Abstract
Space travel involves complicated processes, and the potential tourists may avoid these trips at any stage due to various risks and costs. The avoidance intention has serious implications for both the tourists and the services. Applying a push-pull-mooring (PPM) framework, we modelled space tourist’s avoidance intention. We developed a model that investigates the direct effect of the push, pull, and mooring factors on avoidance intention. We evaluated the moderation role of the mooring factor with the associations of the push and pull factors with the avoidance intention. We also assessed the necessity of the push, pull, and mooring factors with avoiding space tourism. Using configurational modelling, we explored algorithms that explain the conditions where tourists avoid space tourism. Space tourism avoidance intention is increased by the push factor and decreased by the push and mooring factors. The mooring factor moderates the impact of the pull factor on the avoidance intention.
Introduction
Recent advancements in space tourism open up the skies for the tourists to undertake spacewalks and grand tours to the Moon and Mars. In 2020, the first commercial human spaceflight transformed space tourism, and the completion of the certification of the human-rated commercial space system are two milestones in order to regularly fly humans to space (Cawley, 2020). The SpaceX flight is an example of a collaborative mission between the private rocketry companies and the state agencies, such as NASA in order to provide services for the potential space tourists to fly into Low-Earth orbit (LEO). Space X and Boeing plan to reserve seats for the space tourists in order to send them with astronauts to the International Space Station during next year's mission (Weule and Hobb, 2020). Virgin Galactic declared that they already purchased 600 space travel tickets (Thomas, 2020).
Despite the demands of spacefaring, space travel involves a set of complicated protocols, because the tourists must ensure that they receive extensive training, such as underwater training in order to satisfy criteria for medical screening, learn and follow safety protocols, which includes mandatory quarantining, and gaining prior experience about dealing with weightlessness and high velocities (Blue et al., 2017; Reddy et al., 2012). The service providers must prepare the tourists physiologically and psychologically to behave and react in the outer space environment properly (Pletser et al., 2019). Gallagher et al. (2014: 391) indicated that the service providers should create “environments that invoke a new level of affective states, preparing commercial space flight passengers so that their entire belief systems are not jolted during their first flight to space.”
Even though there is a growing amount of research that is related to fundamental engineering, technology development, and health issue in space (Voorhies et al., 2019; Wu and Bonnet, 2017), there is a limited research about the general social aspects and the behaviours of space tourists in particular (Crouch et al., 2009; Olya and Han, 2020; Spector and Higham, 2019). One reason refers to misconceptions around legitimacy and reality of commercial space tourism. Furthermore, space development projects were hindered with spaceflight-related accidents and incidents. Despite the challenges, the positive attitudes and behaviours of potential tourists toward spacefaring contribute to the economy of the space industry, which is estimated to be worth USD 2.7 trillion by 2040 (Bank of America Merrill Lynch, 2017). Considering the aforementioned time-consuming efforts and strict measures, it is likely that the potential tourists will wish to withdraw at any stage of their trip. The tourists have rights to withdraw their applications, and the private spaceflight companies can secure financial benefits with the inclusion of the precautionary terms in the contract. Nonetheless, the sustainable success of the companies’ business model mainly relies on the completion of the missions that can stimulate the revisits and the recommendation intentions of space tourism. With this realisation, there is a need for research that addresses the avoidance intention of the space tourists, and this empirical study fills this gap by developing a conceptual model that is based on the push-pull-mooring (PPM) framework to predict the conditions that lead to the avoidance intention of space tourism. The PPM framework involves a wide range of challenges (push) and motivations (pull) that are considered by the tourists to make decisions on undertaking a space trip. This framework also includes mooring factors, which are composed of personal, social and cultural factors that moderate the impacts of push and pull factors on tourists’ intention. Mooring factors are important subjective indicators (e.g. sign value and self-esteem) that can strengthen or weaken effects of push and pull factors on individuals’ decisions. Hence, the PPM framework can capture a holistic view on interactions of drivers and hinders leading to space tourism avoidance.
