Journal of Travel Research http://jtr.sagepub.

com/

Tourist Satisfaction with Mallorca, Spain, as an Off-Season Holiday Destination

Metin Kozak and Mike Rimmington
Journal of Travel Research 2000 38: 260
DOI: 10.1177/004728750003800308

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/38/3/260

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Travel and Tourism Research Association

Additional services and information for Journal of Travel Research can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://jtr.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://jtr.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Citations: http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/38/3/260.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Feb 1, 2000

What is This?

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 24, 2014

FEBRUARYOF2000
JOURNAL TRAVEL RESEARCH
Tourist Satisfaction with Mallorca, Spain,
as an Off-Season Holiday Destination
METIN KOZAK AND MIKE RIMMINGTON
A number of research studies have investigated tourist
satisfaction with mass tourism destinations, particularly
during the peak (summer) season. However, there has been
limited investigation of tourist satisfaction with off-season
holiday destinations. This article reports the findings of a
study to determine destination attributes critical to the over-
all satisfaction levels of tourists visiting Mallorca, Spain,
during the winter season. Their future holiday intentions also
are investigated. Findings are analyzed, and implications
and limitations are discussed.
Developments in international tourism and travel have
increased competitiveness among overseas tourist destina-
tions. New destinations become established, some existing
ones make further progress, and others decline. Bordas
(1994) stated that competitiveness is established between
destinations and tourism businesses rather than countries
because of the different aspects and features of the destina-
tions within a country. Travel agents also sell destinations
rather than countries. As a result of increases in tourism
demand for package holidays over the past two decades, des-
tinations also have become more important than individual
attractions. Therefore, tourist satisfaction with a destination,
rather than with a facility, might create repeat visits. This
highlights the importance of destination management in
directing tourism supply and ensuring the needs of tourists.
Seasonality also is a feature of tourism and is a problem,
particularly for mass tourism destinations. Butler and Mao
(1997) discussed factors, both in tourist destinations and in
the countries from which tourists originate, that have impacts
on the structure of seasonality. They stated that destination
factors such as weather can influence the level of seasonality.
However, destinations also can put different marketing poli-
cies into progress, such as market diversification (e.g.,
attracting retired senior citizens who have enough time to
spend for holidays) and price verification (e.g., reducing
prices of goods and services at the destination as well as tour
prices). Such tactics influence the level of tourist activity at
times of the year that might not be intrinsically so attractive
and influence tourist perceptions of their holiday experi-
ences. For example, Murphy and Pritchard (1997) found that
tourists visiting a destination in the low season had the lowest
satisfaction scores, but these were the respondents who were
more likely to return to the destination than were other
groups.
Although much research has been conducted to investi-
gate tourist satisfaction with domestic or overseas tourism
destinations during the peak season, measuring tourist
Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 24, 2014
satisfaction with off-season holidays suffers from a lack of
sufficient attention. This article presents findings of a tourist
satisfaction survey carried out among British tourists who
had been to Mallorca, Spain, for their holidays during the
winter season. The article has three specific objectives: (1) to
investigate British tourists’ holiday experiences of Mallorca
as an off-season holiday destination; (2) to identify destina-
tion elements they most liked and disliked; and (3) to deter-
mine these elements’ impact on overall satisfaction, likeli-
hood to visit again, and intention to recommend to others.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Tourist perceptions are important to successful destina-
tion marketing because they influence the choice of a desti-
nation (Ahmed 1991), the consumption of goods and serv-
ices while on holiday, and the decision to return (Stevens
1992). The majority of tourists have experiences with other
destinations, and their perceptions are influenced by com-
parisons among facilities, attractions, and service standards
(Laws 1995).
Empirical and conceptual articles concerning customer
satisfaction (CS) and service quality, both their nature and
how to measure them, abound within the recent marketing
literature (Cronin and Taylor 1992; Gronroos 1990; Oliver
1980; Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry 1985; Westbrook
1980). A review of the related literature shows an increase in
the number of articles dealing with different aspects of con-
sumer satisfaction in tourism, travel, hospitality, and recrea-
tion. For example, Reisinger and Waryszak (1995) consid-
ered satisfaction with tour guides, Hughes (1991)
investigated satisfaction with cultural tours, and Ross and
Iso-Ahola (1991) studied satisfaction with daily tours. Pack-
aged and nonpackaged tours were investigated by Hsieh,
O’Leary, and Morrison (1994), and the operation of travel
Metin Kozak is a research assistant at Mugla University in Tur-
key and currently is pursuing his Ph.D. in the School of Leisure and
Food Management at Sheffield Hallam University in the United
Kingdom. Mike Rimmington is M.B.A. director in the School of Ho-
tel and Restaurant Management at Oxford Brookes University in
the United Kingdom. The authors thank Ercan Sirakaya of Texas
A&M University for his critical reading of an earlier version of the
article. They also thank Inmaculada Benito Hernandez of Univer-
sity of Balearic Islands, Spain, for her assistance in carrying out
surveys in Mallorca.
Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 38, February 2000, 260-269
© 2000 Sage Publications, Inc.

