Heritage tourism brand experiences: The influence of emotions and emotional engagement

Abstract

Despite growing research on the role of emotions in tourist experiences, there is limited research on how emotional engagement enhances the brand experience at tourist heritage sites, in particular when negative or mixed emotions are involved. The aim of the research is to explore how emotional engagement influences heritage tourism brand experiences (HTBEs). This study provides an understanding of the type of mixed emotions that are experienced by visitors during heritage tourism brand engagement and how their emotional engagement influences HTBEs. Data for this study came from 36 interviews conducted with visitors who participated in an HTBE – the Australian New Zealand Army Corps (ANZAC) Gallipoli; and supported by other data triangulation methods including photos, journals and memo analyses. Findings not only reveal several mixed emotions that influence the heritage brand experience but also uncover the factors (such as story-showing) that elicit these mixed emotions. The research makes an explicit theoretical contribution through a heritage tourist brand framework that explains the process of emotional engagement during heritage tourist brand experiences.

Keywords

Heritage tourism brand experience mixed emotions emotional engagement heritage tourism heritage brand

Introduction

Heritage tourism research did not really take off until the mid 1990s when O'Leary et al. (1998) identified it as one of the fastest growing sub-disciplines of tourism. However, until the mid-2010s, heritage tourism research has mostly been focussed on attempts to conceptualise and clarify the term heritage tourism (Poria et al., 2001; Santa and Tiatco 2019 and Poria et al. 2003), so it should be noted that heritage tourism research is still in its fledging phase, which in itself calls for more research. Alongside this proliferation of tourism heritage research, heritage tourism brands emerged as a significant stream of research. Scholars have attempted to establish heritage brand creation (Ryan and Silvanto 2009); heritage brand awareness (Dewar et al., 2012); heritage brand legitimacy (Chen and Lee 2021), heritage brand management (Lak et al., 2020), heritage brand communication (Ukpabi and Karjaluoto 2017) and to a large extent, heritage brand marketing (Fyall and Schrils, 2022; Donohoe, 2012; Gardiner et al. 2022; Pennington and Thomsen 2010). Within marketing, research on heritage brand experiences (Mencarelli et al., 2020) is gaining momentum with researchers attempting to understand the relationship between visitor motivations, interactions and experiences with heritage tourism brands (Butler et al., 2014; Di Pietro et al., 2018; Chen and Rahman 2018; Jewell and Crotts 2009; Su, Ngueyn et al. 2020; Prayag Alrawadieh and Alrawadieh 2021. Despite this knowledge, our understanding of the emotions visitors experience when engaging with tourism brand experiences is still fragmented. For example, Mencarelli et al. (2020) argue that consumers can feel emotional dissonance about heritage brands due to prior perceptions of the heritage brand, but what causes this dissonance was not established. Prior research has shown that visitor emotions are a critical component of tourism experiences (Nawijn and Biran 2018; Oren et al. 2021; Prayag and Del Chiappa, 2021) but there has not been an overarching exploration that shows the development of emotional engagement with heritage tourism brand experiences (HTBEs).

In heritage tourism experiences, destination managers make a special effort to maintain the originality of heritage sites (Magee and Gilmore, 2015) by evoking emotions (Hede and Hall, 2012) to create stronger emotional and spiritual outcomes (Hall et al., 2018). Emotional experiences have been shown to have lasting effects on visitors, leading them to recommend these places to family and friends (Hall et al., 2010). Although both experiences and emotions have been examined in regard to tourism (Hede and Hall, 2012; Sigala and Steriopoulos, 2021), research on how emotional engagement specifically influences heritage brand experiences is less explicit (Schmitt, 2012) and there have been recent calls for researchers to explore this (Pallant et al., 2022; Tasci et al., 2016).

Within the limited studies on emotions and heritage tourism, it has been found that visitors use the opportunity to emotionally engage with heritage places in search for authentic experiences (Munar and Ooi, 2012). This discovery of emotional engagement at heritage sites offers the opportunity for further exploration, but more importantly, it raises a need for a conceptual framework that advances theory regarding emotional engagement during heritage tourist brand experiences. Nawijn and Biran (2018) examined the role of emotions in heritage tourism, and how they influence the creation of meanings. They revealed that contexts are crucial in how emotions are influenced to create meanings and therefore call for further research on the role of emotions in heritage tourism, with a particular focus on negative emotions at different contexts and their influence on HTBE. Most recently, Oren et al. (2021) cautioned that empirical research has thus far neglected the influence of negative or mixed emotions on heritage tourism research, and yet this understanding could be the crucial missing link that bridges the gap between emotional engagement and HTBEs.

This research aims to address these current theoretical gaps on tourist emotional experiences by examining mixed emotions felt by consumers as they relate to a heritage brand at a tourism destination. The major theoretical contribution of this study is the newly developed framework on emotional engagement during heritage tourist brand experiences. Practically, this framework will guide destination brand managers and marketers, and more specifically heritage tourist brand marketeers, to understand how emotional engagement can influence heritage brand experiences.

Given the gaps within heritage tourism, heritage brand experiences and the lack of empirical research that explains the relationships between mixed emotions and HTBEs, the overall aim of this study is to explore how visitors engage emotionally with HTBEs. Aligned with this aim, the two primary research questions for this study are (1) What types of mixed emotions are experienced by visitors during heritage tourism brand engagement? and (2) How does emotional engagement influence HTBEs? The main contribution of this study is a theoretical framework drawn from empirical insights that explains the influence of mixed emotions on HTBEs that would be foundational for future scholars advancing the marketing and management of tourism heritage brands.

Literature review

HTBEs

A brand experience definition is drawn from the Pine and Gilmore (1998) framework of experience economy, whereby it is suggested that consumers want more than just a brand; they want experiences. Schmitt (2012) built on the experience economy framework suggesting that consumers are emotionally influenced by the brand experience. In heritage brand experiences, consumers interact with the heritage brand, the consumer and the experience (Mencarelli et al., 2020). The same authors claim a brand can be conceptualised as heritage, if it carries strong historical elements and if consumers are immersed in an experience where they are led to ‘discover, learn and extend their knowledge’ (Mencarelli et al., 2020, p.32). This suggests that heritage brands can also create an immersive and memorable experience (Cifci, 2021). As in heritage tourism experiences, where both positive and negative emotions influence outcomes in relation to visitor satisfaction (Hede and Hall, 2012), heritage brand experiences may also have influential elements such as cultural and historical assets (Mencarelli et al., 2020) or influence positive emotions (Rose et al. 2016). These can lead to spiritual effects following deep emotional engagement (Hall et al., 2018). Accordingly, heritage tourist brand experiences can be conceptualised as those where emotions are released during interactivity between the consumer, heritage brand in a heritage tourist setting.