This empirical study contributes to the current knowledge of the space tourist’s behaviour by adopting the PPM framework to address the four research questions (RQs). RQ1: What are the significant factors that influence the avoidance intention of the space tourists? RQ2: How to include the mooring factor to moderate the effects of the push and pull factors to reduce the avoidance intention of the space tourists? RQ3: What are the necessary conditions for the space tourists to avoid? RQ4: What PPM configurations stimulate the avoidance intention of the space tourists. We used a multi-analytical approach to respond to these questions, which are imperative to diminish the avoidance intention of the space tourists. This study investigated the effect of the push, pull, and mooring factors to address RQ1, which are treated as higher order factors, on the avoidance intention of space tourism. In response to RQ2, this study evaluated the moderation role of the mooring factor on the associations between the push and pull factors with the avoidance intention of space tourists. To address RQ3, this study performed the necessary condition analysis (NCA) to identify the necessary factors to avoid space tourism. In response to RQ4, this study conducted a fuzzy set-qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to explore algorithms, which included configurations that are combinations of the first-order factors of the push, pull, and mooring effects, that lead to the avoidance intention of the space tourists.
Theoretical framework
Avoidance intention
The avoidance intention refers to the degree that an individual intends to keep distance from a place or an event (Wu et al., 2008). There is numerous research in different disciplines that models people's intention to avoid negative stimuli or uncertain events. For example, Dai et al. (2020) investigated the user’s avoidance intention toward social media caused by frustration, fatigue, and information overload. Khan and Lee (2014) hypothesised that perceived risk, animosity, negative social influence, undesired self-conference, and attitude as predictors of avoidance intention of a specific brand. Kahlor et al. (2020) used the theory of planned behaviour to model avoidance intention toward risk information in the context of a natural threat. Avoidance intentions to be exposed by marketing communications, such as location-based advertising (Shin and Lin, 2016) and social media advertising (Li et al., 2019) were also investigated. Apart from the advertising benefits, which include the ads relevance and the sales promotions, the audiences deal with some types of dilemmas, and the hesitation to use these types of platforms by specifically using digital services involve different types of risk and uncertainty, which include privacy and safety concerns.
In travel research, there is a paucity of empirical research about the tourist’s avoidance intention, because the researchers are mainly interested in developing implications for the desired behaviours, which include undertaking a tour, repeat visits, and recommendation intentions, toward a destination and or an activity (Chi and Han, 2021; Han et al., 2018; Karagöz and Uysal, 2020; Mehran et al., 2020; Li et al., 2021). Nonetheless, there are forms of tourism, which are referred to as the so-called new tourism, that are involved in high levels of risks where adventure and uniqueness are outweighed by the risks of the activity (Boulais, 2017; Cater, 2006; Wang et al., 2019). This is important as models take actions that are not simply mirror opposites of the models in order to avoid that action (Olya, 2020). According to the cumulative prospect theory, the tourists use a judicious mixture of risks and benefits to make decisions, and depending on the type of activity risk, which can backfire, it is more likely that the tourists avoid the expected behaviours (Mehran et al., 2020). Specifically, in the case of space tourism, the risk factors, which include safety risks and psychological risks, significantly and adversely influence the space tourist’s behaviours (Olya and Han, 2020). This study attempted to understand why and how the potential tourists avoid space tourism.
Push-Pull-Mooring (PPM) framework
The PPM is rooted in the migration theory, which explains why people migrate from one place to another place (Bansal et al., 2005). The PPM is adopted as a holistic framework in order to stimulate the shifting behaviours or the switching behaviours of the individuals in different disciplines, such as transportation (Wang et al., 2020) and the airline industry (Jung et al., 2017). Based on the PPM, the negative stimuli push humans to move away from an event, whereas the positive forces pull humans to other events. Moreover, the mooring factor can moderate the effects of the push and pull factors on the undesired behaviours of the individuals, which include shifting, avoidance, and the intentions to unfollow. This study adopts the PPM framework to predict the avoidance intention of space tourism. The subsections below are dedicated to elaborate the relationships between the push, pull, and mooring factors with the individual’s intention.