agencies was investigated by LeBlanc (1992). Guest satis-
faction with hotels was reported by Saleh and Ryan (1992)
and Bojanic (1996), and CS with restaurants was reported by
Fick and Ritchie (1991). The level of tourist satisfaction with
the behavior of local people was investigated by Pearce
(1980). Measurement of user satisfaction with leisure and
recreation facilities also has been an important topic within
the related literature (Dorfman 1979). Finally, research on
tourist satisfaction with destinations also has increased
(Chon and Olsen 1991; Danaher and Arweiler 1996; Pizam,
Neumann, and Reichel 1978).
Different approaches to the measurement of CS have
been explored extensively during the past three decades, but
a consensus approach has not yet been reached. The market-
ing literature has mainly reflected two approaches to CS
research. The American school, led by Parasuraman,
Zeithaml, and Berry (1985), considers CS as a negative or
positive outcome resulting from a comparison process
between initial expectations and perceived performance of
products and services. The Nordic school, led by Gronroos
(1990), brings a completely different perspective to measur-
ing CS by stating that it is only an outcome of the actual qual-
ity of performance and its perception by consumers. There
has been extensive debate in the marketing literature regard-
ing the nature and determinants of CS and how it is best
measured (Oh and Parks 1997).
These approaches also have been applied to researching
CS within tourism and travel. For example, Parasuraman,
Zeithaml, and Berry’s (1985) expectation-perception gap
model (Duke and Persia 1996), Oliver’s expectancy discon-
firmation theory (Pizam and Milman 1993), Sirgy’s congru-
ity model (Chon and Olsen 1991), performance-only model
(Pizam, Neumann, and Reichel 1978) all have been used to
measure tourist satisfaction with specific tourism
destinations.
Arguments in the literature concerning the respective
merits of the expectations and perceptions approaches go
back many years (Cardozo 1965; Czepiel, Rosenberg, and
Akerele 1974; Engledow 1977; Olshavsky and Miller 1972).
One shortcoming of the expectation-perception model is that
customers might update their expectations once they receive
further information about the destination (Boulding et al.
1993). Expectations also can be influenced by advertising
and other sales promotion methods (Cardozo 1965). Tourists
have the opportunity to receive information about the desti-
nation through multiple information sources, such as word-
of-mouth communication, brochures, television, and other
media. Both commercials and the social environment have
been shown to affect destination choice (Mill and Morrison
1992). The former refers to information provided by compa-
nies, destinations, and tourist businesses, whereas the latter is
formed by the interaction with friends, relatives, and refer-
ence groups who do not expect to gain anything. Tourists’
own experiences with the destination should be regarded as a
third source of information. Certainly, a tourist who selects
an overseas holiday destination often is better preinformed
than a tourist who spends a holiday at home (Duke and Persia
1994). This surely will affect expectations. Tourists also
might have difficulty in distinguishing between expectations
and perceived performances during or after the holiday
(Meyer and Westerbarkey 1996). One reason for that could
be the length of time spent at a destination. This is much
Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 24, 2014
JOURNAL OF TRAVEL RESEARCH 261
longer than time spent at supermarkets, department stores,
food and beverage facilities, and the like.
Cultural differences in attitudes, behavior, and social
class also can influence expectations and perceptions (Lewis
1991; Mayo and Jarvis 1981). For example, tourists with
lower levels of income and education, from lower socioeco-
nomic groups, and from higher age brackets all are likely to
have lower expectations. They might consider a summer
vacation abroad to be a luxury consumption, resulting in
higher levels of vacation satisfaction (van Raaij and
Francken 1984). In addition, tourism destinations attract
tourists from different cultures and countries, so tourists
might be more or less satisfied depending on the countries
from which they originate.
It has been stated that differences between tourism prod-
ucts and other consumer products make it difficult to meas-
ure CS in the tourism industry. It is important to identify and
measure CS with each component of the destination because
consumer satisfaction or dissatisfaction (CS/D) with one of
the components leads to CS/D with the overall destination
