FACTORS INFLUENCING DESTINATION IMAGE FORMATION IN DISTANT CULTURE

FACTORS INFLUENCING DESTINATION IMAGE FORMATION IN DISTANT CULTURE COUNTRIES: THE MODERATING ROLE OF FAMILIARITY, CORPORATE IMAGE AND TRAVEL MOTIVATIONS Gema Pérez Tapia, Department of Marketing and Market Research, University of Málaga, Spain.

ABSTRACT The present research aims to explain more deeply the Theory of the Image of Tourist Destination and its process of formation, specifically regarding the factors that influence the above-mentioned process. This work tries to develop and empirically validate a model which explains the main factors that influence the image of a tourist destination and its process of formation. Based on a literature review, this will involve analysing the relationship between the different factors of the perceived image. These include the familiarity, the corporate image and the motivation of potential tourists.

INTRODUCTION Tourist industry High level of competition DESTINATION IMAGE - Estrategic sector. - Economic and employment benefits - Responsible for the transmition of social and cultural attitudes. In order to compete in this sector Most studies show the importance of creating a strong, positive, and recognizable image to achieve a COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE.

INTRODUCTION A destination image is important not only due to its influence at the stage of choosing the destination (Goodrich, 1978; Bigné, Sánchez, & Sánchez, 2001) but also in the level of satisfaction (O’Leary & Deegan, 2005; Pikkemaat, 2004), loyalty (San Martín & Del Bosque, 2008), and future behaviour (Campo, Garau, & Martinez, 2010; Chen & Tsai, 2007; Lee, & Lee, 2005). Image perceived of tourist destination

INTRODUCTION The aim of this paper is to develop and empirically validate a model which explains the main factors that influence the image of a tourist destination and its process of formation in distant culture countries Travel motivations Corporate Image Level of familiarity DISTANT CULTURE COUNTRIES

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Hypothetical model of the relationship between familiarity, corporate image, travel motivation and cognitive/affective destination image. H 2 a FAMILIARITY COGNITIVE IMAGE H 3 a H 2 b CORPORATE IMAGE H 1 H 4 a MOTIVATION H 3 b AFFECTIVE IMAGE H 4 b

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Destination Image Personal Factors: Psychological (values, motivations, personality) -Social(age, education. . . ) Stimulus factors: DESTINATION IMAGE: Information sources Previous experience Baloglu and Mc. Cleary (1999)

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Destination image. Moutinho (1987) defines the tourist destination image as the subjective interpretation of the reality generated by the tourist, establishing the bases for later studies (Baloglu, 2001; Baloglu and Brinberg, 1997; Baloglu and Love, 2005; Baloglu and Mc. Cleary, 1999; Beerli and Martín, 2004 a, 2004 b; Bigné et al. , 2001; Mac. Kay and Fesenmaier, 1997; San Martín and Rodríguez, 2008). These studies tend to consider image as a concept formed by Ø The cognitive evaluations referring to the beliefs and personal knowledge about the object. Ø The affective approximation relating to the individual feelings towards the object. H 1: Cognitive and affective images are positively related

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Familiarity as a multidimensional concept Kim and Richardson (2003) Informational (sources of information consulted by the tourist) Experiential (visits to the destination) Beerli and Martin (2004) also found that such experience “has a positive and significant relationship” with the cognitive and affective dimensions between first-time and repeat tourists. H 2 a: Level of familiarity will have a positive effect on the cognitive image of destination in distant culture countries. H 2 b: Level of familiarity will have a positive effect on the affective image of destination in distant culture countries.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Corporate image A recent group of authors presents the corporate image as perceptions, (mental) pictures or impressions of an organization that reside in the public’s mind (Grönroos, 1984; Jonhson and Zinkhan, 1990; Balmer, 1995; Gray and Balmer, 1998; Balmer and Gray, 2000; Gotsi and Wilson, 2001; Balmer and Greyser, 2002). H 3 a: The more positive the corporate image in a It might be interesting to know if this variable influence the image and how strong is that relationship distant destination is, the more positive the cognitive image will be as a tourist destination. H 3 b: The more positive the corporate image in a distant destination is, the more positive the affective image will be as a tourist destination.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Travel motivations can be considered as one of the most important psychological influences of tourist behavior (destination´s election). Motivations are the inner state of a person or certain needs of a person, which forces them to act in a specific way to satisfied it. Those destinations that have a stronger image of agreement with the motivations of the potential tourist, will have major possibilities of being chosen. H 4 a: Travel Motivations will have a positive effect on the cognitive image of destination in distant culture countries. H 4 b: Travel Motivations will have a positive effect on the affective image of destination in distant culture countries.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Decision making process (Singhapakdi et al. , 1994; Swaidan & Hayes, 2005); Trade (Heide, 1994); Distant destinations Consumer behaviour (Dawar et al. , 1996; De Mooij & Hofstede, 2002); Sensitivity to ethical problems (Swaidan & Hayes, 2005); Human resource practices (Aycan et al. , 2000)

RESEARCH METHODS Survey methods were used to collect data. Major variables in the questionnaire are: Ø Destination images (affective/cognitive). Ø Familiarity. Ø Corporate image. Ø Travel motivations.

