The Effects of Holiday Leisure Travel on Subjective Well-Being: The Moderating Role of Experience Sharing

Abstract

Despite growing interest in experience sharing among leisure travelers, there is still limited research concerning the role of travel experience sharing on leisure traveler’s life satisfaction. The main objective of this research is to test the moderation effects of experience sharing during and after leisure travel on the bottom-up spillover process of tourists’ leisure travel satisfaction–life satisfaction hierarchy. The positive effect of holiday trip motivation fulfillment on overall holiday trip satisfaction is hypothesized to be amplified by on-site experience sharing (e.g., uploading holiday pictures or videos to social media platforms while traveling). Also, the positive effect of holiday trip satisfaction on holiday travelers’ subjective well-being is hypothesized to be amplified by posttrip experience sharing (e.g., publishing blog posts or travel reports online post trip). We used data from a large-scale social survey in Germany (N = 2,198) and the results confirmed the hypotheses. Theoretical and managerial implications are discussed.

Keywords

holiday travel motivation fulfillment holiday leisure travel satisfaction subjective well-being experience sharing

Introduction

There has been an increased research interest in the tourism and leisure literature concerning the antecedents and consequences of sharing experiences among leisure travelers (Sotiriadis 2017). This could reflect the current trend that people constantly pursue extraordinary experiences and share them through various personal media. Consider the following statistics. According to a global online travel platform company’s panel study results, 87% of travel decisions (e.g., destination and activity choices) made by Generation Z are influenced by messaging in social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat. Study results also showed that more than 70% of all generations of Latin American descent use mobile devices to gather and post information throughout their travel trip (Expedia Group 2018, 2019). These statistics show that today’s leisure travelers are shaping their leisure travel experiences even before and after actual trips via experience sharing on social media. Unlike recent studies that focus primarily on social media as travel experience sharing tools, this study also includes broader types of communication tools (e.g., phone calls, e-mails, post cards) to fully cover the full spectrum of experience sharing practices among holiday leisure travelers.

The consumer behavior literature has identified consequences of experience sharing mostly in the context of consumers’ brand experience sharing. For example, research has shown that positive brand experience sharing positively affects consumer–brand associations and perceived brand performance; and conversely, negative brand experience sharing has an equally negative impact (Trusov, Bucklin, and Pauwels 2009). Other research (Berger, Sorensen, and Rasmussen 2010; Wilson, Giebelhausen, and Brady 2017) have provided evidence hinting at potential positive consequences of negative experience sharing. In their dual path model of negative brand experience sharing on sharers’ online brand community happiness, Zhou et al. (2019) showed that consumers’ negative experience sharing on brand community brings both positive consequence of social support especially for short-term members, and negative consequence of social exclusion especially for long-term members affecting sharers’ online brand community overall happiness. Other studies focusing on the impact of experience/information sharing on sharers’ life evaluation showed somewhat mixed results depending on media user characteristics such as age and gender (Jiang and Hu 2016; Teo and Lee 2016).

Travel experience sharing can be defined as activities occurring when an individual disseminates travel-related experiences to others though various communication tools (Kang and Schuett 2013). Published studies on this theme in the field of tourism are mostly focused on understanding the underlying motivation of travel experience sharing among tourists and its consequences. Leisure travelers are motivated to share their experiences through social media platforms by either self-centered (i.e., the sharing of experience bolsters one’s self-esteem by strengthening social ties and enjoyment of online activities) or community-related reasons (i.e., helping other travelers with tips and recommendations) (Kim and Tussyadiah 2013; Munar and Jacobsen 2014; Park, Yoon, and Kim 2015; Parra-López et al. 2011). Experience sharing also serves to enhance sharers’ evaluation of their travel experiences through positive (re)interpretation and regurgitation of the events (Kim and Fesenmaier 2017; D. Wang, Park, and Fesenmaier 2012). Furthermore, travel experience sharing tends to foster a sense of belonging, social presence, and meaningfulness through participation in online community activities (Kang and Gretzel 2012; Kang and Schuett 2013; Qu and Lee 2011).

Despite the seemingly positive influence of experience sharing on leisure travelers’ satisfaction with travel, there is still a limited understanding regarding the impact of leisure travel experience sharing on sharers’ subjective well-being. Given that consumers can co-produce the meaning of experiences by sharing (Sigala 2012; Yoo and Gretzel 2011), we believe that leisure traveler’s sharing of their travel experiences is likely to magnify the impact of satisfaction with leisure travel on life satisfaction overall. Interestingly, a recent theorization of shared-reality creation in communication (Echterhoff and Higgins 2017, p. 177) suggested that individuals may fulfill their epistemic need to understand the world they are living in and relational need to connect with others through sharing experiences. Any action that drives to fulfill fundamental human motives is likely to contribute to one’s life satisfaction. As such, the goal is to demonstrate that the leisure travel experience sharing during and after the trip plays an important role in the way leisure travel contributes to tourists’ life satisfaction. Specifically, we hypothesize that tourists’ sharing of their experiences on-site is likely to amplify the impact of leisure travel motivation fulfillment on overall satisfaction with the holiday trip, whereas posttrip experience sharing is likely to amplify the impact of holiday trip satisfaction on subjective well-being. Given empirical support of these hypotheses, we believe that the managerial implications are indeed significant. Leisure travel marketers should develop new programs (and strengthen existing programs) designed to assist leisure travelers share their travel experiences with others through various communication tools.

The remainder discussion proceeds as follows: First, we review past literature on the leisure travel experience sharing and its consequences. Second, we develop a model to demonstrate the moderating role of leisure travel experience sharing on leisure travel satisfaction hierarchy. Third, we report the results of a major survey involving holiday leisure travelers. Finally, in conclusion, we discuss several theoretical and managerial implications.

Conceptual Development

Studies have identified several benefits that experience sharing may provide to sharers in a tourism context. These benefits can be largely categorized as functional benefits, hedonic benefits, and social (self-expressive) benefits. We will address these benefits in the context of on-site travel and post travel.

Benefits of On-Site Travel Experience Sharing

Tourists who upload and share content related to their holiday trip on-site do so to ensure that their leisure experiences are captured and stored effectively (Choe, Kim, and Fesenmaier 2017). This is, essentially, a functional benefit. Additionally, on-site experience sharing serves to positively shape their travel experiences by receiving positive feedback from friends, family members, or others because such feedback reflects moral support (Chung, Tyan, and Chung 2017; Kim, Fesenmaier, and Johnson 2013). Furthermore, posting travel experience online may lead to heightened satisfaction with travel, because such postings tend to motivate those content uploaders to participate in more activities, which in turn serve to induce more feelings that are positive during travel (D. Wang, Park, and Fesenmaier 2012). As such, on-site postings of traveler’s leisure experiences have additional hedonic benefits. Hedonic benefits are also extracted through the mere act of information sharing. For example, there is evidence suggesting that posting on Geotag (a service provided by social media firms that enables users to identify their location for other people) provides instant gratification (Chung and Lee 2016; Okuyama and Yanai 2013; Parra-López et al. 2011; Y. Wang and Fesenmaier 2004). Lastly, research has provided evidence that active participation on online travel platforms during travel strengthens participants’ social presence and enables them to realize their ideal images of themselves, thereby satisfying their social and self-expressive needs (Kang and Gretzel 2012; Kang and Schuett 2013). Consider the following study by Park, Seo, and Kandampully (2016). These researchers were able to empirically demonstrate that tourists who share pilgrimage experiences on social network sites (hereafter SNS) experience satisfaction in relation to their need for self-presentation and status.

