Journal of Sport Management, 2012, 26, 237-248
© 2012 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Recurring Sport Events and Destination Image
Perceptions: Impact on Active Sport Tourist Behavioral
Intentions and Place Attachment
Kyriaki (Kiki) Kaplanidou
University of Florida
Jeremy S. Jordan
Temple University
Daniel Funk
Temple University and Griffith University
Lynn L. Ridinger
Old Dominion University
Hosting recurring sport events can be a solution for sustainable tourism development resulting in destination
loyalty and higher place attachment levels. This study proposes active event sport tourists may include in
their destination perceptions a number of destination and event attributes, given the direct association of the
event with the place. The feasibility of the convergence of event and destination image attributes in one scale
was explored and that scale’s influence on place attachment and on specific active sport tourists’ behaviors
was examined. Data were collected from sport event tourist participants (n = 2,015) at a recurring marathon
event via an online survey. Exploratory factor analysis confirmed the factor structure of destination image to
include event characteristics. Regression analysis was used to test the impact of destination image factors on
behavioral intentions and place attachment and supported the predictive validity of destination image factors.
Implications for event and destination marketers are discussed.
Certain types of tourism have witnessed considerable
growth during the last decade with event sport tourism as
one of them (Weed & Bull, 2009). Recent evidence reveals
a growth in the American sport events industry in terms
of the number of sport events hosted by communities (O’
Connor & Bradford, 2010). An important reason destinations bid for sport events relates to their attempt to enrich
the tourism product portfolio and capitalize on the power
of sport events as tourism and local economies stimulators
(Schneider, 2009) through the influx of nonlocal monies
(Daniels, Norman, & Henry, 2004). Another reason relates
Kaplanidou is with the Dept. of Tourism, Recreation and Sport
Management, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Jordan
is with the School of Tourism and Hospitality Management,
Temple University, Philadelphia, PA. Funk is a Professor and
Washburn Senior Research Fellow, School of Tourism and
Hospitality Management. Temple University, Philadelphia, PA
and Professor of Sport Marketing, Griffith Business School,
Griffith University, Southport, Queensland, Australia. Ridinger
is with the Dept. of Human Movement Sciences, Old Dominion
University, Norfolk, VA.
to the large potential of the sport and travel market which,
based on preliminary information by the Travel Industry
Association of America (TIA) on behaviors and spending
power of sport tourists, is fairly significant (TIA, 1999).
More recently, the sport tourism sector was identified to
be at the heart of the international tourism market growth
and the fastest growing sector in the global travel and tourism industry. This growth accounted in 2008 for US$600
billion or 10% of the international tourism market (World
Sport Destination Expo, 2010).
Given the growth of the sport tourism market, the
understanding of the factors that influence the destination
loyalty of sport tourists is of essence. Hosting recurring
sport events may be one avenue for the development
of destination loyalty which can be operationalized as
either behavioral intentions or as attitudinal loyalty via
the form of place attachment (Alegre & Cladera, 2006;
Pritchard, Havitz, & Howard, 1999). Support for the
former notion comes from a study by Kaplanidou and
Gibson (2010) who suggested the hosting of recurring
sport events can contribute to a sustainable customer base
of active event sport tourists (i.e., participants) resulting in
repeat event participation in the host destination. A more
237
238 Kaplanidou et al.
recent study by Getz and Andersson (2010) supports the
latter finding as well. The fact that the image of the event
can significantly influence the image of the destination
(Kaplanidou & Vogt, 2007) leads to the proposition that
there may be a convergence of the event image with the
destination image and thus a correlation between the two
concepts. In other words, hosting recurring sport events
may contribute to the destination image profile formation
and has the potential to create additional cobranding and
marketing benefits. This discussion is the basis for the
first research question of the study: Can destination and
event image attributes converge to predict sport tourist
loyalty outcomes?
The convergence of destination and event attributes is
important for other behavioral outcomes such as the formation of positive revisit intentions and word-of-mouth
recommendations (Pritchard, et al., 1999). Destination
and event images have the potential to influence behavioral intentions to revisit the destination for vacation
or to participate in the event again (Getz & Andersson,
2010; Kaplanidou & Vogt, 2007), and also engage in
word-of-mouth recommendations (de Matos & Vargas
Rossi, 2008; Pike & Ryan, 2004). A second important
outcome is place attachment resulting from engagement
with a recreational activity (Kyle, Graefe, Manning, &
Bacon, 2004c). Thus, engagement in the activity through
event participation and the formation of positive event
perceptions may lead to higher attachment levels. Place
attachment can also be enhanced from the perceptions
about the destination where the preferred sport activity
takes place (Kyle, Bricker, Graefe, & Wickham, 2004a;
Kyle, Graefe, Manning, & Bacon, 2003). Given the
literature above, it is expected that if convergence of
destination and event images exist, then it can influence
place attachment levels for a destination (Kyle, Mowen,
& Tarrant, 2004d).
In summary, the purpose of the study is to: a) explore
the feasibility of the convergence of sport event image
and destination image attributes in one scale and b) test
the formative influence of destination and event image
attributes on active sport tourists’ behavioral intentions
and place attachment levels. To further support the focus
of this study, a literature review on the topics of destination and event image, place attachment and behavioral
intentions follows.
Literature Review
Sport tourism has been conceptualized as a phenomenon
that arises from the unique interaction among place,
people and activities (Weed & Bull, 2004). In other words,
there are sport components (in this case, the event) and
tourism elements (in this case, the destination attributes)
at play. This conceptualization brings to the forefront
theoretical considerations that can relate to the sport
tourist profiles, the place characteristics, and the type
of activity. Previous research that has examined the role
of the destination in the decision making of the sport
tourist found destination image attributes could directly
influence behaviors of sport tourists (Kaplanidou & Vogt,
2007) while event image influences behaviors indirectly
through destination image. The following section discusses the notion of destination attributes and image, the
concept of event image and its interrelationship with the
concepts of the destination image and place attachment.
Destination and Event Images
Destination attributes are characteristics associated with a
destination’s perceived image and can be defined through
cognitive, affective, conative and global evaluations
(Baloglu & McCleary, 1999; Beerli & Martin, 2004).
Destination image measurement has varied across studies, a problem which Beerli and Martin (2004) aimed to
resolve by providing a thorough list of dimensions and
attributes derived from existing destination image scales.
