the aspects of culinary tourism in ... - modul.ac.at · by pls-sem, confirmatory factor analysis...

Theaspectsofculinarytourismin

Tourists’satisfactionandtourists’loyalty.

InsightsfromVienna

MasterThesissubmittedinfulfilmentoftheDegree

MasterofBusinessAdministration

inTourismandHotelDevelopment

SubmittedtoLidijaLalicicPh.D.

ThuThuyKhuat

1502004

Vienna,13May2018

I

AFFIDAVIT

IherebyaffirmthatthisMaster’sThesisrepresentsmyownwrittenworkandthatIhaveused

nosourcesandaidsotherthanthoseindicated.Allpassagesquotedfrompublicationsorpara-

phrasedfromthesesourcesareproperlycitedandattributed.

Thethesiswasnotsubmittedinthesameorinasubstantiallysimilarversion,notevenpartial-

ly,toanotherexaminationboardandwasnotpublishedelsewhere.

13May2018

Date Signature

III

ABSTRACT

Culinarytourisminvolvestravelling“inordertosearchforandenjoypreparedfoodanddrink”

and hence acquiring “unique andmemorable gastronomic experiences” (Wolf, 2002 cited in

Kivela&Crotts,2006,p.356).Culinarytourismorgastronomytourismhasbeenrecognisedby

theWorldTourismOrganisation(UNWTO)tobeoneofthecontributingfactorstothedevel-

opmentof tourismdestinations in theworld.Gastronomy, culinary, foodarenowbecoming

moreinfluentialintheprocessofdestinationselectionasstudiessuggestthatculinaryplaysan

importantroleincreatingqualitytravelexperienceoftourists,tourismsatisfactionandhence

impact their revisit intention (Kivela& Crotts, 2006). Yet the role of gastronomy in tourists’

experiencehasnotbeenexploredindepth.Thus,thisstudyfocusesontheaspectsofculinary

tourism in which influences tourists’ satisfaction and subsequently tourists’ loyalty. In the

search to answer the above question, the thesis looks at how the tourists perceive images,

quality of the culinary, destination familiarity and destination self-congruence to the overall

culinarysceneinVienna.Thestudyemployedonlineconvenientsamplingmethodofinterna-

tionalvisitorswhohadbeenatleastone-nightstayinVienna.Thecollecteddatawasanalysed

byPLS-SEM,confirmatoryfactoranalysisapproachviatheuseofsmartPLSsoftware.Thefind-

ings suggest a strong positive effect of perceived quality on tourism satisfaction and hence

increasingthetouristloyaltytoadestination.Thefindingsalsosupportthetheorythattourism

satisfactioninfluencestheattitudinalandbehaviouralloyalty.Thefindingsofthisstudycould

helpculinarytourismstakeholderstounderstandbetterthe internationalvisitorstoplanthe

strategiesandmarketingcampaignstostrengthenthedestinationimageasaculinarydestina-

tion,andifculinaryistobethefocusofdestinationtourism.

Keywords:culinarytourism,destinationloyalty,destinationimage,perceivedquality,destina-

tionfamiliarity,destinationsatisfaction,destinationself-congruence,revisitbehaviouralinten-

tions,Vienna,willingnesstorecommend.

V

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First, Iwouldliketothankmyparentswhohavegivenmetheopportunitytostudyandsup-

portthroughoutthedurationoftheMBAprogrammeatModulUniversityVienna.Alsothat

has enabled me to travel, and realizing my love and passion for discovering new cultures

throughfoodasawayoflocallife.Ithasbecomemyinspirationforthethesistopic.

Second,Iamverymuchthankfultomysupervisor,Dr.LidijaLalicic,whotookmeonunderher

supervision for thethesis.Shehadguided,givenmeresponsiveadvicesandoverall somuch

supportthroughouttheprocessoftheresearch.

Lastly, thanks to theownersof Facebookpageson traveland lifestyle (1000Things todo in

Vienna,Citymigrant,Hungryfortravel,ViennaWuerstelstand,ViennaUnwrapped)forallow-

ing and sharingmy questionnaire on their pages. And thanks tomy friends and all the re-

spondentswhohadcompletedthequestionnaire, thethesiscouldnothavebeencompleted

withoutthem.

VII

TABLEOFCONTENTS

Affidavit..........................................................................................................................................I

Abstract........................................................................................................................................III

Acknowledgements(optional)......................................................................................................V

ListofTables................................................................................................................................IX

ListofFigures................................................................................................................................X

ListofAbbreviations....................................................................................................................XI

1 Introduction............................................................................................................................11.1 Background..........................................................................................................................11.2 ResearchObjectives............................................................................................................21.3 Structureofthesis...............................................................................................................3

2 Literaturereview....................................................................................................................62.1 Destinationimage...............................................................................................................62.1.1 Definition........................................................................................................................................62.1.2 Componentsofdestinationimage;cognitive,affectiveandconative............................................72.1.3 Formingofdestinationimage.........................................................................................................82.1.4 Destinationimageandtourists’loyaltytoadestination..............................................................102.2 Destinationidentity...........................................................................................................112.2.1 Definition......................................................................................................................................112.2.2 Abrandidentity’scomponentsandaspects.................................................................................122.3 Destinationbranding.........................................................................................................142.3.1 Definition......................................................................................................................................142.3.2 Brandequity..................................................................................................................................162.4 Brandself-congruence......................................................................................................182.4.1 Self-congruenceandloyalty..........................................................................................................192.5 CulinaryTourism................................................................................................................202.5.1 Definition......................................................................................................................................202.5.2 CulinaryTouristsandtypesofculinarytourists............................................................................202.5.3 Motivationsandinfluencingfactorsfortouriststodoculinarytrips...........................................21

3 Conceptualframework:........................................................................................................233.1 Destinationimage,destinationsatisfactionandtourists’loyalty....................................................233.2 Perceivedquality,destinationsatisfactionandtourists’loyalty......................................................233.3 Destinationfamiliarity,destinationsatisfactionandloyalty............................................................243.4 Destinationself-congruence,destinationsatisfactionandloyalty..................................................24

VIII

3.5 Destinationsatisfactionandloyalty.................................................................................................25

4 Methodology........................................................................................................................264.1 Introduction......................................................................................................................................264.2 Qualitativeandquantitativeresearch..............................................................................................264.3 Samplingprocedures........................................................................................................................294.4 Surveydesign...................................................................................................................................294.5 Dataanalysis.....................................................................................................................................31

5 Findings.................................................................................................................................325.1 Demographicprofile.........................................................................................................................325.2 Respondentsprofile.........................................................................................................................335.3 Independentt-testRespondents’Profile&FoodPreferences........................................................385.4 Culinaryexpectationsandattitudes.................................................................................................405.5 CulinaryexpectationsandParticipants’Profile................................................................................415.6 ModelAnalysis.................................................................................................................................455.7 Qualitativeresults............................................................................................................................50

6 Conclusions...........................................................................................................................526.1 FinalRemarks...................................................................................................................................526.2 Recommendations...........................................................................................................................536.3 Futureresearchandlimitations.......................................................................................................55

7 Bibliography..........................................................................................................................57

Appendices..................................................................................................................................65Appendix1:Consentform..........................................................................................................................65Appendix2:Questionnaire.........................................................................................................................66

IX

LISTOFTABLESTABLE1.INTERRELATIONSHIPOFVARIOUSDEFINITIONSOFTHEDESTINATIONIMAGE......................................................9TABLE2.BRANDEQUITYDEFINITIONSANDCONCEPTS............................................................................................17TABLE3.DEMOGRAPHICPROFILESOFRESPONDENTS.............................................................................................33TABLE4.INDEPENDENTT-TESTGENDER-FOODPREFERENCES.................................................................................38TABLE5.INDEPENDENTT-TESTAGE-FOODPREFERENCES......................................................................................38TABLE6.INDEPENDENTT-TEST:FREQUENCYOFVISIT-FOODPREFERENCES................................................................39TABLE7.INDEPENDENTT-TEST:SHARINGCULINARYEXPERIENCEONLINE-FOODPREFERENCES.....................................39TABLE8.CROSS-TABULATIONPOSTINGCULINARYEXPERIENCESONLINE-AGE............................................................39TABLE9.QUESTIONNAIRE,MEANSANDSTANDARDDEVIATIONS..............................................................................40TABLE10.INDEPENDENTT-TEST:GENDER-CULINARYSCENEANDIMAGEEXPECTATIONS.............................................41TABLE11.INDEPENDENTT-TEST:AGE-CULINARYSCENEANDIMAGEEXPECTATIONS...................................................42TABLE12.INDEPENDENTT-TEST:FREQUENCYOFVISITS-CULINARYSCENEANDIMAGEEXPECTATIONS............................43TABLE13.INDEPENDENTT-TEST:SHARINGCULINARYEXPERIENCESONLINE-CULINARYSCENEANDIMAGEEXPECTATIONS...44TABLE14.CFA-MEASUREMENTMODELS............................................................................................................46TABLE15.FORNELL-LARCKERCRITERIUM............................................................................................................48TABLE16.PLS-SEMPATHCOEFFICIENTSANDHYPOTHESIZEDRELATIONSHIPS...........................................................49

X

LISTOFFIGURESFIGURE1.MODELOFDESTINATIONIMAGEFORMATION..........................................................................................10FIGURE2.BRANDIDENTITYPRISM......................................................................................................................13FIGURE3.BRANDIDENTITY,BRANDPOSITIONINGANDBRANDIMAGE.......................................................................16FIGURE4.FOODTOURISMASSPECIALINTERESTTOURISM.......................................................................................22FIGURE5.PURPOSE(S)OFVISIT.........................................................................................................................34FIGURE6.FOODPREFERENCES...........................................................................................................................34FIGURE7.RESPONDENTS'DIETPREFERENCES........................................................................................................35FIGURE8.RESPONDENTS'PREFERREDCUISINES.....................................................................................................35FIGURE9.INFORMATIONSOURCES.....................................................................................................................36FIGURE10.PARTICIPATEDCULINARYACTIVITIESDURINGVISITS................................................................................36FIGURE11.SIMILARDESTINATIONSTOVIENNA'SCULINARYSCENE............................................................................37FIGURE12.PROPOSEDCONCEPTUALMEASUREMENTMODEL(SMARTPLS)................................................................46

XI

LISTOFABBREVIATIONS

Abbreviation Explanation

AVE Averagevariantextracted

CA Cronbach’salpha

CR Compositereliability

DF Destinationfamiliarity

DI Destinationimage

DL Destinationloyalty

DMO Destinationmarketingorganisation

DS Destinationsatisfaction

DSC Destinationself-congruence

PQ Perceivedquality

TDI Touristdestinationimage

VTB ViennaTouristBoard

WOM Word-of-mouth

UNWTO WorldTourismOrganisation

THEASPECTSOFCULINARYTOURISMINTOURISTS’SATISFACTIONANDTOURISTS’LOYALTY.

INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Today,travellinghasbecomeeasierforpeople;notonlythattravelingisnowmoreaffordable,

butalsotherearelessbarrierstodoso.Withhigherlevelofdisposableincomeandanincreas-

ing demand for leisure time, people are looking for different ways to immerse themselves

more intheworldoffreedomandnovelty. IthasbeenrecognizedbytheWorldTourismOr-

ganization(UNWTO)thatgastronomy iscontributingtothedevelopmentoftourismdestina-

tionsintheworld(Herrera,Herranz,&Arilla,2012).

In 1995, results froma study in San Francisco show that international tourists spent28%of

theirestimatedaveragepercapitadailyspendingonfoodandbeverages(EconomicsResearch

Associates, 1996 cited by Hall & Sharples, 2003). Compatibly, in 2000 Australian Bureau of

Statisticsreleasedresultsfromastudyconductedover1999and2000;touristsfromCanada,

theUK,EuropeandNewZealandspentmostonprepaidairfares,foodanddrinks,andaccom-

modation,peoplewhovisitedfor‘other’reasons(apartfrombusiness)spent26%oftheirtotal

expenditureonfood,drinksandaccommodation(AustralianBureauofStatistics,2000citedby

Hall&Sharples,2003).AstudyfromQuanandWang(2004)alsosupportsthestatistics,that

touristsallovertheworldspendathirdoftheirtotalspendingonfoodduringtravelling.Andit

has been recorded by International Culinary Tourism Association that all tourists dine out

when travel to a destination (World Food Travel Association, 2006 cited in Kivela & Crotts,

2006).Inthepast,foodwassimplyconsideredassupportingproducttotourism,aboutadec-

ade ago, culinarywas considered as niche segment in tourism, but nowadays it is themost

dynamic segment in the tourismmarket (World TourismOrganisation, 2012, p. 10). In fact,

gastronomy,culinary, foodarethenowbecomingmore influential in theprocessofdestina-

tionselectionasstudiessuggestthatculinaryplaysanimportantroleincreatingqualitytravel

experienceoftourists,andhenceimpacttheirrevisitintention(Kivela&Crotts,2006).

ArecentstudyintheUnitedStates(US)demonstratesthatdiningoutduringtripshasbeena

secondfavouriteactivityofforeignertourists intheUS,while it isthemostfavouriteactivity

forAmerican touristswhen they travel toother countries (Herrera,Herranz,&Arilla, 2012).

Moreover,variousstudiesclaimthatglobally,internationaltouristsspendathirdoftheirtotal

expense on food when travelling (Quan & Wang, 2004). Therefore, understanding the im-

portanceoffoodintourists’experienceswouldhelpdestinationmarketingorganizers(DMO)

toenhancethetourismexperiencesaswellastobetterstrategizedestination-marketingactiv-

ities.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

2

Herreraetal.(2012,p.6)claimsthat“thecuisineofthedestinationisanaspectofutmostim-

portance in the quality of the holiday experience Increasing in different food trends”.Many

destinations’imagesaretiedcloselywiththeirculinaryscenes,wheregastronomyisthemain

motivation for travelling to these destinations in order to enrich their culinary experiences,

suchasFrance, Italy,Spain,Greece,China,Thailand,Japan justtonameafew.Furthermore,

thediversitiesof cuisines available inone singledestination also attract tourists as they are

offeredwithnotonlythetasteandexperienceofthe localcuisine,butatthesametimeop-

tionsforsomethingfamiliarfromtheirhomecountries.Forexample,EuropeanandAmerican

touristssometimesprefertohavefriedchicken,burgersorcontinentalfoodontheirtrips,and

someAsiantourists(i.e.,fromcountrieslikeChinaandIndia)wouldliketodineatrestaurants

offeringtheirhomecuisinewhiletravelling(Changetal.,2010citedinKuang&Bhat,2017).In

addition, sincea fewyears, various factorshavebeen triggering theemergenceof local cui-

sines. For example, new lifestyle trends, health-conscious in particular, create demand for

vegetarianfood,butalsomoreoftenrestaurantsareintegratinglocalfood,andthroughinno-

vativeways,prepareandserveittotheirguests.Giventhesedevelopments,destinationsbe-

come appealing places for tourists to visit and revisit (Smith& Xiao, 2008 cited in Kuang&

Bhat,2017).Inthislight,gastronomyisanopportunityfortourismofadestinationtoprolong

orrevivetheproductlifecycleviacreatingnewproductsandtrends.

However,theroleoftourists’satisfactionneedstobebetterunderstoodwithregardstothe

culinaryexperiencesinthedestination.Asresearchhasdemonstrated,customers’satisfaction

isanimportanttributetothesuccessofthetourismindustry.Researchersagreethatsatisfac-

tionofatouristtowardsadestinationresults inhigherlevelof loyaltyaswellasintentionto

revisit(Herrera,Herranz,&Arilla,2012).However,theroleofgastronomyinthetourists’ex-

periencehasnotbeenexploredin-depth,despiteitsrisinginterest.Themajorityofthestudies

relatetowinetourismratherthanfoodorgastronomyingeneral(Hall&Sharples,2003;Kivela

&Crotts,2006;Herrera,Herranz,&Arilla,2012). Thus,moreresearchisneededtounderstand

theroleofculinaryexperiencesasapartofthetouristexperience.

1.2 ResearchObjectives

ThisstudyusesViennaastheframeworktounderstandtheculinaryexperiences.Vienna,the

capitalofAustria,hasplayedanimportantrolethroughoutdifferentphasesofEuropeanhis-

tory.Thecityisnotonlyknownforitsmusicalbutalsoculturalscenes,andhasbeennineyears

consecutivelyratedthemostliveablecityintheworldaccordingtotheinternationalconsult-

ingfirmMercer(ViennaTouristBoard,2017).SinceJanuary1980,Viennahasbeenthehome

foroneoffourheadquartersoftheUnitedNationofficesaroundtheworld,henceincreasing

thecity’sdiversificationimageineconomic,ethnic,politicandculture.Thisisalsooneofthe

pullfactorstotheincreasingdemandindiversityofcuisinesandlifestylesinthecity.Interms

of the culinary scene, Vienna is the only one city, which has a cuisine named after itself,

‘VienneseCuisine’. Inaddition, it is theonlycapital intheworldtoproduceasignificantvol-


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

3

umeofwinewithinthecityboundary,thecoffeehousecultureisapartoftheUNESCOWorld

Heritage(ViennaTouristBoard,2017).Overall,thecityhasawidevarietyofculinaryoffersfor

tourists toengagewith.However,historical scenesandmusicaloutstandingoffersdominate

theimageofViennaasatouristdestination,leavinglittlespacefortheculinaryoffering.Given

thefiercecompetitioninEurope,citieshavetofindnewwaystopositionthemselves,extend

theirofferingsand createnew images.Thus, abetterunderstandingof tourists’perceptions

aboutVienna’sculinarysceneand impactontheirsatisfactioncansupportDMOstodevelop

newexperiences.Therefore,thisstudyhasthefollowingresearchquestion:

Whichaspectsofculinarytourisminfluencestouristsatisfactionandsubsequentlytour-

ists’loyalty?

In the search to answer the above question, the researcher aims to demonstrate the im-

portance of culinary element in the tourists’ experience. In doing so, the thesiswill analyse

howthetouristsperceivedimages,quality,self-imageoftourists,aswellastheirfamiliarityto

thedestination’sculinarysceneaspartoftheirtravelexperiencesinadestination.Thethesis

alsoaimstounderstandhowthiscontributestotourists’satisfactionoftheoverallexperiences

andtheirintentionstoreturntoViennaaswellasrecommendingthepositiveculinaryexperi-

encestootherpeople.Asaresult,suggestionstoDMOandtheculinarytourismstakeholders

inViennacanbedrawnforenhancingthetourists’perceivedimageofViennaasadestination

inrelationtoculinarysceneaspartoftheirtravelexperiences.

Overall,theresearchwilldeterminewhethertheculinaryexperienceisoneofthestrongmoti-

vationsfortouriststovisitVienna,atthesametime,determiningthelevelofattractivenessof

Viennaasaculinarydestination.

1.3 Structureofthesis

Thestudyconsistssixpartsashighlightedbelow:

Chapter1:Introduction

Inthischapter,thebackgroundofthethesisisintroduced,aswellastheoutlineofthechap-

ters. In order to provide an overall understanding of the thesis’s chosen topic, brief infor-

mationoverculinary tourism,andhow it is contributing to theoverall tourismdevelopment

andimageofadestinationwerepresented.Byhighlightingtheimportantofculinarytourism

andtheincreasinginterestsinresearchesinculinarytourismintherecentyears,theresearch-

erthenaddressedtheobjectivesandaimofthisresearch.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

4

Chapter2:Literaturereview

Thischapterreviewsfiveliteraturesandtheoryfoundations,whichthisstudyisbasedon.Con-

tinuingwiththeintroductionofculinarytourismanddestinationimageinChapter1,thischap-

terwillgoindepthwithwhatis(1)destinationimagewhichistheimageperceivedbytourists,

whatdoimagesconsistof,howdotouristsformimage(s)onadestination,andwhyimagesat

differenttravelingstagesmaybenotthesame.Ontheotherhand,howthedestinationwants

toportraititself,andtohavea(2)destinationidentity.However,thereareoftenanmisunder-

standinggapbetweentheperceivedimageandtheself-identifiedimage,henceitisnecessary

forcreating(3)destinationbrandingstrategiestobridgethegap.Thischapteralsodefines(4)

culinarytourism,why it isbecomingan importantpartoftheoveralldestinationtourismde-

velopment, and how it is different to food tourism. And finally how the tourists reflect the

destination as a brand upon themselves; (5) destination self-congruence. Based on the re-

viewed literatures, theauthorwilldeveloptheresearchhypothesesandatheoretical frame-

work.

Chapter3:Conceptualframework:

Inthischapter,theimportantthemesareaddressed.Eachsub-chaptersummarisesandhigh-

lightsthetopicinquestionandproposesthehypothesizedrelationshipstobeinvestigatedand

analysedinthefollowingsectionsofthethesis.

Chapter4:ResearchMethod

Thischapteroutlinesthedefinitionandobjectivesofquantitativeresearchmethods.Forthis

particularresearch,theresearcherselectedquantitativemethod,usingconvenience-sampling

technique to collect data for the objectives of this research. The chapter explains how the

questionnaire was built and for which purpose the questions were constructed in order to

covereachrelatedtopicsandinturntoobtainthenecessarydata.Thedataanalysistooland

approachusedtoanalysethecollecteddataareintroducedinthissectionofthethesis.

