Analysis of antecedents and consequences of memorable tourist experiences (MTEs): A Spanish case study

Abstract

Competition in the tourism industry has intensified over the years and the process of searching for information when choosing a tourist destination has become more important. The most valuable information we have is what we remember: the memorable tourist experience (MTE). This study explores this concept by proposing a model that includes antecedents, such as destination image and tourist engagement, as well as consequences of the tourist experience, such as satisfaction, revisit intention and recommendation intention for the tourist destination. For this analysis, a self-administered online survey was conducted with clients of a Spanish hotel chain, resulting in a sample of 328 valid returned questionnaires. To carry out the analysis a structural equation model was developed. The results underline the importance of memory in the creation of memorable tourist experiences. Academic and management implications are proposed to complete the paper.

Keywords

Destination image memorable tourist experience (MTE)recommendation intention revisit intention satisfaction tourist engagement

Introduction

Competition in the tourism industry has intensified over the years and destinations now have to create different offers to their competitors (Neuhofer et al., 2012). The rapid development of the sector has made it highly competitive and tourism service providers must ensure that tourists enjoy positive experiences. Moreover, in recent years the tourist experience and the concept of memory (Chen and Rahman, 2018) have received special attention.

Tour organisers and researchers must help tourists in their information-seeking processes when choosing a destination (Zhang et al., 2018). There are now many websites, platforms, opinions and comments, available to all, that allow the consumer to form opinions. However, the most valuable information we have is what is already in our heads: memory. Personal experiences are the first step in the process of searching for tourist information (Zhang et al., 2018). These experiences will be more valuable if they are retained in the memory for a long period; from this point these experiences will be termed memorable tourist experiences (MTE) (Tung and Ritchie, 2011).

Destination management organisations have recognised that memory is fundamental to the destination’s competitiveness, viability and profitability (Tung and Ritchie, 2011). Often the main goal of many tourist destinations is to retain tourists, due the cost associated with this strategy, and because they are likely to recommend the destination to their acquaintances (Chen and Rahman, 2018). To persuade tourists to revisit a destination, providing mere satisfaction is not enough, they must be given a memorable experience. For this reason, managers must develop tourism programmes that create these MTE.

The specialised literature has analysed some of the antecedents (Chandralal and Valenzuela, 2013; Kim, 2014; Zhang et al., 2018) and future tourist behaviours (Chen and Rahman, 2018; Faizan et al., 2016) in terms of memorable tourist experiences. However, research into the antecedents and consequences of MTEs remains scarce, and few integrative models have investigated these relationships and how they influence the future behaviour of the tourist. Moreover, as Zhang et al. (2018) noted, there has been limited empirical research into the antecedents and consequences of memorable tourism experiences (MTEs). Consequently, the present research seeks to contribute to the existing literature in two ways: 1. By proposing an integrative conceptual model. The model integrates the main antecedents (destination image and tourist engagement) and consequences (satisfaction, revisit intention, recommendation intention) of memorable tourist experiences, and; 2. By empirically testing the relationships between some of the most important variables in the area of consumer behaviour in the tourism sector.

The memorable tourist experience

The tourist experience is the essence of the tourism and hospitality industry (Kim, 2014) and, as Neuhofer et al. (2012) note, ‘destinations must create and deliver memorable tourism experiences to their consumers to increase their competitiveness’. Tourist experiences are the most important and powerful drivers of their future behaviour, as they determine satisfaction and create memorable customer experiences (Huang et al., 2015; Kim, 2014).

From the marketing viewpoint the tourist experience concept is constantly evolving. There are different definitions and variations of the term, from satisfactory experiences, through higher quality experiences, to the most recent, extraordinary memorable experiences. For this reason, the difference between the two terms – tourist experience and memorable tourist experience (MTE) – should be emphasised.

On the one hand, according to Tung and Ritchie (2011), the tourist experience is ‘an individual’s subjective (i.e. affective, cognitive and behavioural) evaluation and undertaking of events related to their tourist activities before (i.e. planning and preparation), during (i.e. in the destination) and after the journey (i.e. memory)’. Tourist experiences are generated by visiting a destination distant from home, learning about its attributes and enjoying its activities (Stamboulis and Skayannis, 2003).

On the other hand, MTE have been defined as experiences that are selectively constructed from tourist experiences and will be remembered time and time again after the trip or event (Kim et al., 2010b). However, not all tourist experiences can be considered MTE (Zhang at al., 2018). The importance of MTE theory lies in the power of memory to influence the consumer’s future decision making (Chandralal and Valenzuela, 2013).

Memories are considered to be the most valuable information source when choosing a tourist destination (Chandralal and Valenzuela, 2013). Tourists tend to make biased decisions based on their past experiences, that is, they remember their past experiences when they decide to travel and look for information (Kerstetter and Cho, 2004). According to Hoch and Deighton (1989), there are three reasons why recalling past experiences stored in the memory is important: (1) the motivation to buy is higher when based on previous consumer experiences; (2) consumers tend to perceive previous experiences as valuable and reliable sources of information; and, (3) previous experience has great power to influence future behavioural intentions (cited in Chen and Rahman, 2018). For these reasons, MTE are more relevant than tourist experiences; they will be remembered and will influence tourists’ future decision-making. These decisions will be based both on the consumer’s own experience and on recommendations and storytelling (Kerstetter and Cho, 2004; Kim et al., 2010b; Zhang et al., 2018). Moreover, tourists who have enjoyed positive MTEs may make recommendations through word of mouth, or through positive reviews, that impact on other tourists’ decision-making. This is of particular importance from the tourism marketing perspective.

In recent years, research has been conducted into what kind of tourist experiences can be converted into MTE. Tung and Ritchie (2011) identified four key dimensions of MTE: affect, expectations, consequentiality and recollection. Chandralal et al. (2015) studied MTE in travel blog narratives and noted eight experiential themes: local people, life and culture, personally meaningful experiences, shared experiences, perceived novelty, perceived serendipity, services of professional guides and tour operators, and affective emotions.

Theoretical framework and hypothesis

Destination image

Destination image is a complete and general image of a tourist destination, unlike other image-related concepts, such as of a product or a country. The concept includes aspects related to the perception and evaluation of consumers, the local population, history, geography, culture, economy and the development of the destination (Carneiro and Faria, 2016; Costa et al., 2016). There are many definitions of destination image in specialised literature, one of the most current being that provided in Zhang et al. (2016) as ‘the main image of the tourist product related to tourist attractions and facilities, which satisfy directly the main needs of tourists’.