In evaluating the future of brand experiences, Schmitt et al. (2015) call for research in how various settings can influence the brand experience; they also call for additional focus on stories and the role they play during immersive settings. Since destinations aim to create memorable tourist experiences (Coelho et al., 2018), heritage site managers may rely on cultural elements and storytelling to educate tourists and enhance the overall experience (Mossberg, 2008). Indeed, historical elements and narratives help brand the heritage experience. For example, Magee and Gilmore (2015) highlight the role site managers play in narrating the history of Auschwitz during the natural geographical place. The natural heritage elements help conceptualise the heritage experience in Auschwitz as spiritual and transformative. Pallant et al. (2022) assert that individuals pursue customised settings however this has not been empirically validated. This research will therefore clarify the type of heritage brand experience consumers undergo in a specific heritage setting and will extend knowledge in the field of heritage tourist brand experiences.

The role of emotions in heritage tourism

While there is no universal agreement in defining emotions (Richins, 1997) the study adopts the key concept by Richins (1997) who proposes that emotions are responses during consumption. In tourism, a definition by Hosany et al. (2021: 1392) states that ‘Emotions represent distinct mental states (e.g., joy, anger, or fear)’. In the context of heritage tourism, the authors adopt the definition whereby emotions are instant responses during heritage consumption. The literature focuses on the role of emotions in tourism experiences at destinations with links to perceived image, behavioural intentions (Prayag et al., 2017), nostalgic feelings, motivation and perceived authenticity (Prayag and Del Chiappa, 2021), evoked emotions and spiritual effects at heritage sites (Hede and Hall, 2012). The literature also suggests that the environment where the experience takes place can influence emotions (Volo, 2021) and that emotions can influence tourist perspectives (Hosany et al., 2021; Volo, 2021). This suggests that heritage environments can influence tourist emotions. Studies have also highlighted emotional intensity at heritage tourism with a particular focus on the influence of positive emotions relating to satisfaction and revisitation (Prayag et al., 2017; Prayag et al., 2013). However, the studies by these authors largely focus on positive emotions and neglect the outcomes based on mixed or negative emotions. Oren et al. (2021) explored visitor emotions during a visit to the Auschwitz Death Camp and its relationship to the perceived benefits and quality of experience. These authors found that negative emotions can influence the heritage experience positively; therefore, they contest previous claims that negative emotions have negative outcomes (Tuerlan et al., 2021). While Zheng et al. (2020) contradict this claim, the authors also assert that negative feelings can still create meanings via learnings that take place at original settings. Due to the contradicted views on the role of negative emotions and more broadly mixed emotions, the influence of emotions on the consumer experience affords further exploration in customised settings.

Zheng et al. (2020) conducted an empirical study of visitors to a heritage site in China and found that negative emotions have no direct influence on meanings, however, this is challenged by Oren et al. (2021) who claim that negative emotions can positively influence the visitor experience. In another study by Hede and Hall (2012) the authors classify clusters of positive and negative emotions during visitation to Gallipoli and highlighted ‘joy’ ‘sadness’ and ‘love’ being key emotions in the heritage experience. An empirical exploration of the Gallipoli experience revealed visitors experience spiritual feelings and meanings (Hall et al., 2018). This is affirmed by Zheng et al. (2020) who claim mixed emotional experiences at heritage settings can also create meaningful outcomes.

It is generally accepted that there are various emotions that are released during heritage tourist experiences. The intensity of emotions felt at a heritage site may also lead to individualised meanings (Gatewood and Cameron, 2004) and can influence the level of satisfaction provided by a memorable trip (Tung and Ritchie, 2011). Given the mixed views on the role of mixed emotions in the heritage experience and the importance of the topic for destination branding (Morgan et al., 2003), researchers have called for further studies to clarify the key players in experiences and the type of emotions that occur (Teoh et al., 2021 and Nawijn and Biran, 2018).

Emotional engagement and heritage tourism brands

The concept of heritage is predominantly linked with history and the connection with the past (Balmer, 2011) while engagement has been conceptualised as having four foci: online customer engagement, tourist engagement, customer brand engagement and customer engagement behaviour (Hao, 2020). Recent studies have noted that emotional engagement consists of one facet alongside cognitive and behavioural concepts (Rather et al., 2021). These authors contend first time visitors tend to be project cognitive aspects during first-time visitation while emotional engagement would occur during repeat visitation. The authors also claim that there are psychological factors during engagement with tourist brands (So et al., 2012) and can influence brand loyalty (So et al., 2016).

Emotional Engagement with historical elements can create personal meanings (Gatewood and Cameron, 2004) and enhance identities during heritage tourism (Hyde and Harman, 2011). For example, Hyde and Harman (2011) claim consumer motivation to attend Gallipoli is highly identity related due to visitors having past connections with the site. These connections may be linked with ancestors who took part in a historical campaign, the Australian New Zealand Army Corps (ANZAC) campaign. The ANZAC heritage experience in Gallipoli is based on ‘ story-showing’ where tourists learn about the campaign that took place during the First World War. With heritage pertaining to historical components, monuments and symbols (Balmer, 2011) the ANZAC experience in Gallipoli is conceptualised as a heritage tourist brand experience due to the heritage elements of the site.

Visitors to tourist heritage sites can be guided by goal-driven motivations releasing lasting positive feelings and connections to sites (Hamid et al., 2020). They may also feel connected with the heritage brand when learning is being offered during the experience, which enhances cultural value (Mencarelli et al., 2020). Accordingly, story-showing and cultural elements may play a significant role in the individual's relationship with heritage brands and may strengthen their identity relationship with the place or destination. Consumers can also develop long-term memories when they are positively influenced by emotions and authenticity during a brand experience (Manthiou et al., 2018). Key elements such as environmental and social connectedness, reflective opportunities and emotions, are central to the formation of memorable experiences (De Feyter et al., 2012). In a study by Bryce et al. (2015) the authors found that visitors at a Japanese authentic heritage site projected a strong self-connection during engagement. However, few studies have thoroughly unpacked the link between emotions, intensity and heritage tourist brands. (Mencarelli et al., 2020). Mencarelli et al. (2020) posits the heritage brand experience is a complex phenomenon that affords further exploration. The added complexity of mixed emotions and intensity (Gatewood and Cameron, 2004) in heritage brand experiences affords further exploration (Oren et al., 2021). In particular, this research will highlight the process of emotional engagement during heritage tourist brand experiences.

In summary, the literature suggests that there are links between the concepts of mixed emotions, emotional engagement and heritage tourist brand experiences. Literature on place branding (Ooi and Stöber, 2010) suggests that emotional engagement may also be influential in strengthening the tourist relationship with cultural heritage brands. Visitors may become attached to heritage places and sites that are historically important, and this attachment may influence their identity-based relationship (Minkiewicz et al., 2008) and lasting feelings about a tourist brand. The emotions experienced at tourist places may also strengthen the connectedness with a particular destination (Cameron and Gatewood, 2003). These place brands may also become cultural symbols for nations (He et al., 2020). With authors calling for clarification on the role of emotions and specifically the dimension of negative emotions (Nawijn and Biran, 2018; Oren et al., 2021), and recognising the need to explore how visitors engage with heritage tourist brands (Mencarelli et al., 2020), this article aims to extend theory pertaining to the process of visitor emotional engagement with tourist brands during heritage tourist brand experiences.

