A.

2013. “Pricing in a Social World: The Influence of Non-price Information on Hotel Choice.” Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management 12 (5): 385–401.

60.

Noone

Breffni M.

McGuire

Kelly A.

2016. “Impact of Attitudinal Loyalty on the Frequent Unmanaged Business Traveler’s Use of Price and Consumer Reviews in Hotel Choice.” Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management 15 (1): 20–36.

61.

Noone

Breffni M.

Robson

Stephani K. A.

2014. “Using Eye Tracking to Obtain a Deeper Understanding of What Drives Online Hotel Choice.” Cornell Hospitality Report 14 (18): 6–16.

62.

Noone

Breffni M.

Robson

Stephani K. A.

2016. “Understanding Consumers’ Inferences from Price and Nonprice Information in the Online Lodging Purchase Decision.” Service Science 8 (2): 108–23.

63.

Nowak

Kristine L.

McGloin

Rory

. 2014. “The Influence of Peer Reviews on Source Credibility and Purchase Intention.” Societies 4 (4): 689–705.

64.

Önder

Irem

Koerbitz

Wolfgang

Hubmann-Haidvogel

Alexander

. 2016. “Tracing Tourists by Their Digital Footprints: The Case of Austria.” Journal of Travel Research 55 (5): 566–73.

65.

Pan

Bing

Zhang

Lixuan

Law

Rob

. 2013. “The Complex Matter of Online Hotel Choice.” Cornell Hospitality Quarterly 54 (1): 74–83.

66.

Park

Do-Hyung

Lee

Jumin

Han

Ingoo

. 2007. “The Effect of On-line Consumer Reviews on Consumer Purchasing Intention: The Moderating Role of Involvement.” International Journal of Electronic Commerce 11 (4): 125–48.

67.

Petty

Richard E.

Cacioppo

John T.

1986. “The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 19:123–205.

68.

Petty

Richard E.

Cacioppo

John T.

Schumann

David

. 1983. “Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement.” Journal of Consumer Research 10 (2): 135–46.

69.

Petty

Richard E.

Heesacker

Martin

Hughes

Jan N.

1997. “The Elaboration Likelihood Model: Implications for the Practice of School Psychology.” Journal of School Psychology 35 (2): 107–36.

70.

Phelan

Kelly Virginia

Christodoulidou

Natasa

Countryman

Cary C.

Kistner

Leonard J.

2011. “To Book or Not to Book: The Role of Hotel Web Site Heuristics.” Journal of Services Marketing 25 (2): 134–48.

71.

Phillips

Paul

Barnes

Stuart

Zigan

Krystin

Schegg

Roland

. 2017. “Understanding the Impact of Online Reviews on Hotel Performance: An Empirical Analysis.” Journal of Travel Research 56 (2): 235–49.

72.

Pieters

Rik

Wedel

Michel

. 2004. “Attention Capture and Transfer in Advertising: Brand, Pictorial, and Text-size Effects.” Journal of Marketing 68 (2): 36–50.

73.

Preacher

Kristopher J.

Hayes

Andrew F.

2008. “Asymptotic and Resampling Strategies for Assessing and Comparing Indirect Effects in Multiple Mediator Models.” Behavior Research Methods 40 (3): 879–91.

74.

Pullman

Madeleine E.

Robson

Stephani K. A.

2007. “Visual Methods: Using Photographs to Capture Customers’ Experience with Design.” Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 48 (2): 121–44.

75.

Raghubir

Priya

Corfman

Kim

. 1999. “When Do Price Promotions Affect Pretrial Brand Evaluations?” Journal of Marketing Research 36 (2): 211–22.

76.

Rao

Akshay R.

Monroe

Kent B.

1988. “The Moderating Effect of Prior Knowledge on Cue Utilization in Product Evaluations.” Journal of Consumer Research 15 (2): 253–64.

77.

Rao

Akshay R.

Monroe

Kent B.

1989. “The Effect of Price, Brand Name, and Store Name on Buyers’ Perceptions of Product Quality: An Integrative Review.” Journal of Marketing Research 26 (3): 351–57.

78.