Destination image is composed of cognitive (rational benefits and destination characteristics) and affective (tourists’ feelings towards the destination, pleasant experiences) images (Prayag and Ryan, 2011; Qu et al., 2011; Zhang et al., 2018). Destination image is also composed of various products, attractions and attributes that, added together, help the individual form an overall impression (Ashton, 2014; Whang et al., 2016). Destination attributes (landscapes, shopping opportunities, cultural exchange, security infrastructure, activities) (Kim, 2014) can be both tangible (monuments, beaches, mountains) and intangible (culture, customs, history) (Zhang et al., 2018). As such, the same destination might evoke a variety of images for different potential consumers (Zhang et al., 2018), and establish a different decision-making process for each individual, based on the information (s)he absorbs about the destination (Whang et al., 2016).

As noted, perceived destination image is an important factor in future consumer behavioural intention (Zhang et al., 2018), which impacts on a tourist trip in its three different phases: before, during and after the visit (Lee and Bai, 2016). Thus, the destination image that the tourist holds before the visit is a determining factor in the decision-making process (Buhalis, 2000), during the experience, its evaluation, and for future behavioural intentions (Foroudi et al., 2018). In other words, tourist destinations that have strong, positive images are more likely to be selected and provide a better tourist experience (Souiden et al., 2017).

For this reason, it is not enough for tourism managers to create a set of positive characteristics – all the destination image attributes must be unique and different if it is to be selected and generate positive tourist experiences (Ashton, 2014; Qu et al., 2011). Destination image influences the tourist experience by producing high-quality, satisfactory and memorable tourist experiences (Ritchie and Hudson, 2009). Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H1: Destination image positively influences the MTE

Tourist engagement

The concept of customer engagement has been widely studied in the marketing literature. However, the concept of tourist engagement has been explored less (Chen and Rahman, 2018). Most studies into this concept have focused on the tourist’s experience at the destination and less on his/her previous engagement (Chen and Rahman, 2018; Taheri et al., 2014).

Tourist engagement has been defined as the participation and interest that tourists have with respect to a tourist experience (Brodie et al., 2011). This conceptualisation of tourist engagement goes beyond the tourist’s participation with the destination offer (services, activities and types of accommodation, e.g. hotels or resorts) (Brodie et al., 2013). In fact, it includes aspects of emotional connection and engagement (Taheri et al., 2014). This level of engagement has been seen to be affected by two drivers, or factors, previous knowledge and motivation (Chen and Rahman, 2018; Taheri et al., 2014). The first of the two factors – previous knowledge – is associated with familiarity with the destination’s attractions, the tourist’s general travelling skill and background and past experiences, which influence the tourist’s behaviour and decision-making (Huang et al., 2015; Taheri et al., 2014). The second factor – motivation –is associated with the multiple motivations that affect consumer behaviour and final decision making, which can be both intrinsic (reflective motivation) and extrinsic (recreational motivation) (Taheri et al., 2014).

According to Prebensen et al. (2012), understanding a consumer’s degree of engagement is key to predicting his/her future behaviour. In the tourism field, the tourist’s degree of interest, engagement and affective response is very important for understanding how (s)he plans future trips, in terms of the destination and services and companies hired (Altunel and Erkurt, 2015; Taheri et al., 2014).

However, engagement levels are not the same for all consumers (Brodie et al., 2011), but it is crucial to have a full experience. Level of engagement also varies between new and repeat consumers, as they have different levels of familiarity with the products or services offered (Mollen and Wilson, 2010). Tourists, or consumers, who are more engaged, or familiar with, a destination or trip, derive more benefits from their consumer experience (Brodie et al., 2011; Chen and Rahman, 2018; Taheri et al., 2014), which can convert it into a memorable and valuable tourist experience (Chen and Rahman, 2018; Zatori et al., 2018). The higher is the tourist’s degree of engagement, the better will be his/her experience and memory. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H2. Tourist engagement positively influences the MTE.

Tourist satisfaction

Satisfaction is an important concept in marketing and tourism literature. Measuring and managing customer satisfaction is crucial to the survival, development and success of service industries (Altunel and Erkurt, 2015). Customer satisfaction can generate positive effects, such as entry and exit barriers for competitors, and the creation of sustainable competitive advantages. In addition, this factor is associated with other concepts, such as loyalty, attracting new customers and future consumer behaviour (Thakur, 2018). The tourism industry should consider how to involve the tourist before and during his/her experience to increase overall satisfaction (Prebensen et al., 2015). It is, therefore, important for service companies to design strategic policies and make decisions aimed at improving customer satisfaction.

In the tourist context, satisfaction is related to the extent to which general tourism necessities and the specific necessities of each tourist are satisfied (destination quality, services, products, tourist attractions, etc.) (Wu et al., 2018). This feeling of tourist satisfaction is produced when the post-trip impressions exceeds prior expectations (Altunel and Erkurt, 2015), so it is a post-consumption evaluation (Veasna et al., 2013). In the case of travel, tourists feel satisfied when the combination of their previous and post-trip impressions produce pleasant feelings. However, one feels dissatisfied when one has feelings of discontent (Cong, 2016).

Consequently, satisfaction is the result of the evaluation of a consumer experience of a particular product or service (Carlson et al., 2017). To compare these experiences to form feelings of satisfaction or dissatisfaction the tourists must remember their tourist experiences in the destination and their prior expectations (Lin and Kuo, 2016). During a trip tourists experience positive and negative emotions that leave a mark on the memory (Bosque and Martín, 2008). These feelings that arise from consumer experiences deposit traces in the memory that consumers process and integrate to form post-consumption satisfaction assessments (Maunier and Camelis, 2013; Prayag et al., 2013). Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H3. MTE positively influence tourist satisfaction with a tourist destination.

Revisit intention

Visitors who enjoyed positive tourist experiences are more likely to show positive behaviours after a trip (Barnes et al., 2016; Hosany and Prayag, 2013). Some of these behaviours are responses to positive emotions related to the use of products and services, satisfaction, consumption situations and behavioural intentions (Cole and Chancellor, 2009; Hosany and Prayag, 2013). One of the main effects is on revisit intention (Barnes et al., 2016; Chen and Rahman, 2018).

Revisit intention is the perceived probability of visiting a particular place at a specific time (Whang et al., 2016) or the probability of a tourist repeating an activity or revisiting a destination (Li et al., 2017). In this relationship, the influencing elements are both cognitive – quality, value, image- and affective – satisfaction, engagement, security (Tosun et al., 2015).

