Factors Affecting Tourist Destination Choice - A Survey of International Travelers to Hanoi, Vietnam
Journal of Economics and Development, Vol.19, No.1, April 2017, pp. 77-92
ISSN 1859 0020
Factors Affecting Tourist Destination
Choice: A Survey of International
Travelers to Hanoi, Vietnam
Dong Xuan Dam
National Economics University, Vietnam
Email: dongxuandam@gmail.com
Abstract
The study enhances tourism destinations’ competitiveness from the tourist’s perspective.
Departing from the concept of customer-based brand equity (Keller, 1993; Aaker, 1991), our
purpose is to construct a linkage between customer-based brand equity for a tourism destination
(destination image, destination awareness, quality of destination and destination loyalty) and
behavioral intentions for selecting a tourist destination (revisit and/or recommendation to other
people), in order to better understand the role of tourism destination branding. This paper carried
out a survey of international tourists who selected Hanoi - Vietnam as their holiday destination
and our findings show that brand image and brand loyalty play an important role on tourist’s
decision of returning or recommendation to others while brand awareness and quality have no
impact.
Keywords: Customer-based brand equity; tourist behavior; tourists’ behavioral intentions;
tourist destination.
Journal of Economics and Development
77
Vol. 19, No.1, April 2017
1. Introduction
from the tourist perspective has attracted both
researchers and practitioners. The theoretical
conceptualization of such evaluation of a des-
tination (called Customer-based brand equity
of Tourism Destination - CBBETD) consisting
of awareness, image, quality, and loyalty di-
mensions is proposed. All equity is based on
the feeling, perception of tourist of destination
that you have gone or not. The theoretical rep-
resentation of each proposed dimension is a
synthesized review of previous findings from
marketing and tourism research as well as the
author’s approach to each dimension’s con-
ceptualization. The evaluation results that can
help practices to enhance the destination brand
equity have been employed, such as building
stronger emotional attachment through destina-
tion imagery campaigns and destination loyalty
programs. Branding of a product or a destina-
tion not only differentiates itself among com-
peting products but also serves as a means of
creating additional value.
Several studies have suggested that tourism
destination branding represents the most ob-
vious means by which destinations can differ-
entiate themselves from an enormous number
of commodity destinations all over the world
(Fyall and Laesk, 2007). Branding is a wide-
ly-used concept that has existed for centuries
as a way of distinguishing goods or services
of one producer from those of another, while
modern branding finds its origins in the 19th
century (Room, 1992). Accordingly, a brand
can be considered as a legal instrument, logo,
company, identity system, image, personality,
relationship, and/or as adding value. Howev-
er, since the amount of time on which trav-
elers draw upon for selecting a destination is
always limited, they often choose a place with
available information about what they might
expect to enjoy or experience there. Maja and
William (2007) suggested that the range of des-
tination choices is more and more expanding
and destinations become increasingly compet-
itive which means more chance for tourists to
select a final destination they desire. Therefore,
destination management organizations (DMO)
try to use a name or symbol to enhance their
value. The purpose of studying brand equity
from a strategy-based perspective is that des-
tination marketers can improve their marketing
productivity by understanding the destination
brand perceived by both consumers and sup-
pliers side.
For a better development of the tourism in-
dustry, it is crucial to explore both domestic
and international tourism markets and more
importantly to exceed the visitors’ expectation
to attract their return. To achieve this level, the
industry needs to understand the visitors’needs,
serve them better and satisfy their demands
so as to attract their returns. In fact, there are
many international visitors to Vietnam yearly,
but only 15% to 20 % of the visitors are inter-
ested in revisiting (Thu, 2012; Quach, 2013).
Vietnam tourism industry appears to focus on
the short-term benefits and lack long-term in-
vestment as they oversee visitors’ feedback on
tourist destinations and their evaluation of the
Destination brand equity is the combina-
tion of key factors that can be described as the
overall utility that tourists place in the destina-
tion brand when compared to its competitors.
The evaluation of the destination phenomenon services rendered. Vietnam’s capital city, Ha-
Journal of Economics and Development
78
Vol. 19, No.1, April 2017
value of a tourist destination brand may change
over time. For example, Kim et al. (2009) uti-
lized six dimensions - awareness, preference,
value, uniqueness, popularity, and price; Boo et
al. (2009) employed three dimensions - aware-
ness, image, and quality; Konecnik and Gart-
ner (2007) used four dimensions - awareness,
image, quality, and loyalty. According to Aaker
(1991) and Keller’s (1993) categorization, this
study analyzed and proved that CBBE’s mea-
surement can be employed by the authors who
could claim a customer’s evaluation of a brand
including awareness, image, quality, and loyal-
ty dimensions.
noi’s facilities for tourism actively promoted
all its advantages and underutilized potential.
However, tourism products are monotonous,
repetitive quality of service was not able to ful-
fill feature, online travel sites and most recently
invested only in part on the basis of exploita-
tion. There were policies for branding Hanoi as
a “must see” destination, but a huge gap exists
between policies and implementation regarding
its branding strategy. Most actions at provin-
cial level are quite spontaneous, individualistic,
unconcerned, and neglect the overall direction
for long-term goals. This gap will be carefully
analyzed and addressed by exploring the rela-
tionship between the customer-based brand eq-
uity on the behavioral intentions while making
a choice of their holiday destination.