Chapter5:Findings

Thischapterprovidesareportoftheresultsfromtheempiricalstudy. Inthefirstpartofthe

chapter,thedemographicprofileofrespondentsaresummarised,followedbytheirprofilesin

regards to purposes of visits, food and cuisine preferences, information sources andpartici-

patedculinaryactivitiesduringvisits.Asthestudyfocusesonculinary,itisimportanttounder-

standtherespondentsandtheirfoodpreferences,wherethesampleisgroupedintoage,gen-

der,frequencyofvisittoViennaandtheirsharinghabitofculinaryexperiencesonsocialme-

dia,hencethethirdpartofthechapterconductsandsummarisesresultsofindependentt-test

forrespondents’profilesandfoodpreferences.Thefourthandfifthpartsofthechapterlook

furtherintherespondents’culinaryexpectationsandattitudesandcomparingwiththeirpro-


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

5

files.Fromthesixthsectionofthechapter,thehypothesizedmodelisvisualised,thenfollowed

byvalidityandreliabilitytestsofthemodel.Theconfirmatoryfactoranalysisisappliedforthe

testingofthemodelwhereresultsarepresentedattheendandthereforeacceptingorreject-

inghypotheses.Thelastsectionofthechaptersummarisesthefindingsobtainedfromopen-

endedquestionsofthequestionnairetoproviderespondents’feedbackontheculinaryscene

inVienna.

Chapter6:Conclusions

The firstpartof thischapter revisits theobjectiveof thestudyandsummarises the findings.

Basedon the findingsof theempirical study, the secondpartprovides recommendations to

thestakeholdersinculinarytourism,particularlyinVienna.Andlastsectionlistsoutthelimita-

tionsofthestudyandprovidessuggestionsforfuturestudiesintheculinarytourismfield.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

6

2 LITERATUREREVIEW

2.1 Destinationimage

Sincetheearlystudyofdestinationimagein1975,Huntandotherresearchersafterhimhave

realized the important contributionsof destination image in tourismand the tourismdevel-

opmentofadestination(Hunt1975;Pearce1982).Inparticularlyistheimportanceofatourist

perceiveddestinationimageanditsimpactontheconsumers’perception,consequentbehav-

iouranddestinationchoice(Gallarza,Saucra,&Garcia,2002).

2.1.1 Definition

Whilstabrandimagehasbeendefinedintheearly1950s,anditsimportanceinunderstanding

consumers’ behaviour has been long recognized by marketers and researchers (Dobni &

Zinkhan, 1990), only until the 1970s that therewere attempts to define destination image.

Echtner andRitchie (1991) have provided a thorough summary ofmost studies on the con-

struct of destination from 1970s to 1991 and concluded that the definitions of destination

imagewere incomplete; cognitive componentsweremainly used to construct a destination

image in a similarmanner to the root of disciplines of image concept. They in turn recom-

mended their definition to include components of three continua; type of image (attrib-

ute/holistic), functional image (functional/psychological), and uniqueness of image (com-

mon/unique). This definition is nowacknowledged tobe themost comprehensiveandmost

citeddefinition:

“theperceptionsofindividualdestinationattributes...[and]theholisticimpression

madeby thedestination. [It] . . . consists of functional characteristics, concerning

themoretangibleaspectsofthedestination,andpsychologicalcharacteristics,con-

cerningthemoreintangibleaspects.Furthermore,[it]...canbearrangedonacon-

tinuumrangingfromtraitswhichcanbecommonlyusedtocomparealldestinations

to those which are unique to very few destinations.” (Echtner & Ritchie, The

MeaningandMeasurementofDestinationImage,1991,p.8)

Untilnow,auniversaldefinitionhasnotbeenagreedon,theyratherenrichtheliteraturebody

ofdestinationimage,andgivedifferentaspectstoit;socialpsychology,sociologyandmarket-

ing(Dobni&Zinkhan,1990).

Taking thetwomostearlydefinitions fordestination imagebyLawsonandBaud-Bovy (1977

citedinRyan,2003,p.132),whereadestinationimageis“anexpressionofknowledge,impres-

sions, prejudices, imaginations and emotional thoughts an individual has of a specific place”

andbyCrompton(1979),imageisthesumofbeliefs,ideas,andimpressionsthatpeoplehave


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

7

ofaplaceordestination,theycouldbeinterpretedthatadestinationimageisanoverallimage

which is received by an individual, then being perceived based on one’s personalities, prior

experiences,knowledge,needs,preferencesandmotivations,beforebeing formed into their

ownimageoveradestination.MilmanandPizam(1995)laterclaimthatthissumcontributes

tothetouristexperienceofvisitors.Theimageoveraplacehowevercanbeperceivedbyboth

residentsoftheplaceaswellasbyvisitors. Inthisstudy,thedestination imagereferstothe

perceived imageof foreigndestination rather the localplaces,hence implying thedefinition

from Bojanic (1991), which states a destination image is the impressions that people hold

aboutacountryinwhichtheyarenotaresidentof.

Although,atourist’sperceptionofplacebasedontheirmemory(Cai,2002),butthememory

canbe formed at different stages of travel experience, hence the existeddestination image

canalsochangeastouristsgothroughthestages;namelythepre-visitdecision-making,on-site

experience,andpost-visit intentions(Fakeye&Crompton,1991).Therefore, it isnoteasyfor

DMOandmarketerstoassessthetourists’ image.Atthepre-visitstage, imagesofadestina-

tiontendtobesecondary;theyaretheimages,whichvisitorsbuildintheirmindsovercollect-

edinformationfromdifferentsourcesexceptdirectexperiences.However,imagesbeinggen-

eratedduringon-siteandatpost-visitintentionsareprimaryimages,whentouristshavefirst-

handexperiencesandimpressionsatadestination.

Fromthevariousstudies,theresearcherhasrealisedthatthetermtouristdestinationimage

(TDI)anddestinationimageareoftenthesameandhencewillbeusedthroughoutthisthesis

interchangeably.

2.1.2 Componentsofdestinationimage;cognitive,affectiveandconative

As Echtner andRitchie (1993) put it, destination image ismultidimensional, and the root of

imageconceptincludesthreecontinua:

• Attribute/Holistic:comprisesattributesofanindividualdestinationsuchasclimate,fa-

cilities,friendlinessofpeopletocomposeaperception,butalsoaholistic impression

shouldbetakenintoaccount.

• Functional/Psychological:Whilefunctional imagesarewhatcanbedirectlymeasured

andobserved,psychologicalimagesaremoreintangibleanddifficulttomeasure.

• Common/Unique: the continuum refers to features and characteristics of a destina-

tion,whethertheyarecommon,orunique.

However,thesecomponentssupportthethreeemphasisedcomponentsofcognitive,affective

andconativetodestinationimage(Tasci,Gartner,&Cavusgil,2007).InKimandPerdue’sstudy

(2011) the important role of cognitive and affective components in forming the destination

imageinthemindofvisitorsarehighlighted,whichalsoaddsweighttoattractivenessofthe

respectivedestination.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

8

Thisstudyadoptsthethreemaincomponentsofanimageastheylayoutwhatpeopleknow

aboutadestination,thefirstcognitiveimageisformed,basedonthathowtheyfeeltowarda

destination(affective)andfinallyhowtheyreacttotheinformation(conative)(Boulding,1956

citedinAgapito;Valle,&Mendes,2013).Inthetraveldestinationcontext,thecognitivecom-

ponentincludesfactualknowledge,beliefsandattitudesofoneselfoverattributesofadesti-

nation.Affectionsarefeelings,emotionstowardsaplace, leadingtoattachmenttotheplace

andstrongmotivestoselectadestination.Theconativecomponentisreferringtobehaviour

oftourists;thatiswhentouristhastakenallinternalandexternalinformationinconsideration

andprocessedthemtomaketheactualactionofselecting,visiting/revisitingorrecommending

adestination.Thiscomponent is relatedtotourist loyalty (Agapito ,Valle,&Mendes,2013).

Despitetheseeminglyimportanceoftheconativecomponentinconstructingapositivedesti-

nation image, inmanydefinitionsofdestination image, conative (behavioural) component is

missing(Slabbert&Martin,2017).Thenextsectionwillexplainhowthedestinationimageis

formed.

2.1.3 Formingofdestinationimage

Understandinghowdestination image form is beneficial toDMO to knowwhen,where and

howtheperceivedimagecanbeinfluencedfortheadvantageofthedestination.Echtnerand

Ritchie(2003)suggestthatimagescanformatsomephasesinthesevenphasesoftravelex-

perience suggested by Gunn (1988). Table 1 summarises the sources of information and

formedimagesatdifferentphases,thefirstphase,thetouristsreceivesecondaryinformation

from media, magazines, or word-of-mouth (WOM), in other words, non-commercial infor-

mationtoformtheirorganicimageofadestination,atthisphase,theimagecanbeunclear.At

thesecondphaseofpre-tripstage,an image ismodifiedandenhancedbymore information

searchfromcommercialsourcessuchastravelagents,guidebooksorbrochures.Throughthe

information search,an image towardsadestinationbecomesmore induced, clearerand im-

proved.Atthispoint,afavourabledestinationimagewouldleadtoadestinationselection.In

thepost-trip, the last phaseof travel experience, an image is perceivedbasedon first-hand

experienceandreviewedtoformapersonalprimaryandauthenticimage,andthisshallbethe

final image of a tourist toward a destination, however as the experience consisted ofmany

otherfactorstakenintoaccount,hencetheimageiscomplex.

BalogluandMcCleary(1999)introducedageneralframeworkofdestinationimageformation,

to identify influencesduringtheprocessof imageformation;whichhasbeenthefoundation

formanyotherstudiesafterthat.Thebaseimageinthisframeworkrelatedtotheperceived

image by visitors before the actual visitation to the destination. Their framework was built

basedonthewidelyagreementthatthetwoforces;stimulusfactorsandpersonalfactors,to

form the global (overall) destination image. The stimuli factors include information sources,

previous experience and distribution,whereas, personal factors are social and psychological

characteristics.Theresultoftheirmodeltestingshowedthatthethreeidentifieddeterminants


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

9

are:tourismmotivations,socio-demographics,andvariousinformationsources;withhighlight

ontheagehasdirectimpactonbothcognitiveandaffectiveevaluationsandinturntheoverall

destination image (Baloglu & McCleary, 1999). Interestingly, the affective component was

testedtobemoreinfluentialthanthecognitivecomponentinopposetotheotherstudiesas

mentionedearlier(Slabbert&Martin,2017).

Table1.Interrelationshipofvariousdefinitionsofthedestinationimage

Stage Phase(Gunn,1988) Sourceofinformation Image

Pre-trip

1.Accumulationofmental imagesaboutvacationexperiences

Non-commercial second-ary information (Echtner&Ritchie,2003)

Organic image (Gunn, 1988;Gartner,1993)

Unclear image (Tocquer &Zins,2004)

2.Modificationofthoseimagesbyfurtherinformation

Commercial secondaryinformation (Echtner &Ritchie,2003)

Inducedimage(Gunn,1988)

Clear Image/Improved image(Tocquer&Zins,2004)

3.Decisiontotakeavacationtrip

During-trip 4.Traveltothedestination Distorted image (Tocquer &

Zins,2004)

5.Participationatthedestination Refined image (Tocquer &Zins,2004)

Post-trip

6.Returninghome

7.Modificationofimagesbasedonthevacationexperience

First-hand experience(Echtner&Ritchie,2003)

Primary image (Gunn, 1988;Phelps,1986)

Final image (Tocquer & Zins,2004)

Complex image (Gartner,1993)

Realisingthefactthataperceivedimagetowardsadestinationintheconsumers’mindchang-

es throughout the different phases of their travel experience (Fakeye & Crompton, 1991),

henceitisnotaneasytaskbutnecessaryforDMOandmarketerstoassesstheperceivedtour-

ists’ imagebeforeandafter thevisitation.Taking this intoaccount,BeerliandMartin (2004,

cited in Slabbert & Martin, 2017) proposed their adapted model of destination image for-

mationprocesstoincludetheinformationsourcesasshowninFigure1.

There are four objectives to Beerli’s andMartin’s adaption of themodel; (1) the perceived

image can vary between first-time visitors to repeat visitors, (2) the analysing of perceived

Source:AdaptedfromMadden,Rashid,&Zainol,2016


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

10

image from secondary information and perceived image after the first-hand experience can

onlybedoneonce,(3)amongstdifferentvisits,theperceivedimagescouldchangeand(4)the

resultsfromtwosetsofsamplewereabletovalidatetheirproposedmodel(BeerliandMatin,

2004citedinSlabbert&Martin,2017).

Figure1.Modelofdestinationimageformation

Thesestudiesthereforesuggestthatapersoncandevelopanimagetowardadestinationeven

withoutanactualvisitation,andthattheimagesbeforeandaftervisitationscanbedifferent.

ThisstudyfocusesontheperceivedimagesoftouristswhohavebeentoViennaandhaveac-

tualfirst-hand,directexperiencestohaveamoreglobalimageofthedestination.

2.1.4 Destinationimageandtourists’loyaltytoadestination

Zhanget.al(2014)summarisedthedefinitionoftourists’loyaltyasthreeaspects,behavioural,

attitudinalandacombinationofboth;inwhichtheattitudinalisthereceivedvaluehencede-

velopingacertainattitudetowardadestination.Allaspectssuggestthattourists’loyaltywould

leadtointentionofrepurchase,continuedpatronageandrecommendtootherpeople.

Therehavebeensupportedstudieson“thedestinationimageformedasaresultofthetravel

experience has a influence on intentions to visit again and positive word-of-mouth” (Nisco,

InformationSources

• Secondary: Induced, organic,Autonomous

• Primary: Previous experience,Intensityofvisit

PersonalFactors:

• Motivations• Vacationexperience• Socio-demographiccharacteris-

tics

Cognitiveimage

Affectiveimage

Overallimage

Source:Beerli&Martín(2004,p.660citedfromSlabbert&Martin,2017)


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

11

Mainolfi,Marino,&Napolitano,2015,p.310),aspositivedestination imagehave impacton

tourists’behaviouralandcontributetotheprobabilityoftouristsreturningtothesamedesti-

nation.

In their introduction of customer-based brand equity, Konecnik andGartner (2007) propose

thatinthecustomers-centricview,theyagreethatbrandequityshouldbemeasuredbycus-

tomers’ evaluationof brandon four dimensions;awareness, image, quality and loyalty. The

customer-basedbrandequitywillbeinfurtherdetailsinsection2.3ofthisthesis.Thesefour

dimensionsareoverlaidwiththethreecomponentsofdestinationimage;cognitive,affective

andconative.Theyanalyseinthedirectionthatbrandawarenesscontributestowardcognition

ofadestination,atthesametimelinkedtotheconativecomponentofthatdestination.The

imageandqualitydimensionsaffecttheaffectivecomponentaswellasbeinglinkedtocona-

tivecomponent.Allthewhilekeepinginmindthatloyaltyoftouristsisassociatedwithcona-

tivecomponentsof thedestination,hencesuggestingtheoretically thefourdimensionshave

positiveinfluencetotheloyaltyoftouriststoadestination.

Inthisstudy,thedestinationimageismeasuredbasedontheimageandqualitydimensionsin

relations to cognitive and affective components of Vienna andwhat influence do they have

towardtourists’loyaltytothecity,inanotherwords,howdothesecomponentsinfluencethe

decisiontorevisitorrecommendthecitytootherpeople.

However,destinationimageiswhatgeneratedbasedontheportrayeddestinationidentityby

DMOs;itistheimagethatDMOsinitiallywanttoidentifyandmakethedestinationstandout

tovisitors.Hence,itisimportanttoalsounderstandwhatisthedestinationidentityandhowit

isformed.

2.2 Destinationidentity

OneofthemostfrequentcitationsinintheliteratureofdestinationidentityisfromKapferer,

hesuggeststhat‘beforeknowinghowweareperceived,wemustknowwhoweare’.Inorder

tohaveandmanageagoodbrand,aDMOshouldunderstandboththeirdestinationidentity

and thedestination image,andonlywithan identity,adestinationcan identifyandposition

itselfinthemarkettothetourists(Yusof&Ismail,2014).

2.2.1 Definition

Abrandidentityiscommonlyacceptedthatitisanimagefromthesupplier’sperspective.The

definitionofbrandidentityis,accordingtoAaker(1991,p.7citedinPike,2008),“abrandisa

distinguishingnameand/orsymbol(suchasalogo,trademark,orpackagedesign)intendedto

identifythegoodsorservicesofeitheroneselleroragroupofsellers,andtodifferentiatethose

goodsfromthoseofcompetitors”. It iswhatshapesconsumers’comprehensiveopinionofa

brand(Upshaw,1995,p.12).


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

12

Atouristdestinationismorecomplexthanatraditionalproductorservice,becauseatourist

destination includes several products, services and experiences. As a result, there aremany

stakeholders involved in constructing the brand identity, such as the host community and

businessoperators.Thus,adestinationidentitycanbeseenasanetworkpictureofhistorical,

nationalandcultural relationships inorder todrawouta commonview,andhencebuilding

theestablishment for jointaction for/oragainstchange (Olins,2002cited inKonecnik&Go,

2008). It is the common element of a destination, sending a singlemessage amid thewide

varietyof itsproducts,actionsandcommunicationstothetourists (Kapferer,2008). Inother

words,thestakeholdersaresendingtheirvisionofhowthebrandshouldbeperceivedtotheir

targetmarketandsegmentation(Yusof&Ismail,2014).

Abrandisnotsimplyaproduct,butratherareflectionofaproductmeaningthroughdefining

itsidentity;thereflectionconsistsofvisual,auditory,andothersensorycomponents,tobuild

recognition,toprovidedifferentiation,tocreatecommunications,andtorepresentthebrand

promise (Kaferer, 1998,p. 17 cited in Suma&Bello, 2012;Ajagbe, et al., 2015). Pike (2008)

arguesthatDMOsactuallyhavenodirectcontrolofhoweachstakeholder(individualseller)in

thetourismindustryoftheirdestinationidentifies,andhenceDMOscannotguarantythede-

liveryofadestinationpromise;addingdifficultiesinthetasksofbrandidentitymanaging.

Many destination identity’s definitions entail themultiple roles of identity in brand analysis

andmeasuringbrandequity. InstudiesbyKonecnik&Go(2008)andWorluetal.(2015),the

definitionsofbrandidentityarerecitedandlistedasroles,suchas(i)asetofassociationsthat

DMOswishtocreateandmaintain,(ii)avisionhowabrandshouldbeperceivedbythetarget-

edaudience, i.e.tourists inthiscontext,and(iii)anaidtotherelationshipestablishmentbe-

tween a brand and its clientele via the generation of a value proposition potentially either

involvingbenefitsorprovidingcredibilityinordertoendorsesthebrand.

Insomestudies,brand identity isused interchangeablewithbrandpersonality,however it is

worthclarifyingthatbrandpersonalityisasetofhumantraitsassociatedtoabrand,andmay

increase consumers’ preference and usage of a brand (Aaker, 1997 cited in Mahdi, et al.,

2015),thereforebrandpersonalityisdifferentfromabrandidentity,butratheracomponent

ofbrandidentity.Thenextsectionwillexplainthisinmoredetails.

2.2.2 Abrandidentity’scomponentsandaspects

Kapferer (2008)developedabrand identityprism, itspurpose is toanalysebrands from the

supplier-perspectiveasshowninFigure2.Theprismincludessixcomponents:physique,per-

sonality,culture,relationship,reflectionorimageandself-image,thesecomponentstogether

definetheidentityofabrandandwouldcomeintoeffectonceabrandcommunicateswithits

targetcustomers.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

13

Thesixcomponentsaredividedandarrangedoverfourfacets.Througheveryformofcommu-

nication,therecipientscandescribethesenderbyPhysiqueandPersonalitycomponents.On

theotherside, theReflectionandSelf-imagehelp todefine the recipients fromthesenders’

perspective.AndRelationshipandCultureare the components thatbridge thegapbetween

thesendersandrecipients.ThefacetonthelefthandsideincludesPhysique,Relationshipand

Reflection,theyarethevisiblecomponents,whicharethesocialfacets,andtheyareusedto

expressthebrandexternally.Whiletheotherthreecomponents;Personality,CultureandSelf-

image,areincorporatedwithinthebrand’sspirit(Kapferer,2008).

Figure2.Brandidentityprism

TheothermodelbydeChernatony(1999,citedinMahdietal.,2015)iscalledtheprocessof

managingabrand,thismodelisadaptedafterKapferer,andconceptualisesbrandidentity.As

thenameofthemodelsuggests, itemphasizesonthe importanceofDMOs’tasktomanage

thebrands.Thismodelindicatesthatbrandidentityhasfouraspects:personality,positioning,

vision&cultureandrelationship.Whileallaspectsinfluenceeachother,brandvisionandcul-

ture is the core aspect to determine and drive the other aspects to form identity.De Cher-

natony’smodelisanon-goingprocesswherethebrandidentityissimultaneouslyinfluencing

PhysiqueIt isphysicalspecificitiesandquali-tiesofabrand,thesalientobjectivefeatureofabrand.

PersonalityA brand can be described andmeasured by human personalitytraits, which are associated to it.Note:thepersonalityfacetofbrandidentity should not be confusedwithpersonalreflectedimage.

RelationshipBrand relationship defines themodeofconductofthebrand,howabrandwishtobeseenbycustomersviatheexchangedcommunication

CultureA set of value is an aspirationalsourceand inspiresa brand that is abrand’s coreandgoverns the outputofabrand.

ReflectionA successful brand reflection en-couragescustomerstowanttousethebrandtobuildtheirownidenti-ty, instead of showing them whattheyare.

Self-imageItisaninternalimageofanindivid-ual customer, an image of how acustomerwouldliketobeseenas.

Pictureofrecipient

Pictureofsender

Externalisation Internalisation

Source:AdaptedfromKapferer,2008,p.183


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

14

theperceivedbrandimagebyconsumers,whethertheperceivedimageisnegativeorpositive,

itwillaffectthebrandidentity(Mahdi,Mobarakabadi&Hamidi,2015).