(Pizam, Neumann, and Reichel 1978). Overall satisfaction or
dissatisfaction is the result of evaluating various positive and
negative experiences. Therefore, the relative importance of
each component to the overall impression should be investi-
gated (Rust, Zahorik, and Keiningham 1996). The evalua-
tions of both attractions and levels of service quality (supply
side) are regarded as crucial in determining overall tourist
satisfaction (demand side) (Whipple and Thach 1988).
Previous research findings demonstrate that there is a sig-
nificant relationship among tourist satisfaction, intention to
return, and positive word-of-mouth communication (Beeho
and Prentice 1997; Hallowell 1996; Pizam 1994; Ross 1993).
A similar relationship exists among tourist dissatisfaction,
willingness to look for other destinations for further trips, and
negative word-of-mouth communication (Almanza, Jaffe, and
Lin 1994; Peter and Olson 1987; Pizam 1994). Satisfaction or
dissatisfaction with previous experience also is crucial
because it might affect expectations for the next purchase
(Westbrook and Newman 1978; Woodruff, Cadotte, and
Jenkins 1983). This means that favorable tourist perceptions
and attitudes are potentially an important source of competi-
tive advantage. However, it also is important to note that the
impact of CS on repeat business and customer loyalty is nei-
ther the same for all industries (Fornell 1992) nor the same for
all destinations worldwide (Kozak and Rimmington 1998).
Previous tourist satisfaction research indicates that dif-
ferent decisions have been made regarding when to measure
tourist satisfaction. These include comparing preholiday
expectations and postholiday perceptions (Duke and Persia
1996; Pizam and Milman 1993), monitoring during the holi-
day (Gyte and Phelps 1989), completing the overall tour
experience (Loundsbury and Hoopes 1985; Pearce 1980),
and just before completing the holiday (Goodrich 1978; Vogt
and Fesenmaier 1995). Although there is no consensus on
how or when to measure CS, the literature on CS/D suggests
that satisfaction is a function of overall postpurchase evalua-
tion (Fornell 1992). Our own study measured tourist satisfac-
tion by distributing questionnaires while tourists still were at
the airport and waiting for departure. At this point, tourists
have the benefit of the entire holiday to assess their percep-
tions of resort facilities, attractions, and customer services.
Moreover, the experience still is fresh in their minds.
262 FEBRUARY 2000
METHODOLOGY
Questionnaire Design
A questionnaire consisting of three sections was struc-
tured for the purpose of measuring British tourists’ satisfac-
tion with Mallorca as a off-season holiday destination, their
likelihood to revisit in the future, and their likelihood to rec-
ommend it to relatives and friends.
In the first section, basic details about tourists and their
holidays in Mallorca were obtained. This section was com-
posed of nine questions.
The second section, composed of 38 questions based on a
7-point scale ranging from delighted to terrible, was struc-
tured to measure levels of tourist satisfaction with attrac-
tions, facilities, and services in the Mallorcan resorts. Litera-
ture suggests that both Likert-type and semantic differential
scales can be employed for the purpose of evaluating tourist
experiences at the destination area because they are effective
in measuring consumer attitudes and are easy to construct
and manage (Echtner and Ritchie 1991; Ryan 1995b).
Empirical research findings demonstrate that the Likert-type
and semantic differential scales have high reliability and
validity values (Westbrook and Oliver 1991). The use of the
“delighted-terrible scale” has been reported as having the
ability to reduce the skewness of satisfaction responses
(Maddox 1985; Westbrook 1980). The do not know choice
also was included in the scale for those who might not have
any opinion about their experience with any of the destina-
tion attributes. For example, respondents cannot be expected
to make a comment about the availability of daily tours to
other resorts or attractions if they did not have any direct
experience. The scale was based on the following choices: do
not know (0), terrible (1), unhappy (2), mostly dissatisfied
(3), neither satisfied nor dissatisfied (4), mostly satisfied (5),
pleased (6), and delighted (7).
In this research, verbal response alternatives rather than
numerical ones were provided for each question. It has been
shown that respondents prefer verbal labels over numerical
labels when both are used on the same scale (Haley and Case
1979). Survey results have indicated that respondents also
tend to overuse the extremes of a numerical scale with verbal