Push effects
High perceived risks, high financial costs, and a lack of trust are used as push factors that increase the avoidance of space tourism. The potential tourist perceives a high level of risk due to different uncertainties that are attached to space tourism (Spector, 2020). Perceived risk refers to an individual's subjective evaluations of uncertainties and the possibility of losses attached to space tourism. This study considers the perceived risk as a push factor that may cause unfavourable behaviours, such as the avoidance intention of space tourism. Similar to the previous PPM research, Cheng et al. (2019) indicated that the privacy and security risks push users to avoid using their primary mobile personal cloud storage services.
Apart from the safety and security risks, high financial costs can increase the likelihood of the avoidance of space tourism. Crouch (2001) mentioned that at the early stage of space tourism, a portion of the customers are keen enough to take safety and financial risks of this trip in order to attain their life-time ambitions. However, in order to stimulate the demand and the sustainability of the business model, it is imperative to minimise the risks and the costs of space travel trips. This study contends that the lack of trust can act as a push factor for the space tourism avoidance intention. Jung et al. (2017) identified a significant linkage between low trust and giving up on flying with the airline that the tourists recently used. In automobile and hairstyling settings, a lack of trust is recognised as a push factor to avoid a service provider (Bansal et al., 2005). Specifically flying into space using rocket planes is a sophisticated process that requires advanced technology and spacecraft hardware design as well as huge investment to develop and update facilities and equipment to deliver reliable and quality service. Crouch et al. (2009) argues that the potential tourists trust national operators from Australia, Japan, and the UK, and they do not prefer to travel to space with Russian and Chinese operators. It is important that potential space tourists trust the service provider as the expectations from the tour operator in terms of technological advancement and service management is very high due to sophistication and costs of this trip.
Pull effects
The space experience, the opportunity for exploration, and the attractiveness of space are used as pull factors that can decrease the avoidance of space tourism. Space tourism offers a unique experience for the tourists, which is not similar to other travel experiences on the earth (Olya and Han, 2020). The space experience as a pull factor can motivate the potential tourists to not give up on spacefaring. In the hospitality context, Yan et al. (2019) applied the PPM to explain why tourists avoid hotels as Airbnb accommodations offer new experiences. In the context of space tourism, tourists would have the opportunity to explore new types of accommodation at space hotels that contain restaurants, bars, and gyms (Ravenscroft et al., 2021; Strickland, 2012). In the same vein, Lehto et al. (2015) used the PPM model to understand why the leisure travellers, which is in comparison to the business travellers, desire to explore new hotels, because they have more time to spend and enjoy their holiday. Beyond the hotel context, Jung et al. (2017) indicated that tourists avoid the airline they recently used, because new airlines may offer new opportunities, such as covering more air routes. Space trips involve a wide range of new exploratory opportunities that are new to the space tourists (Laing and Frost, 2019). For example, travelling with rockets and spacecraft to outer space offers unique opportunities such as exploring spacecraft launch processes, viewing the earth from space, observing space related jobs, services and daily life activities.
In the service dominant logic, attractiveness is used as a pull factor in the PPM research (Bansal et al., 2005). The attractiveness of a destination influences tourists’ decision making process. For example, Wu et al. (2015) argued that tourists visit a heritage site if they find the design and theme of the site attractive. Reddy et al. (2012) discussed that key reasons that entice space tourists are weightlessness and the unusual nature of space. Space agencies are working with businesses to develop and offer more exciting activities (e.g. space balloon, space burial, using a space hotel) to make space tourism more attractive (Hackl, 2020; Laing and Frost, 2019; Strickland, 2012). These attractions transform space trips from a scientific mission to an attractive experience and make it a more exciting and engaging trip to tourists. With this realisation, the attractiveness of space tourism is used as a pull factor that can address the avoidance of space tourism.
Mooring effects
The mooring effects involve personal, cultural, and social elements that influence the people's intention to travel to a new destination or stay in their current location (Jung et al., 2017; Hou et al., 2011; Moon, 1995). This study uses variety seeking, attitude, self-esteem, and the sign value as four mooring factors that affect the avoidance intention of space tourism. The novelty seeking concept is a subsect of variety-seeking theory (Keaveney, 1995). In the context of space tourism, the entire or one of the activities might be novel, nonetheless, variety seekers expect to experience a varied option of services and different activities within the space trip. Jung et al. (2017) used variety seeking as a personal characteristic, which had a mooring effect on the tourists’ intention to avoid the airline they used recently. Lehto et al. (2015) also found that variety seeking as a mooring factor stimulates the tourists to avoid staying at hotels, and they prefer to use peer-to-peer accommodations. In line with the previous research, this study investigates the mooring effect of variety seeking on the avoidance intention of space tourism.