DespitetheobviousimportanceofdestinationidentitydevelopmentforDMOsandmarketers,

therearelackingliteratureresearchesonthesubject.Thebrandidentityintheperspectiveof

touristsisstillthefocusforstudiesinthefieldoftourismdestinationliterature.Theformation

ofdestinationidentityisanon-goingandtwo-wayprocessbetweenthesupplierandthecus-

tomer.Atthesametime,itisarguablethatthereisalwaysagapbetweenprojectionimageby

DMOs and the tourists’ perceived image (Tasci, Gartner& Cavusgil, 2007). Thus, a need for

destinationbrandingisarisentobridgethisgap.

2.3 Destinationbranding

Manyresearchersandmarketerspointoutthatanactualimageperceivedbyconsumerscould

beratherdifferentfromanimage,whichDMOintendstoassigntotheirownbrandordestina-

tion.Destinationmarketershavebeentryingtobridgethegapviamarketingstrategy,inorder

toeitherincreasetheawarenessofthedestination,ortoenhancethedestinationimageinthe

consumers’mind(Pike,2008).Itiscommonlyacceptedthatdestinationbrandingisacompo-

nentofdestinationmanagement (Ritchie&Ritchie,1998).Whencollecting the literature for

destinationbranding,Pike (2008)pointedout that therewasa lack in studyon this subject,

andonlyuntilthe1990sthedestinationbrandingwasmentionedinthetourismliterature,and

thefirstmeetingonitbetweenpractitionersandacademicswasin1997.Yettherearesome-

timesconfusionsbetweendestinationbrandinganddestinationmarketing,asBuncle,anex-

pertinthedestinationbrandingexplainsit,destinationbrandingis‘whoweare’,whiledesti-

nationmarketingis‘howyoucommunicatewhoyouare’(ThePlaceBrandObserver,2015).

2.3.1 Definition

From themarket perspective, Aaker’s definition of destination branding is one of themost

cited definitions for destination branding. His definition of branding suggests that there are

twomainrolestoit;toidentityandtodifferentiateabrand.

Abrandisadistinguishingnameand/orsymbol(suchasalogo,trademark,orpackage

design) intended to identify the goods or services of either one seller or a group of

sellers, and to differentiate those goods from those of competitors (Aaker, 1991, p.7

citedfromPike,2008).

WhileRitchieandRitchie(1998,p.103)tookAaker’sdefinitionandextendedit,theysuggest

destinationbrand


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

15

“conveys the promise of a memorable travel experience that is uniquely associated

with the destination; it also serves to consolidate and reinforce the recollection of

pleasurablememoriesofthedestinationexperience”.

Theybelieve,thevisitorexperienceisindeedwhatbeingeffectivelypurchasedbytouristsand

ispartof thepromiseadestinationbranddelivers.A successfulandcompetitivedestination

brand is a brand being able to deliver ‘quality experience’, a high quality ‘stream of prod-

uct/servicetransactions’ (Otto&Ritchie,1995cited inBlain,etal.,2005).Thereforedestina-

tionbrand’spromiseisdifferenttothetraditionalproductbrand’spromise(exceptionsinclude

butnotlimitedtoproductssuchasperfumeandserviceslikemassage),wherethecustomers’

satisfaction tends to rely on the functional nature of the product, product usage (Ritchie&

Ritchie,1998).Thisdefinitionalso takes intoaccountofdifferentstagesofa trip,andhence

suggests that any attempt in destination branding should reassure certain (positive) future

pleasureand/orexcitements relating to thedestination inquestionatduring-trip stage,and

reinforce the recollection of memorable experiences at post-trip stage (Ritchie & Ritchie,

1998).

Fromtheorganisationalperspective,manyresearcherssuchasMorgen,PritchardandPiggott

(2002citedinBlain,Levy,&Ritchie,2005)agreethatabrand’spromiseis important,forthe

samepurposeofindicatingabetterpictureandmoreaccuratelyofwhatabouttocome,which

typeofexperienceatthedestination inthequestionvisitorscanexpecttoobtain.However,

theyandPike(2008),alsoadmitthatforDMOshavenodirectinfluenceandcontroloverthe

promise,astherearemanyandcomplicatedentities involvedincreatingdestinationidentity

andhenceaddingdifficultiesdestinationbranding.

Inthestudyondestinationbranding,withinsightsandpracticesfromDMOs,Blainetal.(2005)

summarisethatdestinationbrandingisasetofmarketingactivitiesthat(1)identifyanddiffer-

entiateadestination,(2)conveyexpectationsofmemorableexperiencesrelatedtothedesti-

nation,(3)consolidateandreinforcetheemotionalconnectionbetweenvisitorsandthedesti-

nation,and(4)tohelpreducesearchcostsandperceivedrisksforconsumers.However,they

highlightedthatdestinationimageisthemostimportantelement,beingcreatedthroughthis

setofactivitiesininfluencingvisitors’destinationchoice(Blain,Levy,&Ritchie,2005).

Indestinationbrandinginvolvesdestinationpositioning,inwhichDMOshavecontrolover,and

theyusebrandpositioningasa tool tocreateattractiveness inpeople’smind,a fitbetween

supplyanddemand,andhenceshapingadvantagepointscomparingtootherdestinations,all

inordertodifferentiatetheirbrandfromothercompetitors.AsshowninFigure3,destination

positioningistheinterfacebetweendestinationimageanddestinationidentity.(Pike,2008)

Throughpositioningactivities,thedestinationidentityshouldbecommunicatedandprojected

to the targetedmarket in order to gain destination uniqueness; destination differentiation,


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

16

andstandingoutinthemindsoftargetmarketwhenselectingadestination.Andbrandequity

hasbeenrecognisedtobeanimportantfactortohelpabrand(product/service)todojustthat

(Horng,Liu,Chou,&Tsai,2012).

Figure3.Brandidentity,BrandpositioningandBrandimage

2.3.2 Brandequity

Aaker(1991)providedthefirstdefinitionofbrandequityasaconcept,whichcanbeappliedto

bothtangibleandintangibleelements.Horngetal.(2012)andKim&Kim(2005)hassumma-

rised the major definitions of brand equity as shown in Table 2, the definitions imply that

brandequityreflectsthesuccessofmarketingstrategy,whichenhancesthedestinationbrand

inthemindofconsumers,andmightresultinincreaseinvisitation,spendingtimeatthedesti-

nationand/ordestinationloyalty(Gartner,2014).

Therearemainly threeperspectivesonbrandequity:consumer-based, financial,andacom-

binedperspective(Kim&Kim,2005).Theconsumer-basedperspectiveitselfincludestwocon-

cepts,brandstrengthandbrandvalue(Srivastava&Shocker,1991citedinKim&Kim,2005).

Whilethebrandstrengthisdeterminedbyconsumers’perceptions,knowledgeandbehaviours

toward a destination, creates the destination’s competitive advantages,brand value is from

thesupplier side, it reflects the financial returns fromthebrandstrength,whichDMOcould

abletocreatethroughstrategicactions(Kim&Kim,2005).

In the marketing operational literature, there are many dimensions and components being

suggestedwithin the frameof customer-basedbrand equity, howeverAaker’s findings have

been widely accepted and adopted in studies. He suggests that customer’s evaluation of a

brandconsistsfourdimensions:awareness,image,qualityandloyaltydimensions(Kim&Per-

due,2011;Gartner,2014).Whiletheconsumerperceptionisreflectedthroughdimensionsof

brandawareness,brandimageandbrandquality,consumerbehaviourisshowninbrandloyal-

ty.

Destination

Identity

Desired

brandimage

Destination

Image

Actualimage

heldbycon-

sumers

Destinationpositioning

Source:Pike,2008,p.179


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

17

Table2.Brandequitydefinitionsandconcepts

Authors Definition

Farquhar(1989) theaddedvalueendowedbythebrandname

Aaker(1991) brand loyalty, brand awareness, perceived quality, brandassociations,andotherproprietarybrandassets

Srivastava&Shocker(1991) Brandstrengthwithcustomerperceptionandbehaviour

Keller(1993) differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer re-sponsetothemarketingofthebrand

Simon&Sullivan(1993) incrementalutility

Swait, Erdem, Louviere, &Dubelaar(1993)

totalutility

Kamakura&Russel(1993) Brandvalueintangiblevalueandintangiblevalue

Park&Srinivasan(1994) Thedifferencebetweenoverallbrandpreferenceandmulti-attributed preference based on objectively measured at-tributelevels

Blackston(1995) Theobjectivebrandinpersonalitycharacteristicsandbrandimageandsubjectivebrandinbrandattitude

Lassar,Mittal&Sharma(1995) The discovery of a halo of brand equity dimensions thatmeasure performance, social image, commitment, valueandtrustworthiness

Agarwal&Rao(1996) overallqualityandchoiceintention

Source:AdaptedfromKim&Kim,2005andHorng,etal.,2012

Inthisparticularstudy,apart fromdestination image,perceivedquality isbeingexamined in

thebasisofvarietiesofculinaryofferingsinVienna,inordertodeterminewhetherornotthe

perceivedqualityinfluencethetouristsloyaltytowardthecity.

2.3.2.1 Perceivedquality

Whilethedefinitionofqualityisnotuniversallyagreedon,therearemanystudieswhichwere

basedonthefiveapproacheswhichGarvin(1984)synthesisedfromphilosophy(transcendent

approach),economics(product-basedapproach),marketing(user-basedapproach),andoper-

ations management (manufacture-based and value-based approaches). On one hand, for a

productitissomewhateasiertodeterminequality,ontheotherhand,aservicewherequality

isindividuallyevaluated,thusqualityisratherperceivedquality(Radder&Han,2013).Many

researchersstatethatthemeasurementofperceivedqualityisthecomparisonofwhatacus-

tomershouldexpect(Bitner,1990;Bolton&Drew,1991;Parasuraman,Zeithaml&Berry,1998

inCronin&Taylor,1992).


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

18

Anoverallevaluationofatouristonadestinationisoftenacombinationofproducts,services

andexperiences, inwhichqualityplaysanimportantroleinallofthem(Konecnik&Gartner,

2007), it isstillarguableonthemeasurementsofquality,astheevaluationofqualitycanbe

subjective, at the same time different from objective and/or actual quality (Kwak & Kang,

2009).Oftenenough,qualityhasbeenbeinglinkedtopriceasawayofevaluating.Neverthe-

less, therearevariousresearchesprovingthatperceived imageandperceivedqualityare in-

terrelatedattributesandaresupportingoneandanotherinvisitorsevaluationofimage,quali-

tyandtoshapetheirmindoveradestination(Konecnik&Gartner,2007).Andthe“qualityof

experience”countstowardindirecteffecttoaffectvisitors’overallimage(Baloglu&McCleary,

1999, p. 881). Inmany studies, perceived quality shows to have a positive effect on tourist

satisfaction,andsatisfactionaffectsloyaltyandpost-tripbehaviour(Aliman,etal.,2014).More

over,qualityhasbothdirectandindirect(throughformingpositivecognitiveperceivedimage

andsatisfaction)effectsonvisitors’behaviouralintentioninserviceindustry,andthatquality

is a better indicator of visitors’ behavioural intention than satisfaction (Kayat & Hai, 2013;Radder&Han,2013).

2.3.2.2 BrandLoyalty

Brand loyaltybringsbenefits tonotonly thebrand,destinationsbut alsobeneficial the cus-

tomers. On the one hand, companies,marketers, and in this caseDMOs, acknowledge that

customers’loyaltymeanslowermarketingcosts,highertradetravelleverage(e.g.revenuein

tourism and related industries, stand-out from competitors), WOM referrals. On the other

hand,customersfindbeingloyaltoadestinationprovidesthemlowerlevelofriskanddissatis-

faction,theknowledgeofsimilarpeopletothemselves,emotional/personalattachmenttothe

experience,chancetovisit themissedsights/aspectsofadestinationthatpreviouslynotful-

filled,andtoshareandexposeotherpeopletoapreviouslysatisfyingexperience(Gitelsonand

Crompton,1984citedfromPike,2008,p.182).

2.4 Brandself-congruence

Theinterestsonconsumersbehaviourhavebeenincreasedduetotherecognizedimportantin

strategies development of a brand/product/service, self-congruence in particular helpsmar-

keters and researchers to better understand the perceived image of their own

brand/product/serviceinordertodefinetheirtargetsegment,tobetterpositionthemselvesin

themarketandcreatemoreappropriateadvertisement targeting their consumers (Abdallat,

2012).

Self-congruencereferstothematchbetweenconsumers’self-conceptandtheir(tourists)per-

ceivedimageofthedestination(Sirgy&Johar,TowardanIntegratedModelofSelf-Congruity

andFunctionalCongruity,1999).Theself-conceptisone’sbeliefsone’sattributes,andhowhe

orsheevaluatesthesequalities(Solomon,et.al,2006,p.208).Itiscreatedandshapedviathe


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

19

symbolic action of goods acquisition and consumptions, in a simplicity perspective; self-

concept reflects the cognitive and affective knowledge of ‘who we are and what we are’

(Schouten,1991).Theprocessofself-congruityiswhenaconsumerselectsabrandormakesa

travel destination decision inwhich it enhances and reflects his or hermental image (Sirgy,

1985citedinMahjoub&Naeij,2015).Duetothisreason,self-conceptandself-imageareused

interchangeablyinthisstudy.

Inhisresearch,Sirgysuggestedseveralcomponentstoself-congruence;actualself, idealself,

actual social self, ideal social self (Sirgy, 1982, 1985, 1986 cited inMahjoub&Naeij, 2015),

where:

- Actualself-congruity ishowpeopleactuallyseethemselves inrelationtothetypeof

peoplewhopurchasetheproduct/brand

- Idealself-congruityishowpeopleliketoseethemselves

- Actualsocialself-congruity is referringtohowpeoplebelievetheyareseenbyother

peopleinrelationtotheproduct/brandimage

- Idealsocialself-congruityishowpeoplewouldliketobeseenbyotherpeopleinrela-

tiontotheproduct/brandimage(Kiliç&Sop,2012).

In the tourismcontext, themost commondimensionsbeingemphasizedare theactual self-

and the ideal self-congruence in evaluating tourists’ revisit intention andpredicting tourists’

destinationdecision(Kiliç&Sop,2012).Andhenceinthisstudy,theresearcherwouldliketo

conduct an empirical study on how touristswho visit Vienna perceive the city as a culinary

destinationviatheiractualandidealself-congruence.

2.4.1 Self-congruenceandloyalty

As in the tourism context, loyalty to a destinationmeans revisiting and recommending the

destination to other people. Various researches demonstrate the relationship between self-

congruenceandloyaltytobrand,products,and/ordestinations,whereinfactself-congruence

hasaneffectontheconsumerbehaviour,andbrandpreferences(Chon,1992citedfromTasci

etal.,2007,p.214;Kressmannetal.,2006).

Byselectingcertainbrands/destinations,customersbelievethatthebrand-imagereflexescus-

tomers’ ideal self-image, and hence the selected brands satisfy their needs for self-esteem.

Whiletheself-identityofcustomershavebeencreated,customersthenhaveaneedtomain-

taintheidentity,howcustomersactuallyseethemselves,hencetheneedforself-consistency

needstobemet,andthisneed isoneofthemotivationstomakecustomers loyaltobrands

(Kressmannetal.,2006).StudiesfromSirgyandSu(1999citedinKiliç&Sop,2012),Ekinciet

al.(2011)demonstratethatself-congruitymotivatestouriststobeloyaltoadestination, ina

later studybyKiliç&Sop (2012) shows that the idealandactual self-congruencehavemore


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

20

significantinfluencesonloyalty;bothintentiontorevisitandtorecommend,thansocialself-

congruence.

2.5 CulinaryTourism

2.5.1 Definition

The term “culinary” derives fromGreek term of Culinaria,which refers to the local cuisine,

eitherthatisacountry’s,aregion’soradestination’sdishes,techniquesinfoodpreparation,

hencegiventhespecialitytotheircuisine(Kivela&Crotts,2006).Dr.LucyLong(2004)wasthe

firsttointroducethephraseculinarytourism in1996ataconference,andin2004itwasthe

titleofhereditedvolume.Culinaryinherdefinitionreferstofoodasbeing“asubjectandme-

dium,destinationandvehicle”whichaidtourism.Fromthetourist’sperspective,culinarytour-

ismisthe intentional,exploratoryofnewfoodasone“exploresnewcultureandwaysofbe-

ing”. FromaDMOs’perspective, it is aproduct (food),which is sold to showcase their local

histories,andconstructtheirdestinationidentitytoattractandsatisfythevisitors.Butoverall,

itisanunconventionallywayofexperiencingfood,awaythatisoutsideofaneverydayroutine

tonoticeandappreciatethatdifference(Long,2004).

While Long’s definition of culinary tourismmainly focuses on food, other definitions by re-

searchersandexpertssuchasErikWolf(2004citedinKivela&Crotts,2006),suggestthatculi-

narytourismisalsoaboutbeverages,notonlyfood.Wolf(Wolf,2002citedinKivela&Crotts,

2006,p.356)refers toculinarytourismasactivities that involvetravelling“inorder tosearch

forandenjoyprepared foodanddrink”andhenceacquiring“uniqueandmemorablegastro-

nomicexperiences”.Theseexperiencescontributetowardsthepleasurefeelingsthattourists

haveduring theirholidays. Insomedestinations, theculinaryscene isamajor focuspoint in

destinationmarketingtoattracttouristsaswellasbuildingthedestination identity (Kivela&

Crotts,2006).

2.5.2 CulinaryTouristsandtypesofculinarytourists

Atypicalculinarytouristor“foodie”exploresadestinationthroughauthenticityoffood,and

socialisesbysharingtheexperiences(WorldTourismOrganisation,2012,p.10).Adestination

hasamorecomprehensiveoffer tonotonly ‘foodies’.Given that theculinary scene isoften

linked to cultural and natural heritage of the destination, creating opportunities for several

touristsegments(Hall,2012).Hjalager(2003cited inKivela&Crotts,2006),proposedaphe-

nomenologicalmodelofculinarytourismexperiencesinwhichtouristsattitudesandfoodand

beveragepreferencesarecategorisedintofourgroups:

- Existentialgastronomytourists seekforthe“whereonlythe localseat”placeforthe

foodandexperiencecombinationwhichfosterlearningandknowledgeaboutthelocal

cultureandthedestination.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

21

- Experimentalgastronomytouristsseekforthetrendyfoodplacesandthe‘in’,fashion-

able foods, as they reflect their lifestyle. To them quality and fissionability value of

foodarestrongconsiderationpoints.

- Recreationalistgastronomytouristsaremoreconservativetype.Theyseekforthefa-

miliarity of their home cuisine, prefer to self-cater, and hence dining ambiance and

servicestylehavelittleimpacttothem.

- Diversionarygastronomytourists lookforeveryday-life-escapeandhencespendlittle

effortinseekingforfoodandfoodoutlets.Tothempopularandchainrestaurantop-

erationsarecommonchoices.Theyfocusonquantityratherthanquality,andsoexot-

icfoodarenotoftenpreferred.

Thenextsectionwillexplainthemotivationsandinfluencingfactsthetrip.

2.5.3 Motivationsandinfluencingfactorsfortouriststodoculinarytrips

Althoughgastronomic touristsare thosewhoplantheir trippartiallyor totally toexperience

thecuisineofthedestination,therearecertainlydifferentmotivationstogoonculinarytrips.

ManydestinationswhereDMOsaimtodesignandcreateproductsthatareculinary-oriented

togivetheirvisitorsauniqueexperience.Destinationswhereculinaryistheirdestinationiden-

tity, suchas Italy, Spain,Greece, andMoroccodue to the fact that these countrieswere in-

cludedinUNESCO’slistofIntangibleCulturalHeritageofHumanityinNovember2010(Herrera

etal.,2012).

HallandSharples(2003)havefurtherclarifieddifferentlevelofinterestandhencetravelmoti-

vationinthefoodtourismsegmentasshowninFigure4,whereculinarytouristshavemoder-

atelevelofinterest,theirmotivationsarevisitingalocalmarket,festival,restaurantsorwinery

atthetraveldestinations,andhenceculinary isasecondarymotivationalfactortoselectthe

destination.

Despite thatculinary isamotivation itself tourgepeople to travel, inamoregeneral sense,

motivations to culinary tourism are classified into internal (pushmotives) and external (pull

motives) stimuli. Push factorsderive frompersonaldemandanddesiresof visitors; theyare

based on psychological (relaxation), sociological (bonding time with family, friends), and/or

egocentric needs (Herrera et al., 2012). Studies have shown that the higher the level of in-

volvement with culinary, the more specific the motivation to travel (Getz, Robinson,

Andersson,&Vujicic, 2014). Kimet al. (2010) explored food tourists’motivations aremulti-

dimensionalandconcludedwith threemost standoutpush factors for thisgroupof tourists:

KnowledgeandLearning,FunandNewExperiences,andRelaxationwithFamily.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

22

Figure4.Foodtourismasspecialinteresttourism

Source:(Hall&Sharples,2003,p.11)

Butdecision to travel isalso influencedbypull factors;DMOs take intoconsiderationof the

importantofthesefactorstoattractnewandrepeattouristsinthiscompetitivetourismindus-

try(Yiamjanya&Wongleedee,2014).Here,culinaryofadestinationcanbeusedasaproduct,

brandor symbolofaplace (Smith,2007).Pull factors in tourismarenatural, culturalattrac-

tions,specialeventsandfestivals,friendlinessofresidents,value,proximity,etc.,inthedirect

relationstoculinarytourism;thefactorsareexperienceswithfoodproductionatthedestina-

tions,gastronomicdiversityandvariety,areaqualityandvalue,qualityofevent(Herreraetal.,

2012;Kimetal.,2010).


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

23

3 CONCEPTUALFRAMEWORK:

Intourism,itisindifferenttootherindustries,wherecustomers’loyaltyisalsohighlydesirable.