These dimensions included natural resources, general
infrastructure, tourist infrastructure, tourist leisure and
recreation, culture history and art, political and economic factors, natural environment, social environment,
and atmosphere of the place. In the tourism literature
such destination dimensions have been found to influence intentions to travel to a destination (e.g., Baloglu,
1999; Gartner, 1993; Lee, Lee, & Lee, 2005; Tapachai &
Waryszak, 2000; Woodside & Lysonski, 1989). However,
the examination of destination attributes for a host city
of a recurring sport event has not been discussed in the
sport and tourism literature. In other words, do we need to
consider the presence of sport event characteristics as part
of a destination’s image? Since research is not extensive
on this topic, only assumptions can be made about the
way the event is incorporated in the destination’s pool of
attributes and the potential of sport event attributes along
with other destination attributes to predict sport tourists’
behavioral intentions.
The significance of the concept of a destination’s
image in tourism has received considerable attention
among tourist scholars primarily for its role in influencing
tourists’ behavioral intentions (Baloglu, 1999; Baloglu &
Brinberg, 1997; Bigné, Sanchez, & Sanjez, 2001). The
concept was defined in the late 1970s as the sum of beliefs
and ideas a person has of a place (Crompton, 1979).
The importance of these beliefs has been incorporated
in the understanding of the construct (Ryan, 1991) in
order for destination marketers to influence positioning
strategy and tourist perceptions (Pike & Ryan, 2004).
There are more than 30 definitions of destination image
in the tourism literature (Li & Vogelsong, 2006; San
Martín & Rodríguez del Bosque, 2008) that allude to a
three component structure of the concept. These three
components include cognitive, affective and, conative
characteristics (Gartner, 1993). Cognitive evaluations
refer to the beliefs a person has about a destination’s
attributes, whereas affective evaluations refer to the
feelings toward the destination. Conative evaluations are
analogous to behavior because they evaluate the action
component of the image which is usually equated with
behavioral intentions (Gartner, 1993).
Sport Events and Destination Perceptions 239
A structural relationship between these concepts
has been suggested in the literature where cognitive
evaluations influence affective perceptions and other
components of destination image (Baloglu & McCleary,
1999). The influence of cognition on affective evaluations is also supported from accumulated evidence in
neuroscience where it is discussed that cognition is able
to regulate affective processing in a post hoc fashion
(Davidson, 2003; Eder, Hommel, & De Houwer, 2007).
Therefore, an understanding of cognitive perceptions of
destination image or related attributes is a good point of
initiation when examining the relationship between the
tourism product’s image (in this case, the sport event)
and the attributes of the destination.
The cognitive destination image literature suggests a
number of factors compose this dimension. These factors
consist of items that relate to latent concepts such as quality
of tourism experiences, attractions, environment, value for
money, and atmosphere of the place (Baloglu & McCleary,
1999; Beerli & Martin, 2004; Gibson, Qi, & Zhang, 2008)
[for a detailed list of factors see Beerli & Martin,(2004)].
Although the latter literature is comprehensive in terms of
conceptualizing cognitive destination image, the integration of items related to a recurring sport event has yet to be
identified and addressed in the sport tourism literature. The
incorporation of event attributes in a destination attribute
pool may be necessary for places that host recurring sport
events as over time these events become intertwined with
the destination’s tourism product portfolio.
This proposition aligns with research proposed by
Shonk and Chelladurai (2008) where the event characteristics enhance the sport tourism experience along with the
destination characteristics. Furthermore, such understanding should take place in sport tourists’ post visitation trip
phase, where a more stable evaluation of the destination
attributes is available. The postvisitation phase allows for
the evaluation of direct experiences with both the destination and the sport event, which can enable active sport
tourists to make clearer judgments about the importance of
specific destination characteristics or dimensions that influence their destination experience (Tasci & Gartner, 2007)
and intentions to participate again in a recurring sport
event (Kaplanidou & Gibson, 2010). The latter studies
support the multidimensionality of cognitive destination
image perceptions and the differential impact of its various
components on the formation of behavioral intentions.
In recent efforts to conceptualize the image of a sport
event for active event sport tourists, Kaplanidou (2010)
found that one of the important event aspects in the sport
tourists’ mind is the destination’s attributes. This finding
is also supported by Chen and Funk (2010) who identified
that fifteen destination image attributes (e.g., historical
attractions, accommodations, shopping and cleanliness
of the city) are important destination attributes for sport
tourists’ intentions to revisit the destination. Similarly,
active event sport tourists from smaller scale nonrecurring
sport events associated the event experience with emotional, physical, social, organizational and environmental
elements, the latter consisting of destination attributes
(Hallman, Kaplanidou, & Breuer, 2010; Kaplanidou
& Vogt, 2010). In the case of marathon runners, the
image of the event included destination components
suggesting that the destination profile is important for
this segment (Kaplanidou, 2010). Taken together, this
stream of research suggests that the destination image
plays a role in the decision making of active event sport
tourists. Especially in the case of marathon runners, a
combination of event and destination choices is evident
to satisfy event participation and vacation motivations
(Getz & Andersson, 2010).
The literature on destination and event image suggests that the two concepts can experience a symbiotic
relationship, primarily in the case of recurring events
(Hallman, et al., 2010; Kaplanidou & Gibson, 2010).
Therefore, we propose that for recurring sport events,
the concept of destination image should include some
attributes related to the event. Furthermore, we propose
that attributes of recurring sport events when viewed
as part of the collection of destination attributes in the
sport tourists’ minds can influence behavioral intentions.
Behavioral intentions include the following: revisit the
destination for vacation, participate in the event again,
and engage in word-of-mouth communications for both
the event and destination. Although destination and event
revisitation intention variables have been examined in
the sport tourism literature (e.g., Kaplanidou & Gibson,
2010; Kaplanidou & Vogt, 2007; Kim & Chalip, 2004;
Kouthouris & Alexandris, 2005), word-of-mouth communications has not been extensively examined for
active sport tourists despite its importance as a source
of information and its influence in forming images and
selecting a destination (Baloglu & McCleary, 1999; Vogt,
Stewart, & Fesenmaier, 1998). In conclusion, this study
will explore the convergence of event and destination
image components and then examine the relative contribution of destination image components including event
attributes on behavioral intentions. Thus, the following
first four hypotheses of the study arise:
H1: Destination image factors will predict active
sport tourists’ behavioral intentions to revisit the
destination in the next year;
H2: Destination image factors will predict active
sport tourists’ behavioral intentions to participate
in the event in the next year;
H3: Destination image factors will predict active
sport tourists’ likelihood to engage in word-of-mouth
communications about the destination;
H4: Destination image factors will predict active
sport tourists’ likelihood to engage in word-of-mouth
communications about the event.