Benefits of Posttravel Experience Sharing

Experience sharing through social media also serves to satisfy travelers’ functional, hedonic, self-expressive, and social needs (Wu and Pearce 2016). Specifically, while reporting their reasons in their online travel blogs, bloggers have alluded to the functional aspects of self-documentation, the hedonic goal of blogging enjoyment, together with social and self-expressive goal of positive self-enhancement through online connection, social status, and achievement. Given the malleability of memory, Wood (2019) has argued that tourists tend to share their experiences with others to achieve a consensual understanding of their emotional memories. That is, what really matters to tourists is not the actual emotions they felt during travel but rather a cocreated memory through experience sharing. This type of experience sharing serves a social function, to strengthen social bonds and the sense of belongingness. Also, there is suggestive evidence that sharing travel experiences enhances subjective well-being through the fostering of social relationships (Van Boven and Gilovich 2003).

Segmentation Patterns Based on Travel Experience Sharing

Several studies have attempted to classify tourists into groups based on their travel experience sharing, mostly via SNSs. For example, based on data related to social media content concerning both consumption and production activities, Amaro, Duarte, and Henriques (2016) were able to classify leisure travelers into five segments: (1) inactive, (2) occasional consumers and apathetic creators, (3) occasional consumers and creators, (4) consuming enthusiasts and apathetic creators, and (5) fully engaged. Choe, Kim, and Fesenmaier (2017) were also able to identify four different segments: (1) socializers, (2) attention seekers, (3) actives, and (4) non-users. Each segment appears to have distinctive media habits in developing their own unique way of forming memories (e.g., travel reviews, social networking, photo or video sharing, microblogs, personal blogs, and online communities). These study findings collectively suggest that tourists are participating in cocreation of travel experiences with varying degrees of SNS usage and involvement.

The Conceptual Model

As shown in Figure 1, our model reflects a satisfaction hierarchy with mediating effects. This satisfaction hierarchy is based on much research in quality of life referred to as bottom–up spillover theory of life satisfaction (Andrews and Withey 1976; Campbell, Converse, and Rodgers 1976; Diener 1984; Diener et al. 1999; Sirgy 2012) and research in travel and tourism has provided much support for it (e.g., Neal, Sirgy, and Uysal 1999, 2004; Neal, Uysal, and Sirgy 2007). What is satisfaction hierarchy? The basic premise of this quality-of-life model is that life satisfaction sits on top of a hierarchy of satisfaction that ranges from the very abstract to the very concrete. Life satisfaction (satisfaction at the most abstract level) is mostly determined by domain satisfaction. That is, satisfaction segmented in the context of various life domains (i.e., satisfaction with leisure life, satisfaction with work life, satisfaction with family life, satisfaction with social life, and so on) spills over bottom to top to influence life satisfaction. In other words, happiness in leisure life, work life, family life, and social life contribute directly to life satisfaction overall. In turn, domain satisfaction is influenced by satisfaction with specific life concerns and events, which are satisfaction at the bottom of the satisfaction hierarchy. Satisfaction with specific life concerns and events spills over bottom-to-top to influence domain satisfaction. For example, satisfaction experienced with a specific tourist event by the leisure traveler is likely to contribute to overall satisfaction in leisure life, social life, family life, etc. (i.e., domain satisfaction). In turn, domain satisfaction (i.e., satisfaction in leisure life, social life, family life, and so on) contributes to overall life satisfaction. Guided by the concept of satisfaction hierarchy, we propose to test the following hypotheses.

Figure 1.

The conceptual model.

Hypotheses 1-4 (Mediation Effects: Holiday Trip Motivation Fulfillment →Overall Holiday Trip Satisfaction →Travelers’ Subjective Well-Being)

Travel motivation is an essential element that shapes overall tourist behavior and it has been studied as an important determinant of tourists’ destination experience perception, leisure travel satisfaction and life satisfaction (Caber and Albayrak 2016; Han and Hyun 2018; Hsu, Lee, and Chen 2017; Kruger et al. 2015; Lee, Chua, and Han 2017; Li and Cai 2012; Prebensen et al. 2013). The travel career pattern (TCP) approach, a reworked version of an earlier travel career ladder approach, maintains that tourists are motivated to engage in leisure travel based on five sets of needs (a la Maslow): relaxation needs, safety/security need, relationship needs, self-esteem and development needs, and self-actualization needs (Pearce 2005). Similarly, Pearce and Lee (2005) have empirically demonstrated that leisure travel motivation involves escapism, relaxation, relationship enhancement, and self-development. Some tourists are also motivated by attraction to nature, stimulation, nostalgia, among others.

Tourists develop expectations based on their travel motives, and as such, their satisfaction with their leisure trip is dependent on the extent to which the trip met their trip-related needs (Han and Hyun 2018; Kozak 2001; Pearce 2011). Studies showed that trip-related goal attainment also contributes to life satisfaction (Kruger et al. 2015; S. Wang 2017). Goals are more specified forms of human needs, and the more leisure travelers achieve important goals (goals set before actual travel), the greater are the leisure travel satisfaction and overall life satisfaction. Based on the goal valence principle, Kruger et al. (2015) empirically demonstrated that intrinsic (vs. extrinsic), approach (vs. avoidance), and flow (vs. nonflow) goals improved leisure travelers’ life satisfaction. S. Wang (2017) also showed that leisure travel contributes to leisure travelers’ life satisfaction by achieving physical, social, and career development goals. In sum, holiday leisure travelers are likely to feel satisfied with their holiday trip to the extent to which their travel motivations are met. Based on this discussion, we propose to test the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1: Holiday trip motivation fulfillment has a positive predictive influence on overall holiday trip satisfaction.

So far, we have argued that overall holiday trip satisfaction is likely to be influenced by holiday trip motivation fulfillment. But then we need to control for other variables that are well established in the literature that also influence overall holiday trip satisfaction. Doing so would help us determine that the influence of holiday trip motivation fulfillment on overall holiday trip satisfaction is robust. One antecedent variable that has much support in the literature is holiday trip planning. Specifically, leisure travel research typically breaks down the travel experience into three stages: previsit, on-site, and postvisit (e.g., Cohen, Prayag, and Moital 2014). Because of enhanced online connectivity, the previsit stage involves seeking out information about alternative options on travel sites (Tanti and Buhalis 2017). Such information seeking serves to ensure that the planned trip is more likely to increase tourists’ travel motivation by reducing risks of dissatisfaction and expectancy disconfirmation (Jun, Hartwell, and Buhalis 2012; Xiang and Gretzel 2010). For example, the degree to which a holiday trip is thoroughly planned (in terms of accommodation, transportation, food, and activities) the more likely to result in heightened trip satisfaction. Based on this discussion, we propose to test the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2: Holiday trip planning has a positive predictive influence on overall holiday trip satisfaction.