Destination image
Nowadays, the terms brand and image are
part and parcel of the business world. Accord-
ing to studies of customer-based brand equity
(CBBE) for a destination, the destination image
dimension plays an important role in CBBE for
a destination. It is specifically relevant in the
evaluation and selection process (Konecnick
and Gartner, 2007; Pike, 2007) that is a key
factor to indicate destination brand equity (Cai,
2002). Image is a powerful vehicle for promot-
ing destination brand for it would be recalled in
a customer’s mind whenever he or she consid-
ers making destination choice.
2. Literature review
2.1. Customer-based brand equity for a
tourism destination
From marketing perspective, custom-
er-based brand equity is defined as “the differ-
ential effect that brand knowledge has on con-
sumer response to the marketing of the brand”
(Keller, 1993, 2). In other words, it is the val-
ue that consumers apply to the brand based on
the impact of the brand components compared
to reactions to similar brand components of
other versions of the product or service. Con-
ceptually, a tourism destination-based brand is
composed of both tangible and intangible com-
ponents (Aaker, 1991; Konecnik and Gartner,
2007; Boo et al., 2009). Tourists perceive these
elements as a unique combination of functional
(physical, measurable) and abstract (psycho-
logical) components of a destination brand. De-
pending on kinds of product/service assets and
the characteristics of tourist, the attraction, and
According to Baloglu and McCleary (1999)
and Baloglu and Mangaloglu (2001), destina-
tion image represents a person’s knowledge,
feelings, and global impression about an object
or destination. Perceptions of destination as
reflected by the associations are stored in the
tourist’s memory. Based on the perceptions,
the image is a determinant in the behavior of
tourists during the different moments which
involve their experience or memory in process
Journal of Economics and Development
79
Vol. 19, No.1, April 2017
especially in the consumer’s decision-making
(Kwun and Oh, 2004; Oh, 2000).
that the organizations responsible for; include
the decision process of choosing a destination;
the process of comparison of expectations with
experience, preceding the state of satisfaction
and perceived quality; the process of revisit-
ing and recommending the destination to oth-
er people who are willing to pay to pay atten-
tion one more time (Galí and Donaire, 2005).
These processes are complex since a place or
a destination is a composite product whose im-
age consists of multiple dimensions as well as
processes. Moreover, several current studies
(Tasci and Gartner, 2007; Bosque and Martin,
2008; Bosque et al., 2009; Nguyen, 2012) also
confirmed destination image as a factor that
influences the consumer behavior during the
pre-purchase (decision-making process of des-
tination choice), during the purchase (anteced-
ent of satisfaction), and post-purchase (recom-
mendation and intention to revisit).
Destination quality
According to Konecnik and Gartner (2007),
brand quality is a strong and influential com-
ponent of customer-based brand equity when
applied to a destination. It is defined as “per-
ception of the overall quality or superiority of
a product or service relative to relevant alter-
natives and with respect to its intended pur-
pose” (Keller, 2003, 238). It is often used in-
terchangeably with perceived quality and is de-
fined as travelers’ perception of a destination’s
ability to fulfill their expectations and the per-
formance on salient quality attributes. Keller
(2003) proposed seven distinct dimensions of
product quality including performance, reli-
ability, durability, features, conformation qual-
ity, serviceability, and style and design.
Destination brand loyalty
Destination awareness
Customer loyalty is considered an important
goal by any marketer as it determines long-
term viability or sustainability of a company.
Despite the extensive investigation of the loy-
alty concept in marketing literature, destination
loyalty has rarely been studied and there exist
few published studies. Many authors argue that
loyalty should not be neglected when examin-
ing destination brands and some studies partly
introduce it (Oppermann, 2000; Bigne, San-
chez and Sanchez, 2001). From an operational
perspective, destination loyalty may be defined
as a potential traveler’s attachment to a desti-
nation brand. It implies that previous experien-
tial familiarity influences today’s and tomor-
The concept of destination awareness has
been mostly examined and placed under the
research agenda of tourism decision process
(Woodside and Lysonski, 1989) which is itself
part of consumer behavior studies. It is consid-
ered the ability to recognize and recall a brand
(Aaker, 1991; Berry, 2000; Berry and Seltman,
2007), reflected in the salience of the brand in
the customer’s mind (Aaker, 1991), and it is the
main element of a brand’s effect on tourism (Oh,
2000). Awareness of the destination not only
stems from the tourist’s experience but may
also exist in the form of image that makes the
destination included into the perceived oppor-
tunity set. Brand awareness is considered one row’s tourism decisions, especially destination
of the major components of a brand’s effect in choice in the future (Aaker, 1991). Destination
brand equity stems from travelers placing more
hospitality and tourism (Kim and Kim, 2005),
Journal of Economics and Development
80
Vol. 19, No.1, April 2017
that the outcome variables of “intention to re-
turn to the service provider” and “word-of-
mouth communication” are two of the most
used indicators for measuring behavioral in-
tentions, which is generally supported in the
literature (Soderlund, 2006). These are the
two most important behavioral consequenc-
es in destination image and post-consumption
behavior studies. Accordingly, the travelers’
intentions result from their perceptions of pre-
vious travel experiences. Jang and Namkung
(2009) explained that travel motivation is an
effective predictor of tourist behavior because
travelers’ mindsets significantly influence their
trips in the future. This finding indicates the im-
portance of measuring tourist perceptions and
identifying the dimensions of destination brand
equity that influence travelers’ tourism inten-
tions (Boo et al., 2009; Kim and Kim, 2005;
Stokburger Sauer, 2011).