Along with behavioral intentions and word-of-mouth
communications, the notion of place attachment is also
considered as an outcome variable for this study and the
rationale for its inclusion is discussed in the following
section.
240 Kaplanidou et al.
Place Attachment
Destination characteristics may influence the development of a bond with the location of the activity (Hammitt, Backlund, & Bixler, 2004) and can result in higher
place attachment levels (Rubinstein & Parmelee, 1992).
Therefore, place attachment could be a desired outcome
for destination and event marketers as an indication of
loyalty to both the event (activity) and the destination.
Subsequently, the question that arises is: What is the relationship between destination image attributes and place
attachment? To proceed with an informed hypothesis on
the relationship of these variables, a discussion of place
attachment literature is necessary.
The literature suggests that there are various definitions of the place attachment construct (Yuksel, Yuksel,
& Bilim, 2010). An encompassing and general definition
describes attachment to a place as the personal connection the individual feels for a place (Kyle, et al., 2004c).
This connection, however, can be emotional (Hidalgo &
Hernandez, 2001), psychological (Hummon, 1992) or
more evaluative in nature where individuals value and
identify with a specific place for the benefits it offers
them (Moore & Graefe, 1994). For example, in the case
of active sport tourists, place attachment can be formed
through the direct experiences these sport tourists have
with the destination and social interactions encountered
at the destination. Both direct experiences (Hammitt, et
al., 2004) and social interactions can contribute toward
developing a meaning about a place and can result in
higher attachment levels (Rubinstein & Parmelee, 1992).
Place attachment has been measured primarily
through two constructs: place identity and place dependence (Kyle, et al., 2004a; Kyle, et al., 2004c; Kyle, et al.,
2004d). According to Kyle, et al., (2004b) “place dependence is said to capture recreationists’ setting attachments
that are instrumental and goal related, particularly with
regard to the setting’s ability to facilitate desired leisure
experiences” (p. 65). More specifically, place dependence
allows for a relationship with the attributes of the environment where the activity is taking place to materialize
(Williams, Patterson, & Roggenbuck, 1992). As Kyle et
al., (2004a) discuss “the value of a setting to the individual
is based on specificity, functionality, and satisfaction of a
place and its goodness for hiking, fishing, camping, scenic
enjoyment and so forth” (p.124). On the other hand, place
identity “captures recreationists’ emotional and affective bonds with the setting” (Kyle et al., 2004b, p. 65).
Place identity refers to “those dimensions of the self that
define the individual’s personal identity in relation to the
physical environment by means of a complex pattern of
conscious and unconscious ideas, beliefs, preferences,
feelings, values, goals, and behavioral tendencies and
skills relevant to the environment” (Proshansky, 1978,
p. 155). Both these dimensions have been found to be
reliable and valid with various samples of recreationists
(Kyle, et al., 2004b; Kyle, et al., 2004d).
Place attachment dimensions have not been examined in the sport and tourism literature as outcome variables despite their influential role in developing loyalty
to a place (Yuksel, et al., 2010). The tourism literature
suggests that affective reactions to destinations’ attributes
are predicted by the cognitive attribute structures including attractions, quality of experience, environment and
value for money (Baloglu & McCleary, 1999). Thus, the
inclusion of place attachment in this study as an outcome
variable is warranted given its affective nature and also its
definition that alludes to connection with certain destination features. Another reason for the inclusion of place
attachment as an outcome variable in this study is because
individuals value and identify with a specific place for the
benefits it offers them while engaging in the activity of
their choice (Moore & Graefe, 1994). Place attachment
and destination image have been found to interact in a
study utilizing a qualitative approach, namely tourist
employed photography (Stednian, Beckley, Wallace,
& Ambard, 2004). The results of this study, although
based on a resident sample of a popular tourist area,
suggest that place attachment is created through social
and ecological destination characteristics. According to
Stednian et al., (2004) these characteristics may relate to
the perceptions of visitors and could suggest that place
attachment develops rapidly in “chosen places” relevant
to the visitor characteristics. The intensity of the experience in combination with the impressive destination
landscapes (a destination image attribute) can be present
(Tuan, 1977) and add to place attachment levels. Active
sport tourists engage in intense activities or events and
rely on the natural and manmade resources of a place
(Stedman, 2002) that is hosting the sport event. These
characteristics could enable the development of place
attachment, a proposition tested with this study. The
previous discussion leads to the next two hypotheses:
H5: Destination image factors will predict active
sport tourists’ place identity levels;
H6: Destination image factors will predict active
sport tourists’ place dependence levels.
Method
Participants
Data were collected from participants of a Marathon and
Half Marathon event at the Southeast region of the United
States through an online survey sent to all participants
after the event was completed. The event had a total of
13,925 participants in the marathon and half marathon
distances. Participants who were residents of the county
that hosted the event were deleted from the sampling
frame resulting in a total of 8,454 nonlocal participants.
Of this amount, a total of 2,015 participants completed the
survey resulting in a response rate of 24%. Sample characteristics consisted of 52.6% females and 47.4% males.
Seventy percent of the sample (n = 1,410) participated
in the half marathon event. The largest percentage of the
respondents (49.4%) fell between the ages of 30 and 44,
ethnicity was predominantly Caucasian (71.3%) followed
by Hispanic (19.5%), and 62.3% were married or living
Sport Events and Destination Perceptions 241
with a partner. The respondents were highly educated
as 52.7% held a graduate degree or higher and 37% had
an undergraduate degree. They were also affluent with
45.7% having an annual household income of $100,000
(USD) or more and 26.6% with incomes between $60,000
and $100,000 (USD).
The threat of nonresponse bias was addressed by
comparing characteristics of the respondents with known
characteristics of the population. Comparisons were made
on various demographic variables, including age, race
type, and gender as well as past experience with the event.
Further, a comparison on core study variables was made
between early and late respondents as late respondents
have been shown to be an appropriate proxy for nonrespondents (Dooley & Lindner, 2003; Lindner, Murphy, &
Briers, 2001). Late respondents were defined as those that
completed the survey after receipt of the post notification
e-mail reminder. Results of these comparisons indicated
no significant differences between the obtained sample
and the event population.
