| Literature DB >> 36160526 |
Yang Zhou1, Ligang Liu1, Xiao Sun2.
Abstract
This research discusses the impact of the perception of video images and online word of mouth on tourists' travel intentions. A survey of 390 users who watched travel videos on short-video platforms was conducted using structural equation modeling. The results are as follows. First, the perception of video images can significantly affect tourists' intention to visit the destinations. Second, as a mediating variable, online word of mouth can enhance the positive effects of the perception of video images on tourists' travel intentions. Third, gender had a positive moderating effect, which was particularly obvious in the relationship between the perception of video images and online word of mouth. This research provides a theoretical basis for the utility of tourism-related short videos, which can help stimulate tourists' intention to visit promoted destinations.Entities:
Keywords: affective image; cognitive image; emotional evaluation; gender; online word of mouth; short video platform; travel intentions; video images perception
Year: 2022 PMID: 36160526 PMCID: PMC9493354 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.984240
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
FIGURE 1The research model.
The composition and distribution of the sample (N = 390).
| Item | Category | Frequency | Rate% | Item | Category | Frequency | Rate% |
| Gender | F | 180 | 46.2 | Source channel | Professional travel websites | 279 | 71.5 |
| M | 210 | 53.8 | Portal sites | 169 | 43.3 | ||
| Age | Under 20 | 54 | 13.8 | Self-media | 258 | 66.2 | |
| 20–30 | 167 | 42.8 | Social media platforms | 211 | 54.1 | ||
| 31–40 | 90 | 23.1 | Online community sites | 111 | 28.5 | ||
| 41–50 | 56 | 14.4 | Others | 71 | 18.2 | ||
| Over 50 | 23 | 5.9 | Trusted channel | Professional travel websites | 273 | 70 | |
| Education | Less than high school/technical school | 31 | 7.9 | Portal sites | 146 | 37.4 | |
| Junior college | 34 | 8.7 | Self-media | 212 | 54.4 | ||
| Bachelor’s degree | 242 | 62.1 | Social media platforms | 188 | 48.2 | ||
| Master’s degree | 50 | 12.8 | Online community sites | 104 | 26.7 | ||
| Doctor’s degree | 33 | 8.5 | Others | 75 | 19.2 | ||
| Occupation | Student | 158 | 40.5 | Sharing channel | Professional travel websites | 208 | 53.3 |
| Civil servant/public institutions | 37 | 9.5 | Portal sites | 124 | 31.8 | ||
| Corporate employee | 64 | 16.4 | Self-media | 227 | 58.2 | ||
| Lawyer/teacher/healthcare professional | 64 | 16.4 | Social media platforms | 234 | 60 | ||
| Freelancer | 37 | 9.5 | Online community sites | 82 | 21 | ||
| Others | 30 | 7.7 | Others | 69 | 17.7 | ||
| Monthly income (yuan) | Under 2000 | 134 | 34.4 | ||||
| 2001–3000 | 43 | 11 | |||||
| 3001–4000 | 46 | 11.8 | |||||
| 4001–5000 | 48 | 12.3 | |||||
| Over 5000 | 119 | 30.5 |
Confirmatory factor analysis.
| Observed variable | Factor loading | CR | AVE | References | |
| The destination in the videos has beautiful natural scenery. | 0.707 | 0.925 | 0.508 | ||
| The destination in the videos has a unique historical and cultural landscape. | 0.729 | 17.146 | |||
| The residents of the destination in the videos have unique lifestyles and customs. | 0.723 | 18.619 | |||
| The destination in the videos has a pleasant climate. | 0.806 | 15.196 | |||
| The destination in the videos has good public order. | 0.808 | 15.154 | |||
| The destination in the videos has diverse foods. | 0.731 | 13.783 | |||
| The destination in the videos has a fun nightlife. | 0.721 | 13.581 | |||
| The destination in the videos has a clean environment. | 0.704 | 13.283 | |||
| The businesses at the destination in the videos have standard transaction procedures and their prices are reasonable. | 0.577 | 11.083 | |||
| There are standardized services offered by the businesses at the destination in the videos. | 0.715 | 13.493 | |||
| The destination in the videos has convenient transportation. | 0.699 | 13.106 | |||
| The destination in the videos has comprehensive and user-friendly infrastructure. | 0.606 | 11.530 | |||
| The destination in the videos would be relaxing. | 0.827 | 0.875 | 0.637 | ||
| The destination in the videos would be exciting. | 0.850 | 19.437 | |||
| I think being at the destination in the videos would make me happy. | 0.818 | 18.517 | |||
| I think being at the destination in the videos would be an emotional experience for me. | 0.685 | 14.666 | |||
| The online evaluations of the destination in the videos are consistent. | 0.767 | 0.867 | 0.520 | ||
