Mitigating Mortality Anxiety: Identifying Heritage Tourism’s Role in Terror Management

Abstract

Although terror management theory has been widely studied, little research has empirically examined whether travel functions as a terror management mechanism. Thus, the present research investigated the influence of mortality anxiety on heritage tourism preference and heritage protection intention through two studies. Study 1 shows that as individuals’ general mortality anxiety increases, their tendency to search for meaning in life increases, which fosters their heritage travel preference and heritage protection intention. Study 2, using an experimental method, reveals a causal relationship where incidentally increasing mortality anxiety increases heritage travel preference and heritage protection intention. In addition, this causal relationship is prominent for people with higher legacy beliefs. These findings shed light on the critical roles of the search for meaning in life and legacy belief in the links between mortality anxiety and heritage-related behavior.

Keywords

terror management theory mortality anxiety heritage tourism heritage protection search for meaning in life

In modern society, people tend to suppress thoughts about their inevitable death, but the prevalence of death cues in daily life can provoke anxiety about mortality (Coleman et al. 2017). For example, during the recent COVID-19 pandemic, the heavy death toll and high infectivity of the virus have brought increased mortality anxiety for people around the world (Pyszczynski et al. 2021). Terror management theory (TMT) concerns the role that mortality anxiety plays in human affairs. TMT posits that people can manage anxiety about death by living up to norms and values in accordance with their cultural worldviews, which provides a meaningful conception of life (Greenberg, Pyszczynski, and Solomon 1986). TMT has been applied to understand diverse consumer behaviors, such as materialism, nationalism, status seeking, and prosocial behavior (Chen et al. 2019; Huang and Wyer 2015; Mandel and Smeesters 2008).

In recent years, the link between mortality anxiety and travel behavior has gained increased attention from tourism scholars (Oren, Shani, and Poria 2019). Extant studies focused on mortality salience as an outcome of tourism experience (e.g., visiting dark tourism sites such as Auschwitz-Birkenau) and explored how tourists engaged with mortality thoughts and feelings onsite (Iliev 2021). Despite these advances, little research has examined mortality anxiety as antecedent of travel behavior. Systematic and empirical inquiry is called for to understand tourists’ preferred experiences in coping with death anxiety, and how to accommodate such preferences to stay competitive and sustainable (Miao et al. 2021; Zhang and Wu 2019).

Heritage travel has long been recognized as a significant catalyst of cultural worldview validation by offering experiences that authentically represents people’s heritage and their cherished beliefs and values (Prayag, Buda, and Jordan 2021; Timothy and Nyaupane 2009; Yi et al. 2022). Heritage tourism, compared with many other tourism and recreational practices, is considered one of the most important segments that contribute to culture expression and continuity (Kim, Whitford, and Arcodia 2019). Prior research has highlighted memorable cultural experiences as a key driver of the recent growth in demand for cultural tourism (Little et al. 2020). Based on TMT, we expect that, compared with other tourism segments (e.g., modern man-made tourism sites), increased mortality anxiety stimulates heritage travel preference. In addition, the act of heritage protection can produce a sense of meaning, value and security, which exemplifies one’s cultural worldview. As such, awareness of death may trigger individual’s intention to engage in heritage protection. Given the growing significance of conserving the tangible and intangible cultural heritage through tourism practice (e.g., UNESCO World Heritage and intangible cultural heritage lists), studying the effect of morality salience on heritage protection behavior intention is important.

Thus, the first aim of this research was to explore the effect of morality anxiety on intention to visit heritage tourism sites and engage in heritage protection. TMT theory asserts that people can circumvent mortality anxiety by believing their lives are imbued with meaning. Search for meaning in life is a process of connecting one’s actions to highly valued aims, feeling a sense of competence and control, and having positive self-regard (Baumeister 1991). A large body of experimental research indicates that when awareness of death is heightened, people respond with efforts to reinforce a sense of meaningful life (Landau et al. 2006). In modern fashion, travel is often prescribed as a priority for “bucket lists” of things to do before one dies (Periyakoil, Neri, and Kraemer 2018). The experiential consumption of heritage tourism has been shown to provide tourists with a sense of meaningfulness, which promote tourists’ personal growth and change (Alexander, Bryce, and Murdy 2017; Kang, Lee, and Lee 2016). Though mortality anxiety and meaning in life has been previously linked, understanding of this nexus remains scant in tourism context. Therefore, the second aim of this study is to explore the mediating role of the search for meaning in life in influencing people’s responses to mortality anxiety.

Furthermore, past work has demonstrated that individuals’ legacy beliefs play an important role in terror management. Legacy beliefs refer to one’s convictions about whether they will have an enduring impact and leave something behind after death (Kotre 1999; Wade-Benzoni and Tost 2009). The human need for a legacy emerges from the basic and universal fear of death (Bauman 1992). As a vehicle that extends one’s identity and meaning beyond the temporal constraints of the lifespan, a legacy could enable one to transcend death anxiety and attain the feeling of symbolic immortality. Such beliefs drive people to make life meaningful so that they can be remembered fondly and leave a mark when they depart (Zacher, Rosing, and Frese 2011). However, the extent to which legacy belief can enhance or inhibit the effect of mortality anxiety on search for meaning in life, remains unexplored. Address this gap, this study investigates the moderating role of legacy beliefs.

This study offers valuable contributions to the literature on TMT and tourism. With regard to TMT research, although mortality anxiety and its effect on consumption behavior have gained attention, existing studies tend to focus on material consumption. This study extends these findings to experiential consumption in the context of heritage tourism, which is one of the most pervasive types of tourism (Timothy 2018). Additionally, previous TMT research indicates that mortality anxiety defenses may induce both negative and positive prosocial behavior outcomes (Cai and Wyer 2015; Dunn, White, and Dahl 2020; Fritsche and Häfner 2012). This study provides possible further evidence on the positive impact of mortality anxiety defense on heritage protection and reveals its underlying mechanism and boundary condition. Furthermore, TMT has been criticized for overlooking the possible cultural variation in attitudes toward death. This study employs multinational studies to validate TMT in a different population.

We see TMT as a potential tool to advance tourism research and practice by enhancing our understanding of when mortality anxiety defenses can be triggered and whether these defenses influence tourist behavior. During COVID-19, the sheer scope of individual and societal reactions to death awareness has had a great impact on the tourism industry. This study is among the first to explore how this variability manifests in tourist decision making. By doing so, this study offers a comprehensive model to predict travel patterns following crises. In addition, while the TMT and tourism literature provides support that people may adopt heritage tourism as an important source of cultural worldview validation to subconsciously buffer their death anxiety, research applying the TMT framework in the heritage tourism context and using an experimental design is scarce. Thus, the understanding of heritage tourism could be enriched through a fear-based approach. Finally, research findings can be useful for tourism practitioners and policy makers to attract tourists and increase their support for sustainability efforts.

Literature Review

Terror Management Theory

Fear of death is one of the most common forms of anxiety that humans struggle with (Becker 1973). TMT suggests that the awareness of our death terrifies us (Greenberg, Pyszczynski, and Solomon 1986). To cope with death concerns, people develop an anxiety buffering system including cultural worldviews, self-esteem, and close relationships (Pyszczynski, Solomon, and Greenberg 2003). This study focuses on the cultural worldview defense function. To cope with the terror of death, humans strive to develop or maintain a meaningful, orderly, and enduring conception of the world—commonly referred to as a cultural worldview (Arndt et al. 2002). Following the values of and standards prescribed by our cultural worldview can imbue the meaning of self existence. By bolstering their cultural worldview, people achieve a sense of symbolic immortality and are thus less impacted by mortality anxiety.

Empirical support for TMT has been found in a large number of studies in different fields (for an overview, see Burke, Martens, and Faucher 2010). These studies have revealed that mortality anxiety increases prejudice (Li et al. 2015), harsh evaluation of moral transgression (Maxfield et al. 2007), nationalism (Friese and Hofmann 2008), consumption quantity (Mandel and Smeesters 2008), healthy behavior intention (Bevan, Maxfield, and Bultmann 2014), materialism and status seeking (Ciaramelli, Giannetti, and Orsini 2019), prosocial behavior (Zaleskiewicz, Gasiorowska, and Kesebir 2015), and many other socially significant behaviors. Their findings provide converging evidence that cultural worldviews provide, at least in part, protection against mortality anxiety.