Research design

This study draws on cross-disciplinary perspectives situated in consumer behaviour, tourism and branding theories. Specifically, the research required a deeper understanding of how emotional engagement influences HTBE. Therefore, the research adopted phenomenology as an approach to this study, and within it, a qualitative methodology in order to delve into the lived experience of the individual (Creswell, 2013). A phenomenologist's aspiration is to express any experience in terms of what was experienced and how it was experienced (Vagle, 2018), which is very much aligned with the two research questions for this study – what types of emotions are experienced and how does emotional engagement in turn influence experience. Social scientists use qualitative methods when examining human-related issues (Creswell, 2013) and multiple meanings based on individual experiences with the intent to create new theory (Creswell and Creswell, 2018). Giorgi and Giorgi (2003) discuss the use of a phenomenological approach to data collection as an effective method to capture the lived experiences of a range of participants with a focus on how these unfold from the participants point of view. All evidence is seen with ‘fresh eyes’ and the stories as they are presented by participants are accepted in their entirety. The stories are read as a complete and whole presentation of the personal experience, before analysing sections for meaning. The meanings are then further analysed for relevance to the research and the participants stories. As this work is focused on emotion types and emotional engagement, the descriptions and meanings of the psychological elements, emotions and feelings, is a critical component (Giorgi and Giorgi, 2003). A similar approach has been used by Sarkar (2014) who explored the concept of brand love, and found that consumers indeed interact with and love at least one brand.

Sampling

A purposeful sampling technique (Creswell, 2013) was used to recruit participants with experience of the ANZAC heritage brand and tourism experience. An email was sent only to prospective participants with relevant experience using a third-party travel agent. After ethics approval had been granted, an initial email was sent via a travel database, to 300 participants who had visited Gallipoli. Using the third-party travel database ensured that participant confidentiality could be fully maintained. From this recruitment phase, 100 replies were received. A further reduction of the sample occurred as participants self-selected based on time and availability. Participants were recruited nationwide which ensured that data saturation would be reached (O'Reilly and Parker, 2012). The participants had all attended the specific experience and age and gender were varied. The sampling technique was in line with other researchers who adopted phenomenological approaches when analysing consumer experiences with brands (Grace and O’Cass, 2002).

Data collection

Data were gathered via semi-structured interviews to capture the visitors’ experiences and emotional engagement with the heritage brand. The questionnaire was designed to elicit the participants’ stories of their lived experiences and their personal perceptions of their emotions. As participants were dispersed throughout Australia, interview techniques were conducted by phone in order to obtain an adequate sample for analysis, while also ensured that the researcher could deal with some of the difficulties relating to the sensitivity of the topic (Holt, 2010). Phone interviews made participants feel comfortable and allowed the researcher to develop a rapport with the interviewees (Sampson, 2004). Initially, the main researcher conducted two interviews as a pilot project to give an indication of the experiences and clarity of questions and the timeframe required to collect the data (Sampson, 2004). The interview questions were modified as necessary with probing questions added (Appendix Table A1). The length of the interviews varied from 20 min to 1 h, and were recorded and transcribed verbatim.

Ahn et al., (2009) advocate that rich experiences that are recalled after a period of time feel longer and have lasting effects. The interviews began three (3) months after the experience and the interview process took a total of six (6) months to complete. Following Fusch et al. (2018) method of triangulation, the researchers ensured evidence was collected from different sources. Participants were given the choice to contribute additional material for the analysis as data triangulation source, therefore evidence consisted of additional photos and journals were collected (Table 1). For this same reason, researcher memos were also added as data source.

Table 1.

Data sources.

Total number of files analysed in QSR NVivo (n = 72)

Interviews (n = 36)

Photographs (n = 22)

Journals (n = 3)

Researcher memos (n = 11)

Data analysis

Transcriptions were imported into NVivo (Bazeley and Jackson, 2013) using pseudonyms. One of the challenges when transcribing interviews is to ensure accuracy. Therefore the main researcher listened to the recordings multiple times and transcribed the interviews without editing. Using the steps suggested by Vagle (2018) to capture meanings accurately, the entire text was read as a holistic document before moving to a line-by-line reading and the identification of emerging patterns.

The data were analysed using a combination of deductive (theory driven) and inductive (new themes emerge) methods (Fereday and Muir-Cochrane, 2006; Saldana, 2016). Thematic analytical approaches recommended by Braun and Clarke (2006) and Vagle (2018) were used due to the complexity of the phenomenon and the need to obtain the participants’ constructions. A content analysis of emotive words was also conducted to explore the role of mixed emotions, and in particular the role that negative emotions played in the brand experience (Fusch et al., 2018). The researchers identified patterns of meaning and were flexible regarding the changing of codes and creating new ones by allowing ‘in vivo’ codes during the initial coding phase (Creswell, 2013). As sub-themes emerged, some were linked back to theory and new ones allowed the researcher to reflect on the most appropriate grouping in the next phase (Saldana, 2016). The next phase used interpretive coding, (Miles and Huberman, 1994), to examine relationships among codes; the final step involved merging codes into categories which led to the creation of key components.

To achieve code validation the researcher utilised two external qualitative experts to blind code two interviews. This step ensured the analytical process took into consideration the additional step of verifying researcher understandings (Morrow et al., 2015). The external coding showed a match of 86% when compared to the primary coding. Following a discussion on the discrepancy, the coding list was refined. In addition, a rigorous process was used to ensure trustworthiness and authenticity of the data, a key step in qualitative enquiry, as proposed by Tracy (2010).

The rigor and validity (Fusch et al., 2018) of the research method was ensured through the following steps:

The recruitment process and sampling technique were in line with previous researchers examining aspects of this field.

A semi-structured questionnaire was used to ensure that all participants were interviewed using the same guidelines.

Data saturation was reached at 32 interviews but all interviews were conducted to ensure that all types of participants were included.

Data triangulation was ensured as participants supplied photographs and journals to support their recollections, providing recalled data, visual data and data recorded during the experience.

The coding process was reviewed by three researchers to ensure coding relevance and consistency.

The categorisation of words was influenced by prior research (Figure 1) (Hsieh and Shannon, 2005). Words were grouped according to clusters as outlined by Hede and Hall (2012) with positive dimensions relating to the emotional cluster of love, joy, thrill, compassion, pride and negative dimensions relating to the emotional cluster of anger, fear and sadness. Frequencies were counted to determine the dominant emotional dimension (Krippendorff, 2018).