Research in tourism has also demonstrated that satisfaction with recent travel trip enhances tourists’ life satisfaction overall. Sirgy et al. (2011) provided empirical evidence suggesting that leisure travelers’ positive and negative affective responses from leisure travel activities influence their life satisfaction through domain satisfaction (satisfaction with leisure life, social life, family life, cultural life, etc.). Kim, Woo, and Uysal (2015) showed that satisfaction with trip experience contributes to elderly tourists’ quality of life through satisfaction with leisure life. More recently, S. Wang (2017) assumed a hierarchical relationship among life domains and demonstrated that leisure tourists could improve their overall life satisfaction through satisfaction with physical health and safety as well as satisfaction with social life as directly related to leisure travel experiences. Therefore, successful holiday leisure travel experiences are expected to enhance tourists’ subjective well-being. Based on this discussion, we propose to test the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 3: Overall holiday trip satisfaction has a positive predictive influence on tourists’ subjective well-being.

Up to this point, we have argued that subjective well-being is likely to be influenced by holiday trip satisfaction. We need to control for other variables that are well established in the literature that also influence subjective well-being in a leisure travel context. Doing so would help us determine that the influence of overall holiday trip satisfaction on subjective well-being is indeed robust. One antecedent variable that has much support in the literature is anticipation of the next holiday trip. That is, in the context of leisure travel, not only satisfaction with the overall holiday trip contributes to subjective well-being but also the anticipation of future holiday trips. In other words, research has shown that mere anticipation about upcoming holiday travel trips raised vacationers’ previsit happiness (Gilbert and Abdullah 2002; Hagger and Murray 2009; Nawijn et al. 2010). Although preparation for the trip could be stressful, anticipation about travel generates a significant amount of personal happiness (Nawijn, De Bloom, and Geurts 2013). A qualitative study identified factors that affect positive prevacation emotions, namely, memory from experience, expectations, and interaction with others, among others (Jung and Cho 2015). Based on this discussion, we propose to test the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 4: Anticipation of the next holiday trip has a positive predictive influence on tourists’ subjective well-being.

Hypotheses 5 and 6 (Moderation Effects: Moderating Role of Experience Sharing)

Now we will address the moderation effects of experience sharing on the holiday satisfaction hierarchy involving holiday trip motivation fulfilment, holiday trip satisfaction, and subjective well-being. However, before making the case for the moderation effects of experience sharing, let us first discuss the psychology of experience sharing.

One distinguishing aspect of human beings that separates us from other animals is our social nature. We are not simply social beings—we are hypersocial. That is, we choose to share our experience with others, especially significant others. There is an inherent psychological need to bond with others. This is the need to belong (Baumeister and Leary 1995). This social need serves an adaptive evolutionary purpose. It helps us develop social connections that protect us, both physically and mentally. Much research has shown that social isolation leads to both physical and mental ill-being (e.g., Cacioppo and Patrick 2009; Heinrich and Gullone 2006). In other words, developing and maintaining social connections provides long-term adaptive value to humans. Evidence suggests that people are driven to connect with each other by sharing their experiences with others even in the most minimalistic contexts (Jolly et al. 2019).

Holiday trip motivation fulfillment, holiday trip satisfaction, and on-site experience sharing

Our study makes the distinction between on-site experience sharing and posttrip experience sharing. As travelers are now constantly connected to their friends and family through various social media, their holiday trip experiences tend to be shared on social networks immediately (Tanti and Buhalis 2017; Tussyadiah 2014). There is some research that supports the notion that shared experiences are more enjoyable (e.g., Boothby et al. 2017; Mogan, Ronald, and Bulbulia 2017). That is, evidence suggests that shared experiences related to an activity amplify the emotions felt concerning that activity (Boothby, Clark, and Bargh 2014).

As previously mentioned, on-site experience sharing has several benefits for holiday travelers. Kang and Gretzel (2012) showed that tourists’ on-site experience sharing via a podcast enhances overall tourist experiences through perceived social presence and meaningfulness. He, Melumad, and Pham (2019) also showed that expressing and externalizing one’s momentary evaluation in consumption contexts provides tourists with hedonic benefits. That is, leisure travelers may feel an instant pleasure by expressing their feelings and opinions about their travel experiences. Experience sharing also serves to reduce discrepancies between previsit expectations and actual experiences (Jun, Hartwell, and Buhalis 2012; Xiang and Gretzel 2010). These expectations are revised to ensure congruence with the actual on-site experience. In sum, we believe that holiday travelers’ on-site experience sharing may amplify the positive impact of holiday motivation fulfillment on holiday trip satisfaction. Based on the discussion, we propose to test the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 5: The positive effect of holiday trip motivation fulfillment on overall holiday trip satisfaction is stronger under high than low conditions of on-site travel experience sharing.

Overall holiday trip satisfaction, subjective well-being, and posttrip experience sharing

Consumer studies have shown that experiential consumption contributes one’s subjective well-being more so than material consumption (Van Boven and Gilovich 2003). This may be due to its openness to subjective reinterpretation of the experience and the fact that sharing experiences foster social relationships. Tourists’ leisure travel experience is perhaps the most representative example of experiential consumption and is the most shared topic on SNSs. Kim and Fesenmaier (2017) demonstrated that posttrip experience sharing through social media leads to more favorable overall evaluations of the travel experience via increased positive affect (and decreased negative affect), even for unsatisfactory experiences. The study also found that holiday experiences savored through on-line travel blogs help tourists maintain and extend positive emotions better than without such behaviors (Filep et al. 2013). As such, we believe that these subjective reinterpretation and reminiscence through experience sharing may magnify the positive impact of holiday trip satisfaction on travelers’ subjective well-being. Based on the discussion, we propose to test the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 6: The positive effect of overall holiday trip satisfaction on holiday travelers’ subjective well-being is stronger under high than low conditions of posttrip experience sharing.

In sum and as shown in the Figure 1, satisfaction with recent holiday trip is hypothesized to be influenced from holiday trip motivation fulfillment along with holiday trip planning. The effect of holiday trip motivation fulfillment on holiday trip satisfaction is likely to be moderated by on-site travel experience sharing. That is, the more one participates in sharing experiences during leisure travel trip, the stronger the motivation fulfillment effect on holiday trip satisfaction. In turn, holiday trip satisfaction may influence travelers’ subjective well-being in addition to anticipation for the next holiday trip. The extent to which holiday trip satisfaction contributes to overall life satisfaction is likely to be amplified by posttrip experience sharing. That is, the more one participates in sharing experiences after trip, the stronger the holiday trip satisfaction effect on travelers’ subjective well-being.

Method

Our conceptual model was tested using data collected via the GESIS Panel, a large-scale social survey administered to a representative sample of German panel members of the GESIS Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences from August to October 2014 (GESIS 2017). Mainly because of reducing survey burden to panel survey participants, it is not uncommon to use available data collected over a period of time (Nickerson et al. 2003; Santini et al. 2020). The reader should also note that none of the constructs and relationships in our model are time sensitive. Also, most of the experience-sharing platforms mentioned in the measurement are largely consistent with today’s communication venues.

One of the key benefits of using the GESIS Panel data is to obtain demographically representative samples (Bosnjak et al. 2018). A total of 4,938 respondents were active members of the GESIS Panel in 2014. Sixty-two percent of respondents participated in the online version of the survey while 38% of respondents participated in the mail survey version. Among the entire sample, respondents who had a holiday trip within two months were selected for the analysis (N = 2,198). The demographic profile of respondents shows that there is a great deal of variability in terms of age, gender, marital status, type of employment, and net monthly income (see Table 1), which is to be expected. Detailed information about the project, sample, and data collection procedure are available from http://www.gesis-panel.org/.