However, literature also highlight controversies around TMT. First, TMT has received criticisms from alternative theoretical perspectives. For instance, uncertainty-identity theory is presented as an alternative to TMT by researchers exploring uncertainty and unknowns, who argue that the ultimate goal of the anxiety buffer mechanism proposed by TMT is to alleviate uncertainty rather than death anxiety (Hogg 2007; Yang, Kexin, and Hong 2021). Evolutionary psychologists proposes that the phenomena described by TMT are better explained by the human adaptive mechanisms that facilitate normative bias and coalitions (Navarrete and Fessler 2005). Thus, improvements of research designs are called for to rule out the plausible alternative explanations (Meng et al. 2021). Second, TMT has been questioned for ignoring the possible cultural variation in attitudes toward death. While TMT is premised on the supposition that the fear of death is universal, cross-cultural studies indicates a mixed response. Research indicated that many cultures (e.g., Ireland, India, and Iran) treat death with attitudes other than fear, such as acceptance and contempt (Dunne, Gallagher, and Matthews 2015; Fernandez, Castano, and Singh 2010). Therefore, multinational studies should be prioritized to validate TMT in a diverse population. Last but not least, TMT also faced challenges from inconsistent findings and replication failure. Meta-analysis on TMT indicated that the explanation power of TMT varied significantly across studies (Yen and Cheng 2013). This suggest that updating of the theory is needed on various boundary conditions. Despite a large number of published evidence providing support for TMT, a multi-lab large scale replication research failed to replicate the effect of mortality salience on worldview defense (Klein et al. 2017). This replication failure underscores the need to enhance the robustness and reliability of research findings based on TMT.

Mortality Anxiety and Heritage Travel Intention

While the predicted effects of TMT have been studied widely in consumer behavior research, most studies have focused on material consumption; overall little research has assessed the direct effect of mortality salience on experiential consumption, such as travel (Zhang and Wu 2019). Research on tourist’s decision-making process has found cultural worldview to be a significant predictor of tourist’s desire and intention to visit heritage destinations (Lee et al. 2020). Tourists enhances cultural worldview by gaining cultural experiences at heritage destinations and by comparing and filtering these experiences with their own culture (Kang, Lee, and Lee 2016). In addition, a growing body of literature has highlighted the cultural and social experiences of heritage tourists (McCain and Ray 2003; Smith, Waterton, and Watson 2012; Zhang and Smith 2019). Given that heritage includes the full range of our inherited traditions, historical remains, artifacts, and culture, heritage tourism is viewed as a cultural process of meaning-making in which heritage is used as a tool to create, recreate and validate contemporary meaning (Smith 2006). Heritage tourism allows tourists to engage with places, objects, stories and events to understand the past of a particular group or society (Laing et al. 2014). Several authors noted that heritage tourism not only helps tourists to construct a sense of abstract identity but also enables them to position themselves as members of a nation, members of a community or individuals in their world (Poria, Butler, and Airey 2003; Stebbins 1997; Timothy and Nyaupane 2009). As such, heritage tourism can be viewed as an important source of cultural worldview defense, which can contribute to terror management.

The link between death anxiety and heritage tourism has been more explicitly investigated in a sub category of heritage tourism-dark tourism, which is also termed as difficult heritage and atrocity heritage (Ashworth and Hartmann 2005; Logan and Reeves 2009). Dark tourism refers to the presentation and consumption of death, suffering, and disaster places (Foley and Lennon 1996). Examples of such sites include massacre and genocide sites, civil and political prisons, and disaster areas. While motivations for visiting dark tourism sites appear to be in line with mainstream heritage tourism, recent research has emphasized on theorizing the dark tourism experience. The mortality mediation model put forward by Stone and Sharpley (2008) suggested that dark tourism offers modern mediating opportunity for visitors to engage with death. Subsequent research has extended the mortality mediation model through integrating concepts of dark esthetics, simulation, and dystopia (Podoshen et al. 2015). Recently, scholars began to employ the TMT model to understand dark tourism consumption. Biran and Buda (2018) asserted that “dark tourism is a socially acceptable modern practice for dealing with our inherent and shared fear of death.”

Overall, the understanding of heritage tourism could be enriched through the consideration of mortality salience (Oren, Shani, and Poria 2019). The literature from TMT and tourism provides support that people may adopt heritage tourism to subconsciously buffer their death anxiety. Yet, empirical research applying the TMT framework in the heritage tourism context is limited (Biran and Buda 2018). Based on the discussion above, we formulated Hypothesis 1 (H1) as follows:

H1: Mortality anxiety increases heritage travel preference.

Mortality Anxiety and Heritage Protection Intention

Engaging in prosocial behavior affirms people’s belief in their worldviews and increases their sense of security and belongingness, thereby reducing the fears of death (Jonas et al. 2008). It thus stands to reason that mortality anxiety would make people more prosocial. For example, Jonas et al. (2002) reported that people with heightened mortality salience showed more positive attitudes toward charities. Cai and Wyer (2015) revealed that the relative effectiveness of donation appeals depended on individuals’ awareness of their mortality. In addition, mortality awareness has been shown to provoke avoidance of a self-focused state, which induces a shift toward prosocial behavior and makes people genuinely interested in giving and sharing (Arndt et al. 1998; Dunn, White, and Dahl 2020).

Heritage protection is a primary type of prosocial behavior that is widely discussed in the context of heritage tourism management (Wang and Bramwell 2012). Heritage tourism resources, including vulnerable and irreplaceable natural and human-made treasures, must be protected and sustained for current and future generations (Timothy 2017). Although one of the most important goals in developing heritage tourism is heritage protection, when too much emphasis is placed on the tourism economy, heritage protection may be traded off or compromised (Gursoy, Zhang, and Chi 2019). As many heritage sites are open to tourists, heritage protection heavily depends on the extent to which the heritage sites are valued by tourists (Chui et al. 2011). Thus, it is critical to identify factors that can influence individuals’ intention to engage in heritage protection. According to the TMT, death awareness increases the perceived importance of social norms and the desire to conform to them (Zaleskiewicz, Gasiorowska, and Kesebir 2015). As a result, increasing the salience of thoughts about death would make people more motivated to engage in prosocial acts. Carrying out prosocial acts can affirm people’s faith in their worldviews, thereby creating a buffer against terror of death. On the basis of the discussion above, this study proposes the following hypothesis:

H2: Mortality anxiety increases heritage protection intention.

The Mediating Role of Searching for Meaning in Life

Meaning in life has been defined from various perspectives, including the nature of one’s existence in accordance with purposefulness (Martela and Steger 2016), the sense made of one’s life (Reker and Wong 1988), the significance felt regarding one’s life (Crumbaugh and Maholick 1964), and the attitude toward life (Reker and Peacock 1981). According to TMT, people can circumvent death anxiety by striving for meaning. That is, the inevitability of death is not as terrifying if people believe that their life is worth living and serves a greater purpose (Pyszczynski, Solomon, and Greenberg 2003). A number of experimental studies provided supporting evidence that mortality salience may motivate people to search for life’s meaning. For example, mortality salience was found to increase negative reactions to modern art, which undermines perceptions of meaning (Landau et al. 2006). Similarly, research has shown that awareness of death can increase ethnocentrism and prejudice against those from different meaning-providing cultural backgrounds (Greenberg et al. 1990; Nelson et al. 1997).

Although search for meaning has been an important concept in tourism research, only limited research has explored its role in the decision-making process for visiting heritage destinations (Henderson 2001). Approached from interpretive ethnography, Gouthro (2008) suggested that visitors to industrial heritage site in search of meaning and identity. Based on in-depth interviews, Caton and Santos (2007) found that individuals seek out heritage tourism to look for meaningful experience and promote personal growth. In addition, heritage tourism also contributes to meaning in life through tourism souvenirs (Wei 2018). To the best of our knowledge, only one qualitative study examined the linkage between mortality salience and meaning in life in the tourism context. However, it focused on how visit to dark tourism destinations trigger mortality salience and meaning in life.

Overall, it is evident from the aforementioned literature that mortality anxiety increases individuals’ intention for heritage tourism, through the motivation of search for meaning in life. Heritage travel provides a vehicle for consumers to identify the meaning of life. Therefore, we propose the following hypotheses:

H3: Mortality anxiety increases the search for meaning in life, which enhances heritage travel preference.

As raised prior, thoughts of death drive people to search for meaning (Pyszczynski et al. 2006). Literature also provided supporting evidence of the direct effect of meaning in life on prosocial behavior. For example, Wu (2019) found that nostalgia at heritage tourism sites facilitates tourists’ pro-environmental behavior through increased meaning in life. Dakin et al. (2021) suggested that seeking meaning (rather than happiness) play an important role in motivating costly prosocial actions. Further, scholars have attempted to examine the possible indirect effect of mortality anxiety on prosocial behavior. Chang et al. (2021) reported that death anxiety can predict experienced meaning in life through search for meaning and prosocial behavior serially. Thus, we argue that mortality anxiety increases the desire for a meaningful life, which promotes intention for heritage protection. It follows:

H4: Mortality anxiety increases the search for meaning in life, which increase heritage protection intention.