Context of the research study

Gallipoli (Turkey) is perceived as the heritage setting where the ANZAC story was born. The context was chosen due the significance of the place as a long-haul heritage destination. Governments invest significant funds for the preservation of the heritage site (Lagos et al., 2015) with recent funding of 4.9 million allocated for the creation of additional heritage trails to revive the Gallipoli experience (Greekreporter, 2022). Due to consumer demand for heritage consumption, the Australian government placed restrictions for attendance during the centenary commemorations. The ongoing demand for the heritage experience in Gallipoli threatens the viability of the place (Lagos et al., 2015). It, therefore, presents a worthy context for exploration in order to preserve the spiritual experience sought during emotional engagement.

Figure 1.

Snapshot of first-order categorisation.

The heritage experience in Gallipoli is a customised experience organised by tour operators and includes visits to various key sites of the brand story such as ANZAC Cove, Chunuk Bair, trenches, graves and monuments. It is also noteworthy that the terms heritage tourism and secular pilgrimage are used interchangeably. Due to the challenging geographical aspects of the site (5 h distance from Istanbul) visitors undertake organised tours with customised itineraries. The visit to Gallipoli is linked to those who died in the First World War (Hall et al., 2010), therefore itineraries usually include sites where soldiers had fought in 1915, while historians and experts use storytelling techniques and provide opportunities for reflection on learnings at key sites. The use of expert guides for authentic narration is an important dimension during a customised heritage brand experience (Gursoy et al., 2021). The ANZAC story is usually narrated by expert historians at various authentic sites suggesting consumers sought to consume the heritage brand at authentic place (Ooi and Stöber, 2010). In the context of this research, the HTBE and the interaction the consumer has with the heritage brand (ANZAC) in Gallipoli, the original site where the ANZAC campaign took place, the heritage place (Gallipoli) is an important empirical context to explore emotions and emotional engagement.

Findings

This study was interested in answering two main questions: (1) What types of mixed emotions are experienced by visitors during HTBE? and (2) How does emotional engagement influence HTBE?

Mixed emotions

The HTBE led visitors to undergo instant emotions influenced by elements of storytelling. As participants were describing the brand story and reviving images, they would express their mixed emotions predominantly sadness which turned into feelings of relatedness. As Rita revived those images and narrated the story, she commented on how the soldiers were lowered down from the ship and started rowing in. She could feel ‘the oars in the water’ and that influenced her emotional intensity, as she felt a mixture of positive and negative instant emotions. Bethany, felt an emotional intensity, influenced by negative emotions, which she described as overwhelming sadness, especially as she learnt the story from the knowledge experts and saw how her own mother was trying to deal with her own feelings:

I also felt at times there's an overwhelming sadness. I know mum had a moment, a day when she was incredibly angry, she felt so angry about the loss of her father and the connection … just the sense of helplessness that major world events kind of take over and had that major effect. [Bethany]

Rachelle felt intense negative emotions and, as she learnt more about the brand story, these emotions became positive feelings which strengthened her connection to the brand. Sharing the experience with others was also an important factor for Tara who enjoyed being among others and experiencing mixed emotions:

It was so moving. I cried my eyes out, I’m glad I did it to be aware of what a big sacrifice it was, and I think a lot of young people especially don’t really understand it and probably just skip over it, but it was really good to go and experience it, just to see what a big thing it actually was. [Rachelle]

A lot of sadness of course. Pride. I enjoyed being with other people who were experiencing the same thing. We met some wonderful people on the trip. So, I guess overall I’d say happiness really and that sounds funny because I was sad a little bit of the time but it was happy and I was very glad I’d made the effort. [Tara]

Findings reveal that storytelling contributed to intensifying participant emotions. As participants moved to the various sites and listened to the historians who gave them new perspectives on the conflict, they experienced emotional intensity. Mixing emotions became apparent when Melanie was learning more details about the ANZAC campaign and realised how different the story was from what she knew before visiting Gallipoli:

Sadness and anger, I think shocked when we went at just how small the area was, it was an overwhelming desperateness that these young men had signed up for it not knowing what it was going to be, thinking that it would be a bit of lark and suddenly they were immersed in this awfulness and there was no getting out, they were stuck there until they got out. [Melanie]

The dawn service for me was very emotional and very moving and especially when they started the service. Someone was describing about the soldiers being lowered down from the ships that were offshore and then they started rowing in and you could hear the splish splash, but they played a tape…It was very emotional… It was a very emotional experience for me and I’m glad I was there because it just brought some wonderful feelings to me. [Rita]

While visitors experienced intense concentration, their emotions fluctuated between positive and negative as they revived images of the story. Jacinta described this as the most extraordinary moment, probably due to the fact that she was able to connect with the past using her intense concentration to live parts of the ANZAC story. The storytelling intensified the experience and allowed the participants to make sense of their own interpretations and symbolic meanings. This concept of reviving the ANZAC story led participants to feel they were part of the story themselves, and this left a lasting feeling of empathy. During the experience, participants shared new learnings and, as they moved in small groups to various authentic sites, they were able to interact with the brand story and feel lost in the moment, thereby reaching the optimal experience.

Probably the most impact for me was sitting looking out across the water being there on the anniversary of the landings and seeing the landing and seeing imaginary ANZACs sail past [Jacinta]

Connecting with the ANZAC story, bringing images to life and seeing original sites such as hillsides, trenches and the reality of the small size of the peninsular, impacted on participants’ emotions. Listening to the other side of the story and actually seeing how the story unfolded in its original location, were the main touch points that impacted on participants instant emotional transformation which was influenced by an interplay of negative and positive emotions.

Emotional engagement

Visitors who interacted with the heritage brand (ANZAC) had prior emotional connections and identity links to the place. Prior studies on tourist experiences in Gallipoli confirm that the experience positively affects tourists’ feelings (Hall et al., 2018). Findings reveal that participants are left with feelings of relatedness towards the ANZACs. Feelings of relatedness form part of emotional engagement. The opportunity to reflect in small groups assisted individuals to form their own interpretations based on an exchange process with the brand, Gallipoli sites and historians. The deep reflection and individual interpretations led to meaningful connections and strengthened brand commitment. During emotional engagement, participants revived the story and experienced emotions varying from admiration for the story's actors to sadness for the conditions they had to endure during the Gallipoli campaign. The experts’ revelations of new parts of the story enhanced participants emotional engagement when they visited and interacted with additional sites and monuments. As the sites turned out to be smaller than participants’ expectations, they experienced instant emotional reactions, to feeling overwhelmed upon learning new information, which then turned into feelings of relatedness for the Turks (actors in the brand story) who had lost more people than the Australians during the ANZAC campaign. Kevin expressed feelings of relatedness commenting on parts of the story he already knew, while Mary realised the harsh conditions that the ANZACs had to endure based on new learnings:

I was very moved by all the gravesites and about how terrible it was the for Turkish people as well as the British and I felt very much what a travesty and a waste of life it was [Mary]

I always get a bit of a lump in my throat when I stand on the beach at ANZAC Cove and traipse through the bush and you feel something, you can visualise, realise, the terrain they had to fight in, the tunnelling and the slaughter and the bloody corpses, all the horrible things, you have admiration for those guys who had to experience all those hardships.[Kevin]

Nicola's feelings of relatedness were influenced by anger as she had realised what the ANZACs had been through. She immersed herself in understanding the story based on what she saw and what she felt was true. Empathy and feelings of relatedness were evident as Nicola acknowledged that the Turks were defending their own country.