Revisit intention has been a key research topic in tourist literature, with a particular focus on the study of the antecedents and motivations that lead the tourist to revisit a destination. Its main antecedents have been identified in previous studies, among them the following: satisfaction, destination image, perceived value, previous travel experience, engagement, perceived risk, motivation and attachment (Cole and Chancellor, 2009; Li et al., 2017). Of these, destination image and previous experience are fundamental components in destination choice and revisit intention. However, the affective elements derived from experiences can have a greater effect on tourist intentions than on destination affective image (Tosun et al., 2015).

As discussed above, emotional assessments of past experiences can influence tourists’ future behaviour (Tosun et al., 2015). Along the same lines, Barnes et al. (2016) suggested that experiences from the distant past that the tourist remembers have the greatest impact on destination revisit intention. Therefore, the influence of MTE on revisit intention is considered fundamental for the management of tourist destinations, for several reasons: where they exist they give competitive advantages over other tourist destinations, they contribute to the prosperity of the destination and provide higher-spending tourists. These tourists tend to disseminate positive information and participate intensively in consumption activities (Zhang et al., 2018). All this indicates that MTE have a significant influence on the revisit intention for a tourist destination, so the following hypothesis is proposed:

H4. MTE positively influence the intention to revisit a tourist destination.

Recommendation intention

Word of mouth (WOM) is a very important communication form that influences consumers’ attitudes and behaviours (Reimer and Benkenstein, 2018), as customer to customer communication (C2C) is much more credible and persuasive than traditional advertising (Trusov et al., 2009). WOM is replete with consumers’ real experiences and personal feelings (Alves et al., 2016). In the tourism industry this information exchange focuses on recommendations for destinations, experiences and places of tourist interest (Alves et al., 2016).

Traditional WOM has been defined as an interpersonal exchange of information between individuals known to each other (Gupta and Harris, 2010). Online commerce and the Internet have developed a new form of electronic communication through which consumers express their opinions, make recommendations and comment on products and services, such that WOM has become electronic WOM (e-WOM). However, in the online context, there is normally no familiarity between senders and receivers, as there is in traditional WOM (Gupta and Harris, 2010). E-WOM is understood as any positive or negative statement regarding products or services made by consumers and published on the Internet for other users to read (Abubakar and Ilkan, 2016).

E-WOM has a strong influence in the tourism industry due, mainly, to the intangible nature of tourist services (Casaló et al., 2015). Potential consumers consult online comments about tourism products and services that are impossible to assess prior to consumption and which, consequently, carry increased risk and uncertainty (Abubakar and Ilkan, 2016). Potential tourists are influenced by the recommendations and comments of their friends, family and social networks (Casal et al., 2015), and it has been argued that these have become one of their most important tourist sources of information (Alves et al., 2016). Potential tourists search for relevant information to plan their future trips; this has become an essential step in the decision-making process (Zhao et al., 2015). In turn, consumers who view other consumers’ comments remember and share their own memories of past tourist experiences (Tung et al., 2018). This social exchange process of post-trip impressions is positive for tourists, as sharing experiences plays an important role in their well-being (Kim and Fesenmaier, 2015).

This phenomenon is a valuable and low-cost alternative for tourism companies and institutions, as well as being a new way of managing customer recommendations (Reimer and Benkenstein, 2018). Destination managers should encourage tourists to recommend their destination, as this decreases the perceived risk for other potential tourists (Foroudi et al., 2018). To attract new visitors it is important that tourist destinations ensure that their visitors are highly satisfied and have a highly positive experience (Prayag and Ryan, 2011). On the other hand, tourism managers must understand the importance of e-WOM as a tool for communication and management, and to adapt their business models to this new customer communication channel to obtain better results in satisfaction, retention and acquisition of new tourists.

Based on this approach it can be said that the most satisfied tourists are more likely to have positive recommendation intentions (Foroudi et al., 2018) and to share their experiences of a destination (Alexandrov et al., 2013). However, satisfaction alone is not enough for a tourist to revisit or recommend a destination; memory and experience also play fundamental roles in these tourist behaviours. This underlines the importance of MTE in the recommendation intention of tourists for destinations. A positive memorable tourist experience produces favourable recommendation intention results (Chen and Rahman, 2018). Therefore, it is posited that MTE is a good predictor of recommendation intention:

H5. MTE positively influence recommendation intention for a tourist destination.

Figure 1 depicts the proposed integrative model of the antecedents and consequences of MTE examined in this study:

Figure 1.

Proposed research model.

Methodology

A structural equation model was developed with the concepts previously defined in the theoretical framework and the proposed relationships. For the data analysis we undertook an exploratory analysis with SPSS (SPSS Statistics 22), a confirmatory analysis and a structural analysis with EQS (EQS 6.3 for Windows).

A survey designed using the online tool Google Formulate was used to collect the data and carry out the empirical tests. The data were collected through convenience sampling with clients of the Eizasa hotel chain, from Aragon (Spain), between 30 October and 12 November 2018. This chain has six hotels and three apartment hotels, all between two and four stars, located in several Spanish cities (Zaragoza – capital of Aragon, Jaca – in the Aragon Pyrenees, Lérida and Valle Ezcaray – Rioja). Zaragoza (and the zone surrounding) is one of the Spanish cities most used for market research, due to its sociodemographic characteristics and the consumption habits of its population. Similar sampling methods have been used in other studies into tourism experiences (e.g. Wu et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2018).

To carry out the survey the hotel customers were given a direct link to the questionnaire (and a QR code that led to the same link) as they checked out at the hotel reception. The hotel reception staff gave information to the customers about the survey and asked them to participate. The tourists could enter the link into, or read the QR code with, their mobile phones and thus complete the survey. A total of 328 valid questionnaires were returned.

As part of the survey, the participants were asked to select a tourist experience they had had in the previous 5 years; this emulates previous studies into MTE by Kim (2014) and Chen and Rahman (2018). The respondents were asked to describe briefly their experience of the destination itself, the actual experience they had and the reasons why they chose that particular experience for this survey.

Subsequently, general questions were asked about the trip, its duration, how it was organised, companions and the main reason for travelling. The next set of questions related to the model variables, destination image, tourist engagement before the visit, the tourist experience during the visit, satisfaction, and revisit and recommendation intentions. Finally, questions were posed about travel habits: number of annual trips, main motivations; and sociodemographics, about gender, age, education level and monthly income.