The Moderating Role of Legacy Beliefs

As an important psychological resource, legacy beliefs have long been a subject of inquiry in the field of intergenerational behavior and generativity (McAdams and de St Aubin 1992). Legacy beliefs drive people to make life meaningful so that they can be remembered fondly and leave a mark when they depart (Zacher, Rosing, and Frese 2011). The way people value legacy is subjective based on one’s life story, personal opinions and feelings (Hunter and Rowles 2005). For some, leaving a legacy is essential to give meaning to one’s life, while for others, leaving a legacy can be insignificant. Previous research has attempted to associate the concept of legacy with mortality anxiety (Dunn, White, and Dahl 2020; Wade-Benzoni 2006; Wade-Benzoni et al. 2012). For instance, Sligte, Nijstad, and De Dreu (2013) found that the possibility of leaving a legacy can neutralize the negative impact of mortality salience on creativity. This result suggests that when people can leave a legacy through their creative production, their creativity is less impaired by mortality salience. Zacher, Rosing, and Frese (2011) investigated the interplay of age and legacy beliefs in predicting leadership behavior. They found that as leaders grow old, low legacy beliefs impede, and high legacy beliefs maintain active leadership behaviors. Despite the significance of legacy in heritage tourism and protection, legacy beliefs as an individual difference remain an understudied concept.

Based on the existing literature, we argue that mortality anxiety increases individuals’ heritage travel preference and heritage protection, and these effects should be more salient for people with stronger (vs. weaker) legacy beliefs. This is because people with stronger legacy beliefs are more likely to regard heritage travel and heritage protection as meaningful and can reflect their cultural values. Thus, we propose the following:

H5: The impact of mortality anxiety on heritage travel preference is more salient for those with higher (vs. lower) legacy beliefs.

H6: The impact of mortality anxiety on heritage protection intention is more salient for those with higher (vs. lower) legacy beliefs.

Empirical Studies

The two studies presented here investigated the impact of mortality anxiety on heritage travel preference and heritage protection intention. First, we employed a correlational study (Study 1) to understand the relationships among mortality anxiety, search for meaning in life, heritage travel preference, and heritage protection intention. By employing an experimental design (Study 2), we assessed the causal effect and unique process of mortality anxiety on heritage travel preference and heritage protection. In addition, Study 2 examined legacy beliefs as a moderating factor to further demonstrate the underlying process of the search for meaning in life in response to mortality salience.

Study 1

In this study, we used an online survey panel of the United States (Amazon Mechanical Turk; mturk.com) to attain participants. This panel has been recognized as a valid source of research participants (Paolacci, Chandler, and Ipeirotis 2010). We expected that as mortality anxiety increases, heritage travel preference (H1) and heritage protection intention (H2) increase and that these effects are attributed to an increased tendency to search for meaning in life (H3 and H4).

Method

Survey instrument

There were four parts in this survey (see Supplemental Appendix A). The first part was to assess participants’ mortality anxiety by using the fear of death subscale of Wittkowski’s (2001) Multidimensional Orientation Toward Dying and Death Inventory, which is a frequently used scale in TMT research (e.g., Rindfleisch, Burroughs, and Wong 2009). Specifically, participants answered six statements ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 strongly agree. The items were “I am frightened by the idea that all my thoughts and feelings will stop when I am dead”; “Thinking about my death makes me feel afraid”; “The very idea that my entire personality will disappear forever with my death appeals me”; “The idea that I will never be able to think and experience anything after my death disturbs me”; “The thought that I will be dead someday makes me apprehensive”; and “The idea that my body will disappear after my death disturbs me.”

In the second part, participants were instructed to indicate their travel preferences and heritage protection intention, and the order of these two variables was randomized. One item was used to measure participants’ travel preferences: Compared with modern man-made destinations, I prefer to go to heritage destinations (1 = not at all, 7 = extremely). Items for heritage protection intention (4 items) were adapted from prior literature (Lee, Jan, and Yang 2013; Vaske and Kobrin 2001): (1) I would like to encourage people around me to protect heritage; (2) I would like to volunteer for heritage protection; (3) I would like to advise tourists not to destroy heritage (such as by defacement and littering); and (4) I am willing to offer suggestions for heritage protection (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree).

In the third part, the search for meaning in life was measured using the subscale of the meaning in life questionnaire from Steger, Oishi, and Kesebir (2011). Participants rated their agreement with 5 items (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). Sample items include “I am looking for something that makes my life feel meaningful” and “I am seeking a purpose or mission for my life.”

In the last section, basic demographic variables were collected (e.g., age, gender).

Sample and data collection

Following Hair et al. (2010), the suggested sample size should be at least 10 times the number of items (N = 26 in this survey). To ensure the predicted and satisfactory power, we collected 562 responses, which was 20 times the number of items. In our sample, there were 271 males. Participants were aged between 20 and 78, and the average age was 38.08 years, with a standard deviation of 11.65. The majority of participants were white, accounting for approximately 75.6% of the sample; African Americans accounted for 9.4%, Asians accounted for 7.7%, Hispanics accounted for 5.7% and others accounted for 1.6% of the sample. Most of our participants had college degrees, accounting for approximately 73.8% of the sample; 15.8% of the participants had graduate degrees, and 10.5% of the participants had high school degrees.

Results

All our measures were highly reliable (α_{mortality anxiety} = 0.95; α_{heritage protection} = 0.85; α_{search for meaning in life} = 0.95). Therefore, we averaged the items used to assess each variable and generated composite indices of mortality anxiety, heritage protection intention, and search for meaning in life.

The effect of mortality anxiety on heritage travel preference (H1) and heritage protection intention (H2)

The results showed that mortality anxiety was positively related to the search for meaning in life (r = 0.33, p < .001), heritage travel preference (r = 0.09, p = .04), and heritage protection intention (r = 0.20, p < .001) (see Table 1). Three parallel regression analyses including demographic variables also showed the same pattern, which confirmed the robustness of the relationships between mortality anxiety and heritage travel preference, heritage protection intention, and search for meaning in life.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics in Study 1.

	M	SD	Mortality anxiety	Search for meaning in life	Heritage travel preference	Heritage protection intention
Mortality anxiety (a = 0.95)	3.83	1.97	1
Search for meaning in life (a = 0.95)	4.43	1.67	0.33***	1
Heritage travel preference	4.93	1.48	0.09*	0.18***	1
Heritage protection intention (a = 0.85)	4.73	1.35	0.20***	0.26***	0.59***	1

Note: ***p < .001, *p < .05.

Mediation analysis (H3 and H4)

To examine the mediating role of the search for meaning in life on the relationship between mortality anxiety, heritage travel preference, and heritage protection intention, the bootstrapping method was used, as suggested by Hayes (2017) (see Table 2 for each regression step).

Table 2.

Mediation Analysis of the Correlation Between Mortality Anxiety and Heritage Travel Preference.

	Heritage travel preference				Search for meaning in life
	Mode 1		Mode 2		Mode 1
	b	SE	b	SE	b	SE
Independent variable:Mortality anxiety	0.07*	0.03	0.02	0.03	0.28***	0.03
Mediator: Search for meaning in life			0.15***	0.04
R ²	0.01		0.03		0.11
F	4.33*		9.98***		70.45***

Notes: ***p < .001, *p < .05.

Bootstrapping results showed that the positive correlation between mortality anxiety and heritage travel preference was mediated by search for meaning in life (indirect effect: b = 0.04 (0.01), 95% CI = [0.019, 072]). Specifically, mortality anxiety was positively related to the search for meaning in life (b = 0.28 (0.03), t(560) = 8.39, p < .001,95% CI = [0.217, 0.349]), and the search for meaning in life was positively related to heritage travel preference (b = 0.15 (0.03), t(559) = 3.94, p < .001, 95% CI = [0.077, 0.230]). When searching for meaning in life included in the regression function, the positive relationship between mortality anxiety and heritage travel preference was no longer significant (Total effect: b = 0.07 (0.03), t(560) = 2.08, p = .04, 95% CI = [0.004, 0.127]; Direct effect: b = 0.02 (0.03), t(599) = 0.67, p = .50, 95% CI = [−0.043, 0.087]) (see Figure 1).

Figure 1.

The role of search for meaning in life in the effect of mortality anxiety on heritage travel preference.

Similarly, the indirect effect of the search for meaning in life on the relationship between mortality anxiety and heritage protection motivation was also examined by using Hayes’s (2017) bootstrapping method (see Table 3 for each regression step).

Table 3.

Mediation Analysis of the Correlation Between Mortality Anxiety and Heritage Protection Motivation.