confidence in one brand than they do in a com-
petitor’s brand. This is translated into loyalty
and a willingness to pay a premium price even
when lower priced options are available. The
degree of destination loyalty is frequently re-
flected in tourists’intentions to revisit the desti-
nation and in their willingness to recommend it
(Oppermann, 2000; Chen and Tsai, 2007).
2.2. Tourist behavioral intention (TBI)
The concept of purchase or behavioral in-
tentions has been widely used in the tourism
research as a predictor of subsequent purchase,
a signal of customer loyalty and the results of
customers’ evaluation of destination after com-
paring with others (Oppermann, 2000). As a
matter of fact, it is more costly to attract new
customers than to retain existing ones. Op-
permann (2000) went further by suggesting
that previous destination experience can shape
a positive or negative factor on destination, af-
fect the demand for information and level of
awareness and evaluation of image of the desti-
nation. He proposed that by analyzing tourists’
repeat visiting data, destinations can determine
the composition of its customers with respect
to the visitors’ repeat intention. In fact, under-
standing the determinants of customer loyalty
can facilitate management’s focus on the major
factors leading to customer retention. Its mea-
sures of loyalty have frequently been used in
leisure settings (Alcaniz et al., 2005; Chang et
al., 2010; Dai et al., 2008; Hsu et al., 2010),
which is the context of the current study. Con-
ventional wisdom suggests that satisfaction
leads to repeat purchase and positive word-
of-mouth (WOM) recommendation in the
post-consumption phase.
2.3. Conceptual model
Based on the basic theories of destination
brand equity of Aaker (1991, 1996); Keller
(1993, 2003); Konecnik and Gartner (2007);
Boo et al. (2009); Kim et al. (2009); a hypoth-
esized model of destination brand equity on the
behavioral intentions was developed based on
the proposed conceptual model.
The concept of perceived value or subject
value evolved from early studies. Rational
choice theory holds that people weigh the pos-
sible benefits of their actions against the cost
incurred. This study proposes that tourists’ en-
during travel involvement has positive impact
on their formation of destination brand equity,
which is a combination of key factors that can
derive the overall utility that tourists place into
the destination brand. Other studies also sug-
Bendall-Lyon and Powers (2004) confirmed
Journal of Economics and Development
81
Vol. 19, No.1, April 2017
gest that customer-based destination brand eq- is quickly developing with the significant new
uity has positive impact on tourists’ intentions. infrastructure in the urban areas. Many modern
buildings have been built recently as the econ-
omy has developed. Moreover, Hanoi is one of
the main tourist attractions in Vietnam as its fa-
mous heritage site Ha Long Bay; the reputation
of beauty of Sapa and Bac Ha; and historical
Dien Bien Phu are in close proximity.
(Bigne´ and Andreu, 2004; Kim et al., 2009).
However, the meaning of each dimension and
its impacts are perhaps functions of perspec-
tives by particular sets of responders in certain
contexts. This paper focuses on examining the
relationship between Customer-based brand
equity for Tourism Destination and Behavioral
Intentions key constructs (destination image,
destination awareness, quality of destination
and destination loyalty) and behavioral inten-
tions for selecting a tourist destination (revisit
and recommendation to other people). Accord-
ingly, four following hypotheses will be tested
using data collected upon international tourists
in Hanoi.
The sample was designed based on area,
random and convenience sampling. Constructs
of the interest were measured based on a re-
view of previous studies and pre-test for face
validity and reliability, and then were integrat-
ed into the final questionnaire sent out to the
target sample. After being gathered, data was
analyzed using structural equation modeling in
which the issues of research are empirically an-
swered. Its design was based on the combina-
tion of convenience sampling method. Firstly,
the population of the study needs to be chosen.
The study draws a random sample of 160 re-
spondents (international tourists) visiting vari-
ous attractions in Hanoi.
H1: Destination brand awareness is posi-
tively related to tourists’behavioral intention;
H2: Destination brand image is positively
related to tourists’behavioral intention;
H3: Destination brand quality is positively
related to tourists’behavioral intention,
3.2. Measures
H4: Destination brand loyalty is positively
related to tourists’behavioral intention
Scale development was performed follow-
ing the suggestions of research process as men-
tioned above. The main method to help gain
the study’s aim is quantitative to have better
understanding the destination brand equity and
its relationships with tourist’s behavioral in-
tention. All of these steps in the development
of the measurement instrument are important
because no previous research on a destination
area includes the expected four dimensions of
the concept.