The predominant age ranges of the sample were 25 to 35 years (22.6%), 46 to 55 years (19.8%) and 56 to 65 years (19.2%). Regarding gender, the sample is fairly equal, at 40.2% male and 59.8% female. In terms of monthly income, 14.9% have none, 16.5% have between 0 and €1,000, 40.2% have between €1,001 to €2,000 and 28.3% have greater than €2,000.

Measures

Six constructs were measured: destination image, tourist engagement, MTE, satisfaction, and revisit and recommendation intentions for the tourist destination. The constructs were measured by 7-point Likert-type scales based on degree of agreement or disagreement (1 being = completely disagree and 7 = completely agree). Likert scales of 5, 7 or 10 points are all equally suitable when used with analytical tools such as confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modelling (Dawes, 2008). The scales were adapted, prior to the analysis, for the purposes of this investigation, from scales validated in the previous literature (see Table 1).

Table 1.

Measurement scales.

Destination image (Adapted from Whang et al., 2016 )
IMAG_1	The destination had historical landmarks of interest
IMAG_2	The destination had unique historical buildings
IMAG_3	The destination had an exotic cultural flavour
IMAG_4	The destination was interesting
IMAG_5	The destination was attractive
IMAG_6	The destination was quiet
IMAG_7	The impression of the destination was positive
IMAG_8	The destination was going to make a good impression
IMAG_9	The destination was going to give me a lovely impression
Tourist Engagement (Adapted from Taheri et al., 2014 )
ENGA_1	I had good knowledge of the destination
ENGA_2	I thought I would get a lot of satisfaction by visiting the destination
ENGA_3	Visiting the destination felt like a comfortable experience
ENGA_4	Visiting the destination was an enriching experience for me
ENGA_5	I thought that visiting the destination would allow me to show my knowledge and experience on certain topics
ENGA_6	I thought that visiting this destination would allow me to interact with other people who are interested in the same things as me
Memorable Tourist Experiences (Adapted from Kim et al., 2010a )
MTE_1	I was delighted to have a new experience
MTE_2	During the trip I dedicated my time to undertaking activities
MTE_3	I really enjoyed the tourist experience
MTE_4	The tourist experience was exciting
MTE_5	It was an unrepeatable life experience
MTE_6	It was a unique experience
MTE_7	It was different to previous experiences
MTE_8	I experienced something new
MTE_9	I had a good impression of the local people
MTE_10	I closely experienced the local culture
MTE_11	The local population were friendly
MTE_12	It was a liberating journey
MTE_13	I enjoyed the feeling of freedom
MTE_14	It was comforting
MTE_15	I felt revitalised/like new
MTE_16	I did something meaningful/valuable
MTE_17	I did something important
MTE_18	I learned about myself
MTE_19	I visited a place I really wanted to go
MTE_20	I liked the activities I undertook
MTE_21	I was interested in the main activities of this tourist experience
MTE_22	The experience was a complete adventure
MTE_23	I learned from the experience
MTE_24	I experienced a new culture
Satisfaction (Adapted from Lee et al., 2011 ; Veasna et al., 2013 )
SAT_1	My general experience at the destination was satisfactory
SAT_2	I really enjoyed the experience at the destination
SAT_3	I felt good about my decision to visit the destination
Revisit Intention (Adapted from Tosun et al., 2015 )
REV_1	I would like to visit this tourist destination again
REV_2	If I had to decide again, I would choose this same destination
REV_3	I would go back to this destination in the future
Recommendation Intention (Adapted from Chen and Rahman, 2018 )
REC_1	I would recommend this place to my friends
REC_2	I would say positive things about this place
REC_3	I would like to encourage my friends and family to visit this place

To measure destination image, we used the 9-item scale proposed by Whang et al. (2016), which measures cognitive image, affective image and the general image of tourist destinations. To measure tourist engagement, we used the 6-item scale of Taheri et al. (2014), which measures recreational and reflective motivations and previous knowledge (Kerstetter and Cho, 2004).

As mentioned above, to measure MTE we used the 24-item scale of Kim et al. (2010a). To measure the consequences of MTE we used the scales of Lee et al. (2011) with an item about overall satisfaction with the experience and Veasna et al.’s (2013) scale with two items about satisfaction with the trip. For revisit intention we used the adapted scale of Tosun et al. (2015) and for recommendation intention we used the adapted scale of Chen and Rahman (2018).

Results

Participants

Prior to the questions about the model variables we confirmed that the participating tourists were Spanish based. They were then asked about the experience and general characteristics of the trip they had selected. Some 36.3% had spent a week or more in the destination and 40.5% 4–7 nights. Thus, most of the memorable tourist experiences were based on holidays of 4 nights or more.

The majority of respondents (82.3%) selected the option ‘by myself, with family or friends, on our own’, for the question about the organisation of the trip. Only 17.7% used a travel agent or went on an organised trip. In addition, the main travel companions of the sample were their partners (33.5%), family and children (29%) and friends (20.1%). The main reasons for making the trip were leisure (68.6%), followed by culture (8.2%), relaxation (7.3%) and visiting family (7%).

Measurement model

The model consists of six variables that include the concepts defined in the theoretical framework: destination image, tourist engagement, memorable tourist experience, satisfaction, and revisit intentions and recommendation intentions. Following data collection, we went through a process of debugging and data reduction.

The first step in the data analysis was to analyse the reliability of the scales through an exploratory analysis of the model. After debugging and applying the Cronbach’s alpha threshold of 0.7 and the correlation item-TAL at 0.3 it was decided to eliminate the following items: IMAG_1, IMAG_2, IMAG_3 and IMAG_6 of destination image; ENGA_1, ENGA_5, ENGA_6 of tourist engagement and MTE_2, MTE_9, MTE_10, MTE_11, MTE_18 and MTE_24 of memorable tourist experiences (see Table 2). In addition, an exploratory factor analysis of the principal components was carried out to analyse the unidimensionality of the scales. The results show that the MTE construct has three dimensions: Hedonism (MTEHED), Usefulness (MTEUT) and Knowledge (MTECON). The hedonic dimension is especially significant since experiences charged with the greatest emotion are remembered more frequently and in more detail (Bohanek et al., 2005). Similarly, experiences that meet tourist needs and desires, and are more useful to them, are more durable over time (Tung and Ritchie, 2011). Also, the motivation of acquiring new knowledge and intellectual development during the trip improves the memory of the tourist experience (Kim, 2014).