	Heritage protection motivation				Search for meaning in life
	Mode 1		Mode 2		Mode 1
	b	SE	b	SE	b	SE
Independent variable:Mortality anxiety	0.14**	0.03	0.09**	0.03	0.28***	0.02
Mediator:Search for meaning in life			0.17***	0.02
R ²	0.04		0.08		0.11
F	23.65***		24.32***		70.45***

Notes: *** p < .001, **p < .01.

Bootstrapping results showed that the search for meaning in life was a significant mediator in the correlation between mortality anxiety and heritage travel protection (indirect effect: b = 0.05 (0.01), 95% CI = [0.023, 0.078]). Specifically, search for meaning in life was also positively related to heritage protection intention (b = 0.17 (0.03), t(559) = 4.90, p < .001, 95% CI = [0.102, 0.240]). When the search for meaning in life was included in the regression function, the positive relationship between mortality anxiety and heritage protection intention was reduced (total effect: b = 0.14 (0.03), t(560) = 4.86, p < .001, 95% CI = [0.082, 0.194]; direct effect: b = 0.09 (0.03), t(559) = 3.04, p = .003, 95% CI = [0.032, 0.148]) (see Figure 2).

Figure 2.

The role of search for meaning in life in the effect of mortality anxiety on heritage protection intention.

Discussion

This study showed that mortality anxiety was significantly correlated with heritage travel preference and heritage protection intention. We also found that search for meaning in life mediated both paths. However, these results are correlational in nature in their strictest sense. It was necessary to further verify whether incidentally changing mortality anxiety would alter individuals’ heritage travel preference and protection intention.

Study 2

The objectives of Study 2 were threefold. First, we attempted to confirm the causal relationships among mortality anxiety and heritage travel preference and heritage protection intention. To demonstrate the unique effect of mortality anxiety on heritage travel preference, other travel preferences were measured. Second, Study 2 attempted to use a moderation approach to further demonstrate that the search for meaning in life is the underlying mechanism. Specifically, if the purpose of heritage travel and heritage protection is to fulfill the desire for meaning in life, this positive effect should exist only for people who believe that heritage is meaningful. As revealed by existing research, people with stronger legacy beliefs tend to regard heritage as meaningful. Thus, they are more likely to search for meaning in life by engaging in heritage-related behaviors such as heritage travel and heritage protection. Therefore, this study examined whether legacy beliefs would moderate the positive impact of mortality anxiety on heritage travel preference (H5) and heritage protection intention (H6). Third, to ensure that the effect of mortality anxiety on heritage travel preference and heritage protection intention was robust across populations, we employed a different sample of Chinese undergraduate students. In general, younger generations tend to be less concerned about death (Bhattacharjee and Mogilner 2014). By confirming that the proposed causal relationships also exist in this population, we can show that our results are robust.

Method

Existing research on TMT has shown that experimental manipulation can effectively arouse one’s mortality anxiety (i.e., Ciaramelli, Giannetti, and Orsini 2019; Ferraro, Shiv, and Bettman 2005). We used a well-established method to experimentally manipulate mortality anxiety, namely, the manipulation of mortality salience (e.g., Arndt et al. 2004; Chen et al. 2019; Wu 2019; Zaleskiewicz, Gasiorowska, and Kesebir 2015), which is further elaborated in the Procedure section.

Participants

Similarly, we followed Hair et al.’s (2010) suggestion (5–10 times the number of items measured) to determine the sample size. A total of 201 students (N_painful = 104,¹ N_{mortality salience} = 97; 126 females; M_age = 20.73, SD = 2.62) were recruited from a major public university in China, which was deemed acceptable. In experimental research, the student sample was a generally accepted participant pool (Druckman and Kam 2011).

Procedure

We told participants that the study consisted of several unrelated tasks and that there were no right or wrong answers for each task.

The first task was a writing task to manipulate mortality salience. We randomly assigned participants to one of the two experimental conditions. In the mortality salience condition, participants were asked to briefly describe their thoughts about their own death as specifically as they could and what they thought would happen to them as they physically died and once they were physically dead. Similar to existing research, we used a painful condition as a control condition to compare with the mortality salience condition. This approach would allow us to rule out the basic negative emotions that might be a potential alternative reason for our proposed effect. Specifically, in the painful condition, participants were informed to describe their thoughts about a visit to the dentist as specifically as they could, especially what they thought would happen to them when they visited the dentist.

The second task was for participants to indicate their agreement with each item included in the travel intention and heritage protection intention measures. We used the same measure of heritage protection intention as in Study 1. To further examine the unique effect of mortality salience on heritage travel preference compared to that on other travel behaviors, in this study, we included another six travel behaviors as comparisons: (1) Compared with modern tourist destinations, I prefer to go to heritage tourist destinations; (2) Compared with traveling domestically, I prefer traveling abroad; (3) I prefer adventurous travel rather than conventional travel; (4) I prefer luxury travel rather than economical travel; (5) I prefer to get travel information from my relatives and friends rather than from travel agencies; (6) I prefer to travel with companions rather than alone; and (7) Compared with material consumption, I prefer travel consumption.

Before collecting demographic variables, in the third section, legacy beliefs were measured using the scale from Urien and Kilbourne (2011). Participants rated their agreement with 15 items (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). Sample items include: “I try to pass along the knowledge I have gained through my experiences”; “Others would say that I have made unique contributions to society”; “I feel as though my contributions will exist after I die.” (see Supplemental Appendix B).

The last task asked participants to provide their basic demographic information. Then, the participants were fully debriefed.

Results

Travel intention

Seven parallel independent t-tests showed that mortality salience influenced only participants’ heritage travel preference (M_painful = 4.87, SD = 1.58; M_mortality = 5.33, SD = 1.39, t(199) = 2.21, p = .03) (see Figure 3), not other travel behaviors (all ps > .15) (see Table 4). These results suggest that while travel is an important buffer against death anxiety, not any general travel behavior can defend against threats from mortality salience; rather, only heritage travel can.

Figure 3.

The main effect of mortality salience on heritage travel preference and heritage protection intention.

Table 4.

T-Tests of Travel Behavior on Mortality Anxiety.

Travel behaviors	Painful condition		Mortality salience condition		T	p
Travel behaviors	M	SD	M	SD	T	p
Domestic vs. international	3.65	1.86	3.54	2.06	0.43	.67
Travel agency vs. family and friends	5.13	1.53	5.27	1.54	0.66	.51
Economy vs. luxury	2.48	1.55	2.79	1.57	1.43	.16
Conventional vs. adventurous	4.57	4.30	1.76	1.90	1.04	.30
Alone vs. with companions	5.40	1.67	5.38	1.70	0.09	.93
Modern vs. heritage	4.87	1.58	5.33	1.39	2.21	.03
Shopping vs. travel	4.35	1.89	4.64	1.59	1.18	.24

Heritage protection intention

The four items assessing heritage protection intention were highly reliable, and thus, we calculated the mean of these four items to achieve the heritage protection intention score (a = 0.88; M = 5.33, SD = 1.18). An independent t-test revealed a marginally significant main effect of mortainlty salience (t(1981) = 1.75, p = .08) such that participants in the mortality salience condition had marginally higher heritage protection intention (M = 5.48, SD = 1.11) than participants in the painful condition (M = 5.10, SD = 1.22) (see Figure 3).

Moderating role of legacy beliefs

The fifteen items assessing legacy beliefs were highly reliable and thus were averaged to create a composite index of legacy beliefs (a = 0.84; M = 4.60, SD = 0.75). To ensure that the experimental manipulation would not influence the moderator and thus lead to a collinearity effect (Mason and Perreault 1991), we first conducted an independent t-test. The results showed that our experimental manipulation had no effect on our measure of legacy beliefs. An independent t-test showed that mortality salience did not influence individuals’ legacy beliefs (M_painful = 4.52, SD = 0.74; M_mortality = 4.69, SD = 0.74, t(1981) = 1.58, p = .12), which suggests that at the individual level, legacy beliefs did not change due to simple, incidental experimental manipulation, as legacy beliefs were stable.

Next, we conducted regression analyses using Hayes’s (2017) Process Model 1 (X = mortality salience [0 = painful condition, 1 = mortality salience condition], M = legacy beliefs [mean-centered], Y = heritage travel preference) with 5,000 bootstrapping iterations. As predicted, we found a main effect of mortality salience (b = 0.47 (0.21), t(1961) = 2.28, p = .02) but no main effect of legacy beliefs (b = −0.10 (0.14), t(196) = −0.74, p = .46). Most importantly, we found a significant interaction of mortality salience and legacy belief salience, as expected (b = 1.07 (0.28), t(196) = 3.87, p < .001) (regression results see Table 5)

Table 5.

Moderator Analysis.