Table 1.

Sample Characteristics (N=2,198).

Age		Marital Status		Employment
Born before 1950	15.0%	Single	24.8%	Full-time employed	48.7%
Born between 1951−1960	21.8%	Married (living together)	63.1%	Part-time employed	18.3%
Born between 1961−1970	26.7%	Married (living apart)	1.7%	Marginal employment	7.7%
Born between 1971−1980	17.1%	Divorced	7.2%	Parental leave or other leave of absence	2.0%
Born after 1981	19.4 %	Widowed	3.1%	Not employed	23.3%
Gender		People living in the household		Net monthly household income
Female	54.9%	1	14.3%	Less than €700	0.4%
Male	45.1%	2	32.5%	€700−€900	0.6%
		3	23.7%	€900−€1100	0.9%
		4	20.8%	€1100−€1300	1.8%
		5 and more	8.7%	€1300−€1500	2.3%
				€1500−€1700	2.4%
				€1700−€2000	6.0%
				€2000−€2300	8.8%
				€2300−€2600	9.6%
				€2600−€3200	15.7%
				€3200−€4000	19.9%
				€4000−€5000	15.3%
				€5000−€6000	9.2%
				€6000 and more	7.0%

Constructs and Measures

Respondents were asked to answer questions about their recent leisure travel experiences in the following order.

Holiday trip motivation fulfillment

Holiday trip motivation fulfillment was measured by Pearce and Lee’s (2005) tourist motivation scale. Respondents were asked to answer the extent to which their travel goals were achieved through their holiday trip experience. The prompt read as follows: “If you think about your past holiday trip this summer, how satisfied are you with the following things?” Examples include “Spend time with others,” “Make different experiences than in everyday life,” and “Come to rest.” Responses to the items pertaining to the construct were captured on 5-point satisfaction scales with “not at all satisfied” (1) to “fully satisfied” (5). See all the measurement items in Appendix.

Overall holiday trip satisfaction

A measure from Walker and Kono (2018) was used to capture satisfaction with one’s holiday trip. The measure is essentially one item: “All things considered, how satisfied are your holiday trip this summer?” and the response was captured on a 11-point Likert-type scale varying from extremely dissatisfied (0) to extremely satisfied (10), and transformed into a 5-point scale.

Holiday planning

Planning for the holiday trip was measured by the following prompt: “Which things had you already planned for your holiday trip: on arrival, accommodation, food, and activities during vacation?” Responses were captured in relation to these four dimensions using dichotomous scales: not yet planned (0) to already planned (1). The scores were then combined as a formative indicator.

Anticipation of the next holiday trip

Van Boven and Ashworth’s (2007) anticipation of experience measure was adopted to capture this construct (“How much are you looking forward to your holiday trip?”). Responses were captured using a 5-point Likert scale: very much looking forward to (1) to not at all looking forward to (5). The scores were then reverse coded.

Subjective well-being (SWB)

SWB was measured by a composite of two items capturing life satisfaction (“How satisfied are you at the moment overall with your life?”) and perceived happiness (“All things considered, how happy would you say you are at the moment?”) (OECD 2013, p. 166). Eleven-point Likert-type scales were used to capture the responses, which were then transformed into 5-point scales (from extremely dissatisfied to extremely satisfied and from extremely unhappy to extremely happy).

During and posttrip experience sharing

Munar and Jacobsen’s (2014) measure of tourism experience sharing was adopted to capture this construct. The prompt read as follows: “How often did you use the following possibilities during your holiday trip this summer to share your experiences with others?” Examples include “Made a phone call,” “Uploaded holiday pictures or videos to social media platforms (e.g., Facebook),” and “Twittered about vacation.” Responses were captured on rating scales varying from “never” (1) to “often” (4) and transformed into 5-point scales. See all the measurement items in the appendix. Additional detailed information about the items used in the survey is available from http://www.gesis-panel.org/.

Results

This section reports findings related to preliminary analyses and testing of measurement model, followed by hypotheses testing.

Preliminary Analyses

Before testing the measurement and structural models, we conducted some preliminary descriptive analyses on during- and after-leisure trip experience sharing (see Figure 2). On average, holiday tourists most commonly share their travel experience via SNS when specific methods (e.g., uploading picture or video on SNS, status message posting on SNS, posting tweets, etc.) are combined, followed by phone call and e-mail. Female respondents scored slightly higher on both on-site leisure travel experience sharing (male = 1.66 vs. female = 1.75, t = 3.97, p < .05) and post leisure travel experience sharing (male = 1.61 vs. female = 1.76, t = 6.76, p < .05). These results collectively demonstrate that tourists generally do engage in experience sharing using traditional means of communications as well as social media.

Figure 2.

Frequency of using various tools to share experiences during/after trip.

Testing the Measurement Model

To examine the psychometric properties of the measures used in this study, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for reflective constructs (see Table 2). Results showed that there is a good fit to the data: χ² (p value) = 309.079 (.00), df = 21; comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.96, goodness of fit index (GFI) = 0.97, normed fit index (NFI) = 0.96, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.08. Furthermore, all factor loadings were significant, the composite reliabilities of all constructs were greater than the usual 0.70 cutoff, and the variance extracted estimate was greater than the 0.50 benchmark. In sum, these results demonstrate adequate evidence of convergent validity and reliability of the measures (cf. Fornell and Larcker 1981). Regarding discriminant validity, the square root of the average variance extracted (AVE) of each construct should be larger than the correlation of the specific construct with any of the other constructs in the model (Chin 1998). Table 3 shows that the squared root of the AVEs for subjective well-being and motivation fulfillment constructs were greater than correlations with other constructs, demonstrating discriminant validity (see Table 3).

Table 2.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis.

Variables	Items	Coefficient	t Value	Alpha	Average Variance Extracted	Composite Reliability
Holiday trip motivation fulfillment	Novelty	0.847	44.682	0.819	0.500	0.832
	Escapism	0.680	33.570
	Relationship	0.640	31.079
	Self-development	0.687	33.816
	Stimulation	0.661	32.127
Satisfaction with holiday trip	Trip	1.000	−	−	−	−
Anticipation for the next trip	Anticipation	1.000	−	−	−	−
SWB	Swb1	0.953	31.462	0.921	0.843	0.915
SWB	Swb2	0.882	30.246	0.921	0.843	0.915

Note: χ² (p value) = 309.079 (.00), df = 21; comparative fit index = 0.96, goodness of fit index = 0.97, normed fit index = 0.96, root mean square error of approximation = 0.08. SWB = subjective well-being.

Table 3.

Correlations among the Constructs (Phi Matrix).

Constructs	1	2	3	4
1. SWB	0.918
2. Satisfaction with holiday trip	0.223	–
3. Anticipation for the next trip	0.098	0.101	–
4. Motivation fulfillment	0.149	0.498	0.159	0.707

Note: Italicized values are significant at 99% confidence interval. Diagonal elements are the square roots of the average variance extracted of each construct. SWB = subjective well-being.

Hypothesis Testing

We tested the hypotheses using structural equations modeling. The results indicate a good fit to the data—χ² (p value) = 597.619 (.00), df = 43; CFI = 0.95; GFI = 0.96; NFI = 0.94; RMSEA = 0.07—and are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4.

Path Analysis Results.