Attitude as a mooring factor influences the behaviours of the customers in the service industries (Bansal et al., 2005). Khan and Lee (2014) found that consumers avoid a brand if they have a positive attitude toward other brands. This is the first study that measures the attitude toward space tourism and assumes that it can reduce the avoidance of space tourism. It assumes a positive attitude toward space tourism negatively associated with avoidance of space tourism. The sign value is used as a mooring factor to predict the avoidance intention of space tourism. A review of the literature shows that there is a scarcity of empirical research that investigates the role of the sign value in the tourist’s behaviours. “According to the theory of sign value, consumers’ needs are considered cultural constructions. Therefore, the signified value is seen as the social status enjoyed when people consume a particular product … By consuming certain signs, consumers can sense and enjoy a certain social status, while simultaneously developing new sign value” (Lin et al., 2015, 149). 600 people have already purchased space flight tickets, which included celebrities, from Virgin Galactic (Thomas, 2020). This study postulates that the sign value has a mooring effect on avoidance of space tourism, because socialising with fellow travellers sitting on the top of the social hierarchy keeps tourists motivated to not give up on going through the complicated process of space tourism. Self-esteem is recognised as a personality trait that could stimulate people to travel (Otoo, Kim, and Park, 2020). Space tourists with high self-esteem are likely to express interest in undertaking adventurous activity (Torres and Ridderstaat, 2021) and less likely they give up from the space journey.
Proposed research models
This study adopts the PPM framework in order to develop structural and configurational models to predict the avoidance intention of space tourism, which is shown in Figure 1. The structural model that is tested using structural equation modelling (SEM) investigates the impacts of the push, mooring, and pull factors on the avoidance intention of space tourism. The push, mooring, and pull factors are treated as higher order factors (Bansal et al., 2005). The first order factors for the PPM model are illustrated in Figure 1. The moderating role of the mooring factor on the push and pull effects to predict the avoidance intention is assessed.
The research model.
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first empirical research that evaluates the necessity of the PPM using the necessary conditions analysis (NCA). The necessary factors refer to the conditions that in their absence tourists avoid space tourism. The configurational model, which explores the configurations of the push, mooring, and pull factors using a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA), predicts algorithms for the avoidance intention of space tourism. The results of the structural and configurational model testing not only provide new theoretical insights but also help spaceflight companies to prevent conditions that lead to the avoidance of space tourism.
Measurement
A set of validated scales were extracted from previous research, which were then adopted to the space tourism setting. In regards to the push factors, six items were used from the study that conducted by Tseng and Wang (2016) to measure high perceived risk (HPR), three items were adopted from Jung et al. (2017) to assess the high financial costs, and four items were borrowed from Lombart and Louis (2014) and Loureiro and González (2008) to evaluate the lack of trust In terms of the mooring effect, variety seeking was measured using three items that were adapted from Jung et al. (2017) and Laurent and Kapferer (1985), the sign value was measured using three items adopted from Laurent and Kapferer (1985), and self-esteem was measured using three items borrowed from Amendah and Park (2008). To gauge the push effect, three items were used from Kang et al. (2016) to measure space experience. Also, three items that were used for opportunity for exploration and the four items that were used for attractiveness of space were derived from Kang et al. (2016) and Jung et al. (2017). The avoidance intention of space tourism was measured using three items adopted from Speck and Elliott (1997) and Yang and Kahlor (2013). All items were measured using a 7-point Likert scale “because respondents could judge and rate the scale items [better compared to other Likert scat] according to the mechanism of the human brain” (Olya and Al-ansi, 2018, 283). As an example, 7 represents a positive attitude and 1 represents a negative attitude toward space tourism. Items are listed in Table 1. The survey was designed in a way that the dependent variable, which included avoidance of the intention of space tourism, and the independent variables, which included the PPM factors, are not on the same page. This prevents the respondents from revisiting their answers in order to satisfy the implicit theory. This is a procedural remedy to control the common method variance (CMV) recommended by (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Another procedural remedy to reduce the CMV is using reverse coded items (Podsakoff et al., 2003). A third item of attractiveness of space, which included getting familiar with a new spacecraft while travelling to space is boring, is reversely coded. The age, gender, education level, and marital status are measured to describe the demographics of the survey participants. The survey includes an introduction section, which provides the aim of the study, two pictures, and concise information about space tourism. Four academics and three experts from the travel industry cross-checked the scale items and confirmed that the survey questions are clear and understandable.