	Heritage travel preference		Heritage protection motivation
	b	SE	b	SE
Independent variable:Mortality anxiety	0.47*	0.21	0.21	0.16
Moderator: Legacy beliefs	−0.10	0.14	0.48***	0.11
Interaction:Mortality anxiety × legacy beliefs	1.07***	0.28	0.38⁺	0.21
R ²	0.09		0.12
F	6.84***		8.85***

Notes: ***p < .001, *p < .05, ⁺p < .10.

To decompose the interaction between mortality anxiety and legacy beliefs, we found that mortality anxiety led to greater heritage travel preference only for participants with higher legacy beliefs (+1 SD below the mean: b = 1.27 (0.29), t(196) = 4.36, p < .001), while for participants with lower legacy beliefs (−1 SD below the mean), mortality salience did not influence their heritage travel preference (b = −0.33 (0.29), t(196) = −1.13, p = .26). In addition, we also found that as legacy beliefs increased, people’s heritage travel preference increased, but only in the mortality salience condition (b = 0.45 (0.20), t(196) = 2.27, p = .02). However, in the painful condition, as legacy beliefs increased, people’s heritage travel preference decreased (b = −0.62 (0.19), t(196) = −3.22, p = .002) (see Figure 4). Taken together, these results demonstrate that legacy beliefs played an important role in determining the impact of mortality salience on heritage travel preference.

Figure 4.

The interaction between legacy beliefs and mortality salience on mortality salience on heritage travel preference.

We also tested the interaction effect between legacy beliefs and mortality salience on heritage protection intention to show legacy beliefs as a moderator. We found a main effect of legacy beliefs (b = 0.48 (0.11), t(196) = 4.46, p < .001) but no main effect of mortality salience (b = 0.20 (0.16), t(196) = 1.32, p = .19). Most importantly, we found a marginally significant interaction of mortality salience and legacy belief salience (b = 0.38 (0.21), t(196) = 1.79, p = .07) (see Table 5 for results). To decompose this interaction, we found that only for participants with higher legacy beliefs (+1 SD above the mean) did mortality lead to greater heritage protection intention (b = 0.49 (0.22), t(196) = 2.21, p = .03). However, for participants with lower legacy beliefs (−1 SD below the mean), mortality salience did not influence their heritage protection intention (b = −0.08 (0.23), t(196) = −0.34, p = .74). In addition, as legacy beliefs increased, people’s heritage protection intention increased, but only in the mortality salience condition (b = 0.67 (0.15), t(196) = 4.40, p < .001). However, in the painful condition, the positive relationship between legacy beliefs and heritage protection intention decreased substantially (b = 0.29 (0.14), t(196) = 1.94, p < .10) (see Figure 5).

Figure 5.

The interaction effect between legacy beliefs and mortality salience on heritage protection intention.

Discussion

In this study, we manipulated mortality anxiety and confirmed the unique causal relationship between mortality anxiety, heritage travel preference, and heritage protection intention. The results from this study offer empirical evidence that mortality anxiety increases heritage travel preference and heritage protection intention. In addition, we found that legacy beliefs, as a relatively stable individual difference, moderated the positive impact of mortality salience on heritage travel preference and heritage protection intention. That is, the positive impacts of mortality salience on heritage travel preference and heritage protection intention exist only for those with high legacy beliefs, who believe that heritage provides meaning in life and are more likely to engage in heritage-related behavior, such as heritage travel and heritage protection, to search for meaning in life. Therefore, these findings to some extent support that the search for meaning in life is the key driver of the positive impact of mortality anxiety on heritage travel preference and heritage protection intention.

Conclusion and Discussion

The aim of this research was to unveil the potential defensive role of heritage tourism in mortality anxiety from a TMT perspective. Two studies were administered to two different populations to improve the robustness of the findings. Using a survey design, Study 1 found correlations among mortality anxiety, search for meaning in life, heritage travel preference, and heritage protection intention. Applying an experimental design, Study 2 provided empirical evidence that the unique effects of mortality anxiety on heritage travel intention and heritage protection were causal, and such positive effects were further moderated by legacy beliefs.

Theoretical Implications

This research provides unique contributions to the literature on terror management, heritage tourism and protection, meaning in life, and legacy beliefs. First, the present research builds a bridge between the terror management literature and the tourism literature. Terror management theory (e.g., Greenberg, Pyszczynski, and Solomon 1986) has been recognized as one of the most influential theories that illuminate the relationships between mortality salience and human behavior (Miao et al. 2021). Among the extant studies on TMT, the majority have endeavored to examine material consumption as a downward behavior (Burke, Martens, and Faucher 2010), leaving experiential consumption such as travel less understood until recent years. The past few years has witnessed a gradual growth of research applying TMT to understand the influence of mortality salience in travel industry, such as terrorist attacks (Guttmann, Gilboa, and Partouche-Sebban 2021) and dark tourism experiences (Oren, Shani, and Poria 2019). Miao et al.’s (2021) conceptual paper further pointed to the application of terror management theory to interpret post-COVID travel behaviors as a fertile area for future research. The present paper makes one of the first attempts to empirically test whether mortality anxiety can facilitate a positive shift from consumerism to experientialism. The findings offer empirical support that people reported preference for traveling to heritage destinations/attractions rather than other general travel types, in response to their heightened sense of mortality. This research thus adds to the knowledge base concerning mortality anxiety and experiential consumption and may inspire future research to take a terror management approach to the impact of crises/disasters on travel behaviors.

Second, this research has unique implications for research on heritage tourism and protection. The existing research usually approaches death-related heritage tourism as an outlet for people to express their fear of death (Martini and Buda 2020; Oren, Shani, and Poria 2019), yet less is known about whether heritage travel can subconsciously buffer or mitigate people’s death anxiety. To advance the classical perspective that an anxiety buffering system can protect people against existential anxiety (Greenberg, Pyszczynski, and Solomon 1986), the results of this research revealed the profound meaning that heritage travel can hold as a buffer. The results from Study 2 showed that the impact of mortality anxiety was specific to heritage protection and travel. On the one hand, this research extends the ongoing discussions on the factors influencing individuals’ heritage protection intention (e.g., national identity and sense of awe; Munasinghe 2005; Wang and Lyu 2019), by revealing the positive effect of mortality salience on heritage protection intention. On the other hand, this research echoes the prior literature suggesting an increase in people’s sustainable, altruistic, and experiential attitudinal and behavioral changes in response to a heightened awareness of mortality salience (Biraglia and Gerrath 2021; Rahimah et al. 2020). When one’s mortality salience is triggered, we can expect to see more socially responsible and mindful tourist behaviors (Galvani, Lew, and Perez 2020), like heritage protection and heritage travel as found in this research.

Third, this research contributes to the meaning in life literature by providing evidence for the inescapable role of quest for meaning in life in heritage tourism, especially in face of mortality anxiety. Heritage tourism has often been sought by tourists to find meaning in their lives (McCain and Ray 2003). The present research extends this line of investigation to a mortality salience context by applying terror management theory. Indeed, posttraumatic event research (e.g., Atwater 1988) suggested that a distressing life-threatening crisis often introduces a priority shift in people’s values from extrinsic benefits (e.g., seeking wealth) to intrinsic rewards (e.g., higher quest for meaning) (Tedeschi, Park, and Calhoun 1998). In the present research, significant causal relationships among mortality anxiety, search for meaning in life, heritage travel preference, and heritage protection intention were identified. The results provided empirical evidence that heritage travel and protection have profound implications for helping people cope with their anxiety caused by mortality salience, through a quest for meaning.

Most importantly, by using a moderation approach (Spencer, Zanna, and Fong 2005), this research further found that legacy beliefs to some extent moderate the mediating role of the search for meaning in life in the impact of mortality salience on heritage travel and protection. When the sense of mortality salience is heightened, people with stronger legacy beliefs are more likely to pursue meaning in life and engage in heritage-related activities such as heritage travel and protection. Sarial-Abi et al. (2017) found that in face of mortality anxiety, people buy vintage products because they believe their connection with the past would protect them against threats to meaning. This research extended such discussion by linking mortality anxiety to one’s desire to connect with the future. In addition, by linking tourism behaviors with individuals’ belief in legacy and mortality salience, this research contributes to the tourism and especially the well-being literature by examining how tourism can be leveraged as a catalyst for individuals’ posttraumatic recovery. The macro-level factors such as the worldwide health and economic crisis over the past few years are exerting tremendous impacts on people’s physical, financial, mental and relational health, and further elicit their thoughts of mortality salience. Through the findings of this research, we recommend that heritage protection and travel-related activities be reconceptualized in the post-crisis world from the lens of individuals’ legacy preservation motive.

Managerial Implications

As “we are essentially living in an ongoing, global mortality salience study” (Menzies, Neimeyer, and Menzies 2020, p. 111), this research yields a number of timely practical implications for destination marketing organizations (DMOs), government policy makers, and cultural and creative industries/companies.