Structural Relationship	SE (t value)
Hypothesis 1: Holiday trip motivation fulfillment → Overall holiday trip satisfaction (+)	0.493**	(22.166)
Hypothesis 2: Holiday planning → Overall holiday trip satisfaction (+)	0.081**	(4.203)
Hypothesis 3: Overall holiday trip satisfaction → SWB (+)	0.180**	(8.388)
Hypothesis 4: Anticipation of the next holiday trip → SWB (+)	0.080**	(3.662)

Note: χ² (p value) = 597.619 (.00), df = 43; comparative fit index = 0.95; goodness of fit index = 0.96; normed fit index = 0.94; root mean square error of approximation = 0.07. SE = standardized estimate; SWB = subjective well-being.

Significant at the .05 level.

Hypothesis 1 states that holiday trip motivation fulfillment is a positive predictor of overall holiday trip satisfaction. The results indicate that satisfaction with holiday trip motivation has a positive predictive impact on holiday trip satisfaction (standardized path estimate = 0.493; p < .05). This result supports hypothesis 1.

Hypothesis 2 states that conducting holiday trip planning is a positive predictor of overall holiday trip satisfaction. The results indicate that holiday trip planning has a positive predictive influence on travelers’ overall holiday trip satisfaction (standardized path estimate = 0.081; p < .05), supporting hypothesis 2.

Hypothesis 3 states that overall holiday trip satisfaction is a positive predictor of tourists’ subjective well-being. The results indicate that holiday trip satisfaction has a positive predictive influence on tourists’ subjective well-being (standardized path estimate = 0.180; p < .05), supporting hypothesis 3.

Hypothesis 4 states that anticipation of the next holiday trip is a positive predictor of tourists’ subjective well-being. The results indicate that anticipating one’s upcoming holiday trip has a positive predictive influence on tourists’ subjective well-being (standardized path estimate = 0.080; p < .05), supporting hypothesis 4.

Hypothesis 5 posits that the relationship between holiday trip motivation fulfillment and overall holiday trip satisfaction is positively moderated by on-site travel experience sharing. The research literature suggests the use of moderated regression when both independent variables and moderators are continuous (Ro 2012) because multigroup testing using SEM may result in Type I or Type II errors due to an “artificial group creation effect” (Frazier, Tix, and Barron 2004). Given that our independent variable and moderators are both continuous variables, moderated regression method was used to test our moderation hypotheses. A moderated regression analysis with mean-centered variables was conducted, and the results show that the interaction effect was significant (β = 0.157, p < .05) after controlling for demographic variables (e.g., gender, age, and household income) and holiday planning (Table 5). Figure 3 shows that the impact of holiday trip motivation fulfillment on overall holiday trip satisfaction is amplified when on-site experience sharing is high, supporting hypothesis 5.

Table 5.

Moderation Effect of On-site Experience Sharing.

Dependent Variable	Independent Variable	Standardized Coefficient	t Value	R-Squared
Overall holiday trip satisfaction	Holiday trip motivation fulfillment	0.355**	6.503	0.200
	On-site experience sharing	−0.088	−1.548
	Holiday trip motivation fulfillment × On-site experience sharing	0.157**	2.723

Note: Control variables: gender, age, household income, holiday planning. Independent variable and moderator are mean centered.

Significant at the .05 level.

Figure 3.

Moderation effect of on-site experience sharing on overall holiday trip satisfaction.

Hypothesis 6 states that the overall holiday trip satisfaction and subjective well-being is positively moderated by posttrip experience sharing. Moderated regression analysis results show that there is a significantly positive interaction effect (β = 0.081, p < .05), after controlling for demographic variables (e.g., gender, age, and household income) and anticipation of the next holiday trip (Table 6). Figure 4 shows that the impact of overall holiday trip satisfaction on subjective well-being is amplified when posttrip experience sharing is high, supporting hypothesis 6.

Table 6.

Moderation Effect of Posttrip Experience Sharing.

Dependent Variable	Independent Variable	Standardized Coefficient	t Value	R-squared
SWB	Overall holiday trip satisfaction	0.307**	8.447	0.126
	Posttrip experience sharing	−0.009	−0.229
	Overall holiday trip satisfaction × Posttrip experience sharing	0.081**	2.222

Note: Control variables: gender, age, household income, anticipation of the next holiday trip. Independent variable and moderator are mean centered.

Significant at the 0.05 level.

Figure 4.

Moderation effect of posttrip experience sharing on subjective well-being.

We further tested the moderation hypotheses using the PROCESS Macro for Model 1 (Hayes 2013; version 3.3). Results based on 5,000 bootstrap samples with a 95% confidence interval showed consistently significant moderation effects and confirmed support for both hypothesis 5 (standardized coefficient= 0.249 [t = 2.723], CI = [.069, .429]) and hypothesis 6 (standardized coefficient= 0.132 [t = 2.221], CI = [.015, .249]).

Discussion

As mentioned in the Introduction section, there is still limited understanding regarding the impact of experience sharing on subjective well-being among leisure travelers. Past research has only demonstrated the positive effects of online experience sharing on tourists’ travel satisfaction (Kim, Fesenmaier, and Johnson 2013; Chung, Tyan, and Chung 2017) and the detrimental effects of passive SNS content consumption on receivers’ affective well-being (Krasnova et al. 2013; Lin, Van De Ven, and Utz 2018; Verduyn et al. 2015, 2017). That is, no research is available dealing with the effects of leisure experience sharing on leisure travelers’ life satisfaction in the tourism literature. As such, we theorized that leisure travel experience sharing may play an important role in the way leisure travel contributes to tourists’ life satisfaction. We distinguished between two types of experience sharing, namely on-site experience sharing and posttrip experience sharing. Specifically, we hypothesized that on-site experience sharing is likely to magnify the effects of holiday trip motivation fulfillment on leisure travel satisfaction, and that posttrip experience sharing is likely to magnify the effects of holiday travel satisfaction on life satisfaction. Our study findings supported our hypotheses that holiday trip motivation fulfillment has a positive influence on satisfaction with holiday leisure travel, which in turn has a positive influence on one’s subjective well-being. The study findings also indicated that the relationship between leisure travel motivation fulfillment and leisure travel satisfaction is significantly moderated by on-site experience sharing, supporting our hypothesis. Moreover, posttrip experience sharing was found to positively moderate the impact of leisure travel satisfaction on tourists’ subjective well-being, supporting our hypothesis. These findings are consistent with our predictions and confirm that on-site and posttrip experience sharing play significant roles in the way leisure travel motivation fulfillment contributes to subjective well-being.

Theoretical Implications

This research contributes to the tourism literature related to the impact of tourists’ experience sharing (Kang and Gretzel 2012; Kang and Schuett 2013; Park, Yoon, and Kim 2015; Parra-López et al. 2011; Qu and Lee 2011; Sotiriadis 2017). Whereas past studies have considered mostly the impact of sharing leisure travel experiences on immediate psychological consequences (e.g., sense of belongingness, enactment of one’s ideal self-image, hedonic pleasure) and overall evaluation of the travel experience per se, this study has focused on the impact of experience sharing on subjective well-being. Although the benefits of having leisure travel trips on tourists’ subjective well-being are relatively well-documented (e.g., Neal, Sirgy, and Uysal 1999, 2004; Neal, Uysal, and Sirgy 2007), there is no research that explicitly links travel experience sharing with tourists’ subjective well-being.