Measures
A multi-item questionnaire was used to assess the following constructs: host event destination image attributes,
behavioral intentions and place attachment. The pool
of items for the host event destination image concept
included 24 items (see Table 1 for items in Factors 1,
2, 4) derived from a content analysis of information
about the place as a tourism destination (e.g., promotion
brochures, guidebooks, CVB website) and the literature
(Chen & Funk, 2010; Heung & Qu, 2000; Jenkins, 1999;
Kaplanidou & Vogt, 2007; Pike, 2002). In addition, based
on the conceptual work of Shonk and Chelladurai (2008)
five items about the event were developed (i.e., Table 1,
Factor 3) to be evaluated as aspects of the perceived destination attributes. All the destination image items were
assessed by asking the respondents what is the perceived
importance for each item for traveling to the destination. The anchors of this seven-point Likert scale were
1=extremely unimportant and 7=extremely important.
Behavioral intentions were measured with four items
that asked the respondents to indicate the likelihood of
returning to the destination for vacation, participating in
the event again, recommending the destination to others
(word-of-mouth) and recommending the event to others
(word-of-mouth). The first two behavioral items were
adapted from Kaplanidou (2007) and the word-of-mouth
items were adapted from Kim, Han, and Lee (2001). All
behavioral intention items were measured on a seven
point scale where 1=extremely unlikely and 7=extremely
likely. Place attachment was measured with two subscales, place identity and place dependency, adapted to
fit the context of the study (Kyle, et al., 2004a). Each
subscale had three items measured on seven point Likert
scales with anchors of 1=strongly disagree and 7=strongly
agree. The mean of these items was estimated for each
construct (i.e., place identity and place dependence) to
form two single item variables corresponding to each
concept to be included in the regression model.
Procedures
The multiattribute questionnaire was developed using
web based software and distributed to each registered
participant. The event organizers provided a database
containing all participant e-mail addresses. An e-mail
invitation containing the URL link to the survey was
sent seven days following the event. A post notification
reminder e-mail was sent to participants, who did not
reply to the first prompt, 10 days after the initial deployment of the survey. All participants who completed the
online survey within three weeks of the event had the
option to enter a drawing to win prizes consisting of
merchandise and complimentary registration for next
year’s event. Before survey deployment approval was
obtained from the institutional review board of the host
institution.
Data Preparation and Analysis
Given the proposition to explore the dimensionality of the
concept of destination image, exploratory factor analysis
was employed to detect the underlying factor structure
of the 24 cognitive destination and event attributes (Hair,
Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 2005). Principal axis
factoring extraction with oblimin rotation was performed
on the importance ratings of 24 destination image attributes on a sample of 1,758 active sport tourists (listwise
deletion that accounts only for complete cases yielded
that sample size). Principal axis factoring was used to
maximize the variance extracted by the factors and to
focus on the shared variance and not on sources of errors
that are unique to individual measurements (Tabachnick
& Fidell, 2007). Oblimin rotation was selected because
correlations among factors were expected given that all
measure the latent factor of destination image.
The results revealed the extraction of four factors
labeled as quality of tourism experience, attractions,
destination atmosphere, and event characteristics. These
factors were internally consistent, well defined by the
variables and cumulatively explained 61.63% of the
variance in destination image. Two items cross-loaded
on a second factor which indicates the items did not have
a strong loading (at least >.30) on a single significant
factor and thus were dropped from subsequent analysis.
These items were: event organization and facilities and
entertainment value. The lowest factor loading across
the factors was .46 and the highest was .90. Hair et al.,
(2005) note that factor loadings greater than 0.30 are
considered to meet a minimal threshold; loadings of 0.40
are considered more important; and loadings of 0.50 or
greater are considered practically significant.
Cronbach’s alpha for the four factors were calculated
and ranged from .81 to .92. The alpha coefficient for
quality of tourism experience was a =.92, for attractions a =.91, for destination atmosphere a =.86, and for
event characteristics a=.81. The results from the factor
analysis are presented in Table 1. The eigenvalues and
the percentage of variance explained (61.63%) highlight
the importance of the quality of the tourism experience,
242 Kaplanidou et al.
Table 1 Destination Image Attribute Factor Structure for Active Sport Tourists: Factor Loadings
from Principal Axis Factoring Extraction, Communalities, Eigenvalues and Percentages of Variance
Item*
Quality of Food
Local infrastructure and transportation
Quality of Accommodation
Entertainment and recreation facilities
Retail shopping
Tourist information and support
Friendliness of the locals
Clean and green environment
Sightseeing opportunities
Cultural, art and historic attractions
Natural/scenic attractions
Chance of experiencing different cultures
and customs
Local sport facilities and activities
Status of the event
Level of competition
Registration fee
Value of the experience for the money
Likelihood of good weather
Destination of the event
Ease of travel
Pleasant atmosphere
Personal safety
Eigenvalue
% of variance explained from extraction
from sums of squared loadings (Total:
61.63%)
Reliability (Cronbach’s alpha)
Factor mean
Factor correlations
Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 3
Factor 4
Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 3
Factor 4
Quality of
Experience
Attractions
Event
Characteristics
Destination
Atmosphere
.80
.71
.69
.67
.58
.55
.47
.47
Communalities
.69
.69
.65
.64
.41
.55
.61
.53
.82
.84
.70
.63
.90
.89
.82
.75
.57
.86
.74
.64
.56
10.78
43.36
2.77
10.14
1.56
4.89
.70
.68
.67
.59
.46
1.16
3.22
.91
4.75
.92
4.36
.81
4.77
.86
5.53
1
.49
.42
.53
1
.55
.26
1
.33
1
.63
.69
.58
.48
.51
.58
.55
.63
.69
.56
*All items were measured on seven point Likert scales with the following anchors: 1 = extremely unimportant, 7 = extremely important. The analysis
was based on N = 1749 complete cases
which although not necessarily related to active sport
tourism, supports the importance of the place characteristics. The factor correlations ranged from .26 to .55 and
are depicted at the bottom of Table 1.
The exploratory factor analysis allowed for the
creation of four destination image factors and provided
evidence for the multidimensionality of destination
image, which incorporates the convergence of event and
destination attributes in one scale. This step answered
the question about the feasibility of destination and event
attributes on one scale and was necessary to proceed
with the testing of the hypotheses of this study. These
hypotheses are depicted in summary form in Figure 1.