First and foremost, a key message to DMOs is that while catastrophic events or situations such as a natural disaster or a health pandemic may unfortunately weaken the tourism industry in the short run, the positive relationship between mortality anxiety and travel behavior found in this study may contribute to better predictions of travel patterns post crises. While it is natural to assume that once a recent crisis, disaster, or pandemic such as COVID-19 is past, people will likely travel and enjoy the “freedom” they have long lacked, the findings of this research showed that in such situations, people’s travel intention will actually depend on the type of destination. Specifically, rather than modern human-made tourism destinations, consumers’ mortality anxiety is more powerful in eliciting their travel intention to tourism destinations and/or attractions featuring cultural/historical heritage. Heritage travel can thus be leveraged as one way to remedy the current situation for the travel industry. As such, the design and promotion of cultural and creative tourism products and services should focus not only on their hedonic features but also on how to maintain and enhance tourists’ cultural confidence and cultural values.

Second, our work demonstrates that the quest for meaning and legacy beliefs have profound implications for heritage travel and protection, as they serve as important mechanisms that connect the pursuit of self-interest with that of societal interest. This indicates that when people feel that death is closer, their focus is no longer only on themselves but more on the meanings of their behaviors. DMOs should promote and even incentivize heritage travel and heritage protection behaviors in an effort to buffer people’s death anxiety triggered by catastrophic events, and eventually cultivate a sense of meaning in tourism. Marketing and promotional materials could highlight how special activities at the destination may help the target market leave a legacy and protect their heritage.

This research also helps to better understand tourists’ preferred experiences in face of life-threatening events that would trigger their thoughts of death, and to accommodate such preferences to stay competitive and sustainable. Owing to the finding that heritage travel can help defend against individuals’ death anxiety, policy makers can incentivize the development and conservation of heritage travel sites/establishments. On the other hand, as heritage tourism destinations may see a surge in their visitor number, destinations and tourism policy makers should also take proactive measures to monitor and manage these destinations’ and attractions’ capacity, and encourage tourists’ mindful behaviors for sustainable destination development.

Finally, this research is critical as policy makers continue to grapple with the question of how to attract tourists and increase their support for sustainability efforts. The findings of this research offer insights on the psychological roots of people’s travel behaviors when their thoughts of death become salient. As tourists were found to search for meaning and resort to heritage protection and travel when their thoughts of death are triggered, legacy and inheritance motives should be treated as a critical element in tourist experience design.

Limitations and Future Research

The present research is not without limitations; however, these limitations may spark future theory building and empirical investigations. While this research showed a significant impact of mortality anxiety on heritage travel intention and heritage protection behaviors, it was beyond the scope of the study to differentiate what might stimulate people’s mortality anxiety. It would thus be interesting for future research to explore whether the cause of one’s mortality anxiety (e.g., prior experience, human-made vs. natural disaster) would drive different travel preferences (e.g., domestic vs. international travel, conventional vs. adventurous travel). Second, this research focused on cultural worldview defense as a meaning search strategy to buffer death anxiety. Future research could benefit from considering additional terror management strategies, such as enhancing self-esteem and engaging in close relationships. Finally, while this paper contributes to the improved management of tourism (mainly heritage-related tourism) in the post-pandemic future, there will be considerable value for future research to replicate the methodology once the pandemic situation has been mitigated to identify potential differences in a non-pandemic situation.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-jtr-10.1177_00472875221126428 – Supplemental material for Mitigating Mortality Anxiety: Identifying Heritage Tourism’s Role in Terror Management

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-jtr-10.1177_00472875221126428 for Mitigating Mortality Anxiety: Identifying Heritage Tourism’s Role in Terror Management by Jiaying Lyu, Lili Wang and Wei Wei in Journal of Travel Research

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The first and second author contribute equally.

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) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 71974173) awarded to the first author, and by funding from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 71972169, 72222018) awarded to the second author.

ORCID iDs

Jiaying Lyu

Lili Wang

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Notes

Author Biographies

Dr. Jiaying Lyu is an Associate Professor at the International School of Cultural Tourism, Zhejiang University City College. Her research interests include tourist behavior, tourism destination management, and sustainable tourism.

Dr. Lili Wang is a full Professor at the Department of Marketing, School of management, Zhejiang University. Her research interests include consumer behaviors and brand management.

Dr. Wei Wei, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor at the Rosen College of Hospitality Management, University of Central Florida. Her research interests include consumer experience, psychology, and behaviors at various hospitality and tourism service encounters. Dr. Wei serves as an Associate Editor for Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research and sits on the Editorial Boards of 5 journals.

References

Alexander

Bryce

Murdy

2017. “Delivering the Past: Providing Personalized Ancestral Tourism Experiences.” Journal of Travel Research 56 (4): 543–55.

Arndt

Greenberg

Simon

Pyszczynski

Solomon

1998. “Terror Management and Self-Awareness: Evidence That Mortality Salience Provokes Avoidance of the Self-Focused State.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 24 (11): 1216–27.

Arndt

Greenberg

Cook

(2002). Mortality salience and the spreading activation of worldview-relevant constructs: Exploring the cognitive architecture of terror management. Journal of Experimental Psychology 131: 307–324.

Arndt

Solomon

Kasser

Sheldon

K. M.

2004. “The Urge to Splurge: A Terror Management Account of Materialism and Consumer Behavior.” Journal of Consumer Psychology 14 (3): 198–212.

Ashworth

Hartmann

2005. “Introduction: Managing Atrocity for Tourism.” In Horror and Human Tragedy Revisited: The Management of Sites of Atrocities for Tourism, edited by Ashworth

Hartmann

, 1–14. New York, NY: Cognizant Communication Corporation.

Atwater

L. E.

1988. “The Relative Importance of Situational and Individual Variables in Predicting Leader Behavior: The Surprising Impact of Subordinate Trust.” Group & Organization Studies 13 (3): 290–310.

Bauman

1992. Mortality, Immortality and Other Life Strategies. Redwood City: Stanford University Press.

Baumeister

R. F.

1991. Meanings of Life. New York: Guilford Press.

Becker

1973. The Denial of Death. New York: Free Press.

10.

Bevan

A. L.

Maxfield

Bultmann

M. N.

2014. “The Effects of Age and Death Awareness on Intentions for Healthy Behaviours.” Health Psychology 29 (4): 405–21.

11.

Bhattacharjee

Mogilner

2014. “Happiness From Ordinary and Extraordinary Experiences.” Journal of Consumer Research 41 (1): 1–17.

12.

Biraglia

Gerrath

M. H. E.

2021. “Corporate Sponsorship for Museums in Times of Crisis.” Annals of Tourism Research 88: 103056.

13.

Biran

Buda

D. M.

2018. “Unravelling Fear of Death Motives in Dark Tourism.” In P. R. Stone, R. Hartmann, T. Seaton, R. Sharpley, & L. White (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Dark Tourism Studies, 515–32. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

14.

Burke

B. L.

Martens

Faucher

E. H.

2010. “Two Decades of Terror Management Theory: A Meta-Analysis of Mortality Salience Research.” Personality and Social Psychology Review 14 (2): 155–95.

15.

Cai

Wyer

R. S.

2015. “The Impact of Mortality Salience on the Relative Effectiveness of Donation Appeals.” Journal of Consumer Psychology 25 (1): 101–12.

16.

Caton

Santos

C. A.

2007. “Heritage Tourism on Route 66: Deconstructing Nostalgia.” Journal of Travel Research 45 (4): 371–86.

17.

Chang

Cheng

Fang

Dang

2021. “The Indirect Effect of Death Anxiety on Experienced Meaning in Life via Search for Meaning and Prosocial Behavior.” Frontiers in Psychology 12:673460.

18.

Chen

Wei

Meng

Ran

2019. “Believing in Karma: The Effect of Mortality Salience on Excessive Consumption.” Frontiers in Psychology 10:1519.

19.

Chui

C. T. B.

Abd Rahim

F. H.

Khan

N. R. M.

Cheng

C. S.

Hassan

F. H.

2011, December. “Assessing Tourists’ Attitude Towards Responsible Cultural Heritage Tourism in Melaka: Development and Validation of Responsible Heritage Tourism Scale.” Paper presented at the 2011 IEEE Colloquium on Humanities, Science and Engineering, December, 497–502. IEEE.

20.

Ciaramelli

Giannetti

Orsini

2019. “Does Death Make Us All Equal? Materialism and Status-Seeking Under Mortality Salience.” International Review of Economics 66 (1): 57–78.

21.