Loyaltyinthisresearchisreferringtotheconativeactionoftouristswhohavevisitedadesti-

nation(inthiscase isVienna)andwould (i) recommend(WOM), (ii)have intentiontorevisit

andrevisit.Manyresearchesandstudieshaveshownthatincreasingleveloftourists’satisfac-

tionhaspositive impactsonthe intentionof return (Lertputtarak,2012),as tourismsatisfac-

tion isdefinedas ‘theextentofoverallpleasureorcontentment feltby thevisitor, resulting

fromtheabilityofthetripexperiencetofulfill thevisitor’sdesire,expectationsandneeds in

relationtothetrip(ChenandTsai,2007,p.1116inNiscoetal.,2015).Andtourists’satisfaction

ispositivelyinfluencedbyaspectssuchasdestinationimage,perceivedquality,andperceived

value(Alimanetal.,2014).

3.1 Destinationimage,destinationsatisfactionandtourists’loyalty

Mostresearchesfocusonthecognitiveandaffectiveaspects inbrand/destinationimagefor-

mationprocessasthetwocomponentsaddweighttoattractivenessoftherespectivedestina-

tionintheeyesofvisitors(KimandPerdue,2011).Basedontheexistentknowledgeandfeel-

ingstowardadestination,avisitorwouldthendecidetovisitthatdestination.Whenvisitors

go through the travel experiences, their image over the respective destination is form, and

studiesproposethatperceiveddestinationimagebyvisitorsdohaveimpactontheprobability

of returning to the same destination, hence influence the destination loyalty (Nisco et al.,

2015).However, tourists’perceived image iscomplexandchanges throughout the traveling

phases(pre-,during-,andpost-trip),andTocquerandZins(2004citedinMaddenetal.,2016)

arguethatatthepost-tripphase,itiswhenvisitorscanconstructafinalimageaboutthedes-

tinationtheywerevisiting.Thereforeinthisstudy,thefollowinghypothesesaretobetested.

Hypothesis1:Apositivedestinationculinaryimagehasadirectpositiveeffectonadestination

satisfaction.

Hypothesis2:Apositivedestinationculinaryimagehasapositiveeffectondestinationloyalty.

3.2 Perceivedquality,destinationsatisfactionandtourists’loyalty

Inmanystudies,perceivedqualityshowstohaveapositiveeffectontouristoverallsatisfac-

tion, and satisfaction asmentioned before is antecedent of loyalty and post-trip behaviour

(Alimanetal.,2014).Asvisitorsaresatisfiedwiththeirexperienceswhiletravel, theywillgo

backtospreadthefavourableWOMorlikelytorevisitthedestination.Inaresearchofvisitors’

loyalty tomuseum,quality is found tobe abetter indicatorover satisfaction tobehavioural

intention of visitors (Radder & Han, 2013). In this research, the following assumptions are


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

24

suggestedfortheempiricalstudyofVienna’sperceivedqualityontheculinaryscenethatthe

cityoffers,inregardstothevisitors’behaviouralandattitudinalloyalty.

Hypothesis3:PositiveperceivedqualityofculinaryoffersinViennahasadirectpositive

effectondestinationsatisfaction.

Hypothesis4:PositiveperceivedqualityofculinaryoffersinViennahasapositiveeffect

ondestinationloyalty.

3.3 Destinationfamiliarity,destinationsatisfactionandloyalty

Destinationfamiliarityisnotonlyreferringtovisitorswhohavebeentoadestination,butalso

a process of awareness development and information evaluation (Milman & Pizam, 1995;

Maestro, Gallego & Requejo, 2007 in Horng et al., 2012). In destination decision making,

familiarity is considered to be one of the influencing factors in order to fulfiled personal

emotional needs of visitors, this is different to the traditional approach in destination

selection,whichwasbasedmostlyondestination’sphysicalassets (Anholt,2009).Astudy in

central Florida suggests that familiarity positively impact on the destination interest and

stimulate intention to return (Milman & Pizam, 1995). Other studies focus on destination

familiarity as a moderation to destination image and hence therefore indirectly affect

destination satisfaction and intention to revisit (Nisco et al., 2015). In this study, the direct

effectofdestinationfamiliarityonvisitorssatisfactionandinturnaffectthedestinationloyalty

aretestedfor.

Hypothesis5:Ahigherlevelofdestinationfamiliarityhasadirectpositiveimpactondesti-

nationsatisfaction.

Hypothesis6:Ahigherlevelofdestinationfamiliarityhasapositiveimpactondestination

loyalty.

3.4 Destinationself-congruence,destinationsatisfactionandloyalty

Theprocessofself-congruityiswhenaconsumerselectsabrandormakesatraveldestination

decisionbasesonhisorherself-image,andtoexpresstheidentity.Researchesacknowledge

that self-congruence include actual self-, ideal self-, actual social self- and ideal social self-

images,howeverwithinthelimitofthisstudy,theactualself-andidealself-imagesarebeing

focused, as the ideal andactual self-congruencehavemore significant influenceson loyalty;

bothintentiontorevisitandtorecommend,thansocialself-congruence(Kiliç&Sop,2012).

Following the findingsandconclusions fromprevious studies, this research looksat the self-

conceptcongruityofinternationalvisitorstoViennaandtheloyaltyofthevisitorstowardthe

city’sculinaryscene.Hencethefollowinghypothesisareproposed:


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

25

Hypothesis7:Apositivedestinationself-congruityhasadirectpositiveimpactondes-

tinationsatisfaction.

Hypothesis8:Apositivedestinationself-congruityhasapositiveimpactondestination

loyalty.

3.5 Destinationsatisfactionandloyalty

Studies in tourism and hospitality industry have shown that satisfaction is an antecedent of

customerloyaltyandhasstronginfluenceontourists’choicesofdestination,positiveWOM,as

wellasrevisit intention(Naidoo,Ramseook-Muhnhurrun,&Ladsawut,2010;Abdallat,2012).

However,someotherresearchersaguethatsignificantproveofthepredictionsatisfactionhas

on loyalty is lacking (Abdallat, 2012). Thus in this research, the following hypothesis is pro-

posed:

Hypothesis9:Apositivedestinationsatisfactionhasadirectpositive impactondesti-

nationloyalty.

Inthenextchapter,Researchmethod,furtherdetailswillbegivenonwhichresearchstrate-

giesareadopted,thetechniquestobeusedandsampleselectioninordertoobtaintheempir-

icaldataforhypothesestesting.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

26

4 METHODOLOGY

4.1 Introduction

Researchmethodology istheprocessofsolvingtheresearchproblem; it ishowaresearch is

donescientifically(Kothari,2004). Thus,inthischapter,themethodologyofthisresearchwill

beintroduced;theselectedresearchandsamplingmethodswillalsobeexplained.Inorderto

fulfil the researchobjective,which is todetermineaspectsof culinary tourism that influence

touristsatisfactionandsubsequentlytotourists’loyalty,theresearcherneedsto(i)assessthe

perceivedimageoftheculinarysceneinVienna,(ii)assesstheperceivedqualityoftheculinary

offers inViennaand (iii) assess the tourists’ self-conceptandViennese identityasa culinary

destination.

4.2 Qualitativeandquantitativeresearch

In the tourism industry, both researchmethods of quantitative and qualitative have gained

greaterusagebydifferentstakeholdersandtoservedifferentpurposes.Asthetourismisex-

pandinggloballyandwithhigherneedsformoreandupdateddatasets,thusmoreresources

havebeen invested,andsoquantitativedata is inpriorityofmanyresearchers.At thesame

time,thequantitativedatabenefitsstakeholders inthetourismindustrysuchasDMOs,gov-

ernmentinawaythattheanalysisandevaluationsfromthedatawillprovidesupportindeci-

sionmaking,policiesissuing(Dwyer,etal.,2012,p.1).

On the other hand, in the twenty-first century, qualitative research has gained broader ac-

ceptance in itsusage innotonly thetraditionalsocialsciencessuchasanthropology,history

andpoliticalscience,butalsopsychology,sociology, linguistics,publicadministration,organi-

sational studies, business studies, health care, urban planning, educational research, family

studies, programme evaluation and policy analysis (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Dwyer et al.,

2012).Forinstanceinthetourismindustry,qualitativeresearchmethodprovidericher,more

in-depthknowledgewhichisobtainedfromdifferentaspectsonthe“how”and“why”oftour-

ismphenomenaandexperiences(Dwyer,etal.,2012).IthasbeenaddressedintheHandbook

ofResearchMethodsinTourism:QuantitativeandQualitativeApproaches(Dwyer,al.,2012),

thatmanyphenomenawereresearchedandfoundintheWestern/developedworldcontexts,

howeverthetourismindustryhasgrowninternationallyhencerequiringwiderviewknowledge

to be sought, withmulticultural views and studies to articulate truly universal theories and

understandingofinternationaltourismphenomena.

Quantitativeresearchmethodsareoftenusedtodetectcausalrelationshipbetweenvariables.

This researchapproach is impliedtotestanexisted framework;hence it typicallystartswith


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

27

theories or hypotheses of tourism trends or issues, then to either prove or disprove pre-

assumptions,thisresearchprocessiscalleddeductiveprocess(Boeije,2010).Brannen(1997)

referstoquantitativeresearchasisolatinganddefiningvariableandvariablecategoriestheo-

retically,andtheaimistoinferacharacteristicorarelationshipbetweenvariablestoaparent

population,andtogeneralisedatafromacontext.

Qualitativeresearchintheacademicresearchfocusesonthehumanbehaviourandsociallife

innaturesetting,wheregeneralconceptsaredefined,thenbasingontheresearchprogressto

finetuneandalterthedefinitions(Brannen,1997).AccordingtoBoeije(2010),thepurposesof

qualitativeresearchare“(1)lookingformeaning,(2)usingflexibleresearchmethodsenabling

contact, and (3) providing qualitative findings”. This researchmethod is adapt an inductive

process, and is used to search for patterns of “inter-relationships between a previously un-

specifiedsetofconcepts”(Brannen,1997).

Although data collection of interviews, questionnaires or experimental research can be em-

ployedineitherquantitativeorqualitativeresearch,butinquantitativeresearch,theprocess

of data collection can combine both descriptive and analytical summaries (Hawa& Raman,

2000).Quantitativesurveymethodisbasedonmeasurementofquantityoramount,thedata

isanalysedintermofnumbers,thelargerthesamplesize,themorereliabletheconclusionsas

itisheldasarepresentativeofapopulation,thistypeofresearchisalsomorestructuredand

logical (Brannen,1997,Hawa&Raman,2000).Thesurvey instrumentsareofquestionnaires

andindividualinterviewswhichinvolvequestionswhichcanbemeasuredinquantities,scales,

ifthequestionscannotbeobtainedinquantitythenthequestionsareoftenavoidedorother

datacollectionmethodsare implied,oracombinationofqualitativeandquantitative isthen

adopted. Inconductingquantitative surveys,oneormore toolscanbeused.Themostcom-

mon tools of quantitative questionnaires are often less time consuming and less expensive

comparingtoqualitativemethod,theyincludepersonalinterviewing,mail interview,viatele-

phoneand/orelectronicinterviewing(Hawa&Raman,2000).

Incontrast toquantitative research,qualitative is focusing in themicroviewof the research

problem, the sample size tends to be small, and the data collectionmethods are flexible in

ordertoadapttonaturalisticsituations(Brannen,1997;Snape&Spencer,2003).Astheaimof

thistypeofresearch istoobservesocial,people’sperspectivesandputthemintomeanings,

thuscollecteddataaredescriptive,informofwordsratherthanstaticterms,detailed,richin

information and extensive (Snape & Spencer, 2003). Therefore, researchers could conduct

assessmentofcausalityofasituation,moreoverqualitativedatacanbeusedtovalidateand

explain,orreinterpretquantitativedataofwhichwasgatheredfromthesamesetting(Miles&

Huberman,1994).Thecommonlyuseddatacollectionmethodsofqualitativeareobservation-

almethods,in-depthinterviewing,groupdiscussions,narratives,andtheanalysisofdocumen-

taryevidence.Throughtheprocessofthisresearch,perceptionsofparticipantsarecooperat-


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

28

ed into consideration, and understanding latent, nonobvious issues can be obtained due to

closecontactbetweenresearchersandobservedaudience(Snape&Spencer,2003).

In quantitative research,while the collected data from large sample allow the sophisticated

results to be statistically analysed. At the same time, results from quantitative analysis are

oftenrestrictedwithinthespecifiedsetofvariables(Brannen,1997),andcannotexplorethe

why orhow.Amajor concernwithquantitative research is that the respondents cannotex-

pressfreelytheiropinions, feelingsnorhavethechanceforquestionstobeexplainedhence

leadingtounansweredquestions,or inauthenticanswers, thusaffectingthe reliabilityof the

collected data (Hawa& Raman, 2000). That is one of themajor concernswith quantitative

researchmethod,thefindingsareovergeneralised leadingtoanassumptionsthatrepresent

falseimpressionofhomogeneityinasample.

Qualitative researchmethodalsohas itsdisadvantages.Due to the typeof collecteddata in

qualitative research, the information is rich, in-depth and extensive, hence requiring higher

level of interpretationmore difficult to be analysed (Snape& Spencer, 2003). Furthermore,

during the close proximity of data collecting, the correspondents are influenced strongly by

both insiders (participants) andoutsiders (researchers), asparticipants couldportrayorpro-

videinformationsothatresearchersseethemashowtheywanttobeseen,andsocollected

data contain much of complexity, therefore conclusions need to be carefully circumvented

(Miles&Huberman,1994).Although,thehowandwhycouldbeobservedandexplainedfor

drawingconclusions,butbecauseofthesmallsamplesize,theresultsarenotgeneralised,and

thusitcreatesnewareafordevelopinghypothesestobetestedinthefutureresearches(Miles

&Huberman,1994).

Intherecentdecades,andalsointourism,itiscommontoadoptbothresearches.Theusage

ofmixmethodaimstoreducethelimitation,whicheachindividualquantitativeorqualitative

has,andtomaximisetheacceptablefindingsandoutcomes(Hawa&Raman,2000).Whilethe

mainpurposeoftheresearchwouldbetodeterminerelationshipbetweenthechosenfieldsof

studyhowever,differentresearchtechniquesareused,tosupportandcomplimenteachother

toexploreandclarifytheresearchquestions (Brannen,1997).Therearedifferentterminolo-

gies,whichrefertothismixmethodsare‘multipleresearchstrategies’byBurgess,oranolder

term‘triangulation’byDenzin.IntheviewofDenzin,thegenerateddataviabothmethodswas

consistentandaimingatthesameresearchproblem,whiletherearecontrastedbeliefsargue

thatthetwodatasetswerenotconsistent,yetcomplimentaryeachothertoresearchdifferent

researchproblemsorexploredifferentaspectsofaresearchproblem(Brannen,1997).

Basedonthebriefsummaryofquantitative,qualitativeandmix-methodsresearches,thefol-

lowingpartofthischapterwillexplaintheselectedmethodsfortheresearchofthisthesis,and

followedbythesurveydesigntoachievethepurposeoftheresearchobjectives.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

29

Thenatureof the research in this thesis is to test the theoriesof relationshipsbetween the

perceiveddestination image,perceivedquality,self-conceptsof tourists throughtheculinary

sceneinViennaandthetourist’sloyaltytothecity,hencethequantitativemethodisadapted

totestthehypothesesasoutlinedinChapter3ofthisresearch.

4.3 Samplingprocedures

For theempirical study for this research,aminimumof100participantswasneeded. In the

end,63participantstookthequestionnaire for theresearch.Therewerenospecial requests

onspecificagegroup,orgendergroup.However,asmentionintheliteraturereview,theper-

ceivedimageofadestinationismorecompleteafteratriptoadestination,hencethetarget

participants to thequestionnairewere thevisitorswhohadbeentoViennaat least forone-

night-stay,andinthisstudy,theresearcherisparticularlyinterestedininternationalvisitorsto

Vienna.Thus,acontrollingquestionwasposedaskingwhether theyhadbeentoViennabe-

fore;thenextsectionwillexplainthisinmoredetails.

Beforethemassdistribution,thequestionnairewaspre-testedbyfivepeopleforestimationof

questionnairelengthintermofhowlongitwouldtaketocompleteandtotesttheclarityof

thequestions.Resultsfromthepre-testledtorephrasingcoupleofstatementsindestination

self-congruitytomakethemeasiertobeunderstood.

Thequestionnairewasdistributedonlineusingconveniencesamplingtechnique,giventhetwo

aforementionedselectioncriteria,theresearcherusedvarioussocialmediaplatformssuchas

herpersonalFacebook,butalsoFacebooksofthreelocalandtravellingwebsitesbytheown-

ers of the pages including their personalmessages. Besides that, the link to the surveywas

postedtotwointernationalFacebookpagesofnewsandmediawebsitesfocusingonproviding

guides to life inVienna regardingcultural,entertainment, culinary,attractionsandactivities.

Thetextsused intheannouncementonresearcher’spersonalFacebookcanbefound inAp-

pendix1. Indoingso,awiderangeofpossiblevisitorswasreached,herebyaimingtohavea

diversesampleandtogeneralizetheresults.

Thequestionnairewasbeingcirculatedfrom24thApril2017to30thMay2017,severalremind-

ershavebeensentoutwhichledtonomoreresponses.Thetotalofreceivedresponseswas

63,inwhichonly58responseswereusableandeffectiveforfurtherstatisticalanalyses.

4.4 Surveydesign

As previouslymentioned, the aim of this research is on the international visitors’ perceived

imageandperceivedqualityof theculinary scene inVienna,howdo theysee themselves in

reflectiontothedestinationbrandandtheirintentiontorevisitand/orrecommendthedesti-

nation. Hence, the surveywas designed to cover themain parts aswell as additional infor-


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

30

mationsuchasfamiliaritytoadestinationandinformationsourceinordertounderstandbet-

terthebehaviourofvisitors.

Adopting the quantitative research techniques, an online survey was designed. The survey

includedclosed-andopen-endedquestions,andcategorisedintenpartsandavailableinthe

English language.Thequestionswereselectedbasedon the literature review.Thequestion-

naireindetailsisenlistedinAppendix2ofthisresearch.

Openingof thequestionnaire, a short introduction to thepurposeof thequestionnairewas

given,alsothetargetedgroupofinternationalvisitorstoViennawasalsostatedclearfromthe

beginning.However,inthefirsttwoquestionsinthefirstpartofthequestionnaireaskedpar-

ticipantshavetheybeentravellinginternationallyinthelastyear,andiftheyhavevisitedVi-

enna longer than a day-visit, this ensured the collecteddatawouldbe amorehomogenous

population.Thefirstpartofthequestionnaireconsistedclosedandopen-endedquestionsaim

forresearchertounderstandthetravelbehaviour,characteristicsofrespondents,demograph-

icinformation.Thispartalsoaskedfortherespondents’purposesofvisittoVienna.

Thesecondpartofthequestionnaireincludedclosed-questionsconcerningtheroleoffoodin

everyday-lifeandduringatravelingtrip.Whileahalfofthispartisaboutwhetherrespondents

areinterestedinfoodandconsiderfoodasanimportantfactorincreatingpositivetravelex-

perience,theotherhalfofthisparthelpsresearchertounderstandthedietandthepreferred

cuisinesofrespondents.

Partthreetoeightconsistedoffive-pointLikert-scalequestionswithstatementsderivedfrom

literature covering the topicsof destination image,perceivedquality, destination familiarity,

destinationself-congruenceanddestination loyalty.The five-point range from ‘stronglydisa-

gree’as1to‘stronglyagree’as5.Five-pointLikert-scalewasselectedoverotherscalesdueto

numberofreasons;itisacommonLikert-scaletouseinservicequalitymeasurement,itisan

odd-numberscaleallowsneutralresponses,yetprovidesenoughcomprehensibleunderstand-

ing to respondentsand reducingormaintaining respondents’ frustration level, thus increase

the response rate and quality of response in comparison to higher point scale, for instance

seven-pointLikert(Babakus&Mangold,1991).Thirty-fourstatementswerebeingaskedusing

the scale, inwhichnine statementswereplacedondestination image, seven statementson

perceivedquality, fivestatementsondestination familiarity,eightstatementsondestination

self-congruence,and fivestatementsondestination loyalty.Themainsource forscalestate-

ments indestination image, perceivedquality, destination familiarity anddestination loyalty

wasreferencedfromaresearchonimpactofculinarybrandequityanddestinationfamiliarity

on travel intentions (Horng et al., 2012). While the scale statements for destination self-

congruencewereadaptedfromnewmethodofmeasuringbrandself-congruitysuggestedbya

groupofmarketingresearchers(Sirgyetal.,1997),andthisnewmethodhasbeenimpliedin

manytourismresearchesbetweenself-congruityandloyaltysuchasstudiesbyAbdallat(2012)


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

31

and Kiliç & Sop (2012). The new method could be used to better predict behaviour of

respondents due to the reason that the self-congruity experiences are captured more

holisticallyandinaglobalmanner;wheretheyareforcedtoconstructtheirownimagesofthe

object (i.e. product, brand, destination) to respond accordingly, rather thandepending on a

predeterminedimages(Sirgyetal.,1997).

Partnineof the survey containedalso closed-andopen-endedquestions to findout the in-

formationsourceswhererespondentscollectedorreceivedinformationaboutculinaryoffers

in Vienna to determine the common source aswell as effective source of information. Fur-

thermore, this part explored the type of culinary activities respondents participated during

theirtrips.Finally,thelastpartofthequestionnaireincludedopenquestionsforrespondents’

commentsonanyspecialculinaryexperiencesduringthetrip,theirrecommendationsforde-

velopmentofculinarytourisminViennaandcommentonthequestionsofthequestionnaire.

