| Literature DB >> 32041242 |
Jinsoo Hwang1, Jinkyung Jenny Kim2, Jenni Soo-Hee Lee1, Noman Sahito3.
Abstract
Many people travel to improve their wellbeing perception (WBP), and senior tourists in South Korea are no exception in that they hope to enhance their quality of life through tourism. As such, this study explored the significance of WBP in the senior tourism industry in South Korea. The current paper collected samples from 349 senior tourists. Analysis of data indicated that brand prestige contributes to increasing WBP among seniors and improving consumer attitude. In addition, it was found that WBP positively affects both consumer attitude and word-of-mouth (WOM). Lastly, tour guide services moderated the relationship between (1) brand prestige and WBP and (2) consumer attitude and WOM. The current paper then presents theoretical and practical implications of the statistical results.Entities:
Keywords: brand prestige; quality of life; senior tourists; tour guide; word-of-mouth
Year: 2020 PMID: 32041242 PMCID: PMC7037669 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17031029
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Proposed conceptual model.
Profile of survey respondents (n = 325).
| Variable |
| Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||
| Men | 95 | 29.2 |
| Women | 228 | 70.2 |
| Educational Level | ||
| High school diploma | 73 | 22.5 |
| Associate’s degree | 29 | 8.9 |
| Bachelor’s degree | 181 | 55.7 |
| Graduate degree | 42 | 12.9 |
| Marital Status | ||
| Single | 4 | 1.2 |
| Married | 314 | 96.6 |
| Others (divorced and widow/widower) | 7 | 2.2 |
| Monthly income | ||
| Less than US$ 1000 | 8 | 2.5 |
| US$ 1001~US$ 2000 | 54 | 16.6 |
| US$ 2001~US$ 3000 | 58 | 17.8 |
| US$ 3001~US$ 4000 | 71 | 21.8 |
| US$ 4001~US$ 5000 | 59 | 18.2 |
| US$ 5001~US$ 6000 | 47 | 14.5 |
| More than US$ 6001 | 28 | 8.6 |
| Mean age = 69.20 years old |
Confirmatory factor analysis: Items and loadings.
| Construct and Scale Item | Standardized Loading a |
|---|---|
| Package tour prestige | |
| My package tour is prestigious. | 0.935 |
| My package tour has high status. | 0.940 |
| My package tour is very upscale. | 0.897 |
| Seniors’ WBP | |
| My package tour plays an important role in my well-being. | 0.925 |
| My package tour meets my overall well-being needs. | 0.938 |
| My package tour plays an important role in enhancing my QOL. | 0.918 |
| Consumer attitude | |
| Favorable—Unfavorable | 0.899 |
| Like—Dislike | 0.916 |
| Good—Bad | 0.918 |
| Pleasant—Unpleasant | 0.924 |
| Positive—Negative | 0.922 |
| WOM | |
| I will encourage others to use the travel agency. | 0.907 |
| I will spread the news about the good aspects of the travel agency to others. | 0.966 |
| I will recommend the travel agency to others. | 0.926 |
| Goodness-of-fit statistics: χ2 = 259.722, | |
Notes 1: a All factors loadings are significant at p < 0.001. Notes 2: NFI = Normed Fit Index, CFI = Comparative Fit Index, IFI = Incremental Fit Index, TLI = Tucker-Lewis Index, RMSEA = Root Mean Square Error of Approximation.
Descriptive statistics and associated measures.
| Variables | Mean (SD) | AVE | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1) Brand prestige | 4.30 (0.94) | 0.854 |
| 0.716 b | 0.746 | 0.677 |
| (2) Seniors’ WBP | 4.37 (0.95) | 0.859 | 0.513c |
| 0.750 | 0.696 |
| (3) Consumer attitude | 4.52 (1.10) | 0.839 | 0.557 | 0.563 |
| 0.733 |
| (4) WOM | 4.40 (0.99) | 0.871 | 0.458 | 0.484 | 0.537 |
|
Notes 1: SD = Standard Deviation, AVE = Average Variance Extracted. Notes 2: a Composite reliabilities are along the diagonal, b Correlations are above the diagonal, and c Squared correlations are below the diagonal.
Standardized parameter estimates for structural model.
| Independent Variable | Dependent Variable | Beta | Result | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1: Brand prestige | → | Seniors’ WBP | 0.896 | 21.236 | Supported |
| H2: Brand prestige | → | Consumer attitude | 0.371 | 3.503 | Supported |
| H3: Brand prestige | → | WOM | 0.102 | 0.939 | Not supported |
| H4: Seniors’ WBP | → | Consumer attitude | 0.418 | 3.941 | Supported |
| H5: Seniors’ WBP | → | WOM | 0.255 | 2.351 | Supported |
| H6: Consumer attitude | → | WOM | 0.465 | 7.097 | Supported |
| H7a: The moderating of tour guide services in the relationship between brand prestige and seniors’ WBP | Supported | ||||
| H7b: The moderating of tour guide services in the relationship between brand prestige and consumer attitude | Not supported | ||||
| H7d: The moderating of tour guide services in the relationship between seniors’ WBP and consumer attitude | Not supported | ||||
| H7e: The moderating of tour guide services in the relationship between seniors’ WBP and WOM | Not supported | ||||
| H7f: The moderating of tour guide services in the relationship between consumer attitude and WOM | Supported | ||||
| Goodness-of-fit statistics: χ2 = 259.722, | |||||
Notes 1: p < 0.05. Notes 2: SE = Standardized Estimate. Notes 3: NFI = Normed Fit Index, CFI = Comparative Fit Index, IFI = Incremental Fit Index, TLI = Tucker-Lewis Index, RMSEA = Root Mean Square Error of Approximation.
Figure 2Structural model results.