Table 2.

Initial reliability analysis.

Variable	Cronbach’s Alpha	Nº of factors	Variance Explained (%)	Factorial Load
IMAG_4	0,956	1	85,026	0,903
IMAG_5				0,936
IMAG_7				0,928
IMAG_8				0,943
IMAG_9				0,899
ENGA_2	0,911	1	84,876	0,916
ENGA_3				0,930
ENGA_4				0,918
MTEHED_1	0,938	1	72,800	0,843
MTEHED_3				0,826
MTEHED_4				0,854
MTEHED_5				0,856
MTEHED_6				0,869
MTEHED_7				0,864
MTEHED_8				0,859
MTEUT_12	0,930	1	74,088	0,871
MTEUT_13				0,889
MTEUT_14				0,885
MTEUT_15				0,867
MTEUT_16				0,840
MTEUT_17				0,810
MTECON_19	0,907	1	72,791	0,801
MTECON_20				0,898
MTECON_21				0,891
MTECON_22				0,833
MTECON_23				0,839
SAT_1	0,966	1	93,57	0,972
SAT_2				0,972
SAT_3				0,958
REV_1	0,906	1	84,209	0,943
REV_2				0,875
REV_3				0,934
REC_1	0,976	1	95,388	0,978
REC_2				0,969
REC_3				0,983

The measurement scales were refined through a confirmatory analysis with EQS (6.3) using the Robust Maximum Likelihood method (Flavián et al., 2006). Indicators that did not achieve a sufficient R² level were eliminated. It was, therefore, necessary to remove item REV_2 from the revisit intention measurement scale. Thus, the goodness-of-fit of the confirmatory model was acceptable. The scales all showed confirmatory validity and adequate levels of composite reliability and average variance extracted (AVE) (see Table 3).

Table 3.

Reliability and validity analysis.

	Correlations	Covariance Confidence Intervals		AVE	FCC
IMAG-ENG	0,938	(0,858; 0,938)	IMAG	0,803	0,972
IMAG-HED	0,842	(0,722; 0,842)	ENGA	0,771	0,938
IMAG-UT	0,726	(0,574; 0,726)	MTEHED	0,686	0,982
IMAG-CON	0,858	(0,742; 0,858)	MTEUT	0,631	0,971
IMAG-SAT	0,836	(0,676; 0,836)	MTECON	0,598	0,954
IMAG-REV	0,713	(0,533; 0,713)	SAT	0,894	0,975
IMAG-REC	0,778	(0,586; 0,778)	REV	0,864	0,927
ENG-MTEHED	0,878	(0,766; 0,878)	REC	0,950	0,988
ENG-MTEUT	0,795	(0,655; 0,795)
ENG-MTECON	0,846	(0,71; 0,846)
ENG-SAT	0,797	(0,625; 0,797)
ENG-REV	0,707	(0,515; 0,707)
ENG-REC	0,729	(0,521; 0,729)
MTEHED-MTEUT	0,859	(0,743; 0,859)
MTEHED-MTECON	0,953	(0,889; 0,953)
MTEHED-SAT	0,847	(0,683; 0,847)
MTEHED-REV	0,719	(0,547; 0,719)
MTEHED-REC	0,757	(0,565; 0,757)
MTEUT-CON	0,854	(0,742; 0,854)
MTEUT-SAT	0,712	(0,544; 0,712)
MTEUT-REV	0,690	(0,518; 0,69)
MTEUT-REC	0,600	(0,376; 0,6)
MTECON-SAT	0,866	(0,702; 0,866)
MTECON-REV	0,766	(0,61; 0,766)
MTECON-REC	0,770	(0,57; 0,77)
SAT-REV	0,777	(0,621; 0,777)
SAT-REC	0,809	(0,625; 0,809)
REV-REC	0,728	(0,54; 0,728)

On the other hand, to confirm the multidimensionality of the MTE variable, we developed a rival models’ strategy. This compared two models: a first order factor model, in which the dimensions were not differentiated, and a second order model with the dimensions identified in the exploratory factor analysis of the MTE construct: MTE-hedonic (items 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8), MTE-usefulness (items 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17) and MTE-knowledge (items 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23). The two models were compared and the results showed a greater fit for the second order model, which confirms the multidimensionality of the MTE variable.

In addition, a discriminant validity analysis was carried out (see Table 3). The weights of the indicators of the unidimensional variables (destination image, tourist engagement, satisfaction, revisit intention and recommendation intention) were analysed in the confirmatory model and found to be significant. The significance, indicator size, and the correlations between the dimensions of the multidimensional variable, MTE, were tested and were found to be significant (at 0.01) and high. Subsequently, it was found that the confidence intervals of the correlations between the different variables did not include the value 1. Finally, the correlation between each pair of variables in the model was set at 1 and a Chi² difference test was carried out. The evaluation of the discrimination criteria showed sufficient discriminant validity in all the measurement scales.

Structural model

Following the process of verifying the reliability and consistency of the measurement scales, the hypotheses were tested. To analyse the multidimensional variable through causal analysis, the arithmetical averages of the items that formed each of these three dimensions were used as indicators.

The analysis showed that the goodness-of-fit was greater, or close to, the recommended limits. Specifically, the absolute goodness-of-fit index was used to verify the fit of the general model (RMSEA = 0.084; GFI = 0.876), the incremental fit index for the composite model (NNFI = 0.890; CFI = 0.9; RCFI = 0.897; IFI = 0.901) and the parsimony index to analyse the quality of the fit (χ/D.F. = 5.1241).

It should be noted, also, that the memorable tourism experience was explained to a high level (R²= 0.63). As shown in Figure 2, destination image and tourist engagement exert a significant, positive effect on memorable tourist experiences. To be precise, we found that the memorable tourism experience was positively affected by destination image (b = 0.60, p < 0.01) and, similarly, the memorable tourism experience is positively affected by tourist engagement (b = 0.52, p < 0.01). Therefore, the more positive the image of the destination have the tourist, and the greater the engagement of the tourist with the destination, the more memorable will be the tourist experience. Thus, H1 and H2 are supported.

Figure 2.

Model relationship results. (*) Significant coefficients at level 0.01.