The hypotheses were tested through the estimation
of six multiple regression models (one for each of the
dependent variables of the study). The independent
variables included the four destination image factors that
were computed to form four new single item variables
Sport Events and Destination Perceptions 243
Figure 1 — Summary of six hypotheses tested: All destination image factors are expected to predict all six outcome variables.
from the mean scores of the items comprising each factor.
As far as the six dependent variables of the study are
concerned, two were single item behavioral intentions:
1) revisit the destination for vacation in the next year, and
2) participate in the event again next year. The next two
were single item word-of-mouth items 1) recommend
the destination to others and 2) recommend the event to
others. One item measured place identity (as a new item
reflecting the mean score of three items) and one item
measured place dependence (as a new item reflecting
the mean score of three items). Multicollinearity was
examined by utilizing the SPSS indicators of tolerance
and variance inflation factor (VIF) and also with the
examination of the factor correlation available in Table
1. The indicators did not show any signs of multicollinearity as the tolerance indicator range was from .40 to
.64 and the VIF indicators were from 1.55 to 2.47 which
are acceptable and beyond any suggested cut-off levels
(Hair, et al., 2005).
Results
Description of Variables
Participants evaluated the four destination image factors
positively. The factor destination atmosphere was above
the midpoint of the scale (M = 5.53, SD=.95), followed
by event characteristics (M = 4.70, SD = 1.04), quality of
tourism experience (M = 4.36, SD = 1.01) and attractions
(M = 4.34, SD = 1.23). Respondents had above average
scores on the place identification with the destination
construct (M =4.32, SD = 1.50) and on the place dependence construct (M =4.59, SD = 1.27). The active sport
tourists were somewhat likely to return to the destination
for vacation (M = 4.47, SD = 1.74) but more likely to recommend the destination as a vacation option (M = 5.49,
SD = 1.34). Regarding their intentions to participate in
the event again next year, the respondents were positive
(M = 5.26, SD = 1.59) but again they were more likely to
recommend this event to others (M = 6.11, SD = 1.07).
Table 2 presents the means and standard deviations of all
the observed variables and the factor means of the items
included in the regression models.
Regression Analysis
The results from the six regression models are presented
in summary form in Table 3 where the standardized
beta coefficients for each path tested in the model are
described. Overall, the results revealed that the destination image factor “destination atmosphere” was a
significant predictor for all dependent variables in the
study, namely intentions to revisit the destination (β =.11,
p < .05), intent to participate in the event again (β =.13,
p < .05), word-of-mouth for the destination (β =.26, p <
.05), word-of-mouth for the event (β =.26, p < .05), place
identity (β =.17, p < .05) and place dependence (β =.23,
p < .05) . The destination image factor “event characteristics” was a significant predictor of intentions to revisit
244 Kaplanidou et al.
Table 2 Descriptive Statistics (Means and Standard Deviations)
Item
Means
SD*
N
5.53
4.70
4.77
4.34
5.17
4.12
4.48
4.47
4.48
4.04
4.47
5.26
5.49
6.11
.95
1.04
1.01
1.23
1.35
1.56
1.42
1.66
1.58
1.69
1.75
1.59
1.34
1.07
1946
1925
1909
1917
2009
1999
1985
2007
2003
1989
1958
2008
1943
2008
Destination Atmosphere
Event characteristics
Quality of tourism experience
Attractions
Place Depa 1: I enjoy participating in Miami more than any other place
Place Dep 2: No other place can compare with Miami for a marathon event
Place Dep 3: Miami is the best place for running events
Place IDb 1: I am very attached to Miami
Place ID 2: Miami means a lot to me
Place ID 3: I feel like Miami is part of me
BIc1: Return to Miami for a vacation within the next 12 months
BI 2: Participate in this event again next year
WOM1: Recommend Miami to other as a vacation destination
WOM2: Recommend this event to others
Factor
means
4.59
4.32
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
a:Dep = dependence
b: ID = identity
c: BI= Behavioral intentions
*Standard deviation
Note. all items were measured on 7 point scales where 1 = low end of the scale and 7 = high end of the scale
the destination (β =.06, p < .05), intent to participate in
the event again (β =.21, p < .05), word-of-mouth for the
event (β =.09, p < .05), place identity (β =.09, p < .05) and
place dependence (β =.09, p < .05) but not for the wordof-mouth for the destination variable. The destination
image factor of “quality of tourism experience” was only
significant for the prediction of revisitation intentions to
the destination for vacation (β =.11, p < .05), Finally, the
destination image factor “attractions” was a significant
predictor of behavioral intentions to revisit the destination
for vacation (β =.27, p < .05), recommend the destination
to others for vacation (β =.32, p < .05), word-of-mouth
for the event (β =.07, p < .05), place identity (β =.26, p
< .05), and place dependence (β =.29, p < .05) but it did
not predict intent to participate in the event again. Most
variance explained by the destination image factors was in
the dependent variables of behavioral intentions to revisit
the destination (R2 = .19), place identity (R2 = .20) and
place dependence (R2 = .25). As evidenced by the beta
coefficients, all hypotheses of this study were partially
Table 3 Standardized Beta Coefficients from the Six Regression Models as predicted by the
destination image factors
Dependent variables
Destination Image factors
Attractions
Destination Atmosphere
Quality of tourism experience
Event characteristics
R2
BI 1
BI 2
WOM 1
WOM 2
PA-ID
PA-Dep.
0.27**
0.11**
0.11**
0.06*
.19
-0.03
0.13**
0.01
0.216**
.06
0.32**
0.26**
-0.029
0.003
.22
0.07**
0.24**
-0.02
0.09**
.10
0.26**
0.17**
0.02
0.09**
.20
0.29**
0.23**
0.01
0.09**
.25
BI 1: Return to Miami for a vacation within the next 12 months
BI 2: Participate in this event again next year
WOM1: Recommend Miami to other as a vacation destination
WOM2: Recommend this event to others
PA-ID: variable computed as the mean from the three items comprising place identity
PA-Dep: variable computed as the mean from the three items comprising place dependence
** significant at p<.05
Sport Events and Destination Perceptions 245
supported with some of the destination image factors
not having predictive power for the dependent variables.