…love is another word that comes to mind, and it's love for the people that you’re with, that you’re experiencing all of that with. [Nicola]

Similar to Nicola's new learnings, Larry also focused on parts of the story he was not previously aware of and this new knowledge influenced his commitment to the ANZAC brand. These intense emotions turned into feelings of relatedness as participants could relate to what the ANZACs had been through and learnt the other side of the story.

…… [I was] completely in awe of what actually happened and how it occurred or why it occurred, and the tricks underwent during the actual campaign itself was very interesting and very informative, so it really did bring home to you the actual terrible conditions people had trying to get ashore. [Larry]

The instant negative emotions later evolved into feelings of relatedness with the actors of the brand story. This suggests participants connected with brand and this connection intensified during the brand experience. Visitors undergoing intense experiences at heritage sites has been discussed in the tourism literature (Cameron and Gatewood, 2003; Hede and Hall, 2012). This research extends theory in the heritage tourism branding literature by clarifying how emotional engagement influences the brand experience and the role it plays in strengthening feelings towards a heritage brand.

A content analysis revealed positive emotions are still prevalent in the pilgrimage experience as shown by the number of frequencies (Table 2). Mixed emotions contributed to ANZAC's intensity and feelings of relatedness, which influenced the HTBE. ‘Respect’ ‘moved’ and ‘admiration’ yield high frequencies while the interplay between positive and negative emotions became mixed as participants experienced story-showing and learnt new parts of the story in its original location.

Table 2.

Frequencies of emotions during emotional engagement.

Theme	Subthemes	Word frequency
Positive	Respect	47
	Moved	30
	Admiration	32
	Camaraderie	22
	Pride	23
Negative	Sadness	46
	Waste	14
	Angry/Anger	11
Mixed emotions	Interplay between positive and negative emotions	46
Feelings of relatedness	Emotions lead to understanding of story, empathy and lasting feelings of relatedness	66

The interplay between negative and positive emotions led to intensity and subsequently feelings of relatedness towards the ANZACs and the Turks, which left them with a sense of connectedness and respect. Negative emotions played a role in the experience due to the interplay and the internal dialogue that took place onsite. Story-showing influenced how participants reached their own understanding about the ANZAC story. While positive feelings dominated during the experience it was the interplay and the mixed emotions that intensified the experience leaving lasting positive feelings during engagement.

Development of an emotional engagement framework during HTBEs

This study presents a framework for understanding the process that visitors undergo during emotional engagement within HTBEs. It highlights the emotional engagement process during which individuals create feelings of lasting relatedness based on mixed emotions which are influenced by story-showing. The consumer engagement with ANZAC is found to be a great HTBE overall, therefore findings corroborate previous discussions on how immersive heritage tourism experiences can stir and influence consumer emotions (Gursoy et al., 2021). The framework highlights the role of mixed emotions (negative and positive) that visitors feel when interacting with heritage tourist brands. Storytelling and story-showing elements influence the visitor's emotional engagement and elicits lasting feelings of relatedness. Therefore, it is important to acknowledge the context in which the interactivity and emotional engagement take place. The framework demonstrates the importance of studying heritage tourist brand experiences in customised contexts (Pallant et al., 2022) and takes into account the role of mixed emotions and their lasting positive influence on the visitor (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

A framework of emotional engagement for heritage tourism brand experiences (HTBEs).

Discussion

The research examined the role of mixed emotions experienced by consumers of HTBE and how emotional engagement influences HTBE. Specifically, the research contributes a framework for consumers of HTBE and clarifies the process of emotional engagement during HTBE. Participants demonstrated close connectivity with Gallipoli which is the place where the ANZAC campaign took place. This agrees with prior studies suggesting visitors to Gallipoli have strong heritage connectivity with the place (Hyde and Harman, 2011; Hall et al., 2018). While studies suggest that visitors are familiar with the ANZAC story this research reveals that participants were not fully aware of the Turkish side of the story. The present study highlights that consumers interacted with sites and monuments and the storytelling and story-showing created new knowledge imparted by the historians which elicited a variety of emotions. Moving in small groups to experience story-showing and receiving expert knowledge from historians influenced the HTBE. The research highlights that mixed emotions can lead to lasting positive feelings (Zheng et al., 2020), therefore including expert story-showing elements can influence personalised interpretations.

Emotional engagement at the original place (based on negative and positive emotions) where the ANZAC campaign took place allows for story-showing. ANZAC represents a heritage tourism brand includes stories from the First and Second World Wars, so it allows for reflective opportunities where visitors can immerse in the experience (Magee and Gilmore, 2015). While visitors experience the HTBE and instant negative emotions occur, these interact with positive emotions as new learnings are created and subsequently turn into positive feelings of relatedness. Once the negative emotions were processed with shared new knowledge, visitors created new shared learnings and positive feelings about the heritage brand. Shaping positive feelings resulted from an exchange among the visitor, historians and the ANZAC story, having undergone an immersive experience under the influence of emotional engagement at original sites in Gallipoli. During the HTBE at Gallipoli, negative emotions played an important role in intensifying engagement with the heritage brand during the experience, which agrees with prior research by Oren et al. (2021) who highlighted that negative emotions need to be acknowledged as they contribute to the emotional heritage experience. This key finding also challenges the claim by Tuerlan et al., (2021) who claim that negative emotions lead to negative outcomes. Mixed emotions that resulted from new learning influenced perspectives and led to lasting (positive) feelings of relatedness as they learnt the Turkish perspective of the story.

The findings reveal that both negative and positive emotions enabled opportunities for reflection during story-showing and that mixed emotions can create intensity during an HTBE. The critical reflection that took place at various sites allowed visitors to process new learnings and create individual understandings, which are a contributing factor to strengthening the emotional brand experience (Schmitt et al., 2015). This also affirms a stronger connection with the heritage brand. Findings agree with Mencarelli et al. (2020) who claim that consumers can resolve their dissonance once they assign personalised meanings during heritage brand experiences. This study demonstrates how individual reflections, that took place in Gallipoli, strengthened the emotional attachment to the ANZAC heritage brand, while the HTBE influenced lasting positive feelings. The interplay among negative and positive emotions influenced by reflective opportunities allowed visitors to create their own understandings of the ANZAC story and immerse in new learnings. This finding agrees with Woodside et al. (2008) who claim that successful storytelling brings people into the story and allows them to reflect and make sense of the story, thus crafting new understandings. Building on the concept of storytelling this study contributes the concept of story-showing which needs to take place at the original place in order for participants to undergo the process of reflection and create their own understandings. Listening to the historian and experts at original sites created opportunities for individuals to craft their own understandings and shape views about the ANZAC heritage brand.