anchors at the ends, whereas an agreement scale without
numbers is less subject to this extremity response bias (Shul-
man 1973).
Analysis of literature displayed substantial variance in
the number and nature of attributes considered relevant to
tourist satisfaction with destinations (Dorfman 1979; Good-
rich 1977; Pearce 1982; Pizam, Neumann, and Reichel
1978). It also is debatable whether attributes relevant to dif-
ferent consumer groups and different overseas destinations
would be transferred to this different context. Therefore,
some attributes were developed by sending open-ended
questionnaires to 30 people working in a U.K. university
who had been to Mediterranean destinations, mainly Spain,
for both their summer and winter holidays in 1997. Respon-
dents were required to state their most and least important
items when selecting a destination and to identify what they
most liked and disliked on their latest holiday. In addition,
further attributes were drawn from the tourist destination and
CS literature. A supplementary questionnaire that aimed to
collect further details regarding destination attributes likely
Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 24, 2014
to be important to travel agents and their customers, as well
as to check the applicability of the 7-point scale, was sent by
mail to 10 local travel agents. A total of 38 attributes, poten-
tially relevant for both destination management and tourists,
were employed.
The third section of the questionnaire, composed of five
questions, was designed to determine tourist satisfaction
with the overall destination (7-point scale ranging from
delighted to terrible); how likely the tourists were to revisit
in the future (7-point scale ranging from definitely to not
likely at all); how likely they were to recommend the destina-
tion to others (7-point scale ranging from definitely to not
likely at all); whether they already had been to the destination
before and, if so, what their overall impressions were with
regard to negative or positive changes compared to their lat-
est holiday in Mallorca (5-point scale ranging from it has
improved a lot to it has become much worse); and how they
perceived their holiday overall compared to their expecta-
tions prior to the holiday. A 5-point disconfirmation scale
ranging from much worse than expected (1) to much better
than expected (5) was used for the final question, attempting
to measure perceptions against prior expectations (Danaher
and Haddrell 1996). Although this is a comparison with
expectations scale, it is possible to consider the worse than
expected choice as dissatisfied, the about as expected choice
as satisfied, and the much better than expected choice as
delighted (Rust, Zahorik, and Keiningham 1996).
Recent CS studies have tended to use multi-item scales.
In multi-item scales, respondents also are asked to give an
overall opinion of their satisfaction with the service (destina-
tion) in addition to rating key components of the service
process (destination attributes). Therefore, it is suggested
that summary questions be added to the questionnaire
involving the level of overall satisfaction, intention to repur-
chase, and intention to recommend to others (Rust, Zahorik,
and Keiningham 1996).
Sample
Mallorca was selected as a sample area because it is one
of the mature tourist destinations for mass tourism in the
Mediterranean region and is an established holiday destina-
tion among British citizens during both the summer and win-
ter seasons. According to official records, Mallorca’s tour-
ism industry has experienced remarkable growth since the
beginning of the 1960s. It continues to be a favorite holiday
destination, attracting nearly 7 million foreign tourists each
year. By 1995, tourists from Germany (44.3%) and Great
Britain (30.3%) represented nearly three-quarters of the des-
tination’s total foreign tourism market (Ibatur 1996).
Previous research revealed that 38.8% of German tourists
visited Mallorca only once, and 56.8% had made two or more
visits. Regarding British tourists, 28.8% had visited only
once, and 71.1% were making repeat visits (Juaneda 1996).
Past experience with Mallorca was rated as an important fac-
tor when selecting the destination. Elderly people were more
likely to make repeat visits (Ryan 1995a). Ongoing research
on the tourism industry in Mallorca also demonstrates that
Mallorca still is developing as a destination for British tour-
ists. As with other destinations, seasonality is a major con-
cern. Records indicate that 80.6% of international tourist
arrivals to Mallorca are concentrated during the 6 months
between May and November. The off-season (between
 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL RESEARCH 263