Furthermore, our study illustrates how two types of sharing experience in leisure travel experience contribute to subjective well-being, namely, on-site and posttrip experience sharing. Based on past research suggesting that sharing experiences may affect and sometimes modify their interpretation (Kim and Fesenmaier 2017; D. Wang, Park, and Fesenmaier 2012; Wood 2019), our study clearly demonstrated how the act of sharing magnifies its positive effect through a hierarchy of satisfaction effects (satisfaction with the holiday trip → satisfaction with the holiday overall → satisfaction with life overall).

Finally, unlike recent studies that have focused primarily on the use of social media in travel, our study has captured a broader set of communication tools (e.g., phone calls, emails, post cards) to fully cover the full spectrum of experience sharing among holiday leisure travelers. In a similar vein, while the majority of recent studies represent youth or early adults (e.g., millennials), our study sample represents the broader adult population. A such, our study findings apply to most adults with differing social media habits.

Managerial Implications

Our findings have important implications for destination marketers and public policy officials. To reiterate, the findings of this study suggest that on-site experience sharing amplify the impact of motivation fulfillment during leisure travel on leisure travel satisfaction, as hypothesized. One may argue that on-site experience sharing provides additional momentary pleasure with engagement in the leisure activities on-site, thereby amplifying overall travel satisfaction. Therefore, marketers of tourist attractions should encourage tourists to use devices to capture their leisure experience and share their experience on-site. That is, marketers should encourage on-site experience sharing. Doing so would further enhance the positive experience of the on-site leisure activities.

The study findings also suggest that posttrip experience sharing boosts the positive spillover effect of leisure travel satisfaction on tourists’ subjective well-being. This finding is consistent with study findings that tourists could enhance their subjective well-being by recollecting their leisure experiences and sharing them with others (Tugade and Fredrickson 2004). This is also in line with research that emphasize benefits of experiential consumption compared to material consumption in creating opportunities to strengthen social bonds through experience sharing and positive reinterpretations of the leisure events. Therefore, it is possible for destination marketers to develop special programs and events that can facilitate experience sharing after the trip.

Limitations and Future Research

There are limitations to this study. First, this study investigated the positive impact of holiday leisure trip experience sharing on life satisfaction from the perspective of the traveler. The use of social media can be negative too (Filep et al. 2013). As such, future research should investigate both the positive and negative effects of experience sharing in social media.

Second, this study examined the moderating role of leisure travel experience sharing of two points in time: during and post leisure travel. However, in this study, these two constructs were captured in a survey administered after travel. Future research should employ emotion measures in real time to capture experience sharing more effectively.

Third, this study measured tourists’ leisure experience sharing across various communication tools: social media (Facebook, Twitter), personal blogs, phone call, post cards, among others. Given differences among these tools, it would be wise to compare the impact of these tools based on their characteristics (e.g., Internet-based vs. non–Internet-based tools) in future research.

Fourth, this study used a somewhat dated data set (survey data collected in 2014). Given that the rapid growth of technology involved in the use of SNS among tourists, we recommend that future research replicate our model using most up-to-date surveys.

Fifth, some of the constructs in this study were captured using a single-item (e.g., overall holiday trip satisfaction or anticipation of next holiday trip) or two-item measure. Although these measures have been validated in past research (e.g., Van Boven and Ashworth 2007; Walker and Kono 2018), future research should employ multiple-item measures and test for consistency among the items to ensure greater construct reliability.

In conclusion, we hope that this study will stimulate future research that shed more light on the role of travel experience sharing on tourists’ subjective well-being. We look forward to research that builds on our study findings.

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 financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Grace B. Yu

M. Joseph Sirgy

Author Biographies

Grace B. Yu, PhD, is Associate Professor at Duksung Women’s University, Seoul, South Korea. Her research interests include quality-of-life studies and consumer happiness.

M. Joseph Sirgy, PhD, is Professor at Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA. His research interests include quality-of-life studies, business ethics, and consumer self-concept.

Michael Bosnjak, PhD, is Professor at University of Trier, and Director of ZPID-Leibniz Institute for Psychology Information, Trier, Germany. His research interests include research synthesis methods, consumer/ business psychology, and survey methodology.

References

Amaro

Duarte

Henriques

2016. “Travelers’ Use of Social Media: A Clustering Approach.” Annals of Tourism Research 59:1–15.

Andrews

F. M.

Withey

S. B.

1976. Social Indicators of Well-Being: America’s Perception of Life Quality. New York: Plenum.

Baumeister

R. F.

Leary

M. R.

1995. “The Need to Belong: Desire for Interpersonal Attachments as a Fundamental Human Motivation.” Psychological Bulletin 117 (3): 497–515.

Berger

Sorensen

A. T.

Rasmussen

S. J.

2010. “Positive Effects of Negative Publicity: When Negative Reviews Increase Sales.” Marketing Science 29 (5): 815–27.

Boothby

E. J.

Clark

M. S.

Bargh

J. A.

2014. “Shared Experiences Are Amplified.” Psychological Science 25 (12): 2209–16.

Boothby

E. J.

Smith

L. K.

Clark

M. S.

Bargh

J. A.

2017. “The World Looks Better Together: How Close Others Enhance Our Visual Experiences.” Personal Relationships 24 (3): 694–714.

Bosnjak

Dannwolf

Enderle

Schaurer

Struminskaya

Tanner

Weyandt

K. W.

2018. “Establishing an Open Probability-Based Mixed-Mode Panel of the General Population in Germany: The GESIS Panel.” Social Science Computer Review 36 (1): 103–15.

Caber

Albayrak

2016. “Push or Pull? Identifying Rock Climbing Tourists’ Motivations.” Tourism Management 55:74–84.

Cacioppo

J. T.

Patrick

2009. Loneliness: Human Nature and the Need for Social Connection. New York: Norton.

10.

Campbell

Converse

P. E.

Rodgers

W. L.

1976. The Quality of American Life: Perceptions, Evaluations, and Satisfactions. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

11.

Chin

W. W.

1998. “Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling.” MIS Quarterly 22 (1): 7–16.

12.

Choe

Kim

Fesenmaier

D. R.

2017. “Use of Social Media across the Trip Experience: An Application of Latent Transition Analysis.” Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 34 (4): 431–43.

13.

Chung

Lee

2016. “Sharing Economy in Geotag: What Are the Travelers’ Goals Sharing Their Locations by Using Geotags in Social Network Sites during the Tour?” International Journal of Tourism Cities 2 (2): 125–36.

14.

Chung

Tyan

Chung

H. C.

2017. “Social Support and Commitment within Social Networking Site in Tourism Experience.” Sustainability 9 (11): 2102–24.

15.

Cohen

S. A.

Prayag

Moital

2014. “Consumer Behaviour in Tourism: Concepts, Influences and Opportunities.” Current Issues in Tourism 17 (10): 872–909.

16.

Diener

1984. “Subjective Well-Being.” Psychological Bulletin 95 (3): 542–75.

17.

Diener

Suh

E. M.

Lucas

R. E.

Smith

H. L.

1999. “Subjective Well-Being: Three Decades of Progress.” Psychological Bulletin 125 (2): 276–302.

18.