4.5 Dataanalysis

The model developed in this study has been analysed through Partial-Least Squares (PLS)

method. Given the small sample of 58 respondents, PLS has its advantages for the small

collectedsampleofthisstudy(i.e.minimum30–100)(Hair,Anderson,Tatham,&Black,1998

inOlya,2017;ChinandNewsted,1999;Henseler,Wilson,andWestberg,2011;Tenenhauset

al.,2005;Wixom&Watson,2001 inGefen,Straub,&Boudreau,2000 inHenseler,Ringle,&

Sinkovics, 2009). Inparticular, this studywill usePLS – structural equationmodelling (SEM),

which“aimsatmaximizing theexplainedvarianceof thedependent latent constructs” (Hair,

Ringle,&Sarst,2011). It relates to covariance-basedapproachofanalysing relationshipsbe-

tweenlatentvariables,atthesametimeprovidesexplanationoftheendogenouslatentvaria-

ble(i.e.destinationloyalty)(Hair,Anderson,Tatham,&Black,2010).PLS-SEMhasatwo-step

approach,withinnerandoutermodelsanalysis.Whereby,theoutermodels,theindicatorsare

analysed based on their fit to represent the latent variables (destination image, perceived

quality, destination self-congruence, satisfaction and destination loyalty), on the other hand

theinnermodelsanalysedtherelationshipsbetweenthelatentvariables.Through,t-statistics

(<-1.96or<1.96)thesignificantrelationshipscanbeidentified.

Beforeanalysingthemodel,reliabilitystatisticswereemployed.Furthermore,differentgroups

ofrespondentswerecomparedtotestfordifferencesineffects,exampleofthesegroupsare,

age,gender,thedestinationfamiliarityandwhethertheysharetheirculinaryexperienceson

socialmediaonthevariousconstructs.

Forthisparticularstudy,thedatawasanalyzedbysoftwareSmartPLS3.2.7(Ringle,2015)de-

velopedbySmartPLSGmbH,Germany.However,forthedescriptiveanalysisofthedata,SPSS

version24(IBM,2016)wasbeingused.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

32

5 FINDINGS

5.1 Demographicprofile

Table3summarizesthedemographiccharacteristicsoftherespondents.Thesampleconsisted

of 58 international visitors of 26 different nationalities, inwhich respondents from Slovenia

were thehighest (15,5%) followedby theU.S.A. andVietnam (12,1%), thenCroatia (10,3%),

Italy(6,9%),theremainingrespondentswerefromother20nationalities,mainlyfromEurope-

anorigin,atthesametimeagoodmixofresponsesfromdifferentregionsintheworld.Most

oftherespondentswerebetween20and30yearsold(37,9%),followedbyagegroupfrom31

to 40 years old (26%), themajority of responseswere generated by these two age groups,

forming almost two thirds of the population. Just more than half of the respondents were

women(59%),comparingtomalerespondents(41%).Themajorityofrespondentswereem-

ployees (53,4%), followedbystudents (20,7%)andbusinessowners (12,1%). In thestudyof

educationstatus,thehighestpercentagebelongstorespondentswithuniversityofeducation

whoformed67,2%ofthepopulation.While72,4%werereturningvisitorstoVienna,ranging

from2to36visits,therewere27,6%ofpopulationwerefirst-timevisitors.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

33

Table3.Demographicprofilesofrespondents

N=58Variables Quantity % Variables Quantity %

Age

Nationality Under20 1 1,7%

Slovenian 9 15,5%

20-30 22 37,9%

USA 7 12,1%

31-40 15 25,9%

Vietnamese 7 12,1%

41-50 7 12,1%

Croatian 6 10,3%

51-60 7 12,1%

Italian 4 6,9%

Over60 6 10,3%

Australian 2 3,4%

Gender

German 2 3,4%

Female 34 58,6%

Russian 2 3,4%

Male 24 41,4%

Spanish 2 3,4%

Education

Turkish 2 3,4%

Juniorhighschool 1 1,7%

Albanian 1 1,7%

SeniorHighschool 2 3,4%

Andorran 1 1,7%

Technicalschool/Diploma 6 10,3%

Belgian 1 1,7%

University 39 67,2%

Finnish 1 1,7%

Graduateschool 10 17,2%

French 1 1,7%

Occupation

Hungarian 1 1,7%

Businessowner 7 12,1%

Indian 1 1,7%

Student 12 20,7%

Kosovar 1 1,7%

Employee 31 53,4%

Maltese 1 1,7%

Retired 4 6,9%

Mexican 1 1,7%

Unemployed 3 5,2%

Nicaragua 1 1,7%

Other 1 1,7%

Peruvian 1 1,7%

TraveltimestoViennabefore

Roman 1 1,7%

1time 16 27,6%

Singaporean 1 1,7%

2times 5 8,6%

SwissandFrench 1 1,7%

3times 3 5,2% 4times 6 10,3%

5times 4 6,9%

Above5times 22 37,9%

5.2 Respondentsprofile

All respondents had travelled outside of their residency country in the last 12months. Re-

spondentswereaskedtoselectmaximumthreepurposes for theirvisitsandculturalexperi-

ence that lead them to visit Vienna.As Figure 5 illustrates, the top 3 ranked activitieswere

sightseeing,visitingfriendsandfamily,historicalsights,interestinglywecanseethatfoodand

cuisinewasonlymentionedasfifthimportantreasontovisitVienna.Althoughthelowpriority

of foodandcuisine inpurpose(s)of visits, inFigure6 showsmore than80%of respondents

agreethatfood isvery important intheireveryday lifeandalmost90%ofrespondentsthink

foodisanimportantfactorincreatingpositiveexperiencesontrips.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

34

Figure5.Purpose(s)ofvisit

Figure6.Foodpreferences

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1 09

19

29

0 1 5

18

34

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1-Stronglydisagree

2-Disagree 3-Neutral 4-Agree 5-Stronglyagree

Foodisveryimportanceinmyeverydaylife.

Foodisanimportantfactorincreatngpositveexperiences.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

35

InFigure7,itshowsthatthemajorityofrespondentswereomnivores(91%),whoeatvariety

ofbothplantandanimaloriginfood,andtheremaining9%werevegetarian(differenttypes),

andtherewasnoveganamongsttherespondents.

Figure7.Respondents'dietpreferences

Andamongstfivegroupsofmaincuisines,respondentswereaskedtoselectmaximumofthe

mostthreepreferredcuisines,whichresultedinEuropeancuisinewasthemostpreferredcui-

sine,followedbyAsianthencuisinesoftheAmericas.

Figure8.Respondents'preferredcuisines

InFigure9,theinformationsourcesusedbyrespondentsregardingcollectinginformationand

knowledgeaboutculinaryinViennaarelisted.Manyrespondentsusedmorethanonesource

ofinformationwhengatheringinformationaboutculinaryplaceinVienna,themainidentified

sourcesarefriends,Tripadvisor’swebsiteanddirectlyfromthewebsiteofVTB.Asitwasop-

Vegetarian9%

Omivore91%

6

19

37

50

9

0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Africancuisines

CuisinesoftheAmericas

Asiancuisines

Europeancuisines

Oceaniccuisine

Others


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

36

tionaltodisclosesourceswhentheyweredifferentthanthepre-listedones,hencetherewere

a lotofalsounknownsources,whichhavebeenuseful for theresearcher tounderstandthe

habitofinformationsearchformthepopulation.

Figure9.Informationsources

DuringtheirvisitsinVienna,almost95%ofrespondentsdinedoutinrestaurants,thisreflects

the activity, which UNWTO highlighted in their first global report on gastronomy tourism

(WorldTourismOrganisation,2012).Following todiningout in restaurants,50%of respond-

entsreportedtoattendfoodfestivalsduringtheirstay inVienna.39,7%respondentspartici-

pated inwinetastings.Fromthenon-specifiedactivities,howeverwasrecordedinthegraph

that therewere 3,4% of populationwho visited localmarkets in Vienna. This can beworth

notingastheactivitycouldalsobeinterpretedasrespondents’interestsinlocalgastronomical

productsandculinaryscenesatthesemarkets.Nevertheless,only1,7%respondentstookculi-

narytoursduringtheirvisitinVienna.ThisinformationisshowninFigure10below.

Figure10.Participatedculinaryactivitiesduringvisits

55

23

29

1

2

3

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Dininginrestaurants

Winetastng

Foodfestvals

Culinarytours

Visitngmarkets

Others


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

37

RespondentswereaskedtomatchViennatotwodestinationswheretheythinkthathavesimi-

larculinaryscene.Therewere41respondentsansweredoutof58,Figure11belowsummariz-

estheresults.13%oftheresponsesreferredtoPragueasthemostsimilardestinationforculi-

naryscenetoVienna,followedbyBerlin(11%)andMunich(11%),howeversomerespondents

listedGermanyas theiranswers,hence together27%of respondentsagreed“German”culi-

naryscenewasconsideredastheclosesttowhatitisinVienna.ThefourthdestinationisBu-

dapestwith10%ofrespondentsperceivedthesame.Interestingly,theculinarysceneinVien-

nawas compared to a few traditionallywell-known culinarydestinations suchasParis (7%),

cities in Spain (total of 4%)and cities in Italy suchasMilan (3%)andRome (1%). 4%of re-

spondentsthoughtVienna’sculinarysceneissimilartoothercitieswithinAustriasuchasSalz-

burgandGraz.

Figure11.SimilardestinationstoVienna'sculinaryscene

Thelastquestionfromrespondentsprofileisthesourceofinformation,fromwhichtheygath-

ered informationabout culinary inVienna.Only18peopleprovided the sources, the results

showsthatasking localswasthemostpopularsource, thefollowingmostcommononceare

Instagram,GoogleandYelp.Theremainingsourcesoriginatemostlyfromdestination-oriented

sourcessuchasTripadvisorwithViennaasadestination,onlinetravel,cultural,Vienna-specific

magazinesandpeoplewhohavegainedknowledgeofculinaryinViennafrompersonalexperi-

ences(i.e.familyorfriendswhohavebeentoViennaortourguidesinVienna).

Inthenextsectionofthechapter,theprofilesofrespondentswillbeexploredfurtherinterm

ofdifferencesinfoodpreferences,attitudeandculinaryexpectations.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

38

5.3 Independentt-testRespondents’Profile&FoodPreferences

To understand better the attitude of the sample, food preferences were analyzed. The re-

spondentsweregroupedincategoriesofgender,age,frequencyofvisittoViennaandwheth-

ertheyposttheirculinaryexperiencesonline,whichmayinfluencetheirattitudestowardtheir

food preferences in everyday life and during their trips. Hence independent samples t-tests

were computed for different mentioned groups against their responses relating their food

preferencesusingSPSS.Firstly,themaleandfemalegroupswereanalyzedandtheresultsare

summarizedinTable4below.Bothmale(N=24,M=4,53)andfemale(N=34,M=4,18)respond-

entsshowedsimilarpreferencestowardfoodintheireverydaylifeandwhentheytravel,that

foodisanimportant(bothM>4),howeverwecannotsignificantstatethisasthep-valuesare

largerthan,05.

Table4.Independentt-testGender-Foodpreferences

ItemsFemale(N=34)Mean(St.D)

Male(N=24)Mean(St.D)

Meandifference

t-value(Sig.)Df.

Foodisveryimportanceinmyeverydaylife. 4,18(,936) 4,50(,659) -0,320 -1,455(,151)56

WhenItravel,foodisanimportantfactorincreatingpositiveexperiences.

4,53(,662) 4,46(,721) 0,070 ,388(,699)56

Second,thefoodpreferenceswereanalyzedbasedontheagefactor.Inthiscategory,theage

groups were divided into two, one included respondents who are 30 years and younger

(N=23),andthesecondgroupwasthosewhoareolderthan30yearsold(N=35).Theresults

aresummarizedinTable5below.Theagefactorwasgroupedaccordingtothemedianofthe

wholesamplesize, themedianwas in therangeof31 -40year-old,however,basingonthe

modeofthesamplesize,thecut-offpointforgrouponewasupto30year-old.Overallthere

wereno significant differencebetween the two groups, both younger andolder age groups

show similar preferences toward food on everyday life andwhen travel. However, younger

respondentsdidweightmoreonfoodasanimportantfactortogeneratepositivetravelexpe-

riences(M=4,65)thantheolderagegroup(M=4,4).

Table5.Independentt-testAge-Foodpreferences

ItemsAge≤30(N=23) Age>30(N=35) Mean

differencet-value

Mean(St.D) Mean(St.D) (Sig.)Df.

Foodisveryimportanceinmyeverydaylife. 4,3(,974) 4,31(,758) -0,010 -,044(,965)56

WhenItravel,foodisanimportantfactor increatingpositiveexperiences.

4,65(,573) 4,40(,736) 0,250 1,389(,170)56

Third, the number of times,which respondents had been visited Viennawas analyzed.One

groupisthoserespondentswhohadbeentoViennaforthefisttime(N=17),andthesecond

group includesthosewhohavebeentoViennafrom2timesormore (N=41).Table6shows


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

39

thesummaryoftheanalyse,theresultsshowedthatthemoretimespeoplehavebeenvisiting

Viennadoesnotchangetheirpreferencesoffoodineverydaylifeandduringtrip.

Table6.Independentt-test:Frequencyofvisit-Foodpreferences

Items First-timevisitor(N=17)

Returningvisitor(N=41) Mean

differencet-value

(Sig.)Df.Mean(St.D) Mean(St.D)

Foodisveryimportanceinmyeverydaylife. 4,00(1,061) 4,44(,709) -0,440 -1,845(,070)56

WhenItravel,foodisanimportantfactorincreatingpositiveexperiences.

4,35 (,606) 4,56(,709) -0,210 -1,059(,294)56

Lastly,Table7providestheoverviewofcomparisonsbetweenpeoplewhoposted(N=16)and

thosewhodidnotpost (N=42) their culinaryexperienceson socialmedia fordifferenceson

foodpreferences.And they showalmost indifferentpreferences,howeverno significantdif-

ferenceswerefound.Thosewhopostedtheirculinaryexperiencesonsocialmediatendtobe

intheyoungeragegroup,ashighlightedinthecrosstabulationinTable8below.

Table7.Independentt-test:Sharingculinaryexperienceonline-Foodpreferences

Items Postculinaryexperiencesonline(N=16)

Donotpostculi-naryexperiencesonline(N=42)

Meandifference

t-value(Sig.)Df.

Mean(St.D) Mean(St.D)

Foodisveryimportanceinmyeverydaylife. 4,31(,704) 4,31(,897) 0,000 ,012(,991)56

WhenItravel,foodisanimportantfactorin

creatingpositiveexperiences.

4,44(,629) 4,52(,707) -0,080 -,428(,670)56

Table8.Cross-tabulationPostingculinaryexperiencesonline-Age

AgeTotal

Under20 20-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 Over60

Doyoupostyourculinaryexperiencesonline?

Yes 0 7 3 2 2 2 16

No 1 15 12 5 5 4 42

Total 1 22 15 7 7 6 58

All theabove independent t-testsanalyses showed thatall groupshavenosignificantdiffer-

encesontheirattitudetowardfoodpreferencesathome,norontrips.Mostrespondentscon-

siderthatfoodisimportantintheireverydaylifeandagreethatfoodisanimportantcontrib-

utingfactortopositiveoveralltravelexperiences.Hence,thegroupvariancesonfoodprefer-

encescanbetreatedasequal(p>0,05).Asthepurposeofthisstudy isfocusingon interna-

tional tourists’ attitude and behavior toward the culinary scene in Vienna, in the following

sectionofthischapterwillexplainfurther.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

40

5.4 Culinaryexpectationsandattitudes

Inordertogetfamiliarwiththefinalmodelconstruct,theintentionalbehaviorofrespondents

willbeanalyzedwithdifferentfactorsrelatedtoViennaculinaryscene,image,andintentional

behaviorsuchfactorsfallunderDestinationimage(DI),Perceivedquality(PQ)andDestination

loyalty(DL).

Table 9 shows that the expectations on the culinary scene are somewhat positive, however

there are only themost obvious views of are that “Vienna has relaxing dining atmosphere”

(DI4), with various dining options (DI5) and “excellent dining facilities” (DI6) withmeans of

above4(outofthe1-to-5Linkert-scale),althoughthestandarddeviationofresponsesacross

allstatementsshowsgoodlevelsofengagementstorespondingtostatements.

Ontheotherhand,theexpectedlevelofservicewasonthepositiveside(means>3),however

therewasnostandoutstatementfromtheresponses,despitethegood levelofengagement

(loweststandarddeviationwas,756).

Themeans from the sample under DL did not show clear sign from the participants basing

fromthemeans.However,theparticipantsaremorelikelytorecommendViennaforitsculi-

naryscenetoothers,thanrevisitingthecitythemselvesforculinarypurpose.

Thenext sectionof the chapterwill look inmoredetails of the statistical differencesof the

culinaryexpectationsindifferentgroupsofparticipants’profile.

Table9.Questionnaire,MeansandStandarddeviations

Items Mean St.DDestinationimage(DI)

DI1 MydiningexperienceinViennaisconsistentwithmyimpressionoftheculinarysceneinVienna

3.84 .894

DI2 Viennaoffersappealingcuisines 3.78 1.093

DI3 VisitingViennaisawonderfulopportunityforsamplingcuisines 3.69 1.063

DI4 Viennahasarelaxingdiningatmosphere 4.09 .756

DI5 Viennahasvariationsofdiningoptions 4.02 .888

DI6 Viennahasexcellentdiningfacilities 4.03 .917

DI7 Viennesefoodservicepersonnelarefriendly 3.50 .978

DI8 CulinarysceneinViennaisdiverse 3.79 .951

DI9 CulinarysceneinViennaisunique 3.33 1.049Perceivedquality(PQ)

PQ1 Viennaoffersexcellentqualityinculinarytourism 3.60 .990

PQ2 Viennaoffersgoodqualityinrestaurantservice 3.81 .888


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

41

Items Mean St.D

PQ3 Vienna’sculinarytourismisofferedatreasonableprices 3.47 .903

PQ4 Viennaoffershighqualitycuisines 3.81 .907

PQ5 Viennaoffersdeliciouscuisines 3.88 .860

PQ6 Viennaisdoingwellinorderfortouriststoenjoytheculinarythecityoffers 3.67 .781

PQ7 Vienna’sculinarysceneisbetterthanthatofsimilardestinations 3.22 .992Destinationloyalty(DL)

DL1 IwouldrecommendotherstovisitViennaforitsculinaryoffers 3.72 1.039

DL2 IwishtovisitViennaagainforculinarytourism 3.47 1.096

DL3 Inthefollowingyear,IwillprobablyvisitViennaagainmainlyforitsculi-narytourism

2.43 1.216

5.5 CulinaryexpectationsandParticipants’Profile

Inordertounderstandfurtherdifferentrespondentgroups’expectationstowardViennaculi-

nary scene,qualityanddestination image, in this sectionof the chapter, the independent t-

testswereconductedtodeterminethedifferencesamonggroupsofgender,age,frequencyof

visit to Vienna andwhether they post their culinary experiences online to related indicator

variables.

First, thegender factorwasanalyzed.Overall, therewerenosignificantdifferencesbetween

thetwogendergroupsinculinaryexpectations(allt-values<1,96).However,asshowninTable

10,femalerespondentstendedtohavehigherexpectationintheculinarysceneinViennathan

malerespondents;comparingthetwogroups’meanstakenfromLinkert-scaleof1to5,from

StronglydisagreetoStronglyagreeresponsively,themeandifferencesoffemalecomparingto

maleweremostlynegative.Ontheotherhand,theexpectedqualityoftheculinaryscene in

Viennawassomewhatsimilarbetweenthetwogroups.

Table10.Independentt-test:Gender-CulinarySceneandImageExpectations

Items Female(N=34)Mean

(St.D)

Male(N=24)

Mean(St.D)

Meandifference

T-value

(Sig.)Df.

Destinationimage(DI)


3,82 (,797) 3,88 (1,035) -0,06 -,214(,831)56

DI2 Viennaoffersappealingcuisines 3,65 (,981) 3,96 (0,01) -0,31 -1,070(,289)56

DI3 VisitingViennaisawonderfulopportunityforsamplingcuisines

3,74 (,981) 3,96 (1,245) -0,22 ,386(,701)56

DI4 Viennahasarelaxingdiningatmosphere 4,09 (,712) 4,08 (,830) 0,01 ,024(,981)56

DI5 Viennahasvariationsofdiningoptions 3,85 (,892) 4,25 (,847) -0,4 -1,704(.094)56

DI6 Viennahasexcellentdiningfacilities 3,88 (,977) 4,25 (,794) -0,37 -1,521(,134)56


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

42

DI7 Viennesefoodservicepersonnelarefriendly 3,56 (,860) 3,42 (1,139) 0,14 ,542(,590)56

DI8 CulinarysceneinViennaisdiverse 3,74 (,898) 3,88 (1,035) -0,14 -,548(,586)56

DI9 CulinarysceneinViennaisunique 3,15 (,989) 3,58 (1,100) -0,43 -1,580(,120)56Perceivedquality(PQ)

PQ1 Viennaoffersexcellentqualityinculinarytourism

3,71 (,871) 3,46 (1,141) 0,25 ,937(,353)56

PQ2 Viennaoffersgoodqualityinrestaurantservice

3,82 (,797) 3,79 (1,021) 0,03 ,133(,894)56

PQ3 Vienna’sculinarytourismisofferedatrea-sonableprices

3,50 (,896) 3,42 (,929) 0,08 ,344(,732)56

PQ4 Viennaoffershighqualitycuisines 3,76 (855) 3,88 (,992) -0,12 -,453(,652)56

PQ5 Viennaoffersdeliciouscuisines 3,85 (,702) 3,92 (1,060) -0,07 -,276(,784)56

PQ6 Viennaisdoingwellinorderfortouriststoenjoytheculinarythecityoffers

3,65 (,734) 3,71 (,859) -0,06 -,292(,771)56

PQ7 Vienna’sculinarysceneisbetterthanthatofsimilardestinations

3,26 (,898) 3,17 (1,129) 0,09 ,368(,714)56

Second,theexpectationsonculinarysceneandimagewereanalyzedbasedontheagegroups.