3. Research methodology
3.1. Sample design
To investigate brand extension of custom-
er-based brand equity for a tourist destination
within four destinations and their intentions in
the future that were selected to cross-check the
hypotheses. Hanoi is the destination was select-
ed because it is a capital and is located in the
North of Vietnam. This is a large city (the sec-
ond biggest city after Saigon). This is the most
A combination of three methods was used
important political center and also is the second for generating the variables needed to be used.
First, for each dimension, relevant variables
city by population density in Vietnam. Hanoi
Journal of Economics and Development
82
Vol. 19, No.1, April 2017
tion (Koufteros et al., 2001). Exploratory factor
analysis (EFA) was then used to determine how
many latent variables underlie the complete set
of items. Based on EFA results, linear regres-
sion was utilized to test the relationships be-
tween customer-based brand equity and inter-
national tourists’ behavioral intentions.
from previous studies were employed. In line
with researchers’ suggestions special care was
taken when defining the variables of brand im-
age, brand awareness, brand quality, brand loy-
alty and its related dimensions. These variables
are specific, and measures were customized
for the unique characteristics of specific brand
categories. The most commonly used variables
found in previous studies were then adapted for
investigation of Hanoi, Vietnam.
The overall fit of a hypothesized model can
be tested by using the maximum likelihood
Chi-square statistic provided in the Amos (a
software package for SEM, version 21st
) out-
The study instrument only employed
closed-ended questions. For each proposed di-
mension, a related set of variables was utilized.
The variables were measured on a bipolar
7-point semantic differential Likert type scale
where 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly
agree. All scales included a neutral point of no
agreement or disagreement with the statement.
The use of semantic type scales is a common
procedure in the social sciences to allow the
use of nominal (or ordinal-level data to be
treated as interval-level data) which can then
be subjected to higher order analytical tech-
niques. There are five main constructs in the
theoretical model. These are: (1) destination
image; (2) destination awareness, (3) destina-
tion perceived-value; (4) destination loyalty;
(5) behavioral intentions.
put and their fit indices such as the ratio of
Chi-square to degrees of freedom, goodness-
of-fit index (GFI), the root mean square error
of approximation (RMSEA), comparative fit
index (CFI), normed fit index (NFI). Struc-
tural equation modeling (SEM) evaluates how
well a conceptual model that includes observed
variables and hypothetical constructs fits the
obtained data (Hoyle, 1995). A hypothetical
construct accounts for the inter-correlations of
the observed variables that define that construct
(Bollen and Lennox, 1991).
4. Data analysis
4.1. Descriptive statistics
The sample for this study included 160 us-
able questionnaires which had been returned
and had completed data on all the questions.
There were 76 (47.5%) male and 84 (52.5%)
female respondents. Across ranges of age, the
dominant age group of the respondents was less
than 30 years old (50.6%) and 41-50 (22.5%)
that follows; 27 (16.9%) were aged 31-40, only
16 (10%) participants were 51-60 years old
and none was over 60 years old. Nearly 50.6%
(81/160) of the interviewers was European res-
3.3. Research methods
Item generation began with theory develop-
ment and a literature review. Items were evalu-
ated through interviews with practitioners. For
the development and exploratory evaluation of
the measurement scales for the exploratory fac-
tor analysis on entire set and reliability estima-
tion Cronbach’s Alpha, we employ some pop-
ular methods. Cronbach’s alpha is one of the idents. In terms of the respondents’ region resi-
most widely used metrics for reliability evalua- dence, it was distributed: Asia 17.5%, Australia
Journal of Economics and Development
83
Vol. 19, No.1, April 2017
Table 1: The factor loadings
Component
3
Item
1
2
4
5
1.9. The image that I have of Hanoi is as good or even better than other
similar destinations
.749
1.1. In general Hanoi is a safe place to visit
1.8. Local people are friendly
.726
.674
.672
.667
.636
.556
1.7. Restful and relaxing place to visit
1.4. Good tourist accommodations is readily available
1.10.Overall Hanoi image is very positive
3.8. The quality of Hanoi is very favorable
3.5. Appealing local food (cuisine)
.843
.815
.807
.776
.717
.644
3.2. High quality of infrastructure
3.1. High quality of accommodation
3.4. High quality of services
3.7. The quality of Hanoi is very reliable
3.6. The quality of Hanoi is outstanding
4.4. I recommend Hanoi to other people who seek advice
.757
.734
4.3. If there is another travel destination as good as this one, I prefer to
visit Hanoi
4.1. I consider myself a loyal traveler to Hanoi
4.5. I encourage my friends/relatives to visit Hanoi
.725
.716
4.2. I will visit Hanoi instead of other travel destinations if they are
similar
.691
.669
4.6. I will visit Hanoi again in the future
2.1. I can picture what Hanoi looks like in my mind
2.4. I can quickly recall the marketing about Hanoi
.752
.724
2.5. Some characteristics of Hanoi come to my mind quickly
.688
.678
2.2. I am aware of the place as a travel destination
1.5. Hanoi has good museums and art galleries
1.2. Good quality restaurant
-.906
-.717
.643
1.6. Food is similar to mine
15.6%, Americas 11.9% and Africa 4.4%.
helpful for detecting the presence of meaning-
ful patterns among the original variables and
for extracting the main service factors.