Theoretical implications

By exploring the HTBE this study develops a theoretical framework that extends knowledge relating to consumer engagement at heritage sites (Bryce et al., 2015) by clarifying the role of mixed emotions and unpacking the process of emotional engagement at heritage places. Specifically, the research unpacks the types of emotions that need to be considered in the process of heritage tourist brand engagement. Negative emotions such as sadness, anger and shock, as well as positive emotions (admiration, pride and love) lead to lasting positive feelings of respect and love for the heritage tourist brand which better corroborates the discussion on the role of emotions on tourist experiences (Magee and Gilmore, 2015; Oren et al., 2021). The interplay among negative and positive emotions influenced by story-showing elements enabled reflective opportunities, which allowed visitors to experience an immersive HTBE. The process of emotional engagement with the heritage brand demonstrates that visitors to tourist heritage sites seek an emotional experience enabling them to strengthen personal connections with the place and brand thus extending knowledge on emotional heritage brand experiences (Mencarelli et al., 2020). In addition, data reveal that consumers built knowledge in the HTBE. The reflective process is a result of key players in the experience such as historians, original objects and story-showing techniques (Hall et al., 2010; Hall et al., 2018). Building on existing heritage frameworks (Magee and Gilmore, 2015) the findings extend knowledge in the role of mixed emotions and emotional engagement in an HTBE.

The theoretical framework explains the process of emotional engagement with a heritage tourist brand and the elements that need to be considered in the process of engagement. Consumers are the input to the whole process of the heritage brand experience. Consumers use their own knowledge and interactivity to build up the HTBE. It is an iterative process that involves the peers and expert storytellers. The involvement of various actors sets a foundation for the consumers to learn and reflect. Emotional engagement is found to involve both positive and negative emotions. Negative emotions such as sadness, anger and shock, as well as positive emotions (respect, admiration and pride) lead to lasting positive feelings of respect and love for the heritage tourist brand. The findings suggest that both positive and negative, rather than only a positive feeling, can enhance heritage brand experience. The interplay among negative and positive emotions influenced by story-showing enables reflective opportunities, which allows visitors to create personal meaningful experiences. In addition, consumers build knowledge in the heritage tourist brand experience. Building on heritage frameworks (Magee and Gilmore, 2015; Mencarelli, et al., 2020), the findings from this study highlight the role of mixed emotional engagement and ‘story-showing’ an extension of storytelling, both of which can lead to positive lasting feelings of participation in an HTBE.

Practical implications

The research has implications for managers of heritage sites. Customised experiences are important for heritage tourists who have prior identity intentions (Pallant et al., 2022). Data reveal several key factors influence the heritage tourist experience, such as monuments and original sites and story-showing, the interplay that takes place among actors involved in the experience and the different emotions that are elicited during the brand experience as a result of stories. Further managerial implications emerge:

Designing customised itineraries that include key sites in Gallipoli such as Australian and Turkish graves, objects and monuments, consist of elements that can enhance the emotional engagement. Expert historians and knowledgeable tour guides can also offer story-showing techniques at these sites which give further insight into the HTBE.

Inviting descendants from the ANZAC campaign would influence emotions based on expert story-showing in various communities. Tour operators can use experts and ANZAC descendants as part of story-showing techniques to highlight the HTBE.

Destination Management Organisations need to consider how mixed emotions can positively influence the HTBE. The creation of activities that influence emotional engagement would return significant yield for heritage site managers.

Results confirm that opportunities for reflection (such as moving in small groups to various sites and allowing time to reflect) influenced emotional engagement. Destination managers and tour operators could incorporate opportunities for reflection in tourist itineraries, as this will allow for the creation of emotions (positive, negative, mixed) which will become lasting feelings of relatedness.

The small group facilitation during the HTBE also meant that there were opportunities for participants to share learnings. ANZAC descendants may have prior connections to specific sites therefore can contribute insight relating to personalised stories. Expert story-showers can encourage story-sharing during small group facilitation.

The process of emotional engagement with the ANZAC heritage brand in the original place demonstrates that visitors to heritage sites seek an emotional experience enabling them to strengthen personal connection with the heritage brand. Site managers therefore can build experiences that encourage brand commitment.

The context where the storytelling and story-showing take place is important; therefore, it is not easy to re-create this experience at other places. Site managers can maintain the originality of the sites to enhance the HTBE.

There are practical implications when delivering cultural and commemorative events related to the ANZAC campaigns in other places. In Australia, the story is delivered through the Australian cultural lens only, and the Turkish perspective is not acknowledged. Tour operators can narrate the story holistically including both Australian and Turkish perspectives in order to engage tourists emotionally with the consequence of enhancing tourist brand connection.

Part of the heritage brand story reflects identity and cultural values. Therefore, it is important to consider identity links in the branding strategies of heritage places such as Gallipoli.

Visitors to Gallipoli were not fully aware of the Turkish side of the story. Educators and experts need to narrate the cultural significance of the brand story for Turkey as well. Not only the expert storytellers but also the place is important in achieving emotional engagement.

Study limitations and future research

The research reveals there are personalised elements in the experience, therefore future research could focus on other places of heritage importance for the heritage tourist In order to determine whether the effects are similar for others who attend key heritage tourist experiences, the emotional framework could be applied to various profile groups who have undertaken similar experiences in other places. Emotional engagement frameworks can be utilised alongside consumer-based brand equity (CBBE) models (Keller, 2009) to help clarify the brand relationships in various contexts and the consumer journey towards brand equity. Comparative studies of different profile groups from various geographical areas may also present new insights into the visitor's emotional engagement with HTBEs. HTBE phenomena may also include other secular experiences (such as a visit to Uluru in Central Australia or Graceland where Elvis Presley lived). Visits to these places also indicate visitor emotional engagement.

Collecting data from participants who visited Gallipoli to experience the heritage brand was deemed important, however, it should be acknowledged that different contexts may reveal different emotions, therefore future research should focus on revising the data in post-pandemic times to reveal how HTBEs vary. Further, the research could consider participants who had a connection to the heritage brand but were not able to be part of the commemorations or had been to Gallipoli at other times. Due to the importance of the personalisation and the closeness of visitors to the ANZAC brand, smaller commemorative events involving direct ANZAC descendants would add to the story-showing lasting to feelings of positive relatedness. Finally, quantitative measures could be applied to generalise findings and test the frameworks for the process of emotional engagement. Because heritage brand stories can be shared during brand experiences, future research could explore the role of story-showing in the formation of heritage brand communities and the influence on brand loyalty. Smaller communities may become contexts where stories can be easily shared with personalised elements.

Footnotes

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to acknowledge Fairy Chimney's travel in Camberwell, Victoria (Australia) for facilitating access to the Gallipoli travel database.

Author's note

John Hall is also affiliated at Edvantage Institute Australia.

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

Effie Steriopoulos

Appendix

Table A1.