Ring

Amata

Tkaczynski

Aaron

Dolnicar

Sara

. 2016. “Word-of-Mouth Segments: Online, Offline, Visual or Verbal?” Journal of Travel Research 55 (4): 481–92.

79.

Samuelsen

Bendik Meling

Olsen

Lars Erling

. 2010. “Promising Attributes and Experiences.” Journal of Advertising 39 (2): 65–78.

80.

Sparks

Beverley A.

Perkins

Helen E.

Buckley

Ralf

. 2013. “Online Travel Reviews as Persuasive Communication: The Effects of Content Type, Source, and Certification Logos on Consumer Behavior.” Tourism Management 39:1–9.

81.

Sparks

Beverley

Wang

Ying

. 2014. “Natural and Built Photographic Images: Preference, Complexity and Recall.” Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 31 (7): 868–83.

82.

Starch

Daniel

. 1966. “How Does the Shape of Ads Affect Readership?” Media/Scope 10 (7): 83–85.

83.

Stepchenkova

Svetlana

Kim

Hany

Kirilenko

Andrei

. 2015. “Cultural Differences in Pictorial Destination Images: Russia through the Camera Lenses of American and Korean Tourists.” Journal of Travel Research 54 (6): 758–73.

84.

Swarbrooke

John

Horner

Susan

. 1999. Consumer Behavior in Tourism. London: Butterworth-Heinemann.

85.

Tanford

Sarah

Montgomery

Rhonda

. 2015. “The Effects of Social Influence and Cognitive Dissonance on Travel Purchase Decisions.” Journal of Travel Research 54 (5): 596–610.

86.

Tang

Liang

Jang

Soocheong

. 2008. “Tourism Information Trust as a Bridge between Information Value and Satisfaction: An Exploratory Study.” Tourism Analysis 13 (5/6): 565–78.

87.

Trumbo

Craig W.

2002. “Information Processing and Risk Perception: An Adaptation of the Heuristic-Systematic Model.” Journal of Communication 52 (2): 367–82.

88.

Van Fleet

David D.

Atwater

Leanne

. 1997. “Gender Neutral Names: Don’t Be So Sure!” Sex Roles 37 (1/2): 111–23.

89.

Vogt

Christine A.

Fesenmaier

Daniel R.

1998. “Expanding the Functional Information Search Model.” Annals of Tourism Research 25 (3): 551–78.

90.

Huy Quan

Gang

Law

Rob

Ben Haobin

. 2015. “Exploring the Travel Behaviors of Inbound Tourists to Hong Kong Using Geotagged Photos.” Tourism Management 46:222–32.

91.

Wang

Ning

. 1999. “Rethinking Authenticity in Tourism Experience.” Annals of Tourism Research 26 (2): 349–70.

92.

Wang

Ying

Sparks

Beverley A.

2016. “An Eye-Tracking Study of Tourism Photo Stimuli: Image Characteristics and Ethnicity.” Journal of Travel Research 55 (5): 588–602.

93.

Wilson

Alan

Murphy

Hilary

Fierro

Jesus Cambra

. 2012. “Hospitality and Travel: The Nature and Implications of User-Generated Content.” Cornell Hospitality Quarterly 53 (3): 220–28.

94.

Xie

Hui

Miao

Kuo

Pei-Jou

Lee

Bo-Youn

. 2011. “Consumers’ Responses to Ambivalent Online Hotel Reviews: The Role of Perceived Source Credibility and Pre-decisional Disposition.” International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (1): 178–83.

95.

Yacouel

Nira

Fleischer

Aliza

. 2012. “The Role of Cybermediaries in Reputation Building and Price Premiums in the Online Hotel Market.” Journal of Travel Research 51 (2): 219–26.

96.

Qiang

Law

Rob

Bin

. 2009. “The Impact of Online User Reviews on Hotel Room Sales.” International Journal of Hospitality Management 28 (1): 180–82.

97.

Zarantonello

Lia

Jedidi

Kamel

Schmitt

Bernd H.

2013. “Functional and Experiential Routes to Persuasion: An Analysis of Advertising in Emerging versus Developed Markets.” International Journal of Research in Marketing 30 (1): 46–56.