4.2. Exploratory measurement results
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used
to determine how many latent variables under-
lie the complete set of items. An EFA was used
to reduce the forty-two items to a smaller, more
An important tool for interpreting factors
is the rotation of factors. Two methods can be
used to identify the factors, namely the orthog-
onal rotation method and the oblique rotation
manageable set of underlying factors. This is method. Hair et al. (1995) suggested that if the
Journal of Economics and Development
84
Vol. 19, No.1, April 2017
Figure 1: Confirmatory factor analysis results of four constructs
Model fit indexes:
- χ2/df =2.069
- GFI = .851
- CFI = .938
- IFI = .939
- p = .000
- AGFI = .798
- NFI = .888
- TLI= .925
- RMSEA = .080
Correlation
.701
S.E
.198
.151
.166
.184
.175
.135
C.R
P
IMAGE
IMAGE
IMAGE
QUALITY
QUALITY
LOYALTY
<-->
<-->
<-->
<-->
<-->
<-->
QUALITY
LOYALTY
AWARENESS
LOYALTY
AWARENESS
AWARENESS
5.853
5.819
5.767
6.303
4.986
5.160
***
***
***
***
***
***
.696
.775
.701
.536
.565
goal of the research is to reduce the number of ing factor. According to Hair et al. (1995), in a
original variables, regardless of how meaning- sample of 160 respondents, factor loadings of
ful the resulting factors may be, the appropriate value greater than 0.50 are required to retain an
solution would be an orthogonal.
item. This study was based on the cutoff value
by Hair et al. (1995).
A factor loading can be used as an indicator
in interpreting the role each item plays in defin-
Depending on the result of EFA, five fac-
ing each factor. Factor loadings are in essence tors with new items and new names were
the correlation of each item to their underly- checked against Cronbach’s alpha and Cor-
Journal of Economics and Development
85
Vol. 19, No.1, April 2017
fied the threshold of 0.08 (Browne and Cudeck
1993). In short, the measurement model of this
study appears to have an acceptable fit.
rected Item-Total Correlation. Cronbach’s al-
pha is one of the most widely used measures
for evaluating reliability (Koufteros, 1999).
The Cronbach’s alpha value for each measure
is shown at Table 1. The reliability for each
construct was significantly high as above the
value of .82, which is considered satisfactory
for basic research. However, Cronbach’s alpha
has several disadvantages, including the fact
that it is inflated when a scale has a large num-
ber of items, and it assumes that all the mea-
sured items have equal reliabilities (Gerbing
and Anderson, 1987). In addition, Cronbach’s
alpha cannot be used to infer unidimensionality
(Gerbing and Anderson, 1987). That’s the rea-
sons why the data continued to check Regres-
sion to eliminate bad items.
In Figure 1, all factor loadings reveal es-
timates to be both reasonable (from 0.725
to 0.918) and statistically significant (P-val-
ue <0.001); all standard errors appear also to
be in good order. All standard parameters are
above this threshold (>0.6). The feasibility of
estimates, the appropriate standard errors and
statistically significant parameters provide ev-
idence for the adequacy of the parameter esti-
mates.
All the estimate correlations between the
measures had value between 0.5-0.85. Dis-
criminant validity is assessed through correla-
tions between constructs with a cutoff value of
0.85. Value of correlations from CFA model
between variables show that all of correlation
scores are lower than 0.85, which means all of
these constructs are different from each other.
4.3. Confirmatory factor analysis results
To refine the initial measures and test the
internal consistency of the scale, a combina-
tion of exploratory factor analysis, confirma-
tory analysis (each construct individually) and
item-to-total correlations were used. Based on
the results of these analyses, those items that
had low item-to-total correlations were elimi-
nated, as well as the items that had low factor
loadings.
4.4. Structural equation model
A full structural equation model is shown in
Figure 2 where specification is done and pa-
rameters are estimated.
The model’s overall fit with the data was
evaluated using common model goodness-of-
fit measures estimated by AMOS. Overall, the
model exhibited a reasonable fit with the data
collected. The model fit was assessed by using
other common fit indices: goodness-of-fit index
(GFI), adjusted fit index (CFI), comparative fit
index (CFI) and the root mean square error of
approximation (RMSEA). The model exhibited
a fit value exceeding or close to the commonly
The fit of the four factor model (Destination
Image, Destination Quality, Destination Loyal-
ty, and Destination Awareness) was assessed.