Interview questions.

Below interview questions were used during the study with additional probing questions to explore the phenomenon.

What motivated you to experience the centenary?

What does ANZAC mean to you?

Tell us what Gallipoli means to you

Thinking about your visit to Gallipoli, tell us about your experience travelling to this part of the world.

How would you describe some of the feelings you experienced?

How do you think the experience has affected you?

How important was the knowledge you received?

ANZAC: Australian New Zealand Army Corps.

References

Ahn

H-K

Liu

Soman

(2009) Memory markers: how consumers recall the duration of experiences. Journal of Consumer Psychology 19(3): 508–516.

Balmer

JMT

(2011) Corporate heritage identities, corporate heritage brands and the multiple heritage identities of the British monarchy. European Journal of Marketing 45(9/10): 1380–1398.

Bazeley

Jackson

(2013) Qualitative Data Analysis with Nvivo. London: Sage.

Braun

Clarke

(2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2): 77–101.

Bryce

Curran

O'Gorman

, et al. (2015) Visitors’ engagement and authenticity: Japanese heritage consumption. Tourism Management 46: 571–581.

Butler

Khoo-Lattimore

Mura

(2014) Heritage tourism in Malaysia: fostering a collective national identity in an ethnically diverse country. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 19(2): 199–218.

Cameron

Gatewood

(2003) Seeking numinous experiences in the unremembered past Ethnology 42(1): 55–71.

Chen

Rahman

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

Chen

Lee

(2021) How does brand legitimacy shapes brand authenticity and tourism destination loyalty: focus on cultural heritage tourism. Global Business & Finance Review (GBFR) 26(1): 53–67.

10.

Cifci

(2021) Testing self-congruity theory in bektashi faith destinations: the roles of memorable tourism experience and destination attachment. Journal of Vacation Marketing 28(1): 3–19.

11.

Coelho

MDF

Gosling

MDS

Almeida

ASAD

(2018) Tourism experiences: core processes of memorable trips. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 37: 11–22.

12.

Creswell

(2018) Research design qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. 5th ed Thousand Oaks: Sage.

13.

Creswell

(2013) Qualitative inquiry & research design choosing among five approaches, 3rd ed London: Sage.

14.

De Feyter

Caers

Vigna

, et al. (2012) Unraveling the impact of the big five personality traits on academic performance: the moderating and mediating effects of self-efficacy and academic motivation. Learning and Individual Differences 22(4): 439–448.

15.

Dewar

Du Cros

(2012) The search for world heritage brand awareness beyond the iconic heritage: a case study of the historic centre of Macao. Journal of Heritage Tourism 7(4): 323–339.

16.

Di Pietro

Guglielmetti Mugion

Renzi

(2018) Heritage and identity: technology, values and visitor experiences. Journal of Heritage Tourism 13(2): 97–103.

17.

Donohoe

(2012) Sustainable heritage tourism marketing and Canada's Rideau Canal world heritage site. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 20(1): 121–142.

18.

Fereday

Muir-Cochrane

(2006) Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 5(1): 80–92.

19.

Fusch

Ness

(2018) Denzin’s paradigm shift: revisiting triangulation in qualitative research. Journal of Social Change 10(1): 19–32.

20.

Fyall

Schrils

(2022) Marketing challenges and opportunities for heritage tourism. In: Fyall

Garrod

Leask

, et al. (eds) Marketing Challenges and Opportunities for Visitor Attractions: A Collaborative Approach. 3rd ed. London: Routledge, 301–313.

21.

Gardiner

Vada

Yang

ECL

, et al. (2022) Recreating history: the evolving negotiation of staged authenticity in tourism experiences. Tourism Management 91: 104515.

22.

Gatewood

Cameron

(2004) Battlefield pilgrims at Gettysburg national military park. Ethnology 43(3): 193–216.

23.

Giorgi

(2003) Phenomenology. In: Smith

(eds) Qualitative Psychology: A Practical Guide to Research Methods. London UK: Sage, 25–50.

24.

Grace

O’Cass

(2002) Brand associations: looking through the eye of the beholder. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 5(2): 96–111.

25.

Greekreporter (2022) Australia funds remembrance trail on the Greek island of Lemnos Available at https://greekreporter.com/2022/04/04/australia-lemnos-remembrance-trail/ (accessed 19 August).

26.

Gursoy

Akova

Atsız

(2021) Understanding the heritage experience: a content analysis of online reviews of world heritage sites in Istanbul. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change 20(3): 311–334.

27.

Hall

Basarin

Lockstone-Binney

(2010) An empirical analysis of attendance at a commemorative event: ANZAC day at Gallipoli. International Journal of Hospitality Management 29(2): 245–253.

28.

Hall

Basarin

Lockstone-Binney

, et al. (2018) Spiritual values and motives of secular pilgrims. International Journal of Consumer Studies 42: 715–723.

29.

Hamid

AHA

Mohamad

Suki

(2020) Tourists’ revisit intention to UNESCO world heritage sites in a developing nation: investigating the mediating role of place dependence. Journal of Vacation Marketing 27(2): 119–132.

30.

Hao

(2020) The landscape of customer engagement in hospitality and tourism: a systematic review. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 32(5): 1837–1860.

31.

Wang

(2020) Building the connection between nation and commercial brand: an integrative review and future research directions. International Marketing Review 38(1): 19–35.

32.

Hede

A-M

Hall

(2012) Evoked emotions: textual analysis within the context of pilgrimage tourism to Gallipoli. Advances in Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research 6: 45–60.

33.

Holt

(2010) Using the telephone for narrative interviewing: a research note. Qualitative Research 10(1): 113–121.

34.

Hosany

Martin

Woodside

(2021) Emotions in tourism: theoretical designs, measurements, analytics, and interpretations. Journal of Travel Research 60(7): 1391–1407.

35.

Hsieh

Shannon

(2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research 15(9): 1277–1288.

36.

Hyde

Harman

(2011) Motives for a secular pilgrimage to the Gallipoli battlefields. Tourism Management 32(6): 1343–1351.

37.

Jewell

Crotts

(2009) Adding psychological value to heritage tourism experiences revisited. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 26(3): 244–263.

38.

Keller

(2009) Building strong brands in a modern marketing communications environment. Journal of Marketing Communications 15(2–3): 139–155.

39.

Krippendorff

(2018) Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. 4th ed London: Sage publications.

40.

Krippendorff

(2018) Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. 4th ed London: Sage publications.

41.

Lagos

Harris

Sigala

(2015) Emotional language for image formation and market segmentation in dark tourism destinations: findings from tour Operators’ websites promoting Gallipoli. Tourismos 10(2): 153–170.

42.

Lak

Gheitasi

Timothy

(2020) Urban regeneration through heritage tourism: cultural policies and strategic management. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change 18(4): 386–403.

43.

Magee

Gilmore

(2015) Heritage site management: from dark tourism to transformative service experience. The Service Indutries Journal 35(15–16): 898–917.