November and May) attracts just 19.4% of annual foreign TABLE 1

arrivals (Ibatur 1996). SAMPLE PROFILE (IN PERCENTAGES)

Data Collection Age (years, N = 220)

15-24 14.2
The sample population for this study was composed of 25-34 7.3
British tourists who visited any specific resort in Mallorca 35-44 13.2
between December 15, 1997, and January 16, 1998. A total 45-54 21.0
of 250 tourists agreed to participate in the survey. The survey 55 or older 44.3
was conducted at Palma Airport over a 4-week period. All
airline passengers have to use this airport because it is the Gender (N = 220)
Female 51.5
only one in Mallorca. Distribution of questionnaires was car-
Male 48.5
ried out only during the daytime. Respondents were
approached and informed about the purpose of the survey in Occupation (N = 220)
advance of being given the questionnaire. They then were Unemployed 3.8
asked whether they would participate in the survey (Gorden Retired 37.8
1987). Self-completion questionnaires were distributed in Employed 45.6
the airport departure halls after tourists had completed their Student 12.8
check-in procedures.
Respondents younger than age 15 were automatically Party in the group (N = 220)
excluded. Personal observations indicate that people who are Alone 5.6
As a family with children 13.0
age 15 or older go on holidays in Europe either individually
With partner 58.8
or with their friends or families as groups. With families and With friends 22.6
groups, only one member of the party was requested to par-
ticipate in the survey, with the purpose of obtaining different How long in advance booked
views and avoiding repetition and imitation among the par- holiday (N = 220)
ticipants. Respondents who stayed at their own accommoda- Less than 1 week 12.8
tions or with their relatives and/or friends were excluded. No 1-4 weeks 25.5
particular attempt was made to apply a random sample or to 1-2 months 23.3
select particular segments. However, tourists were selected 3-4 months 23.3
at different times of the day. Of the 250 questionnaires col- 5-6 months 8.2
7 months or more 6.9
lected, 30 were discarded as not sufficiently complete for
analysis. SPSS was used to analyze findings. Type of accommodation (N = 220)
Hotel 93.4
Holiday village 1.9
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS Apartment 4.7

Length of holiday (N = 220)