On the other hand, memorable tourist experiences have a positive and significant effect on satisfaction, revisit intentions and recommendation intentions. To be precise, we found that tourist satisfaction is positively affected by memorable tourism experiences (b = 0.59, p < 0.01) and, similarly, the tourist’s revisit intention is positively affected by memorable tourism experiences (b = 0.43, p < 0.01); and, finally, that tourist recommendation intention is positively affected by memorable tourism experiences (b = 0.42, p < 0.01).Thus, the more memorable is the tourist experience the greater will be the satisfaction of the tourist, their revisit intentions and recommendation intentions. This supports H3, H4 and H5. Last, the confirmation of these three hypothesis shows that the model has high explanatory power for: satisfaction (R² = 0.59), revisit intentions (R² = 0.43) and recommendation intentions (R² = 0.42).

Conclusions and implications

The competition to attract tourists to destinations in recent years has been intensifying and success is increasingly difficult to achieve in this highly-competitive market. As suggested by Ritchie and Crouch (2003) ‘What is needed to create a competitive destination is for it to step up its capacity to increase tourism spending, attract more tourists and provide them with satisfactory and memorable experiences’. This statement emphasises the importance of creating memorable tourist experiences to achieve competitive advantage for the tourist destination. The tourism industry and researchers must keep in mind that tourists expect to visit new places and enjoy different experiences. Thus, they need to provide not just tourist experiences, but experiences that remain in the memory in the long term, to attract new and returning tourists.

However, despite the recognised importance of competitiveness for destinations, many previous studies have focussed on price, quality, environment and the competitive positions of specific destinations (Kim, 2014). The present study integrates some of the main antecedents (destination image and tourist engagement) and consequences (satisfaction, revisit intentions and recommendation intentions) of MTE. The results support all the hypotheses and underline the importance of memory in tourist experiences offering interesting theoretical contributions. Destination image and tourist engagement positively influence the creation of memorable tourist experiences and, in turn, MTE positively influences tourist satisfaction, revisit intentions and recommendation intentions for the destination. Thus, the developed model contributes to a greater understanding of the relationships of the MTE with its antecedents and consequences. It could provide new avenues of research for future studies on memorable tourist experiences. The results reinforce the findings of previous studies on MTE and tourists’ behavioural intentions (Barnes et al., 2016; Kim, 2017; Zhang et al., 2018), although these are differentiated from the present study as they do not feature its integrative character, where destination image and tourist engagement are treated as antecedents of MTE.

This study has important implications for destination managers. In the first place, it has demonstrated that destination image positively influences the creation of positive, memorable tourist experiences. This underlines how important it is that tourist destinations create a strong, positive image, and to ensure that the image projected is well received by the tourist (Ashton, 2014). Tourist destination managers must understand the importance of managing and marketing destinations, and of identifying the aspects of the culture, history, local lifestyle, and affective image that differentiate the destination and help keep the experience in the tourist’s memory. This will allow tourism managers to create a positive destination image that will lead tourists to enjoy memorable tourist experiences during their trips. To achieve this, destination image managers should conduct social media-based communication campaigns. In addition, managers might hire influencers. The influencers could live experiences in the destination and later portray them on their social networks, as well as in the destination’s social networks. An example is @chiaraferragni, one of the largest Italian influencers, with more than 21 million Instagram followers. She was a guest in several luxury hotels in the Cinque Terre and Lake Como (Italy) in summer 2020. She stayed for several days in the hotels and posted about the experiences lived by her (and her relatives, who travel with her). She showed the rooms, the meals, relaxation sessions with massages and spa and the leisure areas, for example, the swimming pools. Thus, she showed an image of the entire hotel and the destination based on her experience. Instagram, and social media in general, are now keys tools through which to create an image of, and promote, destinations (Fatanti and Suyadnya, 2015; Hanan and Putit, 2014).

Second, it has been shown that tourist engagement also has a positive effect on the creation of MTEs. Therefore, tourism managers should increase and improve the interaction between tourists and locals by developing activities that: promote the participation of, and engage the interest of, tourists; encourage co-creation with the destination; provide more knowledge about the destination; facilitate cultural exchanges; and create connections between the destination and the tourist. These will contribute to the tourist being more engaged with the tourist destination and deriving more benefits from his/her experience, and therefore a positive MTE. Awareness and motivation campaigns aimed at local tourism entrepreneurs might be carried out; they might thereafter include destination-related experiences in their offers, perhaps in exchange for receiving financial or tax compensation. In this way tourism entrepreneurs could be incentivised to develop tourist engagement.

Third, it has been confirmed that MTE positively influences satisfaction. This relationship is highly significant and underlines the importance to tourist destinations of creating memorable tourist experiences. It is essential that destinations create MTE every time the tourist visits, as satisfaction help creates sustainable, competitive advantages that positively influence future tourist behaviours. Managers should provide tourist experiences that promote retention, loyalty and relationships with tourists through loyalty programmes, good customer service, customised, innovative services and products and cultural offerings that make each trip different and meaningful; this will ensure the tourist will remember it for a long time.

In this way, the tourist will obtain greater satisfaction from his/her tourist experience that will, in turn, influence future behaviours, such as revisit intentions and recommendation intentions. This may have impact beyond leisure travel, that is, by extending into the business travel market. If basic services such as hotel rooms, restaurants, and even leisure activities can be developed in destinations a priori chosen for business, such that the client feels satisfied, the experience can become memorable. Satisfied clients may, thus, develop an intention to revisit the destination when they are considering leisure tourism activities.

The relationship between revisit intentions and MTE is especially important for destinations that base their sustainability strategy on tourists repeating their visits. Thus, according to Chang et al. (2014), if tour operators want tourists to revisit, making their experiences memorable, through meeting their needs and wishes, is undoubtedly essential. Thus, the operators must pay more attention to understanding what tourists experience when visiting destinations.

Recommendations are also one of the main sources of information for new tourists and for seasoned tourists seeking new experiences in familiar destinations; and they have been shown to influence their decision-making processes. For this reason, the experiences created by tourist destinations must be meaningful and special enough to stay in the tourist’s memory. Tourism experts must create strategies based on the three MTE dimensions of the present study: hedonism, usefulness and knowledge, which is consistent with Huang et al. (2015). Destination managers should create positive MTE by: creating new products and services; providing innovative tourism experiences and attractive tourist programmes that promote revisits; generating strong, durable customer relationships; developing customised response programmes; and motivating satisfied tourists to recommend the destination. As previously noted, we also recommend that influencers are used in communication campaigns; their recommendations are the basis of any successful company strategy in the social media age (Fatanti and Suyadnya, 2015; Hanan and Putit, 2014).