44.

Manthiou

Kang

Hyun

, et al. (2018) The impact of brand authenticity on building brand love: an investigation of impression in memory and lifestyle-congruence. International Journal of Hospitality Management 75: 38–47.

45.

Mencarelli

Chaney

Pulh

(2020) Consumers’ brand heritage experience: between acceptance and resistance. Journal of Marketing Management 36(1–2): 30–50.

46.

Miles

Huberman

(1994) Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook, 2nd ed Thousand Oaks: Sage.

47.

Minkiewicz

Evans

Bridson

(2008) Building brand identity: Does it pay? An investigation into cultural and recreational services. Paper presented at the ANZMAC 2008: Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference 2008: Marketing: shifting the focus from mainstream to offbeat.

48.

Morgan

Pritchard

Piggott

(2003) Destination branding and the role of the stakeholders: the case of New Zealand. Journal of Vacation Marketing 9(3): 285–299.

49.

Morrow

Rodriguez

King

(2015) Colaizzi’s descriptive phenomenological method. The Psychologist 28(8): 643–644.

50.

Mossberg

(2008) Extraordinary experiences through storytelling. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 8(3): 195–210.

51.

Munar

Ooi

C-S

(2012) The truth of the crowds: Social media and the heritage experience. In: Smith

Waterton

Watson

(eds) The Cultural Moment in Tourism. New York: Routledge, 255–273.

52.

Nawijn

Biran

(2018) Negative emotions in tourism: a meaningful analysis. Current Issues in Tourism 22(19): 2386–2398.

53.

O'Leary

Morrison

Alzua

(1998) Cultural and heritage tourism: identifying niches for international travelers. Journal of Tourism Studies 9 (2): 2–13.

54.

Ooi

C-S

Stöber

(2010) Authenticity and place branding: The arts and culture in branding Berlin and Singapore. In: Knudsen

Waade

(eds) Re-investing Authenticity: Tourism, Places and Emotions. Bristol: Channel View Publications, 66–79.

55.

O'Reilly

Parker

(2012) ‘Unsatisfactory saturation’: a critical exploration of the notion of saturated sample sizes in qualitative research. Qualitative Research 13(2): 190–197.

56.

Oren

Shani

Poria

(2021) Dialectical emotions in a dark heritage site: a study at the auschwitz death camp. Tourism Management 82: 104194.

57.

Pallant

Karpen

Sands

(2022) What drives consumers to customize products? The mediating role of brand experience. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 64: 102773.

58.

Pennington

Thomsen

(2010) A semiotic model of destination representations applied to cultural and heritage tourism marketing. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 10(1): 33–53.

59.

Pine

Gilmore

(1998) Welcome to the experience economy. Harvard Business Review 76: 97–105.

60.

Poria

Butler

Airey

(2001) Clarifying heritage tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 28(4): 1047–1049.

61.

Poria

Butler

Airey

(2003) The core of heritage tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 30(1): 238–254.

62.

Prayag

Alrawadieh

(2021) Motivation, emotion and world heritage status in discerning the heritage tourists: a segmentation perspective. Tourism Management Perspectives 40: 100906.

63.

Prayag

Del Chiappa

(2021) Nostalgic feelings: motivation, positive and negative emotions, and authenticity at heritage sites. Journal of Heritage Tourism: 1–16.

64.

Prayag

Hosany

Muskat

, et al. (2017) Understanding the relationships between tourists’ emotional experiences, perceived overall image, satisfaction, and intention to recommend. Journal of Travel Research 56(1): 41–54.

65.

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.

66.

Rather

Hollebeek

Rasoolimanesh

(2021) First-Time versus repeat tourism customer engagement, experience, and value cocreation: an empirical investigation. Journal of Travel Research 61(3): 549–564.

67.

Richins

(1997) Measuring emotions in the consumption experience. Journal of Consumer Research 24(2): 127–146.

68.

Rose

Merchant

Orth

, et al. (2016) Emphasizing brand heritage: does it work? And how? Journal of Business Research 69(2): 936–943.

69.

Ryan

Silvanto

(2009) The world heritage list: the making and management of a brand. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 5(4): 290–300.

70.

Saldana

(2016) The coding manual for qualitative researchers, 3rd ed London: Sage.

71.

Sampson

(2004) Navigating the waves: the usefulness of a pilot in qualitative research. Qualitative Research 4(3): 383–402.

72.

Santa

Tiatco

(2019) Tourism, heritage and cultural performance: developing a modality of heritage tourism. Tourism Management Perspectives 31: 301–309.

73.

Sarkar

(2014) Brand love in emerging market: a qualitative investigation. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 17(4): 481–494.

74.

Schmitt

(2012) The consumer psychology of brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology 22(1): 7–17.

75.

Schmitt

Brakus

Zarantonello

(2015) From experiential psychology to consumer experience. Journal of Consumer Psychology 25(1): 166–171.

76.

Sigala

Steriopoulos

(2021) Does emotional engagement matter in dark tourism? Implications drawn from a reflective approach. Journal of Heritage Tourism 16(4): 412–432.

77.

KKF

King

Sparks

(2012) Customer engagement with tourism brands. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research 38(3): 304–329.

78.

KKF

King

Sparks

, et al. (2016) The role of customer engagement in building consumer loyalty to tourism brands. Journal of Travel Research 55(1): 64–78.

79.

Nguyen

NAN

Nguyen

QNT

, et al. (2020) The link between travel motivation and satisfaction towards a heritage destination: the role of visitor engagement, visitor experience and heritage destination image. Tourism Management Perspectives 34: 100634.

80.

Tasci

ADA

Hahm

Breiter-Terry

(2016) Consumer-based brand equity of a destination for sport tourists versus non-sport tourists. Journal of Vacation Marketing 24(1): 62–78.

81.

Teoh

Wang

Kwek

(2021) Conceptualising co-created transformative tourism experiences: a systematic narrative review. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 47: 176–189.

82.

Tracy

(2010) Qualitative quality: eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry 16(10): 837–851.

83.

Tuerlan

Scott

(2021) Customer emotion research in hospitality and tourism: conceptualization, measurements, antecedents and consequences. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 33(8): 2741–2772.

84.

Tung

VWS

Ritchie

JRB

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

85.

Ukpabi

Karjaluoto

(2017) Influence of social media on corporate heritage tourism brand. In: Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2017. Cham: Springer, 697–709.

86.

Vagle

(2018) Crafting phenomenological research, 2nd ed. Routledge.

87.

Volo

(2021) The experience of emotion: directions for tourism design. Annals of Tourism Research 86: 103097.

88.

Woodside

Sood

Miller

(2008) When consumers and brands talk: storytelling theory and research in psychology and marketing. Psychology & Marketing 25(2): 97–145.

89.

Zheng

Zhang

Qiu

, et al. (2020) From mixed emotional experience to spiritual meaning: learning in dark tourism places. Tourism Geographies 22(1): 105–126.