Results of factor analysis, descriptive statistics and normality tests.
Results of factor analysis, descriptive statistics and normality tests.
Note: SFL: standardised factor loading; r: reverse coded item; Sources of scale items are presented in the parenthesis. Fit statistics: X2/df = 2.498 (X2 = 1346.441, df = 539); Comparative fit index (CFI) = .910; Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = .066.
The survey was pilot tested with 27 participants, the results showed that all the questions are easy to understand, and the survey completion has no issues, which include the timing and the format. Data was collected using a web-based survey (Qualtrics) which is a sensible approach to capture views of potential space tourists. As more than twenty million users registered in the online platform, this approach enables targeting individuals from a broader geographical location. Technically it is less likely that we could access rather rich data using other sampling approaches (e.g. convenience sampling). To target the most qualified respondents, the survey includes three filter questions and the survey was terminated for the respondents who failed to respond to these questions: Are you a variety seeker? Are you a heavy spender during travel? Are you interested in a unique and unusual experience? Because commercial space travel has been still an expensive trip for the majority of people while it could offer different and unique experiences, these filter questions can help target relevant respondents. In other words, potential space tourists are those who are ready to spend heavily for unique and different activities. The service provider that administered the survey ensures high integrity of data through handling methodological, regulatory and ethical, standard practices. Nonetheless, we acknowledge that obtaining data that could fully represent the views of those who registered for a commercial space travel issue is not currently feasible due to small sample and accessibility. With this realisation, we are confident that data collected from the web-based survey could meet the research objective on modelling avoidance intentions of potential space tourists. 400 participants were recruited and 32 cases were dropped from the dataset because they were incomplete. Also, 21 cases were screened out due to the procedural CMV check, which included a reversed coded item. The data analyses were conducted using 347 valid cases.
In terms of the gender, 49.3% (171) is female and 50.7% (176 cases) is male. 52 (15%) respondents were between 18–27 years old, 83 (23.9%) were between 28–37 years old, 79 (22.8%) were between 38–47 years old, 66 (19%) were between 48–57 years old, and 67 (19.3%) were older than 57 years. The average level of annual household income of three participants (.9%) is under $30k, six (1.7%) earned between $30,001–$60k, nine (2.6%) earned between $60,001–$90k, 44 (12.7%) earned between $90,001-$120k, 71 (20.5%) earned between $120,001-$150, 58 (16.7%) earned between $150,001-$180, and 156 (45%) earned over 180k. Twenty-seven participants (7.8%) have high-school diplomas, 128 (36.9%) have college degrees, 141 (40.6%) have master degrees, and 51 (14.7%) participants have PhD degrees. The majority of the participants (70.3%), which includes 244 cases, are married/couples, and 29.7% (103) are single.
A multi-analytical approach
The descriptive statistics, which include the mean and standard deviation, of the scale items were calculated. The normality of the data was tested using two measures of skewness and kurtosis. The reliability and validity of the scales were checked using the measurement model testing. The internal consistency of the constructs was evaluated using the Cronbach alpha (α) and the composite reliability (CR). Apart from the procedural remedy for the CMV explained in the previous subsection, a single Harmon’s factor test was used as a statistical remedy in order to check the CMV. According to the results, the CMV is not a major issue with the study measures, because no general factor with a high variance percentage emerged (Podsakoff et al., 2003). The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using AMOS 26.0 and a master validity tool to check the construct validity, which included the convergent and discriminant validity, and to fit the validity of the proposed model (Gaskin et al., 2019). The direct effects of the push, pull, and mooring factors on the avoidance intention of space tourism were tested using the SEM. The moderation effect of the mooring factor on the linkages between the push and pull factors with the avoidance intention was also evaluated. Using the NCA, the necessity of the push, pull, and mooring factors to avoid space tourism was assessed. The configurational modelling was conducted using the fsQCA 2.5 in order to explore algorithms from the combinations of the pull, push, and mooring factors that lead to the avoidance intention of space tourism.