Discussion
The purpose of this research was to explore whether event
and destination image attributes converge in one measurement tool that can be used by destinations to evaluate the
influence of certain destination and event attributes. The
dimensionality of the concept of destination image for
destinations that host recurring sport events was thus examined. Furthermore, the predictive validity of the four destination image factors was tested in six regression models
that aimed to predict sport tourists’ behavioral outcomes.
Results support conceptualizing cognitive destination
image as a multidimensional construct that incorporates
the convergence of host city and event attributes. More
importantly, the results provide evidence for the predictive ability of various destination image dimensions on
predicting outcomes related to behavioral intentions, wordof-mouth communications and place attachment levels of
active event sport tourists. From a theoretical standpoint,
there are three contributions this study is offering: 1) the
convergence of event and destination image attributes in
one measurement tool is an important theoretical consideration because it buttresses the positive interrelationship
of the two entities; 2) the sport event characteristics and
the host destination attributes can influence a number of
behavioral intentions and 3) place attachment can increase
based on certain event and destination attributes.
The four factors comprising the destination image
scale in this study were significantly correlated and
explained nearly 62% of its variance. These factors,
labeled quality of tourism experience, attractions, destination atmosphere and event characteristics relate to the
destination and event image literature and support a relationship between destination attributes, event attributes
and relevant sport tourist behavior outcome variables
(Baloglu & McCleary, 1999; Beerli & Martin, 2004;
Chen & Funk, 2010; Kaplanidou, 2007; Kaplanidou,
2010; Kaplanidou & Vogt, 2007; Kaplanidou & Vogt,
2010; Shonk & Chelladurai, 2008). Thus, we propose that
the destination image concept for recurring sport events
should include dimensions related to the traditional destination attribute measurement scales such as attractions,
quality of tourism experience and destination atmosphere
(Baloglu & McCleary, 1999; Beerli & Martin, 2004), but
should also include a dimension related to event characteristics as part of the recurring nature of the sport event
and its relationship with the destination. Interestingly, the
results support the predictive ability of specific dimensions on different outcome variables namely behavioral
intentions, word-of-mouth communications and place
attachment. Hence, these dimensions are related but also
operate independently as they have varying explanatory
ability on different outcomes.
Our results support the theoretical notions of the
interrelationship between place, activity and people (Weed
& Bull, 2004) as some of the place characteristics (i.e.,
destination atmosphere, attractions) show a central role
toward influencing repeat behavioral intentions and wordof-mouth activity and contribute to higher place attachment levels. The importance of a destination’s attribute
profile in influencing behaviors can be observed in the
significance of all destination image predictors for the
dependent variable of behavioral intentions to revisit the
destination for vacation. These results are consistent with
prior work that has examined the role of destination attributes on intentions to revisit the destination (Kaplanidou
& Vogt, 2007). Place identity and place dependency were
also influenced by all destination image factors except for
the quality of tourism experience factor. This outcome
underlines the important role of destination atmosphere,
cultural context and event characteristics in increasing the
levels of the two place attachment dimensions, namely
identity and dependency. This finding is not surprising
as previous literature has identified connection to places
can be emotional (Hidalgo & Hernandez, 2001), and
psychological (Hummon, 1992; e.g., cultural, atmosphere)
or more evaluative in nature where individuals value and
identify with a specific place for the benefits it offers
them (i.e., event characteristics; Moore & Graefe, 1994).
The results also support the notion of correspondence
(Ajzen, 1991) between specific destination image factors
and the dependent variables of the study. In other words,
behavioral intentions to participate in the event again were
predicted by destination atmosphere and event characteristics, a finding which underlines the focus of these
active sport tourists on the event and on the relevant event
consumption experience destination aspects. This result
supports a previous study that examined tourist marathon
runners’ event image associations (Kaplanidou, 2010).
Managerial Implications
From a practical standpoint, the results of this study are
relevant to both destination and event marketers. The
importance of the event characteristics as part of the
destination attribute pool was evident in this study. This
is an important finding for destinations that host recurring
sport events because attention to sport event characteristics can influence and relate to behavioral intentions.
The intentions include word-of-mouth endorsement for
the destination and revisitation intentions for both the
destination and the event. Thus, destination attributes
should be evaluated beyond the traditional destination
image item pool (Chen & Funk, 2010) and should include
event attributes.
Interestingly, with the exception of behavioral intent
to revisit the destination, the destination image factor of
quality of tourism experience did not predict the other
dependent variables measured in this study. Potentially,
active sport tourists place weight on the aspects of the
destination that enrich their experience such as culture
and atmosphere (Chalip, 1992). These intangible characteristics are potentially valued far more than the tangible
tourism assets the destination offers.
246 Kaplanidou et al.
The importance of word-of-mouth communications
in generating tourism business is known (Bigné, et al.,
2001; Chen & Tsai, 2007; Chi & Qu, 2008) along with its
potential as a marketing tool (Petrick, 2004). The findings
of our study encourage marketers to value the influential
nature of word-of-mouth endorsements and use activities
that can provide “talking points” among the participants
long after the event is completed to further stimulate such
behavior. Clearly, in this study, the atmosphere associated
with the destination contributed to higher levels of wordof-mouth communications. Such atmosphere can possibly
be communicated through social networking tools such
as Facebook and Twitter to stimulate or sustain wordof-mouth engagement after the conclusion of the event.
When destination marketers know which destination aspects can influence attachment with a destination,
they can offer activities and products that are designed
to achieve that goal. The results of this study suggest
that attractions, atmosphere and event characteristics
influence the place attachment dimensions of identity
and dependence. A relevant example of this finding can
be found in Chalip’s and McGuirty’s study (2004) who
suggested the customization of packages for runners to fit
the event participant and destination profiles. Given this is
the first study to our knowledge that tests the link between
destination image dimensions for recurring sport events
and place attachment, it may be worthwhile noting that
sport events have the potential to stimulate higher place
attachment levels among sport tourists. In other words, the
event characteristics coupled with the destination tourism
attributes can result in enhanced attachment levels. Event
organizers in collaboration with destination marketers
can provide the event participants with information about
the destination’s best kept secrets. Such information can
increase the levels of place attachment and provide a
common knowledge platform for the cultivation of active
sport tourists’ social worlds (Gahwiler & Havitz, 1998).