Senior citizens (44%) were the most represented tourist Less than 1 week 1.8
group vacationing in Mallorca during the winter season. As 1 week 63.5
Table 1 shows, people who worked for organizations 2 weeks 29.7
(45.6%) and who were retired (37.8%) were the most fre- 3 weeks 1.4
quently reported occupation groups. Unemployed and stu- More than 3 weeks 3.6
dent groups came last. The high proportion of retired people
supports the idea that Mallorca is an attractive off-season Number of previous visits to the
tourist holiday destination for elderly people. The sample of same resort (N = 203)
respondents was very evenly divided in terms of gender, with 0 75.9
1 11.8
51.5% females and 48.5% males. Tourists who traveled with 2 3.0
their partners came first on the list (58.8%), whereas people 3 2.5
who traveled alone came in last (5.6%). Regarding booking 4 1.5
lead times for holidays, 12.8% had booked less than a week 5 or more 5.3
before commencing their holidays, 25.5% between 1 and 4
weeks, 46.6% between 1 and 4 months, and 15.1% at least 5
months prior to their holidays. The majority of tourists stayed
only 1 week (63.5%). Another group preferred a 2-week win- well as domestic Spanish tourists during the summer season.
ter holiday in Mallorca (29.7%). Other groups (i.e., less than As Table 1 shows, nearly 76% of tourists had not visited the
1 week, 3 or more weeks) were recorded to be much less resort they had stayed at previously, 11.8% had visited only
common (6.8%). The majority of tourists stayed in hotels once, and 9.3% had visited three times or more. These figures
(93.4%). demonstrate that repeat business seems to be important for
As Table 2 shows, British tourists spending their winter the tourism industry in Mallorca. However, it is not so sig-
holidays were concentrated in only a few resorts—for exam- nificant for the winter season, as reported in previous
ple, Magaluf (41.4%), Palma Nova (25.3%), Santa Ponsa research.
(7.2%), Cola Bona (6.3%), Cala Dor (4.5%). These resorts A reliability analysis (Cronbach’s alpha) was performed
also attract large numbers of British and German tourists as to test the reliability and internal consistency of each of 38