Coleman

N. V.

Williams

Morales

A. C.

White

A. E.

2017. “Retracted: Attention, Attitudes, and Action: When and Why Incidental Fear Increases Consumer Choice.” Journal of Consumer Research 44:283–312.

22.

Crumbaugh

J. C.

Maholick

L. T.

1964. “An Experimental Study in Existentialism: The Psychometric Approach to Frankl’s Concept Ofnoogenic Neurosis.” Journal of Clinical Psychology 20 (2): 200–7.

23.

Dakin

B. C.

Laham

S. M.

Tan

N. P.

Bastian

2021. “Searching for Meaning is Associated With Costly Prosociality.” PLoS One 16 (10): e0258769.

24.

Druckman

J. N.

Kam

C. D.

2011. “Students as Experimental Participants.” In J. Druckman, D. Greene, J. Kuklinski, & A. Lupia (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science, vol. 41–57. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

25.

Dunne

Gallagher

Matthews

2015. “Existential Threat or Dissociative Response? Examining Defensive Avoidance of Point-of-Care Testing Devices Through a Terror Management Theory Framework.” Death Studies 39 (1-5): 30–8.

26.

Dunn

White

Dahl

D. W.

2020. “A Little Piece of Me: When Mortality Reminders Lead to Giving to Others.” Journal of Consumer Research 47 (3): 431–53.

27.

Fernandez

Castano

Singh

2010. “Managing Death in the Burning Grounds of Varanasi, India: A Terror Management Investigation.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 41 (2): 182–94.

28.

Ferraro

Shiv

Bettman

2005. “Let Us Eat and Drink, for Tomorrow We Shall Die: Effects of Mortality Salience and Self-Esteem on Self-regulation in Consumer Choice.” Journal of Consumer Research 32 (1): 65–75.

29.

Foley

Lennon

J. J.

1996. “JFK and Dark Tourism: A Fascination With Assassination.” International Journal of Heritage Studies 2 (4): 198–211.

30.

Friese

Hofmann

2008. “What Would You Have as a Last Supper? Thoughts About Death Influence Evaluation and Consumption of Food Products.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 44 (5): 1388–94.

31.

Fritsche

Häfner

2012. “The Malicious Effects of Existential Threat on Motivation to Protect the Natural Environment and the Role of Environmental Identity as a Moderator.” Environment and Behavior 44 (4): 570–90.

32.

Galvani

Lew

A. A.

Perez

M. S.

2020. “COVID-19 is Expanding Global Consciousness and the Sustainability of Travel and Tourism.” Tourism Geographies 22 (3): 567–76.

33.

Gouthro

M. B.

2008. “Consuming Heritage, Experiencing Identity: Finding Meaning Through Interpretations of Industrial Heritage tourism.” Doctoral diss., University of Brighton, England.

34.

Greenberg

Pyszczynski

Solomon

1986. “The Causes and Consequences of a Need for Self-Esteem: A Terror Management Theory.” In R. F. Baumeister (Ed.), Public Self and Private Self, 189–212. New York, NY: Springer.

35.

Greenberg

Pyszczynski

Solomon

Rosenblatt

Veeder

Kirkland

Lyon

1990. “Evidence for Terror Management Theory II: The Effects of Mortality Salience on Reactions to Those Who Threaten or Bolster the Cultural Worldview.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 58 (2): 308–18.

36.

Gursoy

Zhang

Chi

O. H.

2019. “Determinants of Locals’ Heritage Resource Protection and Conservation Responsibility Behaviors.” International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 31 (6): 2339–57.

37.

Guttmann

Gilboa

S. and Partouche-Sebban

J. and J.

. 2021. ““I Live With Terror Inside Me”: Exploring Customers’ Instinctive Reactions to Terror.” International Journal of Hospitality Management 92:102734.

38.

Hair

J. F.

Black

W. C.

Babin

B. J.

Anderson

R. E.

2010. Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

39.

Hayes

A. F.

2017. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. New York: Guilford Publications.

40.

Henderson

2001. “Heritage, Identity and Tourism in Hong Kong.” International Journal of Heritage Studies 7 (3): 219–35.

41.

Hogg

M. A.

2007. “Uncertainty-Identity Theory.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 39:69–126.

42.

Huang

Wyer

R. S.

2015. “Diverging Effects of Mortality Salience on Variety Seeking: The Different Roles of Death Anxiety and Semantic Concept Activation.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 58:112–23.

43.

Hunter

E. G.

Rowles

G. D.

2005. “Leaving a Legacy: Toward a Typology.” Journal of Aging Studies 19 (3): 327–47.

44.

Iliev

2021. “Consumption, Motivation and Experience in Dark Tourism: A Conceptual and Critical Analysis.” Tourism Geographies 23:963–84.

45.

Jonas

Martens

Kayser

D. N.

Fritsche

Sullivan

Greenberg

2008. “Focus Theory of Normative Conduct and Terror-Management Theory: The Interactive Impact of Mortality Salience and Norm Salience on Social Judgment.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 95 (6): 1239–51.

46.

Jonas

Schimel

Greenberg

Pyszczynski

2002. “The Scrooge Effect: Evidence That Mortality Salience Increases Prosocial Attitudes and Behavior.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28 (10): 1342–53.

47.

Kang

S. K.

Lee

C. K.

Lee

D. E.

2016. “Examining Cultural Worldview and Experience by International Tourists: A Case of Traditional House Stay.” Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 21 (5): 477–99.

48.

Kim

Whitford

Arcodia

2019. “Development of Intangible Cultural Heritage as a Sustainable Tourism Resource: The Intangible Cultural Heritage Practitioners’ Perspectives.” Journal of Heritage Tourism 14 (5-6): 422–35.

49.

Kotre

1999. Make It Count: How to Generate a Legacy That Gives Meaning to Your Life. New York: Free Press.

50.

Laing

Wheeler

Reeves

Frost

2014. “Assessing the Experiential Value of Heritage Assets: A Case Study of a Chinese Heritage Precinct, Bendigo, Australia.” Tourism Management 40 (5–6): 180–92.

51.

Landau

M. J.

Greenberg

Solomon

Pyszczynski

Martens

2006. “Windows Into Nothingness: Terror Management, Meaninglessness, and Negative Reactions to Modern Art.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90 (6): 879–92.

52.

Lee

C. K.

Ahmad

M. S.

Petrick

J. F.

Park

Y. N.

Park

Kang

C. W.

2020. “The Roles of Cultural Worldview and Authenticity in Tourists’ Decision-Making Process in a Heritage Tourism Destination Using a Model of Goal-Directed Behavior.” Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 18:100500.

53.

Lee

T. H.

Jan

F. H.

Yang

C. C.

2013. “Conceptualizing and Measuring Environmentally Responsible Behaviors From the Perspective of Community-Based Tourists.” Tourism Management 36:454–68.

54.

Little

Bec

Moyle

B. D.

Patterson

2020. “Innovative Methods for Heritage Tourism Experiences: Creating Windows Into the Past.” Journal of Heritage Tourism 15 (1): 1–13.

55.

Liu

Luo

Han

2015. “Mortality Salience Enhances Racial in-group Bias in Empathic Neural Responses to Others’ Suffering.” NeuroImage 118:376–85.

56.

Logan

Reeves

2009. Places of Pain and Shame. Dealing With ‘Difficult Heritage’. Nueva York: Routledge.

57.

Mandel

Smeesters

2008. “The Sweet Escape: Effects of Mortality Salience on Consumption Quantities for High- and Low-Self-Esteem Consumers.” Journal of Consumer Research 35 (2): 309–23.

58.

Martela

Steger

M. F.

2016. “The Three Meanings of Meaning in Life: Distinguishing Coherence, Purpose, and Significance.” The Journal of Positive Psychology 11 (5): 531–45.

59.

Martini

Buda

D. M.

2020. “Dark Tourism and Affect: Framing Places of Death and Disaster.” Current Issues in Tourism 23 (6): 679–92.

60.

Mason

C. H.

Perreault

W. D.

Jr.

1991. “Collinearity, Power and Interpretation of Multiple Regression Analysis.” Journal of Marketing Research 28 (3): 268–80.

61.

Maxfield

Pyszczynski

Kluck

Cox

C. R.

Greenberg

Solomon

Weise

2007. “Age-Related Differences in Responses to Thoughts of One’s Own Death, Mortality Salience and Judgments of Moral Transgressions.” Psychology and Aging 22 (2): 341–53.

62.

McAdams

D. P.

de St Aubin

1992. “A Theory of Generativity and Its Assessment Through Self-Report, Behavioral Acts, and Narrative Themes in Autobiography.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 62 (6): 1003–15.

63.

McCain

Ray

N. M.

2003. “Legacy Tourism: The Search for Personal Meaning in Heritage Travel.” Tourism Management 24 (6): 713–7.

64.