Again,theagecategorywasdivided intotwogroups,≤35yearsold(Y.O.)and>35Y.O.Alt-

houghtherearenostatisticalsignificantdifferencesbetweentheexpectationsofthetwoage

groups, but themean differences between two groups show that the younger respondents

havehigherexpectationinculinaryimageofthecitythantheolderrespondents;mostdiffer-

enceswerenegativeasshowninTable11below.Inthecontrary,theolderrespondentstend-

edtohavehigherexpectationinqualityofculinaryinVienna;meansoftherelatedindicators

for>35Y.O.grouparelower.

Table11.Independentt-test:Age-Culinarysceneandimageexpectations

Items

≤35Y.O.(N=23)Mean

(St.D)

>35Y.O.(N=35)Mean

(St.D)Mean

differenceT-value(Sig.)

Df.


DI1 MydiningexperienceinViennaisconsistent

withmyimpressionoftheculinaryscenein

Vienna

3,74(,915) 3,91(,887) -0,17 -,727(,471)56

DI2 Viennaoffersappealingcuisines 3,65(1,191) 3,86(1,033) -0,21 -,696(,490)56

DI3 VisitingViennaisawonderfulopportunityfor

samplingcuisines

3,57(,945) 3,77(1,140) -0,2 -,720(,475)56

DI4 Viennahasarelaxingdiningatmosphere 3,96(,706) 4,17(,785) -0,21 -1,060(,294)56

DI5 Viennahasvariationsofdiningoptions 4,00(,953) 4,03(,857) -0,03 -,119(,906)56

DI6 Viennahasexcellentdiningfacilities 3,91(,848) 4,11(,963) -0,2 -,815(,418)56

DI7 Viennesefoodservicepersonnelarefriendly 3,39(1,118) 3,57(,884) -0,18 -,683(,497)56


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

43

DI8 CulinarysceneinViennaisdiverse 3,78(,988) 3,80(,933) -0,02 -,068(,946)56

DI9 CulinarysceneinViennaisunique 3,57(1,121) 3,17(,985) 0,4 1,410(,164)56

Perceivedquality(PQ)

PQ1 Viennaoffersexcellentqualityinculinary

tourism

3,65(,982) 3,57(1,008) 0,08 ,301(,764)56

PQ2 Viennaoffersgoodqualityinrestaurantser-

vice

3,87(,869) 3,77(,910) 0,1 ,409(,684)56

PQ3 Vienna’sculinarytourismisofferedatreason-

ableprices

3,35(,885) 3,54(,919) -0,19 -,803(,426)56

PQ4 Viennaoffershighqualitycuisines 4,04(,878) 3,66(,906) 0,38 1,608(,113)56

PQ5 Viennaoffersdeliciouscuisines 3,91(,848) 3,86(,879) 0,05 ,240(,811)56

PQ6 Viennaisdoingwellinorderfortouriststo

enjoytheculinarythecityoffers

3,70(,703) 3,66(,838) 0,04 ,182(,856)56

PQ7 Vienna’sculinarysceneisbetterthanthatof

similardestinations

3,30(1,020) 3,17(,985) 0,13 ,496(,622)56

Third, the expectationswere continued to be probed basing on the number of visits which

respondentsbeentoVienna.ThecategorywasdividedtoFrist-timevisitorandReturningvisi-

tor.Table12belowsummarisestheresults.Althoughtherewerenostatisticalsignificantdif-

ferencesbeingdetectedunderbothDIandPQ.ButonecouldobservethatthemeansofRe-

turningvisitorsforDIareslightlyhigherthanforFirst-timevisitors,whichcouldindicatethat

Returningvisitorsperceivetheculinary imageofViennabetterthantheFirst-timevisitorsas

theyhadmorechancesandmoretimeatthedestination.Ontheotherhand,First-timevisi-

torsperceivethequalityofculinarysceneinViennahigherthanReturningvisitors.

Table12.Independentt-test:Frequencyofvisits-Culinarysceneandimageexpectations

Items First-timevisitor(N=17)Mean(St.D)

Returningvisitors(N=41)Mean(St.D)

Meandifference

T-value(Sig.)Df.



3,88 (,928) 3,83 (,892) 0,05 ,204(,839)56

DI2 Viennaoffersappealingcuisine 3,64 (1,115) 3,83 (1,093) -0,19 -,575(,568)56

DI3 VisitingViennaisawonderfulopportunityforsamplingcuisines

3,59 (1,004) 3,73 (1,096) -0,14 -,465(,644)56

DI4 Viennahasarelaxingdiningatmosphere 4,06 (,827) 4,10 (,735) -0,04 -,176(,861)56

DI5 Viennahasvariationsofdiningoptions 4,06 (,827) 4,00 (,922) 0,06 ,228(,868)56

DI6 Viennahasexcellentdiningfacilities 4,06 (748) 4,02 (,987) 0,04 ,126(,898)56

DI7 Viennesefoodservicepersonnelarefriendly 3,59 (1,121) 3,46 (,925) 0,13 ,439(,662)56

DI8 CulinarysceneinViennaisdiverse 3,59 (,870) 3,88 (,980) -0,29 -1,058(,295)56

DI9 CulinarysceneinViennaisunique 3,00 (1,061) 3,46 (1,027) -0,46 -1,549(,127)56


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

44

Perceivedquality(PQ)

PQ1 Viennaoffersexcellentqualityinculinarytourism 3,71 (,849) 3,56 (1,050) 0,15 ,504(,616)56

PQ2 Viennaoffersgoodqualityinrestaurantservice 3,84 (,951) 3,78 (,872) 0,06 ,072(,943)56

PQ3 Vienna’sculinarytourismisofferedatrea-sonableprices 3,65 (,996) 3,39 (,862) 0,26 ,986(,328)56

PQ4 Viennaoffershighqualitycuisine 3,53 (,874) 3,93 (,905) -0,4 -1,537(,130)56

PQ5 Viennaoffersdeliciouscuisine 3,65 (,786) 3,98 (,880) -0,33 -1,333(,188)56

PQ6 Viennaisdoingwellinorderfortouriststoenjoytheculinarythecityoffers 3,76 (,831) 3,63 (,767) 0,13 ,576(,567)56

PQ7 Vienna’sculinarysceneisbetterthanthatofsimilardestinations 3,35 (,702) 3,17 (1,903) 0,18 ,633(,529)56

Lastly,theexpectationswereevaluatedagainstwhethertherespondentssharedtheirculinary

experiences on social media or not. In this category, there were no statistical significances

foundasshowninTable13below.Thosewhopostedtheirexperiencesonlinehadgenerally

highermeansthanthosewhodidnotpost,hencethiscouldeithermeanthatoneswhoposted

experienceshad lowerexpectationson culinary scene, imageandqualityofVienna,or their

expectationsweresomewhatmetbywhatViennaoffers.

Table13.Independentt-test:Sharingculinaryexperiencesonline-Culinarysceneandimageexpectations

Items Post(N=16)Mean(St.D)

Donotpost(N=42)Mean

(St.D)

Meandifference

T-value(Sig.)Df.

Destinationimage(DI)DI1 MydiningexperienceinViennaisconsistent

withmyimpressionoftheculinarysceneinVienna

4,00(,632) 3,79(,976) 0,21 ,813(,420)56

DI2 Viennaoffersappealingcuisine3,88(,957) 3,74(1,149) 0,14 ,423(,674)56

DI3 VisitingViennaisawonderfulopportunityforsamplingcuisines 4,00(,894) 3,57(1,107) 0,43 1,383(,172)56

DI4 Viennahasarelaxingdiningatmosphere4,13(,745) 4,07(,745) 0,06 ,239(,812)56

DI5 Viennahasvariationsofdiningoptions3,88(,806) 4,07(,921) -0,19 -,750(,457)56

DI6 Viennahasexcellentdiningfacilities4,13(,806) 4,00(,963) 0,13 ,461(,647)56

DI7 Viennesefoodservicepersonnelarefriendly3,38(,957) 3,55(,993) -0,17 -,597(,553)56

DI8 CulinarysceneinViennaisdiverse3,69(,704) 3,83(1,034) -0,14 ,519(,606)56

DI9 CulinarysceneinViennaisunique3,56(1,094) 3,24(1,031) 0,32 1,053(,297)56

Perceivedquality(PQ)PQ1 Viennaoffersexcellentqualityinculinary

tourism 3,81(,655) 3,52(1,087) 0,29 ,992(,325)56

PQ2 Viennaoffersgoodqualityinrestaurantservice 3,81(,911) 3,81(,890) 0 ,011(,991)56

PQ3 Vienna’sculinarytourismisofferedatrea-sonableprices 3,63(,719) 3,40(,964) 0,23 ,828(,411)56

PQ4 Viennaoffershighqualitycuisine 3,94(,772) 3,76(,958) 0,18 ,656(,515)56


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

45

PQ5 Viennaoffersdeliciouscuisine 4,06(,680) 3,81(,917) 0,25 1,001(,321)56PQ6 Viennaisdoingwellinorderfortouriststo

enjoytheculinarythecityoffers 3,63(,500) 3,69(,869) -0,06 -,283(,778)56

PQ7 Vienna’sculinarysceneisbetterthanthatofsimilardestinations 3,31(,793) 3,19(1,065) 0,12 ,416(,679)56

Toconclude,therewerenostatisticalevidencesthatanygroupwassignificantlydifferentfrom

oneandanother,howevertherewereindicators,whichshowdifferentgroupsexpectationson

Viennaculinaryscene,imageandquality.Therefore,inthisstudydifferentgender,agegroup,

the number of visits to Vienna nor the habit of posting or not posting culinary experiences

onlineinfluencetherespondents’culinaryexperiencesandexpectations.

5.6 ModelAnalysis

In this sectionof the chapter, theproposedconceptualmodelwill beexplainedand thehy-

potheseswillbetested.Asmentionedinthemethodology,PLS-SEMapproachisappliedinthis

study.

AvisualdiagramdepictsthemeasurementmodelisshowninFigure12.Themodeldisplays34

measuredindicatorvariablesand6latentconstructs.Intheproposedmodel,alltheconstructs

are hypothesized as reflexive, as theywere observed in order to reflect each related latent

variable(Gefen,Straub,&Boudreau,2000).However,accordingtotheruleofthumbthateach

latentvariableshouldhaveatleastthreeindicatingvariables(Hairetal.,2010,p.730),DScon-

struct in thismodel has two variables which violates the above rule, however, it is still ac-

ceptableas“theconstructs’measurementpropertiesare less restrictivewithPLS‑SEM” (Hair,

Ringle,&Sarst,2011,p.140).

Inordertoprovideanempiricalmeasureoftherelationshipsamongvariablesandconstructs,

thehypothesizedmodelwillbetested forvalidityandreliability; followingbytheanalysisof

path coefficients and significanceof theeffects to test for construct relationships.However,

firstofall,datascreeningwasdone.

ThedatascreeningwasconductedbySPSS,andprovidednomissingdata inrows.However,

therewasonemissingvaluein(column)theNumberoftimetherespondenthadbeentoVi-

enna (for returningvisitor), and since the responses for this variablevarygreatly,hence the

seriesmean of thewhole collected data for this variablewas used to compute themissing

value,givinganumberof8times.Allofthecollectedresponsesperobservedindicatorvaria-

bleswereengaged,astheanswerswerespreadoutacrossthe1-to-5Linkert-scale,andstand-

arddeviationsofallvariablesweresignificant(>0,5).Therewerenooutliersbeingdetected.

Theresearcherobservedfairlynormaldistributionsforallindicatorsoflatentfactorsintermof

skewness. There was only one indicator of dependent variable Destination Self-congruence

(DSC),whichhadmilderkurtosisthantherestofindicators.Thiskurtosisvaluesat-1.18,how-

everstillwithinthethresholdofnormality+/-2(George&Mallery,2010).


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

46

Figure12.Proposedconceptualmeasurementmodel(SmartPLS)

Inorder toanalyse themeasurementmodel, thebasicalgorithmofPLS-SEMwasapplied to

obtain theouter loadingsofvariables fromsmartPLSsoftware.Outer loadings represent the

correlationsbetweeneachvariableanditsfactor(Hairetal.,2010).Inthiscase,withthesam-

plesize(N)of58,thesuggestedcut-offpointforidentifyingsignificantfactorloadingswas,70

(BMDPStatisticalSoftware,Inc.,1992inHair,etal.,2010).InTable14,theanalysissummary

oftheinnerandoutermodelisshown.WhileothersitemsDI3–DI5,DI7–DI9,PQ5,DF4,DSC2

felljustbelowthecutoffpoint;withinthe,60significantlevelandDL3(,594),theywerestillat

anacceptablelevelforpracticalsignificance(>,50)accordingtoHairetal.(2010).Removalof

lowloadings(<,50)didnotimprovethesignificantofanyconstructs,hencetheywerekeptfor

thefinalanalysis.ExceptforPQ3(,370)wasfarfromthecutoffpointandthereforethevaria-

blewasremovedfromthefinalanalysis.

Table14.CFA-Measurementmodels

Variables Factorloadings R2 CA CR AVE

Destinationimage(DI) 0,881 0,904 0,514DI1 MydiningexperienceinViennaisconsistentwithmyimpressionoftheculi-

narysceneinVienna0,710

DI2 Viennaoffersappealingcuisine 0,860

DI3 VisitingViennaisawonderfulopportunityforsamplingcuisines 0,677


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

47

Next step, the reliability and validity of constructswere tested for. In reliability assessment,

Cronbach’salpha(CA),oneofthemostwidelyusedreliabilitycoefficientswasmeasured,also

acommonreliabilitymeasuresforCFAiscompositereliability(Hairetal.,2010).Ingeneral,it

isagreeduponlowerlimitforCAis,70asanacceptablescale(Garson,2016;Hairetal.,2010),

inwhichall constructs,exceptDestinationsatisfaction (DS) (,694),weremeasuredatagood

level for confirmatory research (≥ ,80). As Hair (2010) points out, there is a positive

relationship between the number of items per construct and the CA coefficient, hence a

DI4 Viennahasarelaxingdiningatmosphere 0,680

DI5 Viennahasvariationsofdiningoptions 0,647

DI6 Viennahasexcellentdiningfacilities 0,862

DI7 Viennesefoodservicepersonnelarefriendly 0,657

DI8 CulinarysceneinViennaisdiverse 0,624

DI9 CulinarysceneinViennaisunique 0,690

Perceivedquality(PQ) 0,877 0,908 0,626PQ1 Viennaoffersexcellentqualityinculinarytourism 0,878

PQ2 Viennaoffersgoodqualityinrestaurantservice 0,828

PQ4 Viennaoffershighqualitycuisine 0,832

PQ5 Viennaoffersdeliciouscuisine 0,841

PQ6 Viennaisdoingwellinorderfortouriststoenjoytheculinarythecityoffers 0,619

PQ7 Vienna’sculinarysceneisbetterthanthatofsimilardestinations 0,718

Destinationfamiliarity(DF) 0,854 0,894 0,631DF1 IamfamiliarwithinformationonVienna’sculinaryscene 0,830

DF2 IammorefamiliarthantheaveragepersonregardingVienna’sculinaryscene 0,863

DF3 IammorefamiliarthanmyfriendsregardingVienna’sculinaryscene 0,853

DF4 Duringmytrip(s)inVienna,IhadthechancetotastetheauthenticViennesekitchen

0,602

DF5 Duringmytrip(s)inVienna,IwasabletoenjoythedifferentcuisinesViennaoffers

0,795

DestinationSelf-congruence(DSC) 0,920 0,935 0,643DSC1 ThetypicalvisitorstoculinaryplacesinViennareflectthetypeofpersonwho

ILIKETOBE0,741

DSC2 ILIKETOSEEMYSELFasatypicaltouristvisitingViennaforitsculinaryscene 0,696

DSC3 ILIKETOBEKNOWNasaknowledgeable-touristoftheculinaryoffersinVienna

0,751

DSC4 TheculinarysceneinViennaisareflectionofMYIDEALIMAGE 0,845

DSC5 ThetypicalvisitorofVienna,toenjoytheculinaryoffersreflectsthetypeofvisitorWHOIAM

0,891

DSC6 ThetypicalvisitorofVienna’sculinaryplacesissimilartomeintermsofTHEACTUALIMAGEaboutmyself

0,863

DSC7 ThetypicalvisitorofVienna'sculinaryplacesisVERYMUCHLIKEME 0,787

DSC8 Vienna’sculinarysceneisappealingtoTHEACTUALIMAGEofmeasavisitor 0,821

DestinationSatisfaction(DS) 0,616 0,694 0,864 0,761DS1 IamsatisfiedwiththeculinaryeventofferingsinVienna 0,824

DS2 IreallyenjoyvisitingViennaforitsoffersinculinarytourism 0,918

DestinationLoyalty(DL) 0,714 0,747 0,852 0,665DL1 IwouldrecommendotherstovisitViennaforitsculinaryoffers 0,903

DL2 IwishtovisitViennaagainforculinarytourism 0,909

DL3 Inthefollowingyear,IwillprobablyvisitViennaagainmainlyforitsculinarytourism

0,594


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

48

reasonexplainingthelowCAforDScouldduetothefactthattherewereonlytwoitemsre-

flectingthisconstruct,incomparisontootherones.Despitethatreason,theCAofDSwasonly

0,006belowthesuggestedvalueof0,70.Themodelreliabilitywasalsomeasuredbycompo-

sitereliability(CR),CRisacommonmeasureforgoodnessoffitforreflectivemodels(Garson,

2016). The suggested good level of threshold for CR is ≥ 0,80 for confirmatory research

(Daskalakis&Mantas,2008,p.288inGarson,2016).TheCRofthemeasuredconstructsinthis

studywereallabovethesuggestedcutoffpoint,indicatingagoodestimatedlevelofreliability.

To test the validity of the model, the average variance extracted (AVE) was called for in

convegentvalidityanalysis.Inareflectivemodel,AVErepresentstheaveragecommunalityfor

each latent factor, and the suggested cutoff point is ,50 for an adequate convegent validity

(Garson, 2016; Hair et al., 2010). As shown in Table 14, the AVE of all constructs met the

suggested cutoff point. However, to further explore the discriminant validity, the Fornell-

Larcker criterion of the constructs were investigated. Table 15 shows a summary of the

analysis, the highlighted variances are theAVE square root of each latent variable, and for

eachconstruct, itsvarianceshouldbehigherthan itscorrelationswithanyothervariable (in

thesamecolumn)(Garson,2016).Therearetwoapparentdiscriminantvalidityproblems,first

isthecorrelationsofPQ(,812)ishigherthantheAVEofDI(,717),andsecondthecorrelation

ofDS(,845)ishigherthanAVEofDL(,815).Thiscouldbeexplainedbythesimilarwordingof

thestatementsleadingtomisunderstandingorconfusionbytherespondentswhileanswering

thequestionnaire.

Table15.Fornell-LarckerCriterium

DF DI DSC DL PQ DS

DF 0,794 DI 0,395 0,717

DSC 0,407 0,445 0,802 DL 0,464 0,629 0,495 0,815

PQ 0,271 0,812 0,415 0,711 0,791

DS 0,404 0,699 0,508 0,845 0,730 0,872Legend:DF=Destinationfamiliarity,DI=Destinationimage,DSC=Destinationself-congruence,DL=Destinationloyalty,PQ=Perceivedquality,DS=Destinationsatisfaction

Lastly,R2wasmeasuredfortheoveralleffectsizeofthemodel,R2isalsoknownasthecoeffi-

cient of determination. Chin (1998, p. 323 in Garson, 2016) suggests the cutoff points for

substantial,moderateandweaklevelsofR2are0.67,0.33and0.19respectively.Inthisstudy,

there are twoendogenous variables,DS andDL, theR2 forDSwas0,616 andR2 forDLwas

0,714,bothvaluesindicatedasubstantialandahighlevelsofpredictiveaccuracyrespectively.

Theymeanthat61%varianceintheDSvariablewasexplainedbythemodel,and71%variance

intheDLvariablewasexplainedbythemodel.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

49

Thestructure(inner)modelwasanalyzedviatheuseofsmartPLStoprovidethepathcoeffi-

cientsbetweenconnectedconstructsforeffectdirections,andtoperformbootstrappingfort-

statistics.ThefinalmodelanalysiswasconductedaftertheremovalofPQ3duetolowfactor

loading.Thestandardizationofpathcoefficientsisbetween-1and+1,withcoefficientscloser

to1showstrongpaths,whilecoefficientscloserto0depictweakpaths(Garson,2016).InTa-

ble16,allthepathsbetweenconstructsshowpositiveeffects,withDShasthestrongesteffect

onDL (0,845), followed by the path PQ toDS (0,469) andDF has theweakest effect onDL

(0,111). Thet-statisticswereobtainedviabootstrapping insmartPLS inordertotest forthe

truedifferenceofpathcoefficientsfromzerointhepopulation.Thesubsamplesizeusedinthe

bootstrapwas3364,whichwashigherthantheactualsamplesize,anddoublebootstrapping

methodwasappliedduetothesmallactualsamplesize(N=58)toensurethestabilityofthe

results(Hair,Hult,Ringle,&Sarstedt,2016).Asubsamplesizeof5000wasalsotested,howev-

er provided insignificant influences to the statistics. For the significance level of 5%, the t-

statisticsneedtobeatleast1,96tojustifythepathcoefficientissignificant(Hairetal.,2016).

TheanalysisonthestructuremodelasshowninTable16revealedthattherearethreeoutof

nine hypothesized relationships showed significant relation, in which all three relationships

havepositivesignificantrelationship.

