مدل شکل گیری تصویر مقصد

Image has been shown to be an important influence in the selection of vacation destinations. A model that represents the important determinants of destination image formation was developed based on previous studies in a number of fields. The research reported in this article presents the results of an empirical test of the model using path analysis. A major finding of the study was that a destination image is formed by both stimulus factors and tourists' characteristics. The results of this investigation provide important implications for strategic image management and can aid in designing and implementing marketing programs for creating and enhancing tourism destination images.

Research of the past two decades has demonstrated that image is a valuable concept in understanding the destination selection process of tourists. Several studies centered on the relationship between destination image and preference or visitation intentions Goodrich, 1978, Mayo, 1973, Hunt, 1975, Milman and Pizam, 1995 and Scott, Schewe and Frederick, 1978. A particular research stream investigated the impact of previous visitation (actual behavior) or familiarity on destination image Ahmed, 1991, Chon, 1990, Dann, 1996, Fakeye and Crompton, 1991, Fridgen, 1987, Hu and Ritchie, 1993, Milman and Pizam, 1995, Pearce, 1982 and Phelps, 1986. Some studies examined the relationship between tourists' geographical location (distance) and image (Ahmed, 1991, Crompton, 1979a, Fakeye and Crompton, 1991 and Hunt, 1975; Scott et al 1978). Others focused on the measurement of destination image Echtner and Ritchie, 1993 and Driscoll, Lawson and Niven, 1994, its components Dann, 1996 and MacKay and Fesenmaier, 1997, or factors incfluencing it Baloglu and Brinberg, 1997 and Walmsley and Jenkins, 1993. Still others examined temporal influences on image change Gartner, 1986 and Gartner and Hunt, 1987, differences between tourist image (demand) and what is projected by destinations (Stabler 1990), variations by trip purpose (Javalgi, Thomas and Rao 1992), and the relationship between sociodemographic variables and destination image Baloglu, 1997 and Walmsley and Jenkins, 1993. However, little empirical research has focused on how image is actually formed, especially in the absence of previous experience with a destination. This suggests that most studies have largely focused on its static structure by examining the relationship between image and behavior, but not on its dynamic nature by investigating the influences on its structure and formation in the absence of actual visitation. The initial image formation stage before the trip is the most important phase in tourits' destination selection processes Gunn, 1972 and Mercer, 1971. As noted by Brokaw “Before image can be used to influence behavior, it is important to understand what influences image” (1990:32). Goodall (1990) noted that knowing factors influencing it would help identify target markets and decide which image should be promoted to which segment of the market. Numerous researchers across fields emphasized the importance of understanding forces which influence image development and suggested that little effort has been undertaken to determine the factors that influence its formation (Brokaw, 1990, Burgess, 1978, Fakeye and Crompton, 1991 and Gartner, 1989Gartner, 1993, Han, 1989, Kotler, Haider and Rein, 1993, Myers, 1968, Phelps, 1986, Russel and Snodgrass, 1987 and Stern and Krakover, 1993). Despite importance and growing interest, destination image studies have also been criticized as atheoretical and lacking a conceptual framework Echtner and Ritchie, 1993, Fakeye and Crompton, 1991 and Gartner, 1993. To address the problem of identifying what influences image development, a model of its formation was developed based on the literature from several fields and disciplines. The model is designed to provide a framework for studying the forces guiding the formation of destination image and proposes relationships among the different levels of evaluations within its structure (cognitive, affective, and global), as well as the elements determining these evaluations. The purpose of the research reported here was to test the proposed model and to provide insights into how images of destinations are developed.