Meng

Zhou

Wang

2021. “Controversies in Terror Management Theory Research and Its Implications for Research on the Psychology of Death.” Advances in Psychological Science 29 (3): 492–504.

65.

Menzies

R. E.

Neimeyer

R. A.

Menzies

R. G.

2020. “Death Anxiety, Loss, and Grief in the Time of COVID-19.” Behaviour Change 37 (3): 111–5.

66.

Miao

Kim

Zhang

Y. E.

2021. “Proximal and Distal Post-COVID Travel Behavior.” Annals of Tourism Research 88:103159.

67.

Munasinghe

2005. “The Politics of the Past, Constructing a National Identity Through Heritage Conservation.” International Journal of Heritage Studies 11 (3): 251–60.

68.

Navarrete

C. D.

Fessler

D. M. T.

2005. “Normative Bias and Adaptive Challenges: A Relational Approach to Coalitional Psychology and a Critique of Terror Management Theory.” Evolutionary Psychology 3 (1): 297–326.

69.

Nelson

L. J.

Moore

D. L.

Olivetti

Scott

1997. “General and Personal Mortality Salience and Nationalistic Bias.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 23:884–92.

70.

Oren

Shani

Poria

2019. “Mortality Salience – Shedding Light on the Dark Experience.” Journal of Heritage Tourism 14 (5-6): 574–8.

71.

Paolacci

Chandler

Ipeirotis

P. G.

2010. “Running Experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk.” Judgment and Decision Making 5 (5): 411–9.

72.

Periyakoil

V. S.

Neri

Kraemer

2018. “Common Items on a Bucket List.” Journal of Palliative Medicine 21 (5): 652–8.

73.

Podoshen

J. S.

Venkatesh

Wallin

Andrzejewski

S. A.

Jin

2015. “Dystopian Dark Tourism: An Exploratory Examination.” Tourism Management 51:316–28.

74.

Poria

Butler

Airey

2003. “The Core of Heritage Tourism.” Annals of Tourism Research 30 (1): 238–54.

75.

Prayag

Buda

D. M.

Jordan

E. J.

2021. “Mortality Salience and Meaning in Life for Residents Visiting Dark Tourism Sites.” Journal of Sustainable Tourism 29 (9): 1508–28.

76.

Pyszczynski

Greenberg

Solomon

Maxfield

2006. “On the Unique Psychological Import of the Human Awareness of Mortality: Theme and Variations.” Psychological Inquiry 17 (4): 328–56.

77.

Pyszczynski

Solomon

Greenberg

2003. In the Wake of 9/11: The Psychology of Terror. Washington: American Psychological Association.

78.

Rahimah

Khalil

Dang

H. P.

Ming-Sung Cheng

2020. “The Terror of Death and Consumers’ Sustainability Attitudes.” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 57:102196.

79.

Reker

G. T.

Peacock

E. J.

1981. “The Life Attitude Profile (LAP): A Multidimensional Instrument for Assessing Attitudes Toward Life.” Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement 13 (3): 264–73.

80.

Reker

G. T.

Wong

P. T.

1988. “Aging as an Individual Process: Toward a Theory of Personal Meaning. In J. E. Birren & V. L. Bengtson (Eds.), Emergent theories of aging (pp. 214–246). New York: Springer Publishing Company.

81.

Rindfleisch

Burroughs

J. E.

Wong

2009. “The Safety of Objects: Materialism, Existential Insecurity, and Brand Connection.” Journal of Consumer Research 36 (1): 1–16.

82.

Sarial-Abi

Vohs

K. D.

Hamilton

Ulqinaku

2017. “Stitching Time: Vintage Consumption Connects the Past, Present, and Future.” Journal of Consumer Psychology 27 (2): 182–94.

83.

Sligte

D. J.

Nijstad

B. A.

De Dreu

C. K.

2013. “Leaving a Legacy Neutralizes Negative Effects of Death Anxiety on Creativity.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 39 (9): 1152–63.

84.

Smith

2006. Uses of Heritage. London: Routledge.

85.

Smith

Waterton

Watson

2012. The Cultural Moment in Tourism. London: Routledge.

86.

Spencer

S. J.

Zanna

M. P.

Fong

G. T.

2005. “Establishing a Causal Chain: Why Experiments Are Often More Effective Than Mediational Analyses in Examining Psychological Processes.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 89 (6): 845–51.

87.

Stebbins

R. A.

1997. “Identity and Cultural Tourism.” Annals of Tourism Research 24 (2): 450–2.

88.

Steger

M. F.

Oishi

Kesebir

2011. “Is a Life Without Meaning Satisfying? The Moderating Role of the Search for Meaning in Satisfaction With Life Judgments.” The Journal of Positive Psychology 6 (3): 173–80.

89.

Stone

Sharpley

2008. “Consuming Dark Tourism: A Thanatological Perspective.” Annals of Tourism Research 35 (2): 574–95.

90.

Tedeschi

R. G.

Park

C. L.

Calhoun

L. G.

, eds. 1998. Posttraumatic Growth: Positive Changes in the Aftermath of Crisis. Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum.

91.

Timothy

D. J.

2017. The Heritage Tourist Experience: Critical Essays. London: Routledge.

92.

Timothy

D. J.

2018. “Making Sense of Heritage Tourism: Research Trends in a Maturing Field of Study.” Tourism Management Perspectives 25:177–80.

93.

Timothy

D. J.

Nyaupane

G. P.

2009. Cultural Heritage and Tourism in the Developing World: A Regional Perspective. London: Routledge.

94.

Urien

Kilbourne

2011. “Generativity and Self-Enhancement Values in Eco-friendly Behavioral Intentions and Environmentally Responsible Consumption Behavior.” Psychology and Marketing 28 (1): 69–90.

95.

Vaske

J. J.

Kobrin

K. C.

2001. “Place Attachment and Environmentally Responsible Behavior.” The Journal of Environmental Education 32:16–21.

96.

Wade-Benzoni

K. A.

2006. “Legacies, Immortality, and the Future: The Psychology of Intergenerational Altruism.” In Tenbrunsel, A.E. (Ed.) Ethics in Groups, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 247–270.

97.

Wade-Benzoni

K. A.

Tost

L. P.

2009. “The Egoism and Altruism of Intergenerational Behavior.” Personality and Social Psychology Review 13 (3): 165–93.

98.

Wade-Benzoni

K. A.

Tost

L. P.

Hernandez

Larrick

R. P.

2012. “It’s Only a Matter of Time, Death, Legacies, and Intergenerational Decisions.” Psychological Science 23 (7): 704–9.

99.

Wang

Lyu

2019. “Inspiring Awe Through Tourism and Its Consequence.” Annals of Tourism Research 77:106–16.

100.

Wang

Bramwell

2012. “Heritage Protection and Tourism Development Priorities in Hangzhou, China: A Political Economy and Governance Perspective.” Tourism Management 33 (4): 988–98.

101.

Wei

2018. “Understanding Values of Souvenir Purchase in the Contemporary Chinese Culture: A Case of Shanghai Disney.” Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 10:36–48.

102.

Wittkowski

2001. “The Construction of the Multidimensional Orientation Toward Dying and Death Inventory (MODDI-F).” Death Studies 25 (6): 479–95.

103.

2019. “Understanding How the Message Appeal of Moral Beauty Influences Advertising Effectiveness Under Mortality Salience.” Journal of Marketing Communications 25 (6): 586–606.

104.

Yang

Kexin

Hong

2021. “Go With the Flow Against Uncertainty About Self Under Existential Threat.” Self and Identity 20 (3): 438–61.

105.

Yen

C. L.

Cheng

C. P.

2013. “Researcher Effects on Mortality Salience Research: A Meta-Analytic Moderator Analysis.” Death Studies 37 (7): 636–52.

106.

Lin

V. S.

Xiao

2022. “Integrating Authenticity, Well-Being, and Memorability in Heritage Tourism: A Two-Site Investigation.” Journal of Travel Research 61 (2): 378–93.

107.

Zacher

Rosing

Frese

2011. “Age and Leadership: The Moderating Role of Legacy Beliefs.” The Leadership Quarterly 22 (1): 43–50.

108.

Zaleskiewicz

Gasiorowska

Kesebir

2015. “The Scrooge Effect Revisited: Mortality Salience Increases the Satisfaction Derived From Prosocial Behavior.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 59:67–76.

109.

Zhang

2019. “How mortality salience affects tourists’ choice of restaurants?” Paper presented at From the perspective of Terror Management Theory. International Conference of TTRA, Melbourne, Australia, June 25–27.

110.

Zhang

Smith

2019. “Bonding and Dissonance: Rethinking the Interrelations Among Stakeholders in Heritage Tourism.” Tourism Management 74:212–23.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.04 MB