Limitations and future lines of research

While this research has shed light on an integrative approach to understanding the antecedents and consequences of MTE, it is not exempt from limitations, and these suggest future research lines.

On the one hand, although the study was carried out with real tourists from an actual hotel chain, each tourist experience was based on a different tourist destination. It would be interesting to apply the model in depth to analyse MTE generated by one particular destination. In this sense, the sample was of tourists who visited several Spanish cities, one in particular (Zaragoza). Therefore, although this city is commonly used in research as a test market, there are limits to the extent that the results can be generalised. In applying the results of this study to other regions and/or countries, future studies might examine MTEs while taking into account cultural and regional differences.

In addition, the purchasing decision-making process was not examined as the survey was carried out retrospectively. In future studies it would be interesting to examine all the relevant phases (before making the decision, the experience at the destination and post-consumption behaviour) and observe the whole decision-making process and tourist experience.

Finally, a model is proposed that analyses the antecedents and consequences of MTE from a positive viewpoint. Where the MTE has been negative, this might yield different and interesting results. It would, thus, be valuable to analyse what role negative MTE play in the proposed relationships. Furthermore, an analysis could be made on how to convert negative into positive MTE through service recovery.

Footnotes

Authors’ note

The authors certify that the contribution is the authors’ original work. The paper is submitted only to this journal and had not been published before. The authors also warrant that the paper contains no harmful statements, does not infringe on the right or privacy or others, or contain material that might cause harm or injury.

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 iD

Carmina Fandos-Herrera

References

Abubakar

Ilkan

(2016) Impact of online WOM on destination trust and intention to travel: a medical tourism perspective. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 5(3): 192–201.

Alexandrov

Lilly

Babakus

(2013) The effects of social-and self-motives on the intentions to share positive and negative word of mouth. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 41(5): 531–546.

Altunel

Erkurt

(2015) Cultural tourism in Istanbul: the mediation effect of tourist experience and satisfaction on the relationship between involvement and recommendation intention. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 4(4): 213–221.

Alves

Abrantes

Antunes

, et al. (2016) WOM antecedents in backpacker travelers. Journal of Business Research 69(5): 1851–1856.

Ashton

(2014) Tourist destination brand image development – an analysis based on stakeholders’ perception: a case study from Southland, New Zealand. Journal of Vacation Marketing 20(3): 279–292.

Barnes

Mattsson

Sorensen

(2016) Remembered experiences and revisit intentions: a longitudinal study of Safari Park visitors. Tourism Management 57: 286–294.

Bohanek

Fivush

Walker

(2005) Memories of positive and negative emotional events. Applied Cognitive Psychology 19(1): 51–66.

Brodie

Hollebeek

Juric

, et al. (2011) Customer engagement: conceptual domain, funadamental propositions and implications for research. Journal of Service Research 14(3): 252–271.

Brodie

Ilic

Juric

, et al. (2013) Consumer engagement in a virtual brand community: an exploratory analysis. Journal of Business Research 66(1): 105–114.

10.

Buhalis

(2000) Marketing the competitive destination of the future. Tourism Management 21(1): 97–116.

11.

Carlson

Rahman

Vool

(2017) Feel the VIBE: examining value-in-the-brand-page-experience and its impact on satisfaction and customer engagement behaviours in mobile social media. Journal os Retailing and Consumer Services 46: 149–162.

12.

Carneiro

Faria

(2016) Quest for purposefully designed conceptualization of the country-of-origin image construct. Journal of Business Research 69 (10): 4411–4420.

13.

Casaló

Flavián

Guinalíu

, et al. (2015) Do online hotel rating schemes influence booking behaviors? International Journal of Hospitality Management 49: 28–36.

14.

Chandralal

Valenzuela

(2013) Exploring memorable tourism experiences: antecedents and behavioural outcomes. Journal of Economics, Business and Management 1(2): 177–181.

15.

Chandralal

Rindfleish

Valenzuela

(2015) An application of travel blog narratives to explore memorable tourism experiences. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 20(6): 680–693.

16.

Chang

Backman

Huang

(2014) Creative tourism: a preliminary examination of creative tourists’ motivation, experience, perceived value and revisit intention. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research 8(4): 401–419.

17.

Chen

Rahman

(2018) Cultural tourism: an analysis of engagement, cultural contact, memorable tourism experience and destination loyalty. Tourism Management Perspectives 26: 153–163.

18.

Cole

Chancellor

(2009) Examining the festival attributes that impact visitor experience, satisfaction and re-visit intention. Journal of Vacation Marketing 15(4): 323–333.

19.

Cong

(2016) A formative model of the relationship between destination quality, tourist satisfaction and intentional loyalty: an empirical test in Vietnam. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 26: 50–62.

20.

Costa

Carneiro

Goldszmidt

(2016) A contingent approach to country-of-origin effects on foreign products evaluation: interaction of facets of country image with product classes. International Business Review 25(5): 1066–1075.

21.

Dawes

(2008) Do data characteristics change according to the number of scale points used? An experiment using 5-point, 7-point and 10-point scales. International Journal of Market Research 50(1): 61–104.

22.

Faizan

Ryu

Hussain

(2016) Influence of experiences on memories, satisfaction and behavioral intentions: a study of creative tourism. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 33(1): 85–100.

23.

Fatanti

Suyadnya

(2015) Beyond user gaze: How Instagram creates tourism destination brand? Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 211: 1.089–1.095.

24.

Flavián

Guinalíu

Gurrea

(2006) The role played by perceived usability, satisfaction and consumer trust on website loyalty. Information & Management 43(1): 1–14.

25.

Foroudi

Akarsu

Ageeva

, et al. (2018) Promising the dream: changing destination image of London through the effect of website place. Journal of Business Research 83: 97–110.

26.

Gupta

Harris

(2010) How e-WOM recommendations influence product consideration and quality of choice: a motivation to process information perspective. Journal of Business Research 63(9–10): 1014–1049.

27.

Hanan

Putit

(2014) Express marketing of tourism destinations using Instagram in social media networking. In: Sumarjan

Mohd

ZMS

Mohd

, et al. (eds) Hospitality and Tourism. London,Abingdon: Taylor & Francis Group, pp. 471–474.

28.

Hoch

Deighton

(1989) Managing what consumers learn from experience. Journal of Marketing 53(2): 1–20.

29.