Limitations and Future Research
This study proposed the convergence of destination and
event attributes in the concept of destination image. A
measurement tool was tested for this concept to account
for the notion of recurring sport events in a destination
utilizing one sample of active event sport tourists. Therefore, caution should be used in generalizing the results
across all sport tourists. Multiple case studies with various
sport tourist types and events can be conducted to further
validate the results. Future research efforts should also
explore the predictive validity of the measurement tool
used to assess destination image for recurring sport events
among other types of active sport tourists and events (e.g.,
cyclists, triathlon participants, spectators) to be able to
generalize to the sport tourism population. Thus, a larger
pool of items may capture the event and destination’s profile in more depth. Future research efforts should also take
into consideration other variables that can influence sport
tourists’ behaviors in the posttrip phase such as overall
satisfaction levels with the event and destination as well
as involvement levels with the event and the destination.
Overall, the results of this study suggest the importance of event and destination aspects for the prediction
of behavioral intentions to revisit the destination, wordof-mouth recommendations and place attachment. Based
on the results from this sample of respondents, recurring
sport events hold promise as viable tourism products
and can be viewed as part of the destination pool of
attributes.
Acknowledgment
This research was supported by the Sport Industry Research
Center at Temple University and the Centre for Tourism, Sport,
and Service Innovation at Griffith University.
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50,
179–211.
Alegre, J., & Cladera, M. (2006). Repeat visitation in mature
sun and sand holiday destinations. Journal of Travel
Research, 44, 288–297.
Baloglu, S. (1999). A path analytic model of visitation intention involving information sources, socio-psychological
motivations, and destination image. Journal of Travel &
Tourism Marketing, 8(3), 81–90.
Baloglu, S., & Brinberg, D. (1997). Affective images of tourism
destination. Journal of Travel Research, 35(4), 11–15.
Baloglu, S., & McCleary, K.W. (1999). A model of destination image formation. Annals of Tourism Research, 26,
868–897.
Beerli, A., & Martin, J.D. (2004). Factors influencing destination image. Annals of Tourism Research, 31, 657–681.
Bigné, E.J., Sanchez, I.M., & Sanjez, J. (2001). Tourism image,
evaluation variables and after purchase behavior: Interrelationship. Tourism Management, 22, 607–616.
Chalip, L. (1992). The construction and use of polysemic
structures: Olympic lessons for sport marketing. Journal
of Sport Management, 6, 87–98.
Chalip, L., & McGuirty, J. (2004). Bundling sport events
with the host destination. Journal of Sport & Tourism,
9, 267–282.
Chen, C., & Tsai, D. (2007). How destination image and
evaluative factors affect behavioral intentions? Tourism
Management, 28, 1115–1122.
Chen, N., & Funk, D.C. (2010). Exploring destination image,
experience and revisit intention: A comparison of sport
and non-sport tourist perceptions. Journal of Sport &
Tourism, 15, 239–259.
Chi, C., & Qu, H. (2008). Examining the structural relationships
of destination image, tourist satisfaction and destination
loyalty: An integrated approach. Tourism Management,
29, 624–637.
Crompton, J.L. (1979). An assessment of the image of mexico
as a vacation destination and influence of geographical
location upon that image. Journal of Travel Research,
17(4), 18–23.
Daniels, M.J., Norman, W.C., & Henry, M.S. (2004). Estimating
income effects of a sport tourism event. Annals of Tourism
Research, 31, 180–199.
Davidson, R.J. (2003). Seven sins in the study of emotion: Correctives from affective neuroscience. Brain and Cognition,
52, 129–132.
Sport Events and Destination Perceptions 247
de Matos, C.A., & Vargas Rossi, C.A. (2008). Word-of-mouth
communications in marketing: A meta-analytic review of
the antecedents and moderators. Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science, 36, 578–596.
Dooley, L.M., & Lindner, J.R. (2003). The handling of nonresponse error. Human Resource Development Quarterly,
14, 99–110.
Eder, A.B., Hommel, B., & De Houwer, J. (2007). How distinctive is affective processing? On the implications of using
cognitive paradigms to study affect and emotion. Cognition
and Emotion, 21, 1137–1154.
Gahwiler, P., & Havitz, M.E. (1998). Toward a relational
understanding of leisure social worlds, involvement, psychological commitment, and behavioral loyalty. Leisure
Sciences, 20, 1–23.
Gartner, W.C. (1993). Image formation process. In M. Uysal
& D.R. Fesenmaier (Eds.), Communication and channel
systems in tourism marketing (pp. 191–215). New York:
The Haworth Press.
Getz, D., & Andersson, T.D. (2010). The event-tourist career
trajectory: A study of high-involvement amateur distance
runners. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 10, 468–491.
Gibson, H.J., Qi, C., & Zhang, J. (2008). Destination image and
intent to visit china, and the 2008 beijing olympic games.
Journal of Sport Management, 22(4), 427–450.
Hair, J.F., Black, D., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., & Tatham,
R.L. (2005). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Prentice
Hall.
Hallman, K., Kaplanidou, K., & Breuer, C. (2010). Event image
perceptions among active and passive sport tourists at
marathon races: A qualitative and quantitative approach.
International Journal of Sports Marketing & Sponsorship,
12(1), 37–52.
Hammitt, W.E., Backlund, E.A., & Bixler, R.D. (2004). Experience use history, place bonding and resource substitution
of trout anglers during recreation engagements. Journal
of Leisure Research, 36, 356–378.
Heung, V.C.S., & Qu, H. (2000). Hong kong as a travel destination: An analysis of japanese tourists’ satisfaction levels,
and the likelihood of them recommending hong kong to
others. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 9, 57–80.
Hidalgo, C.M., & Hernandez, B. (2001). Place attachment:
Conceptual and empirical questions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 273–281.
Hummon, D.M. (1992). Community attachment: Local sentiment and sense of place. In I. Altman & S.M. Low (Eds.),
Place attachment (pp. 253–278). New York: Plenum Press.
Jenkins, O.H. (1999). Understanding and measuring tourist
destination images. International Journal of Tourism
Research, 1, 1–15.
Kaplanidou, K. (2007). Affective event and destination image:
Their influence on olympic travelers’ behavioral intentions. Event Management, 10(2), 159–173.
Kaplanidou, K. (2010). Active sport tourists: Sport event image
considerations. Tourism Analysis, 15, 381–386.
Kaplanidou, K., & Gibson, H. (2010). Predicting behavioral
intentions of active sport tourists: The case of a small
scale recurring sport event. Journal of Sport & Tourism,
15, 163–179.