An examination of the overall fit statistics for
the measurement model, as shown in Figure 1,
indicated that the model provided acceptable fit
to the data, with CMIN/df = 2.069 (<3). Even
though the value of GFI (0.851), AGFI (0.798)
were quite low but CFI (0.938), IFI (0.939), recommended threshold for the respective indi-
TLI (0. 925) stand out to indicate that model ces values of 0.831, 0.782, 0.934, 0.870, 0.935,
0.923 for the GFI, AGFI, CFI, NFI, IFI, TLI
fits data well and RMSEA (0.080) which satis-
Journal of Economics and Development
86
Vol. 19, No.1, April 2017
Figure 2: Full structural equation model
Model fit indexes:
- χ2/df =1.875
- GFI = .831
- CFI = .934
- IFI = .935
- p = .000
- AGFI = .782
- NFI = .870
- TLI= .923
- RMSEA = .074
are satisfactory with respect to the commonly technique, t-value (denoted by C.R in Amos
recommended value of equal to 1.0. RMSEA
(0.074) which satisfied the threshold of 0.08
(Browne and Cudeck, 1993). In short, the
structural model is considered to fit the sample
data reasonably.
output) is z-value. Thus a C.R value exceed-
ing 1.96 represents a level significance of 0.05
or P-value must less than 0.05. The assessment
hypothesis is based on results in Table 2 where
standardized estimates and their significance
level are provided. A positive sign of parameter
estimate indicates a positive direct effect.
The results offer strong support for the hy-
pothesized model relationships. The results of
the tests of the hypothesized relationships be-
tween constructs are presented at Table 2.
Based on the result of regression linear, our
following hypothesis: “Destination brand im-
age is positively related to tourists’ behavioral
intention” (H2) and “Destination brand loyalty
Under study, since the sample is large
(N=160) and presumption of multiple normali-
ty is made for maximum likelihood estimation is positively related to tourists’ behavioral in-
Journal of Economics and Development
87
Vol. 19, No.1, April 2017
Table 2: Results of hypothesis testing
Hypothesis
Estimate
S.E.
C.R.
P
INTENTION
INTENTION
INTENTION
INTENTION
←
←
←
←
QUALITY
.242
.587
.317
.067
.102
.158
.126
.138
2.061
3.392
2.723
.526
.039
.000
.006
.599
Supported
Supported
IMAGE
LOYALTY
AWARENESS
Supported
Not Supported
tention” (H4) are supported by data. It means al model that explains how customer-based
that image of destination and the loyalty about
destination of customers could affect custom-
ers’ intention in the future. This finding con-
firms a positive relationship between destina-
tion brand image and behavioral intention. In
other words, if the tourists are satisfied with the
image of destination and perceive this brand as
of good value, the positive image of the brand
will be imprinted in their minds and 58.7%
respondents would like to revisit or positive-
ly recommend the destination. Compared with
other factors, destination brand image had the
strongest influence on customers’ intention in
the future. On the other hand, if the tourists are
loyal to the destination, they are likely to repur-
chase far more times in the future. In contrast,
the data does not support our hypothesis: “Des-
tination brand awareness is positively relat-
ed to tourists’ behavioral intention” (H1) and
“Destination brand quality is positively related
to tourists’behavioral intention” (H3), which is
an unexpected result due to the previous litera-
ture review on the relationship between brand
awareness, brand quality and behavioral inten-
tion of tourist.
brand equity for tourism destination can affect
behavioral intentions of international tourist
to Hanoi. The findings demonstrated that hy-
potheses 2 and 4 were supported by the data
while hypothesis 1, 3 was not supported. This
means that if DMOs or authorities or market-
ers in general focus on building brand equity
of destination, offer a high-quality products/
services, especial a positive image of the desti-
nation brand will be imprinted in their minds;
more tourist are more likely to come back to
Hanoi or recommend this destination to their
friends or relatives.
These findings were consistent with previ-
ous consumer-based brand equity studies con-
ducted in a consumer context. However, the re-
sults of the theoretical model derived from the
structural equation modeling showed that there
was no significant relationship between desti-
nation brand awareness and tourists’ intention.
This means that whether the tourists recognize
the brand name that compared with the other
certain product category or recognize the brand
name to a highly developed cognitive structure
based on detailed information or not, there was
no influence on their behavioral intention in
the future. The acceptable explanation is the
5. Discussion and conclusion
5.1. Discussion
This study sets out to develop a conceptu- real quality of products/services, the beauty of
Journal of Economics and Development
88
Vol. 19, No.1, April 2017
Figure 3: Results of direct effects and standardized coefficient
Destination
Destination
Brand Loyalty
Brand Image
.587***
.317**
Destination
Brand Quality
Destination Brand
Awareness
.242*
.067
Tourist Behavioral
Intention
Notes:
*** Significant at 0.001 level
** Significant at 0.01 level
* Significant at 0.05 level
sightseeing effect to tourists’ loyalty that really tion, they may to consider returning to Hanoi or
influence on their intention to be back or have encourage their friends to do so. Additionally,
according to the data, the respondents thought
of Hanoi as a safe, restful and relaxing place to
visit, having good and available accommoda-
tions, having delicious food that is similar their
expectations, and having the characteristics
that make them willing to revisit Hanoi if they
have the chance in the future.
word-of-mouth to other people. The tourists
could quickly recall the destination based on
information they got or they could easily to
picture what Hanoi looks like; but their feeling,
their perception are more important.