RESEARCH METHODS Destination Image • The cognitive Familiarity • Experiential Corporate Image • The corporate Travel Motivations • Travel motivations dimension of Spain familiarity was image measures up was measured image was measured by visits across a structured following Baloglu measured through to the destination methodology, there and Mc. Cleary items from Baloglu (previously being included in (1999 a) and San and Mc. Cleary visited/not the questionnaire Martín and (1999). for the previously visited), the corporate Rodriguez (2008) affective whereas attributes of image establishing 14 dimension, four informational that stem from a items related to bipolar items on a familiarity was review of the wide travel motivations five-point semantic measured using the and recent differential scale number of literature were used (Baloglu information (Capriotti, 2013). and Mc. Cleary 1999). sources consulted by the tourist.

RESPONDENT PROFILE The sample was composed of 307 Korean citizens. and in order to facilitate their comprehension, it was translated into Korean. Asia is one of the most important outbound tourist markets in the world.

RESPONDENT PROFILE With regard to specific characteristics, 52. 1% were male while 47. 9% were female. 49. 2% of those surveyed fell into the age bracket of 18 to 24; 29% fell into the bracket of 25 to 44; the remaining 21. 8% of those surveyed were over 45. Among those surveyed, the overwhelming majority already have or will soon have a university degree (94. 1%); 60. 3% were single; and 44. 6% were engaged in active employment, while 54. 4% were students.

RESPONDENT PROFILE The study has not been finished yet. In any case, for its analysis it is going to be used the Structural Equation Modeling technique and the PLS method of estimation to test the proposed research model, using the statistical software package Advances Composites (ADANCO). Analysis for

POSSIBLE CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE STUDY. Ø From an academic point of view, this research would attempt to provide a conceptual framework that permits continued advances in the development of destination image in order to allow a greater understanding of the process of destination image formation. Ø From a managerial point of view, the results of this work emphasize a set of managerial implications concerning the promotion and communication of the tourist destinations as well as of their companies.

LIMITATIONS. These results must be given some limitations. The main limitation arises from the difficulty of access to a widely representative sample of citizens from distant culture countries. A more heterogeneous sample would contribute to a further generalization of the results

REFERENCES. Baloglu, S. (2001). Image variations of Turkey by familiarity index: informational and experiential dimensions. Tourism Management, 22(2), 127 -133. Baloglu, S. , & Mc. Cleary, K. W. (1999). A model of destination image formation. Annals of tourism research, 26(4), 868 -897. Beerli, A. , & Martin, J. D. (2004). Factors influencing destination image. Annals of tourism research, 31(3), 657 -681. Capriotti, P. (2013). Branding corporativo. LA COMUNICACIÓN DE LAS MARCAS, 47. Echtner, C. M. , & Ritchie, J. B. (1993). The measurement of destination image: An empirical assessment. Journal of travel research, 31(4), 3 -13. Gutiérrez, H. S. M. , & del Bosque, I. R. (2010). Los factores estímulo y personales como determinantes de la formación de la imagen de marca de los destinos turísticos: un estudio aplicado a los turistas que visitan un destino vacacional. Cuadernos de Economía y Dirección de la Empresa, 13(43), 37 -63. Moutinho, L. (1987). Consumer behaviour in tourism. European journal of marketing, 21(10), 5 -44. You, X. , O'leary, J. , Morrison, A. , & Hong, G. S. (2000). A cross-cultural comparison of travel push and pull factors: United Kingdom vs. Japan. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 1(2), 1 -26.

Thank you 多謝 ¡Muchas gracias!

Sexo Edad Nivel educativo Hombre: 52, 1 % Mujer: 47, 9% Trabajador en activo: 44, 6% Ocupación Estudiante: 54, 4% 18 - 24 años: 49, 2% Amo/a de casa: 0, 3% 25 - 44 años: 29% Parado/a: 0, 7% 45 - 64 años: 20, 8% 1 persona: 6, 2% Más de 65 años: 0, 3% 2 personas: 5, 9% NS/NC: 0, 7% Número de 3 personas: 12, 7% Sin estudios: 1, 6% miembros de la 4 personas: 45, 6% Primarios/Secundarios: 2, 6% familia 5 personas: 19, 2% Universitarios: 94, 1% 6 personas o más: 2, 6% Otros: 1, 3% NS/NC: 7, 8% NS/NC: 0, 3% De 0 a 890. 000 won: 17, 6% De 891. 000 a 1. 780. 000 won: 13, 7% Soltero/a: 60, 3% Casado/a: 35, 8% Viviendo en pareja: 1, 3% Estado civil Separado/a: 0, 7% De 1. 781. 000 a 2. 670. 000 won: Ingresos 16, 9% mensuales De 2. 671. 000 a 3. 560. 000 won: 20, 2% Divorciado/a: 0, 7% Más de 4. 450. 000 won: 15% Viudo/a: 0, 3% Otros ingresos: 2, 6% NS/NC: 14%