Table16.PLS-SEMPathCoefficientsandHypothesizedrelationships

Variables Pathcoeffi-cients

t-statistics Hypothesizedrelationships SupportforHypotheses

DI>DS 0,187 1,145 H1:PositiveDI→positiveimpactonDS NoDI>DL 0,158 1,133 H2:PositiveDI→positiveimpactonDL NoPQ>DS 0,469 3,043 H3:PositivePQ→positiveimpactonDS YesPQ>DL 0,397 2,996 H4:PositivePQ→positiveimpactonDL YesDF>DS 0,131 1,391 H5:PositiveDF→positiveimpactonDS NoDF>DL 0,111 1,374 H6:PositiveDF→positiveimpactonDL NoDSC>DS 0,177 1,740 H7:PositiveDSC→positiveimpactonDS NoDSC>DL 0,149 1,735 H8:PositiveDSC→positiveimpactonDL NoDS>DL 0,845 28,871 H9:PositiveDS→positiveimpactonDL Yes

HypothesesH1andH2expected theperceived imageofadestination’sculinaryscene tobe

positivelyaffect international visitors’ satisfaction to thedestinationdirectly anddestination

loyaltyindirectly,howeverinthisstudyinVienna,therelationshipswerenotstatisticallyprov-

en(botht-statistics<1,96).Therefore,bothhypotheseswererejected.

HypothesesH3andH4dealtwiththeperceivedqualityoftheoverallculinarysceneatadesti-

nationanditsdirectimpactondestinationsatisfactionandindirecteffectondestinationloyal-

ty. Both of these hypotheses were accepted. Thatmeans when visitors perceive highly the

qualityofculinarysceneinVienna,theyalsotendtobemoresatisfiedwiththecity,andindi-

rectlyincreasetheirloyaltytothecity.Perceivedqualityistheonlyfactorthathasbothrela-


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

50

tionsbeingaccepted,hencehighlightingtheimportanceoftheculinaryqualityintheeyesof

internationalvisitorstoincreasetheirsatisfaction,thusbecomemoreloyaltothecity.

HypothesesH5andH6expectedapositiverelationshipbetweenvisitors’familiaritytoadesti-

nationculinarysceneanddestinationsatisfaction,inturnleadingtopositivedestinationloyal-

ty.However,inthisstudywedidnotsupportthesehypotheses,asstatisticallyshowed,DFhas

the weakest relations to both destination satisfaction (path coefficient = 0,131, t-statistic =

1,391)anddestinationloyalty(pathcoefficient=0,111,t-statistic=1,374).Hence,regardless

how someone is knowledgeable about the Vienna culinary scene; it does not influence the

levelofbeingsatisfiedwiththeculinarysceneofadestinationandintentionstorevisitagain.

HypothesesH7 andH8examined thedirect relationshipbetweendestination culinary scene

self-congruencetosatisfactionandindirectlydestinationloyalty.Bothhypotheseswerereject-

eddueto lackofsupport fromstatisticsignificance(botht-statistics<1,96).Thus,perceived

self-congruenceand itsmatchwithacityculinaryscene, in thisstudydidnotproveto influ-

encethelevelofsatisfactionnorforbeingmoreloyaltothedestination.Touristsmightinthis

casenot seekperdefinitionofamatchbetween their culinarypassionsanda cityoffers,or

thiscasethesampleathanddidnotseekforthis.Futureresearchcouldfocusonfoodlovers

andexplore the relationshipof self-congruency. It couldmean that international visitorsdid

notrelatethemselvestotheculinaryimageofViennaandhencetherewasnoapparentrela-

tionship between their self-congruence and satisfaction with the destination, and thus not

affectingtheirloyaltytotheplace.

Finally,hypothesisH9assumedapositiverelationbetweendestinationsatisfactionanddesti-

nation loyalty. This iswhere the strongest relationshippathwasdepicted, at the same time

producedthehighestt-statisticinthestructuremodel.Thismeans,whenvisitorsaresatisfied

withacity’sculinaryscene,theywouldbemostlikelytorevisit,orrecommendthecitytooth-

ers.

5.7 Qualitativeresults

Inadditionaltothestructuredattributes,thereweretwoopen-ended,non-compulsoryques-

tions,whichaskedrespondentstosharetheirotherexperiencesaboutculinarysceneandthe

developmentofculinarytourisminVienna.Thereweresevenrespondentssharedtheirexpe-

riences during their stay in Vienna, two of thosewere pleasedwith the vegetarian-friendly

offersofdiningplacesinVienna,thismadeiteasiertodineingroupswithoutthecompromise

ofspecifictypeofrestaurantsselection.Onerespondent inparticularenjoyedtheimmensity

ofoffersandqualityofvegan/vegetarianplacesincomparisonwithotherEuropeancapitals,at

thesametime, this respondents thoughtVienneseculinaryscene tobesimilar toBerlinand

Lisbon.Someotherrespondentssharedthesameopinionsabouthavingsimilarmenusatsev-

eralViennese restaurantsandViennesecuisine is tooheavy for them.Oneof themenjoyed


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

51

the outdoor dining andwining atmosphere in Vienna, however would recommend banning

smokingindiningestablishments.

There were seven recommendations for developments of culinary tourism in Vienna given.

TwoofwhichsuggestedculinaryinViennaisbettersuitedtraditionallocalfoodseekers.One

recommended that more information on variance of dining options and cuisines should be

advertisedto initiate informationsearchfromvisitors, this recommendationwouldbe linked

to another respondent’s recommendation that the information for healthier eating options

should be improved, to stress on the fact that there are healthy dining variances available

however,noteasilysearchedfor.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

52

6 CONCLUSIONS

6.1 FinalRemarks

Culinarytourismhasrecentlygaining its importance incontributingtothegrowthoftourism

as well as overall economy of a destination; this is supported by UNWTO and their recent

study in2016among29 countrieswithinaffiliatemembers.As a resultofUNWTO’s survey,

gastronomyisthethirdpopularreasonwhytouriststraveltoadestination,afterculturalmo-

tiveandnature (WorldTourismOrganization,2017).Hence, this studyaimedatdetermining

theaspectsofculinary tourismthat influences tourist satisfactionandsubsequently tourists’

loyaltyviatheinvestigationof internationalvisitorswhohavevisitedViennaat leastonce. In

particular,thisempiricalstudyfocusedonthedestinationimage,perceivedqualityaspartof

destination equity, destination familiarity, destination self-congruence and their impacts on

satisfactionandloyaltytoViennaasaculinarydestination.

ThedataobservationsofthisstudyprovidegreatersupportforthehighlightinUNWTO’sfirst

globalreportongastronomytourism(2012)thatdiningoutactivityisinthetoptwomostpre-

ferredleisureactivities,inwhichalmost95%ofrespondentsdinedoutinrestaurants.Theoth-

er observation in the participated activities during visit in Vienna was 3,4% of respondents

visited localmarkets, although small but it couldbe interpretedas respondents’ interests in

localgastronomicalproductsandculinaryscenesatthesemarkets.

The independent samples t-tests of respondents’ profiles with their food preferences, atti-

tudes and culinary expectations did not detect any differences amongst gender, age group,

numberofvisitsrespondentshavebeentoViennaandwhethertheyshareculinaryexperienc-

esonline.Fromthecollecteddata,theoneswhosharedandpostedtheirculinaryexperiences

moreonlineareonesintheagegroupsof20–30and31–40.Thisalignswithstatisticalfind-

ingsacrossthemostpopularsocialmediaplatformsandmessagingtoolsthattheyoungerthe

agegroups,themoreactivetheyareonsocialmedia(Chaffey,2018).Althoughtherewereno

statisticsignificantdifferencesamongstthegroups,buttheresearcherobservedthattheper-

ceived culinary scene of Vienna is overall positive,where respondents rated highest on the

“relaxingdiningatmosphere”and“variationsofdiningoptions”,however it scored loweron

thefriendlinessofservicepersonnelanduniquenessoftheculinaryscene.

TheanalysiswasdoneinViennagavetheresearcherfurtherinsightsintheinternationalvisi-

tors’perceptions,expectationsandattitudestowardsthecity’sculinaryscene.Theapplication

ofconfirmatoryfactoranalysisaswellasPLS-SEMinsmartPLSsupportedonlyafewsuggested

hypotheses. Such findings suggests that perceived quality of culinary at a destination is the

most importantfactor increatingtourismsatisfactionandhencerecommendingthedestina-


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

53

tiontoother,and/orincreaseintentiontorevisitafterthetrip.Whenvisitorsperceivehighly

thequalityofculinarysceneinVienna,theyalsotendtobemoresatisfiedwiththecity,and

indirectlyincreasetheirloyaltytothecity.Thisconfirmsthepreviousstudiesandtheconcept

ofhighsatisfactionvisitwouldbeabletoaffectthewillingnesstorecommendandintentionto

revisitaspreviouslysuggested(Niscoetal.,2015).

Previously, many researchers have done extensive studies on country image in relation to

productfamiliarity(Han,1989;Johansson,1989;JaffeandNebenzahl,2001;KnightandCalan-

tone,2000inNiscoetal.,2015),inthisempiricalstudyhoweveranalysedthefamiliaritytoa

destinationanditsimpactontourismsatisfactionandloyaltyofinternationalvisitorswhohave

beentoVienna.Thestudyshowsregardlesshowsomeoneisknowledgeableaboutadestina-

tionculinaryscene;itdoesnotinfluencethelevelofbeingsatisfiedwiththeculinarysceneof

adestinationandintentionstorevisitagain.Therefore,thisstudyfailedtoprovetherelation-

shipbetweendestinationfamiliarityanddestinationsatisfactionandinturnhasnosignificant

effectondestinationloyalty.

Basedonprevioussuggestedstudiesonself-conceptandintentiontorevisitandpredictionof

revisit, thisempirical studiedhow touristswhovisitedViennaperceive the cityasa culinary

destinationviatheiractualandidealself-congruence.However,resultsfromthestudyinVien-

nasuggestedthatinternationalvisitorsdidnotrelatethemselvestotheculinaryimageofVi-

ennaandhencetherewasnoapparentrelationshipbetweentheirself-congruenceandsatis-

factionwiththedestination,andthusnotaffectingtheirattitudinal loyalty(recommendation

toother)orbehavioural loyalty(intentiontorevisit)totheplaceforthepurposeofculinary.

Therefore,thisstudydoesnotsupportthestudiesfromSirgyandSu(1999citedinKiliç&Sop,

2012),Ekincietal.(2011)andZhangetal.(2014)wheretheysuggestself-congruitymotivates

touriststobeloyaltoadestination,bothintentiontorevisitandwillingnesstorecommend.

To sumup, the results from the studydo suggest that currently,Vienna isnot stronglyper-

ceivedasaculinarydestination,howeverthereareaspects,whichViennacanpotentiallyde-

velop to be a culinary associated destination.Nevertheless, there is a need for cooperation

amongstDMOsandotherculinarystakeholderstotakeadvantageoftheexistedpositiveper-

ceptions,and integrate the imageofViennaasaculinarydestination into the ‘citybrand’or

‘nationbrand’strategiesandmarketingcampaigns.

6.2 Recommendations

The stakeholders in culinary tourismcanbe the large size suchas country tourismoffice, to

city tourist boardor bureau to small individual foodandbeverageestablishments, suppliers

whoareoperatedwithinadestination,whohaveinterestsinandgainfromthegrowthofthe

positivedestination imageofadestination.Andthereforeshouldactwithintheirpowerand


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

54

abilitytoattractandimprovetheperceivedimageofnotonlytheirorganisations,butalsothe

overallimageofthedestinationinculinaryandtourismperspectives.

Fromthefindingsandobservationsretrievedfromthestudy,thefollowingrecommendations

aresuggestedtothefollowingstakeholdersbutnotlimitedtoDMOsandF&Bestablishments

inordertooverallimprovetheimageofViennaasaculinarydestinationtointernationalvisi-

tors.

WithinthePQfactor,visitorssatisfiedmostwiththequalityofrestaurantserviceandculinary

offers;however, thepricesand friendlinessofservicepersonnelwerenotwell received.Alt-

houghthepricesareanattributethatcannotbeeasilychangedduetothedifferencesinliving

standards, costsandcompatibilityofmarketvalues inAustriaandvisitors’ countryoforigin.

Butthereasonablepricescouldbetranslatedtovalueformoneyoftheculinaryoffers.Hence

F&Bestablishments coulddevelop theproducts and createoffers in away that canbeper-

ceivedasbettervalueformoney.Atthesametime,theculinaryestablishmentscouldimprove

onservicestafftraining,tobemorewelcomingandfriendliertoguests,especiallyinternation-

alguestswhohavenotyetadaptedtotheservicepracticeandcultureinAustriaingeneral.

Asthequalitativefindingspointedout,the lackof informationwassomewhatofa limitation

forinternationalvisitors,whodonotspeakthelocallanguagetoaccessandreachthevastof

availableinformationinculinaryoffersandoptions.Therefore,firstrecommendationcouldbe

tohavemorecontentsavailableinotherlanguage(s).Secondrecommendationinthiscategory

would be to prioritizedmarket(s) and provide information additionally in thatmarket’s lan-

guage.Forinstance,in2017,thenumberofinternationaltouristsvisitedVienna(spentatleast

oneovernightstay)wasslightlyabove5,5million,inwhichtheU.S.A.,theU.K.,Italy,Chinaand

Spainwere the top fivearrival touristsorigins (excludingGerman) (AustrianNationalTourist

Office, 2018), and if oneormoreof these countries are the targetmarkets, the language(s)

shouldbeincludedinthepublishedinformation,sofarEnglishhasbeenthemostusedsecond

languageoptionasobservedfromseveralonlinesourcesforculinaryoffers.Burmoreactively,

thestakeholderscanpenetratethetargetmarketsbetterviaofferinginformationonculinary

of Vienna in the popular search engines at the origin countries, for instance Russian, China

where they are known to be difficult countries for foreign companies/organizations to ap-

proachduetothefactthatGoogleisnotthedominantsearchtoolinthosecountries.Thisis

easierforlargeorganizationsDMOssuchasAustrianNationalTourismOfficeorViennaTourist

Boardratherthansmallerestablishmentstodo,howeveritispossibleyetcostly.Ontheother

hand,otherapproachescouldbeexplored,forexample,sponsoringcelebrities, famousblog-

gers/vloggersfromthetargetmarketwhohavecertainpositiveinfluenceontheirexistedlarge

fan-basestoexperienceforthemselves inViennaandsharetheirreviewsontheirsocialnet-

workasawaytoexpandthereachtotheorigincountries,andintheirnativelanguageshence

influencingthecognitiveandaffectiveimageofadestinationculinaryscene.Thisleadstothe

nextrecommendationinonlineinformationresources.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

55

Itisobservedbytheresearcherthattherearemanyfoodfestivalandculinaryrelatedevents

throughouttheyearinViennasuchasViennarestaurantweek,whereitisagreatopportunity

forvisitorstosampletheculinaryoffersinthecity.However,theseeventsarenotlisted,up-

dated,oravailable inprintedinformationsourcesuchas leaflet,orbrochureformatairport,

maintrainstationsortouristinformationoffice,whereitisinmostofthetime,thefirsttouch-

point to the tourists (international anddomestic alike).Hence, theDMOs could provide the

quarterlyupdatedprintedinformationinbothonlineandprintedsourcessothatlocalculinary

stakeholders likeF&Bestablishmentscouldbenefitfromgreaterexposure,atthesametime,

touristshavebetterinformationonseasonaloffersandeventsinVienna.

Itdependsonthetargetmarketandmarketingobjectives,differentplatformsandtoolscanbe

employed, for instance, people between 30-49 Y.O. use socialmedia as a news source, and

eventheyoungermillennial(18-24Y.O.)usemore“image-led”socialplatformssuchasSnap-

chat and Instagram, than the oldermillennial (25-29 Y.O.) (Target Internet, 2018). Asmen-

tionedabove,thesesocialmediasarethemostpopularonesintheworld,butthereareones

thatareusedandpopularamongstthelocalcommunitiesoftheoriginmarkets,andtherefore

shouldbesoughtafterforanymarket-orientedmarketingstrategies,notonlyforculinaryfo-

cusbutalsoatthesametimetocreatecognitiveimageofthedestination.

6.3 Futureresearchandlimitations

Whilethisstudyaimedtoinvestigatetheculinaryinfluencesontouristsatisfactionandsubse-

quently tourists’ loyaltyofadestination, therewere limitationsduringtheprocessof the in-

vestigation,andtogetherwiththe findings, theresearcherwould liketogivesuggestions for

futureresearch.

First, thiswasasinglecitystudyandhencethevalidityof findingswassubjectivetothecity

under investigationonly. The small total sample size (N=58) cannotbegeneralised to repre-

senttowholepopulation.Whilethestudydealtwithvisitorswhohavebeentothedestination

oneormore times, the total sample sizewas too small to analysis thedifferencesbetween

groupsof ‘First-time’and ‘Returningvisitors’on theirperceptionsofdestination image,per-

ceivedqualityaswellasdestinationfamiliaritytotheculinarysceneofthedestination.These

henceleadtothefollowingfutureresearchsuggestions.

Thefirstsuggestionisthatfutureresearchestoexaminedomesticrepeatingvisitorstoidentify

factors that influence their revisit intention. This also leads to the second suggestion for re-

searchincomparingpre-visitandpost-visitperceivedimageandquality,asitwouldbemore

helpfulfortheculinarytourismstakeholderstounderstandwhatthepositiveaspectsandare-

as for improvements. Third, the study analyzedDF as a direct factor influencingDS andDL,

howeverinthefuture,DFcouldbeanalyzedasamoderatingroletowardDIanPQtounder-


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

56

standbetterthefamiliarityofinternationalvisitorstotheculinarysceneofadestination,and

theirrelationshipstotourismsatisfactionandpost-visitintentions.

Anotherlimitationtothestudywasthesamplingmethod.Onlineconveniencesamplingmeth-

odwasapplied,therewasalackofpersonalcontactwithrespondentstoobservetheirinsights

andpersonalopinionsneitherrelatingculinaryscenesinVienna.Therefore,theintegrationof

qualitative approaches in combinationwith quantitative approach is suggested to provide a

moreholistic andpsychological impressionsofdestination image couldhavebeen identified

(Tascietal.,2007).Additionally,theinformationonthedurationofstayandtheheterogeneity

type of travel organisation (organised tour group or self-organised) could influence the per-

sonalperceiveddestinationimage.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

57

7 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abdallat,M.(2012).ActualSelf-Image,IdealSelf-ImageandtheRelationbetweenSatisfaction

andDestinationLoyalty.JTourismHospit,1(4),1-11.

Agapito , D., Valle, P., & Mendes, J. (2013). The cognitive-affective-conative model of

destination image: A confirmatory analysis. Journal of Travel & TourismMarketing , 30 (5),

471-481.

Aliman,N.,Hashim,S.,Wahid,S.,&Harudin,S.(2014).TouristExpectations,PerceivedQuality

and Destination Image: Effects on Perceived Value and Satisfaction of Tourists Visiting

LangkawiIsland,Malaysia.AsianJournalofBusinessandManagement,2(3),212-222.

Anholt,S.(2009).WhyNationalImageMatters.InS.Anhold,Handbookontourismdestination

branding.Madrid,Spain:WorldTourismOrganizationandEuropeanTravelCommission.

AustrianNational TouristOffice. (2018, April 15). Austria -Nights and arrivals - Annual data

Arrivals/bednightsofallmarketsinonedestination2017.Vienna,Austria.

Babakus,E.,&Mangold,G.W.(1991).AdaptingtheSERVQUALScaletoHospitalServices:An

EmpiricalInvestlgatlon.HealthServicesResearch,26(6),767-786.

Baloglu,S.,&Brinberg,D.(1997,April1).AffectiveImagesofTourismDestinations.Journalof

TravelResearch,35(4),p.11.

Baloglu, S., & McCleary, K. W. (1999). A model of destination image formation. Annals of

TourismResearch,24(4),868-897.

Blain,C.,Levy,S.E.,&Ritchie,B.J.(2005,May1).DestinationBranding:InsightsandPractices

fromDestinationManagementOrganizations.Journaloftravelresearch,328-338.

Boeije,H.R.(2010).AnalysisinQualitativeResearch.SAGE.

Bojanic, D. C. (1991). The use of advertising in managing destination image. Tourism

Management,12(4),352-355.

Brannen,J.(1997).Mixingmethods:qualitativeandquantitativeresearch.Aldershot,England:

Avebury.

Cai,L.A.(2002,July).Cooperativebrandingforruraldestinations.AnnalsofTourismResearch,

29(3),pp.720-742.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

58

Centre for the Promotion of Imports. (2016, October 7). What are the opportunities for

CulinaryTourismfromEurope?RetrievedMarch17,2017fromMarketinformation-Tourism:

https://www.cbi.eu/market-information/tourism/culinary-tourism/

Chaffey, D. (2018, March 28).Global social media research summary 2018. (Smart Insights

(Marketing Intelligence) Ltd, Producer) Retrieved April 10, 2018 from Digital marketing

statistics: https://www.smartinsights.com/social-media-marketing/social-media-strategy/new-

global-social-media-research/

Crompton,J.(1979,April1).AnassessmentoftheimageofMexicoasavacationdestination

andtheinfluenceofgeographicallocationupontheimage.JournalofTravelResearch,17(4),

pp.18-23.

Cronin, J., & Taylor, S. (1992). Measuring service quality: A reexamination and extension.

JournalofMarketing,56(3),55.

Daskalakis,S.,&Mantas,J.(2008).Evaluatingtheimpactofaservice-orientedframeworkfor

healthcareinteroperability.InS.Anderson,G.O.Klein,S.Schulz,J.Aarts,&C.M.Mazzoleni,

eHealth beyond the horizon - get IT there: Proceedings of MIE2008 (Studies in Health

TechnologyandInformatics)(pp.285-290).Amsterdam,Netherlands:IOSPress.

Dobni,D.,&Zinkhan,G.M.(1990).InSearchofBrandImage:aFoundationAnalysis.Advances

inConsumerResearch,17,110-119.