The findings also showed that destination
image critically the most important to behav-
ioral intentions of international tourist in Hanoi.
This means that if DMOs or destination mar-
keters want to attract more international tourist
to Hanoi or let them come back one more time
or have positive word-of-mouth from them;
DMOs or destination marketers have to build a
strong destination brand image. In other words,
if the tourists’ knowledge, feelings, and global
5.2. Conclusion
Firstly, the study potentially adds to a better
understanding of the factors for the success-
ful inter-relationship between customer-based
brand equity for tourism destination and be-
havioral intentions of international tourist. As
summarized, there are two relationships to
consider: (i) Higher evaluation of the destina-
impression about an object or destination, or tion brand image directly increases the tourists’
they have really good memory about destina- behavioral intention; and (ii) higher tourists’
Journal of Economics and Development
89
Vol. 19, No.1, April 2017
loyalty to a destination directly increases the destination branding and tourist behavior, but
tourists’ behavioral intention.
also provides useful insights to local govern-
ment and tour operators in better planning and
managing tourism activities to maximize both
visitors’ satisfaction and profitability of tour-
ism enterprises, and at the same time sustain
natural resources in long term. Especially the
study pointed out the effective way to promote
its existing potential characteristics to be a key
economic sector in Vietnam generally and in
Hanoi particularly. That all contributes to at-
tracting international tourists to Hanoi through
destination competitive strategies in order to
ensure long-term relationships between tourists
and their destinations, and to enhance the rela-
tionship management techniques and practices
to build tourist loyalty within the context of de-
This study develops a model that describes
that the most important factor to tourists’ be-
havioral intention is destination brand image
with the five items indicated. The test of the
model provides strong empirical support for
the pattern of influences it portrays. In particu-
lar, these findings confirm the social exchange
construct that is theorized by customer-based
brand equity for tourism destinations, which
can be applied to the relationship with tourists’
behavioral intention.
Finally, this study was intended to initiate
the development of theoretical foundations of
the relationship among destination branding
and tourist behavior. It not only helps resear-
chers test and develop a stable model in order
to generate a more solid relationship among stination branding.
References
Aaker, D.A. (1991), Managing brand equity: Capitalizing on the value of the brand name, New York: The
Free Press.
Aaker, D.A. (1996), Building Strong Brands, New York: Free Press.
Alcaniz, E. B., Garcia, I. S. and Blas, S. S. (2005), ‘Relationships among residents’image, evaluation of the
stay and post-purchase behavior’, Journal of Vacation Marketing, 11(4), 291-302.
Baloglu, S. and K. McCleary (1999), ‘A Model of Destination Image Formation’, Annals of Tourism
Research, 26(4), 868–897.
Baloglu, S. and M. Mangaloglu (2001), ‘Tourism Destination Images of Turkey, Egypt, Greece, and Italy as
Perceived by US-Based Tour Operators and Travel Agents’, Tourism Management, 22, 1-9.
Bendall-Lyon, D. and Powers, T.L. (2004), ‘The impact of structure and process attributes on satisfaction
and behavioral intentions’, Journal of Services Marketing, 18(2), 114-121.
Berry, L. L. (2000), ‘Cultivating service brand equity’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
28(1), 128-137.
Berry, L. L. and Seltman, K. D. (2007), ‘Building a strong services brand: lessons from Mayo Clinic’,
Business Horizons, 50(3), 199-209.
Bigne, J. E., Sanchez, M. I. and Sanchez, J. (2001), ‘Tourism image, evaluation variables and after purchase
behavior: inter-relationship’, Tourism Management, 22(6), 607-616.
Bollen, K. A. and Lennox, R. (1991), ‘Conventional Wisdom on Measurement: A Structural Equation
Perspective’, Psychology Bulletin, 110, 305-314.
Journal of Economics and Development
90
Vol. 19, No.1, April 2017
Boo, S., Busser, J. and Baloglu, S. (2009), ‘A model of customer-based brand equity and its application to
multiple destinations’, Tourism Management, 30(2), 219-231.
Bosque, I. and Martín, H. (2008), ‘Tourist satisfaction: A cognitive-affective model’, Annals of Tourism
Research, 35, 551-573.
Bosque, I., Martín, H., Collado, J. and Salmones, M. (2009), ‘A framework for tourist expectation’,
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 3, 139-147.
Browne, M.W. and Cudeck, R. (1993), ‘Alternative ways of assessing model fit’, In Bollen, K.A. & Long,
J.S. (Eds.) Testing structural equation models, Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 136–162.
Cai, L. A. (2002), ‘Cooperative branding for rural destinations’, Annals of Tourism Research, 29(3), 720-
742.
Chang, K.C., Chen, M.C., Hsu, C.L. and Kuo, N.T., (2010), ‘The effect of service convenience on post-
purchasing behaviors’, Industrial Management and Data Systems, 110 (9), 1420-1443.
Chen and Tsai (2007), ‘How destination image and evaluative factors affect behavioral intentions?’, Tourism
Management, 28(4), 1115-1122.