Kaplanidou, K., & Vogt, C. (2007). The interrelationship
between sport event and destination image and sport tourists’ behaviours. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 12, 183–206.
Kaplanidou, K., & Vogt, C. (2010). The meaning and measurement of a sport event experience among active sport tourists. Journal of Sport Management, 24, 544–566.
Kim, N., & Chalip, L. (2004). Why travel to the FIFA World
Cup? Effects of motives, background, interest and constraints. Tourism Management, 25, 695–707.
Kim, W.G., Han, J.S., & Lee, E. (2001). Effects of relationship
marketing on repeat purchase and word of mouth. Journal
of Hospitality & Tourism Research (Washington, D.C.),
25, 272–288.
Kouthouris, H., & Alexandris, K. (2005). Can service quality
predict customer satisfaction and behavioral intentions in
the sport tourism industry? An application of the servqual
model in an outdoors setting. Journal of Sport & Tourism,
10, 101–111.
Kyle, G., Bricker, K., Graefe, A., & Wickham, T. (2004a). An
examination of recreationists’ relationships with activities
and settings. Leisure Sciences, 26, 123–142.
Kyle, G., Graefe, A., & Manning, R. (2004b). Attached recreationists... Who are they? Journal of Park and Recreation
Administration, 22(2), 65–84.
Kyle, G., Graefe, A., Manning, R., & Bacon, J. (2003). An
examination of the relationship between leisure activity
involvement and place attachment among hikers along
the appalachian trail. Journal of Leisure Research, 35,
249–273.
Kyle, G., Graefe, A., Manning, R., & Bacon, J. (2004c). Effects
of place attachment on users’ perceptions of social and
environmental conditions in a natural setting. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 24, 213–225.
Kyle, G., Mowen, A.J., & Tarrant, M. (2004d). Linking place
preferences with place meaning: An examination of the
relationship between place motivation and place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 439–454.
Lee, C-K., Lee, Y-K., & Lee, B. (2005). Korea’s destination
image formed by the 2002 World Cup. Annals of Tourism
Research, 32(4), 839–858.
Li, X.R., & Vogelsong, H. (2006). Comparing methods of
measuring image change: A case study of a small-scale
community festival. Tourism Analysis, 10, 349–360.
Lindner, J.R., Murphy, T.H., & Briers, G.E. (2001). Handling
nonresponse in social science research. Journal of Agricultural Education, 42, 43–53.
Moore, R.L., & Graefe, A.R. (1994). Attachments to recreation
settings: The case of rail-trail users. Leisure Sciences,
16(1), 17–31.
O’ Connor, J.T., & Bradford, M. (2010). 2010 market report:
stability & modest optimism. Sports Events Magazine,
March, 22-28. Gulf Shores, AL,Covey Communications
Corp.
Petrick, J.F. (2004). Are loyal visitors desired visitors? Tourism
Management, 25, 463–470.
Pike, S. (2002). Destination image analysis- a review of 142
papers from 1973 to 2000. Tourism Management, 23,
541–549.
Pike, S., & Ryan, C. (2004). Destination positioning analysis
through a comparison of cognitive, affective and conative
perceptions. Journal of Travel Research, 42, 333–342.
Pritchard, M.P., Havitz, M.E., & Howard, D.R. (1999). Analyzing the commitment-loyalty link in service contexts. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(3), 333–348.
Proshansky, H.M. (1978). The city and self identity. Environment and Behavior, 10(2), 147–169.
Rubinstein, R.L., & Parmelee, P.A. (1992). Attachment to place
and the representation of the life course by the elderly. In I.
Altman & S. Low (Eds.), Place attachment (pp. 139–163).
New York: Plenum.
Ryan, C. (1991). Recreational tourism: A social science perspective. London: Routledge.
248 Kaplanidou et al.
San Martín, H., & Rodríguez del Bosque, I.A. (2008). Exploring the cognitive-affective nature of destination image and
the role of psychological factors in its formation. Tourism
Management, 29, 263–277.
Schneider, T. (2009). Shifting the paradigm. Sports Travel, 13,
4. Los Angeles, CA: Schneider Publishing.
Shonk, D., & Chelladurai, P. (2008). Service quality, satisfaction, and intent to return in event sport tourism. Journal
of Sport Management, 22, 587–602.
Stedman, R.C. (2002). Toward a social psychology of place:
Predicting behavior from place-based cognitions, attitude,
and identity. Environment and Behavior, 34, 561–581.
Stednian, R., Beckley, T., Wallace, S., & Ambard, M. (2004).
A picture and 1000 words: Using resident-employed photography to understand attachment to high amenity places.
Journal of Leisure Research, 36, 580–606.
Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (2007). Using multivariate
statistics (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Tapachai, N., & Waryszak, R. (2000). An examination of the
role of beneficial image in tourist destination selection.
Journal of Travel Research, 39(1), 37–44.
Tasci, A., & Gartner, W.C. (2007). Destination image and its
functional relationships. Journal of Travel Research, 45,
413–425.
TIA. (1999). Profile of travelers who attend sports events.
Retrieved March 15, 2004, from www.tia.org
Tuan, Y.F. (1977). Space and place: The perspective of experience. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Vogt, C., Stewart, S., & Fesenmaier, D.R. (1998). Communication strategies to reach first-time visitors. Journal of Travel
& Tourism Marketing, 7(2), 69–89.
Weed, M., & Bull, C. (2004). Sport tourism: Participants,
policies and providers. Oxford, UK: Elsevier ButterworthHeinemann.
Weed, M., & Bull, C. (2009). Sport tourism: Participants, policies & providers (2nd ed.). Oxford: Elsevier.
Williams, D.R., Patterson, M.E., & Roggenbuck, J.W. (1992).
Beyond the commodity metaphor:Examining emotional
and symbolic attachment to a place. Leisure Sciences,
14, 29–46.
Woodside, A.G., & Lysonski, S. (1989). A general model of
traveler destination choice. Journal of Travel Research,
27(4), 8–14.
World Sport Destination Expo. (2010). Sport tourism. Retrieved
January 23, 2010, from http://www.worldsportdestinationexpo.com/sport-tourism
Yuksel, A., Yuksel, F., & Bilim, Y. (2010). Destination attachment: Effects on customer satisfaction and cognitive,
affective and conative loyalty. Tourism Management,
31(2), 274–284.