Dwyer, L., Gill, A., & Seetaram, N. (2012). Handbook of Research Methods in Tourism:

QuantitativeandQualitativeApproaches.EdwardElgar.

Echtner,C.M.,&Ritchie,J.(1991).TheMeaningandMeasurementofDestinationImage.The

journaloftourismstudies,2(2),2-12.

Echtner,C.M.,&Ritchie,J.(2003).Themeaningandmeasurementofdestinationimage.The

journaloftourismstudies,14(1),37-48.

Echtner, C. M., & Ritchie, J. (1993). The Measurement of Destination Image: An Empirical

Assessment.Journaloftravelresearch,31(4),3-14.

Ekinci, Y., Sirakaya-Turk, E., & Preciado, S. (2011). Symbolic consumption of tourism

destinationbrands.JournalofBusinessResearch,66(6),711-718.

Ereaut, G., Imms, M., & Callingham, M. (2002). Analysis and Interpretation in Quallitative

MarketResearch(Vol.4).SAGEPublications.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

59

Fakeye, P. C., & Crompton, J. L. (1991, October 1). Image differences between prospective,

first-time,and repeatvisitors to theLowerRioGrandeValley. Journalof travel research ,30

(2),pp.10-16.

Gallarza,M.G.,Saucra,I.G.,&Garcia,H.C.(2002).DestinationImage:Towardsaconceptual

framework.AnnalsofTourismResearch,29(1),56-78.

Garson, D. G. (2016). Partial Least Squares: Regression & Structural equation models.

Asheboro,USA:StatisticalAssociatesPublishing.

Gartner, W. C. (2014, May 14). Brand equity in a tourism destination. Place Branding and

PublicDiplomacy,1-9.

Garvin, D. A. (1984, October 15). What Does "Product Quality" Really Mean? Retrieved

September 24, 2017 from Massachusetts Institute of Technology:

http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/what-does-product-quality-really-mean/

Gefen,D.,Straub,D.W.,&Boudreau,M.-C. (2000).Structuralequationmodelingtechniques

and regression:Guidelines for researchpractice.CommunicationsofAssociation Information

Systems,4(7),1-78.

George, D., & Mallery, P. (2010). SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and

Reference,17.0Update.(10).Boston.

Getz,D.,Robinson,R.N.,Andersson,T.D.,&Vujicic,S.(2014).Chapter4:Foodiesandtourism:

Motivationandbenefitssought;Pastandprojectedtravel;Experiencesandbenefitssought;.In

Foodiesandfoodtourism(pp.75-98).Woodeaton,Oxford,UK:GoodfellowPublishers.

Hair, J.F.,Anderson,R.E.,Tatham,R.L.,&Black,W. (2010).MultivariateDataAnalysis (7th

Editioned.).PearsonPrenticeHall.

Hair, J. F., Ringle, C.M., & Sarst,M. (2011). PLS-sem: Indeed a silver bullet. The Journal of

MarketingTheoryandPractice,19(2),139-151.

Hair,J.,Hult,G.,Ringle,C.,&Sarstedt,M.(2016).APrimeronPartialLeastSquaresStructural

EquationModeling(PLS-SEM).SAGEPublications.

Hall, M. C. (2012). Boosting food and tourism-related regional economic development. In

OECD,Foodandthetourismexperience:TheOECD-Koreaworkshop,OECDStudiesonTourism

(pp.49-60).OECDPublishing.

Hall, M. C., & Sharples, L. (2003). The consumption of experiences or the experience of

consumption?Anintroductiontothetourismoftaste.InM.C.Hall,L.Sharples,R.Mitchell,N.

Macionis,&B.Cambourne,Foodtourismaroundtheworld(pp.1-24).Oxford:Elsivier.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

60

Hawa,S.,&Raman,S.(2000).QuantitativeandQualititativeresearchmethods:somestrengths

andweaknesses.JournalofEducatorsandEducation,17(1),120-134.

Henseler,J.,Ringle,C.M.,&Sinkovics,R.R.(2009).THEUSEOFPARTIALLEASTSQUARESPATH

MODELING IN INTERNATIONALMARKETING. In T. Cavusgil, R. R. Sinkovics ,& P.N.Ghauri ,

NewChallengestoInternationalMarketing(Vol.20,pp.277-319).EmeraldPublishingLtd.

Herrera, C. F., Herranz, J. B., & Arilla, J. M. (2012). Gastronomy’s importance in the

development of tourism destinations in the world. In World Tourism Organisation, Global

reportonfoodtourism(Vol.4,pp.6-9).Madrid:UNWTO.

Horng, J.-S.,Liu,C.-H.,Chou,H.-Y.,&Tsai,C.-Y. (2012).Understandingthe impactofculinary

brandequityanddestinationfamiliarityontravelintentions.TourismManagement ,33,815-

824.

Hunt, J. D. (1975, January 1). Image as a factor in tourism development. Journal of travel

research,13(3),pp.1-7.

Kapferer,J.-N.(2008).Newstrategicbrandmanagement:creatingandsustainingbrandequity

longterm(4ed.).LesEditionsd’Organisation.

Kayat, K., & Hai, M. (2013). Perceived service quality and tourists' cognitive image of a

destination.AnInternationalJournalofTourismandHospitalityResearch,25(1).

Kiliç, B., & Sop, S. A. (2012). Destination personality, self-congruity and loyalty. Journal of

HospitalityManagementandTourism,3(5),95-105.

Kim,D.,&Perdue,R.R.(2011).TheInfluenceofImageonDestinationAttractiveness.Journal

ofTravel&TourismMarketing,28(3),225-239.

Kim,H.-b.,&Kim,W.(2005).Therelationshipbetweenbrandequityandfirms’performancein

luxuryhotelsandchainrestaurants.TourismManagement,26,549–560.

Kim, Y. H., Goh, B. K., & Yuan, J. (2010). Development of a Multi-Dimensional Scale for

MeasuringFoodTouristMotivations.JournalofQualityAssuranceinHospitality&Tourism,11

(1),56-71.

Kivela, J., & Crotts, J. C. (2006). Tourism and gastronomy: Gastronomy's influence on how

touristsexperienceadestination.JournalofHospitality&TourismResearch,30(3),354-377.

Konecnik,M.,&Gartner,W.C.(2007).Customer-basedbrandequityforadestination.Annals

ofTourismResearch,34(2),400-421.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

61

Konecnik,M.,&Go,F.(2008).Tourismdestinationbrandidentity:ThecaseofSlovenia.Brand

Management,15(3),177-189.

Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques (2 ed.). New Delhi,

India:NewAgeInternational.

Kressmann,F.,Sirgy,J.M.,Herrmann,A.,Huber,F.,Huber,S.,&Lee,D.-J. (2006).Directand

indirecteffectsof self-image congruenceonbrand loyalty. JournalofBusinessResearch , 59

(9),955–964.

Kuang, Y. T., & Bhat, R. (2017). Diversification, Innovation and Safety of Local Cuisines and

Processed Food Products: Emerging issues and the sustainability challenges. In R. Bhat,

SustainabilitychallengesintheAgrofoodsector(pp.482-508).WileyBlackwell.

Kwak,D.,&Kang,J.-H.(2009).Symbolicpurchaseinsport:therolesofself-imagecongruence

andperceivedquality.ManagementDecision,47(1),85-99.

Lawson, F., & Baud-Bovy, M. (1977). Tourism and recreation development. London:

Architecturalpress.

Lertputtarak, S. (2012). The Relationship between Destination Image, Food Image, and

Revisiting Pattaya, Thailand. International Journal of Business andManagement , 7 (5), 111-

122.

Long,L.(2004).CulinaryTourism:“EatingOutOfCuriosity”.RetrievedSeptember7,2017from

Center for Food and Culture: http://www.foodandculture.org/about-food/food-and-

culture/culinary-tourism/

Madden, K., Rashid, B., & Zainol, N. (2016). Beyond the motivation theory of destination

image.TourismandHospitalityManagement,22(2),247-264.

Mahdi, Z.,Mobarakabadi, H., & Hamidi, K. (2015). Brand Identity and Itsmodels.Advanced

SocialHumanitiesandManagement,2(4),110-116.

Mahjoub, H., & Naeij, A. (2015). The Impact of Prestige, Consumer Personality and Self-

ConceptonBrandLoyalty.TheInternationalJournalOfBusiness&Management,3(4).

Miles,M.B.,&Huberman,M.A.(1994).QualitativeDataAnalysis (2ndEditioned.).Holland:

SAGEPublications.

Milman,A.,&Pizam,A.(1995).TheRoleofAwarenessandFamiliaritywithaDestination:The

CentralFloridaCase.JournalofTravelResearch,33(3),21-27.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

62

Naidoo, P., Ramseook-Muhnhurrun, P., & Ladsawut, J. (2010). Tourist satisfaction with

Mauritiusasaholidaydestination.Globaljournalofbusinessresearch,4(2),113-123.

Nisco,A.D.,Mainolfi,G.,Marino,V.,&Napolitano,M.R.(2015).Tourismsatisfactioneffecton

general country image, destination image, and post-visit intentions. Journal of vacation

marketing,21(4),pp.304-317.

Olya,H. (2017,October3-7).Partial Least SquaresBasedStructuralEquationModeling (PLS-

SEM). Retrieved January 26, 2018 from GLOSERV Conferences: http://gloserv.org/wp-

content/uploads/dr.olya_.pdf

Pearce,P. L. (1982).Perceivedchanges inholidaydestinations.AnnalsofTourismResearch ,

pp.145-164.

Pike,S.(2008).Destinationmarketing.Oxford:Elsevier.

Quan, S., & Wang, N. (2004). Towards a structural model of the tourist experience: an

illustrationfromfoodexperiencesintourism.Tourismmanagement(25),297-305.

Radder, L., & Han, X. (2013). Perceived Quality, Visitor Satisfaction And Conative Loyalty In

South African HeritageMuseums. International Business & Economics Research Journal , 12

(10),1261-1272.

Ringle, C. M.-M. (2015). (Boenningstedt: SmartPLS Gmb) Retrieved November 2016 from

http://www.smartpls.com

Ritchie,B.J.,&Ritchie,R.J.(1998).TheBrandingofTourismDestinations:PastAchievements

andFutureChallenges.AnnualCongressoftheInternationalAssociationofScientificExpertsin

Tourism.Marrakech.

Robinson,J.,Shaver,P.,&Wrightsman,L.(1991).Criteriaforscaleselectionandevalution.InJ.

P.Robinson,P.R.Shaver,&L.S.Wrightsman,MeasuresofPersonalityandSocialPsychological

Attitudes.SanDiego:AcademicPress.

Ryan, C. (2003). Aspects of tourism - Recreational tourism: Demand and impacts. Channel

viewspublications.

Schouten, J. W. (1991). Personal rites of passage and the reconstruction of self. Retrieved

August 28, 2017 from Association for Consumer Research:

http://www.acrwebsite.org/search/view-conference-proceedings.aspx?Id=7134

Sirgy, J.M.,& Johar, J. (1999).Towardan IntegratedModelofSelf-CongruityandFunctional

Congruity. Retrieved August 27, 2017 from Association for Consumer Research:

http://acrwebsite.org/volumes/11391/volumes/e04/E-04


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

63

Sirgy,J.M.,Grewal,D.,Mangleburg,T.F.,Chon,K.-S.,Claiborne,C.B.,Johar,J.S.,etal.(1997).

Assessingthepredictivevalidityoftwomethodsofmeasuringself-imagecongruence.Journal

oftheacademyofmarketingscience,25(3),229-241.

Slabbert , E., & Martin, S. (2017). Aspects influencing the cognitive, affective and conative

imagesofanartsfestival.AfricanJournalofHospitality,TourismandLeisure,6(2).

Smith, A. F. (2007). Culinary Tourism. In G. J. Allen, & K. Albala, The Business of Food:

EncyclopediaoftheFoodandDrinkIndustries(p.212).GreenwoodPublishingGroup.

Snape, D., & Spencer, L. (2003). The foundations of qualitative research. In J. Ritchie, & J.

Lewis,Qualitativeresearchpractice:Aguideforsocialsciencestudentsandresearchers(pp.1-

23).SAGEPublications.

Solomon, M., Bamossy, G., Askegaard, S., & Hogg, M. K. (2006). The self. In Consumer

Behaviour - A European Perspective (3rd Edition ed., pp. 207-238). Harlow, Essex: Pearson

Education.

Suma, S., & Bello, K. (2012). Branding a destination identity - A conceptual framework.

ScientificJournal,773(9),89-100.

Target Internet. (2018).How different age groups are using social media. (Target Internet)

Retrieved April 10, 2018 from Resources - Blog posts, digital strategy/social media:

https://www.targetinternet.com/how-different-age-groups-are-using-social-media/

Tasci,A.D.,Gartner,W.C.,&Cavusgil,T.S.(2007).Conceptualisationandoperationalizationof

destinationimage.JournalofHospitality&TourismResearch,31(2),194-223.

The Place Brand Observer. (2015, September 29).Difference Between Destination Branding

and Destination Marketing. Retrieved June 27, 2017 from Destination Branding - Expert

Advice: http://placebrandobserver.com/difference-between-destination-branding-and-

destination-marketing/

Upshaw, L.B. (1995).Buildingbrand identity:a strategy for success ifahostilemarketplace.

Canda:JohnWiley&Sons.

Vienna Tourist Board. (2017).Vienna voted themost livable city in theworld for the eighth

time! Retrieved May 1, 2017 from Lifestyle & Scene: https://www.wien.info/en/lifestyle-

scene/most-livable-city

Vienna Tourist Board. (2017, May). Viennese wine & Heurige. RetrievedMay 8, 2017 from

Shopping,Wining&Dining:https://www.wien.info/en/shopping-wining-dining/wine


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

64

World Tourism Organisation. (2012). Global trends in food tourism. In World Tourism

Organisation,GlobalReportonFoodTourism–AffiliateMembersReports:Volume4.CMT.

World Tourism Organization. (2017). Affiliate Members Report, Volume sixteen – Second

GlobalReportonGastronomyTourismSecondglobalreportongastronomytourism-Vuloume

sixteen.Madrid:WorldTourismOrganization.

Worlu,R.E.,Adekanbi,T.O.,Ajagbe,M.A.,Isiavwe,D.T.,&Oke,A.O.(2015).BrandIdentity

ofTouristDestinationandtheImpactonPatronage.IIARDInternationalJournalofHospitality

AndTourismManagement,1(3),1-11.

Yiamjanya,S.,&Wongleedee,K.(2014).InternationalTourists’TravelMotivationbyPush-Pull

Factors and the DecisionMaking for Selecting Thailand as Destination Choice. International

JournalofSocial,Behavioral,Educational,Economic,BusinessandIndustrialEngineering,8(5),

1348-1353.

Yusof, M., & Ismail, H. (2014). Destination Branding Identity from the Stakeholders’

Perspectives.InternationalJournalofbuiltenvironmentandsustainability,1(1),71-75.

Zhang, H., Fu, X., Cai, L. A., & Lu, L. (2014). Destination image and tourist loyalty: Ameta-

analysis.TourismManagement,40,213e223.


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

65

APPENDICES

Appendix1:Consentform

Content to be posted on Facebook:

Hi everyone,

I am conducting a survey on culinary tourism in Vienna for my Masters Thesis. The purpose of the study is to analyse the influences of culinary on the image of Vienna and subsequently the FOREIGN (non-Austrian) TOURISTS’ loyalty to the city. Please help to complete the survey in the following link.

https://goo.gl/forms/ji6H3XAknbJHiBJB2

The questionnaire will require approximately 15 – 20 minutes to complete. All answer will be kept confidential; please do not include your name in the survey. Only group results will be presented or documented, not individual answers.

Thank you very much for your participation!


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

66

Appendix2:Questionnaire

ThepurposeofthestudyistoanalysetheinfluencesofculinaryontheimageofViennaand

subsequentlytheFOREIGNTOURISTS’loyaltytothecity.

Part I: Demographic information of foreign tourists:

1. Have you been traveling to other countries (outside of your residency country) in the last 12 months? (between April 2016 and May 2017)

⃞ Yes ⃞ No

2. Number of travelling times to Vienna

⃞ I've only visited Vienna on day-visits

⃞ First-time visitor

⃞ Returning visitor; including this trip ________ times

3. Gender:

⃞ Male ⃞ Female ⃞ Other

4. Country of residence: ___________________

5. Nationality: ___________________________

6. Education:

⃞ Junior high school ⃞ Senior high school ⃞ Technical school/ Diploma

⃞ University ⃞ Graduate school ⃞ Other: ______________

7. Occupation

⃞ Business owner ⃞ Student ⃞ Employee

⃞ Retired ⃞ Others: ___________

8. Age

⃞ Under 20 ⃞ 20 - 30 ⃞ 31 - 40 ⃞ 41- 50 ⃞ 51- 60 ⃞ Over 60

9. Main purpose of visit (select max. 3)

⃞ Food and cuisine ⃞ Visit friend/family ⃞ Shopping

⃞ Sightseeing ⃞ Conference/ business ⃞ Nightlife

⃞ Visit historic sights ⃞ Cultural experience ⃞ Others:______________


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

67

Part II: Food preferences:

10. Food is very importance in my everyday life.

⃞ 1

Strongly disagree

⃞ 2

Disagree

⃞ 3

Neutral

⃞ 4

Agree

⃞ 5

Strongly agree

11. When I travel, food is an important factor in creating positive experiences.

⃞ 1

Strongly disagree

⃞ 2

Disagree

⃞ 3

Neutral

⃞ 4

Agree

⃞ 5

Strongly agree

12. You are

⃞ a vegan ⃞ a vegetarian

⃞ an omnivore (eats variety of both plant and animal origin)

⃞ other_____________

13. My preferred cuisines (select max. 3)

⃞ African cuisines ⃞ Cuisines of the Americas ⃞ Asian cuisines

⃞ European cuisines ⃞ Oceanic cuisine ⃞ Other: ______________

Statements 1

Strongly disagree

2 Disagree

3 Neutral

4 Agree

5 Strongly

agree

Part III: Destination image

My dining experience in Vienna is consistent with my impression of the culinary scene in Vienna

Vienna offers appealing cuisine

Visiting Vienna is a wonderful opportunity for sampling cuisine (including wine activities)


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

68

Vienna has a relaxing dining atmosphere

Vienna has variations of dining options

Vienna has excellent dining facilities

Viennese food service personnel are friendly

Culinary scene in Vienna is diverse

Culinary scene in Vienna is unique

Statements 1

Strongly disagree

2 Disagree

3 Neutral

4 Agree

5 Strongly

agree

Part IV: Perceived quality

Vienna offers excellent quality in culinary tourism

Vienna offers good quality in restaurant service

Vienna’s culinary tourism is offered at reasonable prices

Vienna offers high quality cuisine

Vienna offers delicious cuisine

Vienna is doing well in order for tourists to enjoy the culinaries the city offers

Vienna’s culinary scene is better than that of similar destinations

Please name the first TWO similar destinations that came to your mind:

1. ____________________________

2. ____________________________

Statements 1

Strongly disagree

2 Disagree

3 Neutral

4 Agree

5 Strongly

agree

Part V: Destination familiarity

I am familiar with information on Vienna’s culinary scene


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

69

I am more familiar than the average person regarding Vienna’s culinary scene

I am more familiar than my friends regarding Vienna’s culinary scene

During my trip in Vienna, I had the chance to taste the authentic Viennese kitchen

During my trip in Vienna, I was able to enjoy the different cuisines Vienna offers

Statements 1

Strongly disagree

2 Disagree

3 Neutral

4 Agree

5 Strongly

agree

Part VI: Destination self-congruence

The typical visitors to culinary places in Vienna reflect the type of person who I LIKE TO BE

I LIKE TO SEE MYSELF as a typical tourist visiting Vienna for its culinary scene

I LIKE TO BE KNOWN as a knowledgeable-tourist of the culinary offers in Vienna

The culinary scene in Vienna is a reflection of MY IDEAL IMAGE

The typical visitor of Vienna, to enjoy the culinary offers reflects the type of visitor WHO I AM

The typical visitor of Vienna’s culinary places is similar to me in terms of THE ACTUAL IMAGE about myself

The typical visitor of Vienna's culinary places is VERY MUCH LIKE ME

Vienna’s culinary scene is appealing to THE ACTUAL IMAGE of me as a visitor

Statements 1

Strongly disagree

2 Disagree

3 Neutral

4 Agree

5 Strongly

agree

Part VII: Destination satisfaction

I am satisfied with the culinary event offerings in Vienna

I really enjoy visiting Vienna for its offers


INSIGHTSFROMVIENNA

70

in culinary tourism

Part VIII: Destination loyalty

I would recommend others to visit Vienna for its culinary offers

I wish to visit Vienna again for culinary tourism

In the following year, I will probably visit Vienna again mainly for its culinary tourism

Part IX: Information sources

14. I obtained my information about culinary places in Vienna from

⃞ A friend who visited Vienna ⃞ www.vienna.info/ www.wien.info

⃞ Tripadvisor’s website ⃞ Tripadvisor’s forum

⃞ Traveling blog: ________________ ⃞ Others: _________________

15. Do you post your culinary experiences online?

⃞ Yes, ⃞ No

on which platform ______________

16. During my trip(s) in Vienna, I have participated in:

⃞ Dining in restaurants ⃞ Food festivals ⃞ Wine tasting

⃞ Culinary tours ⃞ Other activities: _____________

Part X: Comments

17. Would you like to add anything in relation to your culinary experiences in Vienna?

18. Would you like to recommend in regards to the development of culinary tourism in Vienna and/or in general?

19. Would you like to comment on the content of this survey, or recommend other questions for this topic?

____________ Thank you for your participation!

All answers will be kept confidential. Only group results will be presented or documented, not individual answers.

the aspects of culinary tourism in ... - modul.ac.at · by pls-sem, confirmatory factor analysis...

Documents