Dai, H., Salam, A.F. and King, R. (2008), ‘Determinants and influences of service convenience in electronic
mediated environment (EME): an empirical study of Chinese consumers’, Proceedings of the 15th
Americas Conference on Information Systems, AMCIS, San Francisco, California, USA.
Fyall, A. and A. Leask (2007), ‘Destination marketing: Future issues-Strategic challenges’, Tourism and
Hospitality Research, 7, 50-63.
Galí, N. and Donaire, J. (2005), ‘The social construction of the image of girona:Amethodological approach’,
Tourism Management, 26, 777-785.
Gerbing, D. W. and Anderson, J. C. (1987), ‘Improper solutions in the analysis of covariance structures:
Their interpretability and a comparison of alternate respecifications’, Psychometrika, 52, 99-111.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1995), Multivariable data analysis reading,
USA: Prentice Hall International Editions.
Hoyle, R. H. (1995), Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues, and Applications, Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Hsu, C.L., Chen, M.C., Chang, K.C. and Chao, C.M. (2010), ‘Applying loss aversion to investigate service
quality on logistics: a moderating effect on service convenience’, International Journal of Operations
and Production Management, 30(5), 508-525.
Jang, S. C. and Namkung, Y. (2009), ‘Perceived quality, emotions, and behavioral intentions: application
of an extended Mehrabian Russell model to restaurants’, Journal of Business Research, 62, 451-460.
Keller, K. L. (1993), ‘Conceptualizing, measuring and managing customer-based brand equity’, Journal of
Marketing, 57(1), 1-22.
Keller, K. L. (2003), Strategic brand management: Building, measuring, and managing brand equity, New
Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Kim, S., Han, H. S., Holland, S. and Byon, K. (2009), ‘Structural relationships among involvement,
destination brand equity, satisfaction, and destination revisit intentions’, Journal of Vacation
Marketing, 15(4), 349-365.
Kim. H. and Kim, W. G. (2005), ‘The relationship between brand equity and firms’ performance in luxury
hotels and chain restaurants’, Tourism Management, 26, 549-560.
Konecnik, M. and Gartner, W. (2007), ‘Customer-based brand equity for a destination’, Annals of Tourism
Research, 34(2), 400-421.
Koufteros, X. A. (1999), ‘Testing a model of pull production: A paradigm for manufacturing research using
structural equation modeling’, Journal of Operations Management, 17, 467- 488.
Journal of Economics and Development
91
Vol. 19, No.1, April 2017
Koufteros, X. A., Mark Vonderembseb and William Dollb (2001), ‘Concurrent engineering and its
consequences’, Journal of Operations Management 19, 97–115.
Kwun, J. and Oh, H. (2004), ‘Effects of brand, price, and risk on customers’value perceptions and behavioral
intentions in the restaurant industry’, Journal of Hospitality and Leisure Marketing, 11(1), 31-49.
Maja and William (2007), ‘Customer-based brand equity for a destination’, Annals of Tourism Research, 34(2),
400-421.
Nguyen, Thi Bich Thuy (2012), ‘The relationship between Destination Image and motivations of international
tourists to Danang’, Journal of Science and Technology, Danang University, 2(51), 136-145.
Oh, H. (2000), ‘The effect of brand class, brand awareness, and price on customer value and behavioral
intentions’, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 24(2), 136-162.
Oppermann, M. (2000), ‘Tourism destination loyalty’, Journal of Travel Research, 39, 78-84.
Phuong Giang Quach (2013), ‘Examining international tourists’ satisfaction with Hanoi tourism’, Tourism
Research, EMACIM master thesis, University of Lapland.
Pike, S. (2007), ‘Consumer-based brand equity for destinations: Practical DMO performance measures’,
Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 22(1), 51-61.
Room, A. (1992), ‘In Branding: A Key Marketing Tool’, in History of Branding, J. Murphy (ed.),
Houndmills: Macmillan, 13–21.
Soderlund, M. (2006), ‘Measuring customer loyalty with multi-item scales: a case for caution’, International
Journal of Service Industry Management, 17(1), 76-98.
Stokburger-Sauer, N. E. (2011), ‘The relevance of visitors’nation brand embeddedness and personality congruence
for nation brand identification, visit intentions and advocacy’, Tourism Management, 1, 1-8.
Tasci, A. and Gartner, W. (2007), ‘Destination image and its functional relationships, Journal of Travel
Research, 45, 413-425.
Thu, H. (2012), 80-85% international tourists don’t want return Vietnam, retrieved on December 5th
khongmuon-quay-lai.html>.
Woodside, A.G. and Lysonski, S. (1989), ‘Ageneral model of traveler destination choice’, Journal of Travel
Research, 27, 8-14.
Journal of Economics and Development
92
Vol. 19, No.1, April 2017
16 trang
08/01/2024
940
Bạn đang xem tài liệu "Factors Affecting Tourist Destination Choice - A Survey of International Travelers to Hanoi, Vietnam", để tải tài liệu gốc về máy hãy click vào nút Download ở trên
File đính kèm:
- factors_affecting_tourist_destination_choice_a_survey_of_int.pdf