The findings of the path analysis revealed the overall pattern of the model and indicated that variety (amount) of information sources, type of information sources, age, and education influence perceptual/cognitive evaluations. These and sociopsychological tourism motivations together influence affect. However, the effects of perceptual/cognitive evaluations on affect were much stronger than the effects of travel motivations. It is important to note that the hypothesized model proposed that variety and type of information sources influence only perceptual/cognitive evaluations, while sociopsychological motivations influence only affect. An examination of the correlation matrix indicated that variety and type of information sources had a significant relationship with affect and sociopsychological motivations had a significant relationship with perceptual/cognitive evaluations. These relationships were not hypothesized in the original model and thus not examined because of lack of support from the literature. If they had been investigated, it would have been possible to compare direct and indirect effects of variety and type of information sources and sociopsychological motivations on affect. This would further validate the intervening role of perceptual/cognitive evaluations between exogenous variables and affect. Significantly, overall image is more likely influenced by affect than perceptual/cognitive evaluations and affect together. In other words, affect is more likely to serve as an intervening variable between perceptual/cognitive evaluations and overall image. It should be noted here that the sample was homogenous in terms of characteristics. This may confound the effects of personal variables in the structural model. Therefore, the findings related to age, education, and sociopsychological motivations in the model should be viewed under this limitation. Clearly, future research is needed to further clarify the role of tourist characteristics in image formation from a diverse sample. The findings are limited to unidirectional influences among the variables in the model (a recursive causal modeling) because reciprocal (two-way) relationships among the variables were not studied (a non-recursive causal modeling). Findings are also limited to the set of destination countries included in the study. Additional research can validate the findings of this study, with the relationships among the model variables may be extended to other international destinations, or local destinations, to further assess the external validity of the findings. Another limitation is related to seasonal image of the destinations. In this study, the respondents were asked to evaluate the destinations as summer vacation destinations. This would be a possible explanation of negative effects of age and education in the model because the sample consisted of mostly senior tourists. It is also possible that some sample members are overrepresented in the pooled data set. A respondent who has not been to one destination country was counted once while a respondent who has not been to any of the four was counted four times. An ideal case would be a selection of subsample who have been to none of the four destinations. This study has theoretical and practical implications. From a theoretical standpoint, the study developed and tested a conceptual model of the determinants of destination image. It added to the existing knowledge by providing empirical evidence for the elements contributing to the development of tourism destination images. It was found that a destination image was formed by both consumer characteristics and stimulus factors. Its uniqueness was to illustrate the dynamic structure of image and simultaneous treatment of the elements contributing to destination image development. In this sense, the study shed some light on image formation theory. It empirically demonstrated that the elements that influence destination images are multi-dimensional. Another important implication of this study is that the formation of destination images is dependent on the different roles played by the factors in the process. Variety (amount) and type of information sources used about destinations and tourists' sociodemographic characteristics influence the perceptions and cognitions of destination attributes. Somewhere in the process these perceptions, together with travelers' socio-psychological motivations, form feelings towards destinations. These then mostly form the overall image of tourism destinations. An interesting point to note is that the perceptual/cognitive evaluations are formed as an amalgam of both positive determinants (variety and type of information sources used) and inverse determinants (age and education). In other word, they are impacted negatively by increasing levels of age and education. Some relationships tested confirmed the findings of Holbrook (1978) regarding the relationship between information sources and perceptual/cognitive evaluations and those of Stern and Krakover (1993) in terms of the relationship among perceptual/cognitive, affective, and overall image. The role of consumer characteristics in image formation should further be studied to understand whether they are determining, as they were treated in this study, or conditioning variables (i.e., conditioning the relationship between stimuli variables and image). Destination marketers need a better understanding of how an image is formed and what determines the process. From a practical standpoint, this study provides important implications for strategic image management and development efforts. Because of the positive contribution of the variety (amount) of information sources to perceptual/cognitive evaluations, destinations should find ways to make tourists use multiple information sources. Countries can assess their promotional channels to develop more effective promotional programs. This study demonstrated that different types of information sources have varying degrees of effect on perceptual/cognitive evaluations. Word-of-mouth recommendations from friends and relatives was the most important source in forming touristic images. Therefore, destinations should keep in mind that providing a pleasant experience for their tourists has a major effect on the development of positive images for non-visitors. The sociodemographic variables, age, and education need also to be considered, but have a lesser influence than those relating to information. The motivation factors in the model need to be carefully studied so that marketers can incorporate significant motivators into communications. The results showed that knowledge, prestige, and social motivations directly impact image and excitement/adventure has an indirect impact. Advertising themes can be developed to effectively create and maintain destination image by appealing to these motivations. Countries seeking to increase their tourism share should consider the characteristics of their target markets and tailor their image development and positioning efforts to specific sociodemographic and motivation segments. As the model test revealed, intervening variables, especially affect and to a lesser extent perceptual/cognitive ones, have a strong influence on image. Marketers should understand that to influence affective evaluations of their destinations, both destination attributes and tourists' motivations should be taken into account. Destinations spend considerable time and money to create and enhance a favorable image. Focusing on the most important variables as revealed by the relationships in the model will provide more efficiency in tourism demand stimulation expenditures and more effectiveness in attracting tourists who are evaluating new potential destinations.