Echterhoff

Higgins

E. T.

2017. “Creating Shared Reality in Interpersonal and Intergroup Communication: The Role of Epistemic Processes and Their Interplay.” European Review of Social Psychology 28 (1): 175–226.

19.

Expedia Group. 2018. “A Look Ahead: How Younger Generations are Shaping the Future of Travel.” https://info.advertising.expedia.com/multi-generational-custom-research-gen-z?hsCtaTracking=9d9d8e35-4f9e-4da3-a5c1-db89eeacc07f%7Cc23d04c1-b99d-4bc1-95c9-8efb25fa0862.

20.

Expedia Group. 2019. “Latin American Multi-Generational Travel & Tourism Trends.” https://info.advertising.expedia.com/latin-american-multi-gen-travel-tourism-trends.

21.

Filep

Cao

Jiang

DeLacy

2013. “Savouring Tourist Experiences after a Holiday.” Leisure/Loisir 37 (3): 191–203.

22.

Fornell

Larcker

D. F.

1981. “Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error.” Journal of Marketing Research 18 (1): 39–50.

23.

Frazier

P. A.

Tix

A. P.

Barron

K. E.

2004. “Testing Moderator and Mediator Effects in Counseling Psychology Research.” Journal of Counseling Psychology 51 (1): 115–34.

24.

GESIS. 2017. GESIS Panel Standard Edition. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA5665 Version 18.0.0, doi:10.4232/1.12717.

25.

Gilbert

Abdullah

2002. “A Study on the Impact of the Expectation of a Holiday on an Individual’s Sense of Well-Being.” Journal of Vacation Marketing 8 (4): 352–61.

26.

Hagger

J. C.

Murray

2009. “The Contribution of Multiple Cycles of Tourism Experiences to Post Retirement Life Satisfaction: An Australian Study.” Paper presented at Tourist Experiences: Meanings, Motivations, Behaviours Conference, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom, April 3–4.

27.

Han

Hyun

S. S.

2018. “Role of Motivations for Luxury Cruise Traveling, Satisfaction, and Involvement in Building Traveler Loyalty.” International Journal of Hospitality Management 70:75–84.

28.

Hayes

2013. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis. New York: Guilford.

29.

Melumad

Pham

M. T.

2019. “The Pleasure of Assessing and Expressing Our Likes and Dislikes.” Journal of Consumer Research 46 (3): 545–63.

30.

Heinrich

L. M.

Gullone

2006. “The Clinical Significance of Loneliness: A Literature Review.” Clinical Psychology Review 26 (6): 695–718.

31.

Hsu

C. Y.

Lee

W. H.

Chen

W. Y.

2017. “How to Catch Their Attention? Taiwanese Flashpackers Inferring Their Travel Motivation from Personal Development and Travel Experience.” Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 22 (2): 117–30.

32.

Jiang

2016. “Knowledge Sharing and Life Satisfaction: The Roles of Colleague Relationships and Gender.” Social Indicators Research 126 (1): 379–94.

33.

Jolly

Tamir

D. I.

Burum

Mitchell

J. P.

2019. “Wanting without Enjoying: The Social Value of Sharing Experiences.” PLoS One 14 (4): e0215318.

34.

Jun

S. H.

Hartwell

H. J.

Buhalis

2012. “Impacts of the Internet on Travel Satisfaction and Overall Life Satisfaction.” In Handbook of Tourism and Quality-of-Life Research: Enhancing the Lives of Tourists and Residents of Host Communities, edited by M.

Uysal

Perdue

R. R.

Sirgy

M. J.

, 321–37. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.

35.

Jung

Cho

M. H.

2015. A Discovery of the Positive Travel Experience in Pre-trip, On-Site and Post-trip Stage. Portland, OR: Travel and Tourism Research Association.

36.

Kang

Gretzel

2012. “Effects of Podcast Tours on Tourist Experiences in a National Park.” Tourism Management 33 (2): 440–55.

37.

Kang

Schuett

M. A.

2013. “Determinants of Sharing Travel Experiences in Social Media.” Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 30 (1/2): 93–107.

38.

Kim

Woo

Uysal

2015. “Tourism Experience and Quality of Life among Elderly Tourists.” Tourism Management 46:465–76.

39.

Kim

Fesenmaier

D. R.

2017. “Sharing Tourism Experiences: The Posttrip Experience.” Journal of Travel Research 56 (1): 28–40.

40.

Kim

Fesenmaier

D. R.

Johnson

S. L.

2013. “The Effect of Feedback within Social Media in Tourism Experiences.” In Design, User Experience, and Usability: Web, Mobile, and Product Design, edited by A.

Marcus

. Berlin, Germany: Springer.

41.

Kim

Tussyadiah

I. P.

2013. “Social Networking and Social Support in Tourism Experience: The Moderating Role of Online Self-Presentation Strategies.” Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 30 (1/2): 78–92.

42.

Kozak

2001. “A Critical Review of Approaches to Measure Satisfaction with Tourist Destinations.” In Consumer Psychology of Tourism Hospitality and Leisure, vol. 2, edited by J. A.

Mazanec

Crouch

Ritchie

J. R. B.

Woodside

, 303–20. Wallingford, UK: CABI.

43.

Krasnova

Wenninger

Widjaja

Buxmann

2013. “Envy on Facebook: A Hidden Threat to Users’ Life Satisfaction?” In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik, vol. 2, edited by R.

Alt

Franczyk

, 1–17. Leipzig, Germany: Leipzig Universität.

44.

Kruger

Sirgy

M. J.

Lee

D. J.

G. B.

2015. “Does Life Satisfaction of Tourists Increase If They Set Travel Goals That Have High Positive Valence?” Tourism Analysis 20 (2): 173–88.

45.

Lee

Chua

B. L.

Han

2017. “Role of Service Encounter and Physical Environment Performances, Novelty, Satisfaction, and Affective Commitment in Generating Cruise Passenger Loyalty.” Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 22 (2): 131–46.

46.

Cai

L. A.

2012. “The Effects of Personal Values on Travel Motivation and Behavioral Intention.” Journal of Travel Research 51(4): 473–87.

47.

Lin

Van De Ven

Utz

2018. “What Triggers Envy on Social Network Sites? A Comparison between Shared Experiential and Material Purchases.” Computers in Human Behavior 85:271–81.

48.

Mogan

Ronald

Bulbulia

J. A.

2017. “To Be in Synchrony or Not? A Meta-Analysis of Synchrony’s Effects on Behavior, Perception, Cognition and Affect.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 72:13–20.

49.

Munar

A. M.

Jacobsen

J. K. S.

2014. “Motivations for Sharing Tourism Experiences through Social Media.” Tourism Management 43:46–54.

50.

Nawijn

De Bloom

Geurts

2013. “Pre-vacation Time: Blessing or Burden?” Leisure Sciences 35 (1): 33–44.

51.

Nawijn

Marchand

Veenhoven

Vingerhoets

2010. “Vacationers Happier, but Most Not Happier after a Holiday.” Applied Research in Quality of Life 5 (1): 35–47.

52.

Neal

J. D.

Sirgy

M. J.

Uysal

1999. “The Role of Satisfaction with Leisure Travel/Tourism Services and Experience in Satisfaction with Leisure Life and Overall Life.” Journal of Business Research 44 (3): 153–63.

53.

Neal

J. D.

Sirgy

M. J.

Uysal

2004. “Measuring the Effect of Tourism on Travelers’ Quality of Life: Further Validation.” Social Indicators Research 69 (3): 243–77.