Results and discussions
Measurement model testing
The results of the means, standard deviations, normality tests, and factor analysis are provided in Table 1. The data is normally distributed, because the values for the skewness and kurtosis fall within the recommended range of ± 3. During the CFA, one item from attractiveness of space and one item from perceived risk are deleted due to low factor loadings, which included standardised factor loadings < .5. All the items assigned to the relevant factors are loaded sufficiently and significantly, which included standardised factor loading (SFL) values >.5 and p < 001. According to the fit statistics measures, the proposed model fits the empirical data, because they meet the recommended criteria satisfactory (X2/df = 2.498, comparative fit index = .910, and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = .066).
The Cronbach alpha and the CR values for all the constructs were above the commonly accepted level of .07, which indicate the study measures are reliable (Table 2). The average variance extracted (AVE) is computed for all the constructs, and the AVE values are above .5, which confirm the convergent validity of the scale items (Hair et al., 1998). To check the discriminant validity, the heterotrait-monotrait ratio (HTMT) is calculated. Table 2 shows that the HTMT values are smaller than .85, which support the discriminant validity of the study measures (Henseler, Ringlet and Sarstedt, 2015).
Results of the reliability, convergent, and discriminant validity.
Results of the reliability, convergent, and discriminant validity.
Note: HTMT: heterotrait-monotrait ratio.
The results from the maximum likelihood estimation of the SEM for the direct effects of the push, pull, and mooring factors are illustrated in Figure 2. According to the results, the push factor increases the avoidance intention of space tourism (β = .569 and p < .001). The avoidance of space tourism is reduced by the mooring factor (β = −.120 and p < .05) and pull factor (β = −.370 and p < .001). The R-square is .480, which means that 48% of variation of the avoidance intention of space tourism is explained by the push, pull, and mooring factors. The proposed model is fitted with the empirical data (X2/df = 2.139, CFI = .942, and RMSEA = .079).
Direct impacts of the push mooring, and the pull factors on the avoidance intention of space tourism.
In order to assess the moderation role of the mooring effect, the data is divided into two mooring groups, which included a low group (164 cases) and a high group (183 cases), using a K-means cluster analysis (Hair et al., 2014). Prior to comparing the structural difference across the two mooring groups, we performed invariance tests for the measurement model. Using the chi-square difference test, the unconstrained model is compared to the fully constrained model. Table 3 shows that both the unconstrained and the fully constrained models are a good fit to the data. The results of the chi-square difference test showed that the two measurement models are not significantly different (Δx2 (9) = 11.436 and p > .05). These results supported the full-metric invariance, which is a green light for a test of the structural model variation.
Results of measurement model invariance and comparison of structural model across two mooring groups.
Results of measurement model invariance and comparison of structural model across two mooring groups.
Note: ***: p < .001.
The moderation role of the mooring factor was tested using the critical ratio, and the results are provided in Table 3. The effect of the push factor on the avoidance intention for the low mooring group (β = .510 and p < .001) does not significantly differ from the high mooring (β = .438 and p < .001) group (z-score = .347 and p > .05). This means that the mooring factor does not moderate the association between the push factor and the avoidance intention of space tourism. However, the mooring factor moderates the linkage between the pull factors and the avoidance intention of space tourism (z-score = −4.002 and p < .001). Table 3 shows that the effect of the pull factor for the high mooring group (β = −.672 and p < .001) is stronger than the effect for the low mooring group (β = −.389 and p < .001).