| I attach great importance to positive online word of mouth about the destination in the videos. | 0.653 | 13.025 | |||
| The online evaluations of the destination in the videos are positive overall. | 0.718 | 14.351 | |||
| The online word of mouth generated by the videos of the destination encourage me to go there. | 0.750 | 15.149 | |||
| The online word of mouth about the destination generated by the videos is easy to understand. | 0.689 | 13.762 | |||
| The online evaluations of the tourist destination generated by the videos show the real feelings of the tourists who have visited. | 0.743 | 14.908 | |||
| The online evaluations which were generated by videos of the destination, and which garnered a large number of user comments and replies, attract my attention more. | 0.686 | 0.901 | 0.567 | ||
| A large amount of online word of mouth information on the destination in the videos that can be found on various online platforms. | 0.619 | 13.777 | |||
| The online word of mouth evaluations of the destination in the videos on multiple platforms. | 0.831 | 15.177 | |||
| The online word of mouth evaluations of the destination generated by videos being forwarded on multiple online platforms. | 0.785 | 14.340 | |||
| The quantity of online reviews makes it easier for me to develop trust in the accuracy of their perspectives. | 0.814 | 14.888 | |||
| I am more likely to read well-written online reviews. | 0.798 | 14.553 | |||
| Images, videos and other forms of review are more attractive to me than simple text. | 0.716 | 13.011 | |||
| There is a good chance I will visit the destination after watching the videos about it. | 0.785 | 0.829 | 0.552 | ||
| The destination is worth my time and money after watching the videos about it. | 0.834 | 16.530 | |||
| I will sincerely recommend the destination in the videos to others after watching them. | 0.714 | 13.999 | |||
| I will pass on a positive message about the destination to others after watching the videos. | 0.622 | 12.155 |
Correlation coefficient and results of discriminant validity test.
| Variable | Cognitive image | Affective image | Quality | Quantity | Travel intentions |
| Cognitive image |
| ||||
| Affective image | 0.660 |
| |||
| Quality | 0.551 | 0.680 |
| ||
| Quantity | 0.411 | 0.519 | 0.730 |
| |
| Travel intentions | 0.423 | 0.521 | 0.643 | 0.666 |
|
The numbers in bold which proceed diagonally across the table are the AVE square roots, and the other numbers are the correlation coefficients between variables.
Goodness of fit test.
| Index |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Initial model index value | 3.784 | 0.839 | 0.794 | 0.778 | 0.744 | 0.840 | 0.085 |
| Revised model index value | 2.378 | 0.924 | 0.876 | 0.857 | 0.827 | 0.924 | 0.060 |
| Adaptive standard value | <5 | >0.850 | >0.850 | >0.800 | >0.800 | >0.850 | <0.080 |
Hypotheses testing results.
| Hypothetical path | Standardized path coefficient | S.E. | C.R. |
| Results |
| H1a: Cognitive image → quality of online word of mouth | 0.561 | 0.053 | 11.533 |
| yes |
| H1b: Cognitive image → quantity of online word of mouth | 0.439 | 0.064 | 7.650 |
| yes |
| H1c: Affective image → quality of online word of mouth | 0.180 | 0.048 | 3.708 |
| yes |
| H1d: Affective image → quantity of online word of mouth | 0.121 | 0.057 | 2.106 | 0.035 | yes |
| H2a: Cognitive image → tourists’ travel intentions | 0.119 | 0.066 | 1.976 | 0.048 | yes |
| H2b: Affective image → tourists’ travel intentions | 0.048 | 0.05 | 0.959 | 0.337 | no |
| H3a: Quality of online word of mouth → tourists’ travel intentions | 0.246 | 0.052 | 4.794 |
| yes |
| H3b: Quantity of online word of mouth → tourists’ travel intentions | 0.431 | 0.043 | 9.915 |
| yes |
*p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001.
Bootstrap test results of the significance of the mediating effect.
| Mediating effect path | Significance (two-tailed test) | 95% of confidence interval | |
| Lower limit | Upper limit | ||
| H4a: Cognitive image → online word of mouth → tourists’ travel intentions | 0.000 | 0.262 | 0.423 |
| H4b: Affective image → online word of mouth → tourists’ travel intentions | 0.000 | 0.317 | 0.494 |
Moderating effect test for gender.
| Hypothetical path | Path coefficient of population | Female | Male | Difference ratio | Results |
| H5: Perception of video images → online word of mouth | 0.647 | 0.713 | 0.598 | 17.7% | yes |
| H6: Online word of mouth → travel intentions | 0.620 | 0.629 | 0.622 | 1.1% | yes |
| H7: Perception of video images → travel intentions | 0.130 | 0.124 | 0.129 | 3.8% | no |
**p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.