54.

Neal

J. D.

Uysal

Sirgy

M. J.

2007. “The Effect of Tourism Services on Travelers’ Quality of Life.” Journal of Travel Research 46 (2): 154–63.

55.

Nickerson

Schwarz

Diener

Kahneman

2003. “Zeroing in on the Dark Side of the American Dream: A Closer Look at the Negative Consequences of the Goal for Financial Success.” Psychological Science 14 (6): 531–36.

56.

OECD. 2013. OECD Guidelines on Measuring Subjective Well-Being. Paris: OECD.

57.

Okuyama

Yanai

2013. “A Travel Planning System Based on Travel Trajectories Extracted from a Large Number of Geotagged Photos on the Web.” In The Era of Interactive Media, edited by J. S.

Jin

, 657–70. New York: Springer.

58.

Park

Seo

Kandampully

2016. “Why Post on Social Networking Sites (SNS)? Examining Motives for Visiting and Sharing Pilgrimage Experiences on SNS.” Journal of Vacation Marketing 22 (4): 307–19.

59.

Park

H. J.

Yoon

J. H.

Kim

Y. H.

2015. “A Study on the Effect of Using Motivation of Tourism Social Media and Self-Expression on Tourism Experience, Satisfaction, Reuse Intention.” Journal of Tourism & Leisure Research 27 (3): 379–96.

60.

Parra-López

Bulchand-Gidumal

Gutiérrez-Taño

Díaz-Armas

2011. “Intentions to Use Social Media in Organizing and Taking Vacation Trips.” Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2): 640–54.

61.

Pearce

P. L.

2005. Tourist Behaviour: Themes and Conceptual Schemes. Clevedon, UK: Channel View.

62.

Pearce

P. L.

2011. “Travel Motivation, Benefits and Constraints to Destinations.” In Destination Marketing and Management: Theories and Applications, edited by Y.

Wang

Pizam

, 39–52. Wallingford, UK: CABI.

63.

Pearce

P. L.

Lee

U. I.

2005. “Developing the Travel Career Approach to Tourist Motivation.” Journal of Travel Research 43 (3): 226–37.

64.

Prebensen

N. K.

Woo

Chen

J. S.

Uysal

2013. “Motivation and Involvement as Antecedents of the Perceived Value of the Destination Experience.” Journal of Travel Research 52 (2): 253–64.

65.

Lee

2011. “Travelers’ Social Identification and Membership Behaviors in Online Travel Community.” Tourism Management 32 (6): 1262–70.

66.

2012. “Moderator and Mediator Effects in Hospitality Research.” International Journal of Hospitality Management 31 (3): 952–61.

67.

Santini

Z. I.

Stougaard

Koyanagi

Ersbøll

A. K.

Nielsen

Hinrichsen

Madsen

K. R.

Meilstrup

Stewart-Brown

Koushede

2020. “Predictors of High and Low Mental Well-Being and Common Mental Disorders: Findings from a Danish Population-Based Study.” European Journal of Public Health 30 (3): 532–38.

68.

Sigala

2012. “Social Networks and Customer Involvement in New Service Development (NSD): The Case of www.mystarbucksidea.com.” International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 24 (7): 966–90.

69.

Sirgy

M. J.

2012. The Psychology of Quality of Life: Hedonic Well-Being, Life Satisfaction, and Eudaimonia. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.

70.

Sirgy

M. J.

Kruger

P. S.

Lee

D. J.

G. B.

2011. “How Does a Travel Trip Affect Tourists’ Life Satisfaction?” Journal of Travel Research 50 (3): 261–75.

71.

Sotiriadis

M. D.

2017. “Sharing Tourism Experiences in Social Media.” International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 29 (1): 179–225.

72.

Tanti

Buhalis

2017. “The Influences and Consequences of Being Digitally Connected and/or Disconnected to Travelers.” Information Technology & Tourism 17 (1): 121–41.

73.

Teo

W. J. S.

Lee

C. S.

2016. “Sharing Brings Happiness? Effects of Sharing in Social Media among Adult Users.” In International Conference on Asian Digital Libraries, edited by A.

Morishima

, et al., 351–65. Berlin: Springer.

74.

Trusov

Bucklin

R. E.

Pauwels

2009. “Effects of Word-of-Mouth versus Traditional Marketing: Findings from an Internet Social Networking Site.” Journal of Marketing 73 (5): 90–102.

75.

Tugade

M. M.

Fredrickson

B. L.

2004. “Resilient Individuals Use Positive Emotions to Bounce Back from Negative Emotional Experiences.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 86 (2): 320–33.

76.

Tussyadiah

I. P.

2014. “Toward a Theoretical Foundation for Experience Design in Tourism.” Journal of Travel Research 53 (5): 543–64.

77.

Van Boven

Ashworth

2007. “Looking Forward, Looking Back: Anticipation Is More Evocative than Retrospection.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 136 (2): 289–300.

78.

Van Boven

Gilovich

2003. “To Do or To Have? That Is the Question.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85 (6): 1193–202.

79.

Verduyn

Lee

D. S.

Park

Shablack

Orvell

Bayer

Kross

2015. “Passive Facebook Usage Undermines Affective Well-Being: Experimental and Longitudinal Evidence.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 144 (2): 480–88.

80.

Verduyn

Ybarra

Résibois

Jonides

Kross

2017. “Do Social Network Sites Enhance or Undermine Subjective Well-Being? A Critical Review.” Social Issues and Policy Review 11 (1): 274–302.

81.

Walker

G. J.

Kono

2018. “The Effects of Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction during Leisure and Paid Work on Global Life Satisfaction.” Journal of Positive Psychology 13 (1): 36–47.

82.

Wang

Park

Fesenmaier

D. R.

2012. “The Role of Smartphones in Mediating the Touristic Experience.” Journal of Travel Research 51 (4): 371–87.

83.

Wang

2017. “Leisure Travel Outcomes and Life Satisfaction: An Integrative Look.” Annals of Tourism Research 63: 169–82.

84.

Wang

Fesenmaier

D. R.

2004. “Towards Understanding Members’ General Participation in and Active Contribution to an Online Travel Community.” Tourism Management 25 (6): 709–22.

85.

Wilson

A. E.

Giebelhausen

M. D.

Brady

M. K.

2017. “Negative Word of Mouth Can Be a Positive for Consumers Connected to the Brand.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 45 (4): 534–47.

86.

Wood

E. H.

2019. “I Remember How We All Felt: Perceived Emotional Synchrony through Tourist Memory Sharing.” Journal of Travel Research 59 (8): 1339–52.

87.

M. Y.

Pearce

P. L.

2016. “Tourism Blogging Motivations: Why Do Chinese Tourists Create Little ‘Lonely Planets’?” Journal of Travel Research 55 (4): 537–49.

88.

Xiang

Gretzel

2010. “Role of Social Media in Online Travel Information Search.” Tourism Management 31 (2): 179–88.

89.

Yoo

K. H.

Gretzel

2011. “Influence of Personality on Travel-Related Consumer-Generated Media Creation.” Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2): 609–21.

90.

Zhou

Zhan

Zhou

2019. “How Does Negative Experience Sharing Influence Happiness in Online Brand Community? A Dual-path Model.” Internet Research 30 (2): 575–90.