This result sounds promising, because the mooring factor strengthens the impact of the pull factor on the avoidance intention of space tourism. These results are in line with Jung et al. (2017), which concluded that the mooring factor does not moderate the path of the push factor and the tourist’s intention. However, an interaction of the pull factor with the mooring factor reduces the intentions of the tourists to avoid the airline that they recently used. These results are slightly different from Wang et al. (2020) who found that the mooring factor moderates both links between the push and pull factors with the shifting intentions of the drivers to green transportation. We contend that these heterogeneous results refer to the context of the study regarding how individuals evaluate the significance of the push factor in the equation. The tourists can take risks and costs involved in the context of green transportation, while risks and costs of air travel and space tourism are substantial enough to avoid the travel as they outweigh the benefits.
The results from the NCA indicating the necessity of the push, pull, and mooring factors to avoid space tourism is provided in Table 4. The necessary factors should receive a consistency that is above .9 (Gannon et al., 2019). According to the results, the tourists necessarily avoid space tourism in the absence of the pull effect (consistency: .998). Similarly, the avoidance of space tourism is inevitable in the absence of the mooring effect (consistency: .995). The synthesis of the SEM results with the NCA indicate that the pull and mooring effects are significant and necessary factors that drive the avoidance intention of space tourism. Even though the push factor significantly stimulates the avoidance intention, the tourists still may avoid space tourism in the absence of the push factor (unnecessary).
Necessary push, pull, and mooring factors to avoid space tourism.
Necessary push, pull, and mooring factors to avoid space tourism.
Note: ∼: negation, the bolded item represents the necessary effect.
The results from the configurational analysis using the fsQCA are presented in Table 5. The fsQCA explores algorithms from a combination of the first-order factors of the PPM model, which provide deeper insights of the conditions where the tourists avoid space tourism. According to the results from the push effect configuration, the tourists avoid space tourism if they find high risks and costs attached to this trip (Push1HPR*HFC – coverage: .694 and consistency: .443). The space tourists may perceive a wide range of risks including functional risk (service quality/equipment failure), safety risk (physical danger or injury), and psychological risk if they want to take a space trip. This is in accordance with Olya and Han (2020) who used the cumulative prospect theory to highlight the significance of the risk factors to stimulate the behaviour intentions of the space tourists. In line with Crouch’s (2001) discussion on the market of space tourism, the pull strategy needs to target risk-taker tourists who embrace the trip’s costs in order to ensure their dreams come true.
Results of the configurational modelling using the fsQCA.
Results of the configurational modelling using the fsQCA.
Note: HPR: high perceived risk, HFC: high financial cost, AT: attitude toward space tourism, VS: variety seeking, SE: self-esteem, SV: sign value SE: space experience, OfO: opportunity for exploration, *: and, ∼: negation.
The configurational modelling of the mooring effect shows two algorithms for the avoidance intention of space tourism (coverage: .058 and consistency: .823). Algorithm M1∼At*VS*SE*∼SV indicates that the tourists with a negative attitude toward space tourism and low sign values most likely avoid space tourism, even though they are variety seekers and have high self-esteem. According to algorithm M2∼At*VS*∼SE*SV, the variety seeker tourists with high sign values most likely avoid space tourism because of their low self-esteem and negative attitude toward space tourism.
In terms of the pull effect, the tourists avoid space tourism if they are not interested in experiences involving outer space and space exploration (Pull1∼SE*∼OfO - coverage: .992; consistency: .446). This is similar to Olya and Han (2020) who found the space experience and the opportunity for information acquisition are significant and necessary motivations for the tourists to undertake space tourism.
This empirical study contributes to the current knowledge of the tourist’s behaviours by adopting the PPM framework in order to predict the avoidance intentions regarding space tourism. This is important, because the tourists who avoid space tourism at any stage of their trip have substantial consequences for the tourists who failed to achieve their ambitions as well as for the commercial spaceflight companies in order to ensure the sustainability of their businesses. Using a multi-analytical approach, this study revealed that the push factor is significant, but it is an unnecessary factor to avoid space tourism. This means a high level of the push effect can result in an avoidance intention. However, it does not necessarily stimulate the avoidance of space tourism.