Hosany

Prayag

(2013) Patterns of tourists’ emotional responses, satisfaction, and recommendation intention. Journal of Business Research 66(6): 730–737.

30.

Huang

Afsharifar

van der Veen

(2015) Examining the moderating role of prior knowledge in the relationship between destination experiences and tourist satisfaction. Journal of Vacation Marketing 14: 1–15.

31.

Kerstetter

Cho

M-H

(2004) Prior knowledge, credibility and information search. Annals of Tourism Research 31(4): 961–985.

32.

Kim

Fesenmaier

(2015) Sharing tourism experiences: the posttrip experience. Journal of Travel Research 56(1): 28–40.

33.

Kim

Ritchie

JRB

McCormick

(2010a) Development of a scale to measure memorable tourism experiences. Journal of Travel Research 51(1): 12–25.

34.

Kim

Ritchie

JRB

Tung

WSV

(2010b) The effect of memorable experience on behavioral intentions in tourism: a structural equation modeling approach. Tourism Analysis 15(6): 637–648.

35.

Kim

J-H

(2014) The antecedents of memorable tourism experiences: the development of a scale to measure the destination attributes associated with memorable experiences. Tourism Management 44: 34–45.

36.

Kim

J-H

(2017) The impact of memorable tourism experiences on loyalty behaviors: the mediating effects of destination image and satisfaction. Journal of Travel Research 57(7): 856–870.

37.

Lee

Bai

(2016) Influence of popular culture on special interest tourists’ destination image. Tourism Management 52: 161–169.

38.

Lee

Jeon

Kim

(2011) The impact of tour quality and tourist satisfaction on tourist loyalty: the case of Chinese tourists in Korea. Tourism Management 32(5): 1115–1124.

39.

Wen

Ying

(2017) The influence of crisis on tourists’ perceived destination image and revisit intention: an exploratory study of Chinese tourists to North Korea. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 9: 104–111.

40.

Lin

C-H

Kuo

BZ-L

(2016) The behavioral consequences of tourist experience. Tourism Management Perspectives 18: 84–91.

41.

Maunier

Camelis

(2013) Toward an identification of elements contributing to satisfaction with the tourism experience. Journal of Vacation Marketing 19(1): 19–39.

42.

Mollen

Wilson

(2010) Engagement, telepresence and interactivity in online consumer experience: reconciling scholastic and managerial perspectives. Journal of Business Research 63(9–10): 919–925.

43.

Neuhofer

Buhalis

Ladkin

(2012) Conceptualising technology enhanced destination experiences. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 1(1–2): 36–46.

44.

Prayag

Ryan

(2011) Antecedents of tourists’ loyalty to mauritius: the role and influence of destination image, place attachment, personal involvement, and satisfaction. Journal of Travel Research 51(3): 342–356.

45.

Prayag

Hosany

Odeh

(2013) The role of tourists’ emotional experiences and satisfaction in understanding behavioral intentions. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 2(2): 118–127.

46.

Prebensen

Kim

Uysal

(2012) Motivation and involvement as antecedents of perceived value of the destination experience. Journal of Travel Research 52 (2): 253–264.

47.

Prebensen

Kim

Uysal

(2015) Cocreation as moderator between the experience value and satisfaction relationship. Journal of Travel Research 55(7): 934–945.

48.

Kim

(2011) A model of destination branding: integrating the concepts of the branding and destination image. Tourism Management 32(3): 465–476.

49.

Reimer

Benkenstein

(2018) Not just for the recommender: how eWOM incentives influence the recommendation audience. Journal of Business Research 86: 11–21.

50.

Ritchie

Brent

Crouch

(2003) A model of destination competitiveness/sustainability: Brazilian perspectives. Brazilian Public Administration Review, Río de Janeiro 44(5): 1049–1066.

51.

Ritchie

Brent

Hudson

(2009) Understanding and meeting the challenges of consumer/tourist experience research. International Journal of Tourism Research 11(2): 111–126.

52.

Rodríguez-del Bosque

San Martín

(2008) Tourist satisfaction a cognitive-affective model. Annals of Tourism Research 35(2): 551–573.

53.

Souiden

Ladhari

Chiadmi

., (2017) Destination personality and destination image. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 32: 54–70.

54.

Stamboulis

Kayannis

(2003) Innovation strategies and technology for experience-based tourism. Tourism Management 24(1): 35–43.

55.

Taheri

Jafari

O’Gorman

(2014) Keeping your audience: presenting a visitor engagement scale. Tourism Management 42: 321–329.

56.

Thakur

, (2018) Customer engagement and online reviews. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 41: 48–59.

57.

Tosun

Dedeoğlu

Fyall

(2015) Destination service quality, affective image and revisit intention: the moderating role of past experience. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 4 (4): 222–234.

58.

Trusov

Bucklin

Pauwels

(2009) Effects of word-of-mouth versus traditional marketing: findings from an internet social networking site. Journal of Marketing 73(5): 90–102.

59.

Tung

VWS

Cheung

Law

(2018) Does the listener matter? The effects of capitalization on storytellers’ evaluations of travel memories. Journal of Travel Research 57(8): 1133–1145.

60.

Tung

Sun

Brent

R-JR

(2011) Exploring the essence of memorable tourism experience. Annals of Tourism Research 38(4): 1367–1386.

61.

Veasna

W-Y

Huang

C-H

(2013) The impact of destination source credibility on destination satisfaction: the mediating effects of destination attachment and destination image. Tourism Management 36: 511–526.

62.

Whang

Yong

(2016) Pop culture, destination images, and visit intentions: theory and research on travel motivations of Chinese and Russian tourists. Journal of Business Research 69(2): 631–641.

63.

H-Ch

Cheng

Ch-Ch

Ch-H

(2018) A study of experiential quality, experiential value, trust, corporatereputation, experiential satisfaction and behavioral intentions forcruise tourists: the case of Hong Kong. Tourism Management 66: 200–220.

64.

Zatori

Smith

Puczko

(2018) Experience-involvement. Memorability and authenticity: the service provider’s effect on tourist experience. Tourism Management 67: 111–126.

65.

Zhang

Buhalis

(2018) A model of perceived image, memorable tourism experiences and revisit intention. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 8: 326–336.

66.

Zhang

Leung

, et al. (2016) The influence of destination country image on prospective tourists’ visit intention: testing three competing models. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 21(7): 811–835.

67.

Zhao

Wang

Guo

, et al. (2015) The influence of online reviews to online hotel booking intentions. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 27(6): 1342–1364.