The mooring and pull factors are significant and necessary in order to reduce the avoidance of space tourism. These results indicate that commercial spaceflight companies need to consider a wide range of mooring factors (attitude toward space tourism, variety seeking, sign value, self-esteem) along with pull factors (space experience, opportunity for exploration, and attractiveness of space tourism) in the marketing and operation services in order to keep the tourist’s motivation high, so they don’t give up taking this trip. The results from the moderation test of the mooring factor showed that the effect of the pull factors on the avoidance intention is not significantly different across the two high and low mooring groups. However, the impact of the pull effect on reducing the avoidance intention is stronger for the high mooring group in comparison with the low mooring group. According to these results, we recommend developing marketing plans that target potential tourists who have a positive attitude to tourism, strong appetite to seek various adventures, and high sign value and self-esteem. Marketing department of space agencies could be creative to link these characteristics with occupations of people. For example, celebrities and influencers possibly have higher levels of sign values and self-esteem. Furthermore, we advise conducting a short survey at the early engagement of the marketing department with space tourism applicants to ensure they have a positive attitude toward space tourism and are interested in exploring different experiences.
The findings from the configurational modelling extends our understanding of the interaction of the first-order factors, which includes the algorithm, of the PPM model in order to explain the conditions where tourists avoid space tourism. The service providers need to know the combination of the high risks and the costs, resulting in the avoidance of space tourism. Obviously reduced the cost of tickets could mitigate perceived financial costs of space travel. Another possible solution is providing effective communication and educating space tourists to address functional and safety risks and lack of trust This is in line with Mehran et al. (2020) and Olya and Al-Ansi (2018) that suggested participation in risky tourism activities could be improved through informative programmes and risk communication plans. To this end, space agencies can offer virtual and or physical tours to familiarise the tourists with the thorough process of a space flight. Regarding the mooring effect, the marketers can exclude the variety-seeker tourists who have high self-esteem but have low sign values and negative attitude toward space tourism, so they will most likely avoid the trip. As the space trip currently is a very pricy service for many, still affordable to wealthy people, in accordance with conspicuous consumption theory (Wang and Griskevicius, 2014), people with high sign value and positive attitude toward tourism take space trips as an opportunity to show off to peers. This means marketers could strategically develop personalised marketing communication tactics for people with high sign value and positive toward space tourism.
This study extends the space tourism literature, because it measures and tests the role of the sign value and the attitude of the space tourists toward space travel. An alternative algorithm for the avoidance of space tourism refers to the profile of the tourists with negative attitude toward space tourism and low self-esteem, even though they are variety-seekers and appreciate the sign value. In terms of the pull effect, the marketing managers, which is in regards to their communications throughout the process, should not miss the opportunity to highlight how spacefaring is a chance to experience and explore outer space. The lack of interest regarding experiencing and exploring space leads to the avoidance of space tourism.
The study has several limitations that can be used as opportunities for further research. First, this study used the cross-sectional data from the members of a web-based data collection platform. The future studies can approach individuals who already purchased 600 tickets from Virgin Galactic and then conduct the longitudinal research by collecting data from other commercial spaceflight companies, such as SpaceX, Boeing, Orion Span, and Blue Origin. Orion Span will be offering the world's first luxury hotel in outer space and research about the behaviours of the potential tourists who are in the luxury hotels in space, which is suggested as a pathway for future research. Second, we used a multi-analytical approach (fsQCA), which is a bridge between the qualitative and the quantitative methods, to capture a deeper insight of the space tourist’s behaviours. Nonetheless, conducting qualitative studies and more specifically in-depth interviews with those who already visited outer space can provide pragmatic perspectives toward the space tourist’s behaviours. Third, most space tourism research, such as this study, focused on the views of the potential tourists. However, our knowledge about the service providers, which includes the technical support staff that is working for the spaceflight companies, is minimal. As the mooring and pull effects appear as significant and necessary factors in order to avoid space tourism, the frontline employee’s behaviours and internal marketing can play key roles to diminish the intentions of the tourists to avoid space tourism. Drawing on the theory of change (Olya, 2020), it is imperative to involve all the stakeholders in co-designing the commercial space tourism services in order to maximise the socio-economic impacts of this business.
Footnotes
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.