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 24, 2014

264 FEBRUARY 2000
TABLE 2
BREAKDOWN OF RESORTS VISITED
ON CURRENT OCCASION IN MALLORCA
(IN PERCENTAGES, N = 220)
Magaluf 41.4
Palma Nova 25.3
Santa Ponsa 7.2
Cala Bona 6.3
Cala Dor 4.5
Alcudia 3.2
Palma 2.3
Paguera 1.8
Others 8.0
destination attributes measured (Carminas and Zeller 1979).
The scale was found to be internally reliable (alpha = .98).
This alpha exceeded the minimum standard (.80) suggested
by Nunnally (1978) and was much greater than those pre-
sented in some other surveys (Oh and Parks 1997). The
item-to-total correlation, which indicates the degree of an
item’s relationship to the total score, showed very high
scores (between .70 and .80) for nearly all items. The scores
ranged from .6886 (availability of nightlife and entertain-
ment) to .8180 (availability of menu in English at resorts’
restaurants and bars).
Pearson’s product-moment correlation coefficient was
calculated to determine whether there were any correlations
among variables. Principal factor analysis was performed to
identify destination satisfaction attributes. Finally, two-stage
least squares regression was used to indicate the degree of
influences of certain destination attributes on overall level of
satisfaction, intention to visit the destination again, and
intention to recommend to others.
A significant difference was found between the first-time
and repeat tourist groups (p < .01). Repeat tourists perceived
all destination attributes to be more satisfactory than did
first-time tourists. Of the repeat tourists, 50% reported that
the resort had improved some or a lot, and 40% reported that
it had remained the same. Only 10% reported that the resort
had got worse compared to their previous visit.
Results of Factor Analysis
An exploratory factor analysis was performed on destina-
tion attributes to investigate tourists’ satisfaction with their
off-season holidays in Mallorca. Bartlett’s test of sphericity
(with a value of 5150.81, p < .001) and a calculated Kaiser-
Meyer-Olkin statistic of .92 (which could be described as
“marvelous”) indicated that data seemed suitable for factor
analysis. Principal component and varimax rotation proce-
dures were used to identify orthogonal factor dimensions.
Principal component factors with eigenvalues of 1.0 or
greater were rotated by the varimax analysis. Variables with
loadings equal to or greater than .45 were included in a given
factor to decrease the probability of misclassification. A total
of 30 satisfaction items from the factor analysis resulted in
four factor groupings and explained 71.1% of the variance.
Most of the factor loadings were greater than .60, indicating
good correlations between the items and the factor groupings
to which they belonged. A Cronbach’s alpha test was used to
determine the internal consistency. The coefficients ranged
from .90 (Factor 4) to .94 (Factor 1), indicating that variables
Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 24, 2014
were considered to be internally consistent. All of the final
communalities were higher than .60, indicating strong corre-
lations between the indicators and the associated factors. The
results of the factor analysis are presented in Table 3.
The factors’ labels are destination attractiveness (Fac-
tor 1), tourist attractions and facilities (Factor 2), availability
of English language (Factor 3), and facilities and services at
the destination airport (Factor 4). Factor 1, destination attrac-
tiveness, explained 55% of the variance in the model and
encompassed 11 statements regarding quality standard of
accommodation, level of service at accommodation, safety
and security, natural environment, value for money, atmos-
phere in the resort overall, attitude of staff working in tour-
ism toward foreign tourists, quality and variety of food,
responsiveness to customer complaints, cleanliness of
beaches, and hygiene and sanitation. Factor 2, tourist attrac-
tions and facilities, explained 7% of the variance in the model
and was composed of eight statements regarding availability
of sport facilities, availability of nightlife and entertainment,
attractions, facilities for children, facilities on beaches, avail-
ability of shopping facilities, availability of daily tours to
other resorts, and getting to museums and historical places.
Factor 3, availability of English language, explained 5% of
the variance in the model and was loaded with six statements
relating to the availability of written material in English in
museums, brochures in English about the resort overall,
menu in English in restaurants, menu in English at accommo-
dation facilities, signposts in English at the destination air-
port, and the level of language communication in English.
Factor 4, facilities and services at the destination airport,
explained 4% of the variance and referred to five statements
indicating cleanliness, speed of check-in and check-out,
facilities, time/distance between the resort and the destina-
tion airport, and the comfort of traveling between the destina-
tion airport and the resort.
The mean scores of factor items showed that the most sat-
isfactory item was the facilities and services at the destina-
tion airport (5.03), whereas the least satisfactory item was the
tourist attractions and facilities (4.56). Seasonality might
have affected these responses. One reason for low satisfac-
tion with tourist attractions and facilities could be that fewer
were open or that they had restricted service during the win-
ter season. One reason for high satisfaction with airport
facilities and services, speed of check-in/check-out, and
transport between the resort and the resort airport could be
that all of these processes were handled more efficiently due
to the workload of the airport being lower during the winter
season. In addition, since the summer of 1997, Palma de Mal-
lorca has had a new airport that is much better than the old
one. It can be expected that, in instances such as this, off-
season satisfaction levels will be different from those during
the peak season.
Results of Regression Analysis
A two-stage least squares regression analysis was used to
assess the relationship between one dependent variable and
several independent variables. The dependent variables of
the regression model were the level of overall satisfaction,
intention to revisit in the future, and intention to recommend
to others. The four orthogonal factors, together with previous
experiences and the level of overall satisfaction, were the inde-
pendent variables of the model. The reason for using factor
scores was to avoid the multicollinearity effect of the model
 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL RESEARCH 265

TABLE 3
FACTOR ANALYSIS OF TOURIST SATISFACTION ITEMS

Factor Variance Mean

Factor Loading Eigenvalue Explained Score F Ratio Alpha p
Factor 1 (destination attractiveness) 16.487 55.0 4.8177 3.1273 .9491 .0006
1. Quality standard of accommodation .75245
2. Level of service at accommodation .70535
3. Feelings of safety and security overall .68464
4. Attitude of staff working in tourism .66427
5. Natural environment .65483
6. Overall value for money .65304
7. Atmosphere in the resort overall .65087
8. Quality and variety of food .62707
9. Responsiveness to customer complaints .58899
10. Cleanliness of beaches .56737
11. Hygiene and sanitation overall .55735

Factor 2 (tourist attractions and facilities) 2.103 7.0 4.5582 3.5862 .9305 .0008
1. Availability of sport facilities .80012
2. Availability of nightlife and entertainment .75541
3. Variety of attractions .75470
4. Availability of facilities for children .68912
5. Availability of facilities on beaches .67377
6. Availability of shopping facilities .65185
7. Availability of daily tours to other resorts .60800
8. Getting to museums and historical places .54282

Factor 3 (availability of English language) 1.528 5.1 4.8883 3.4671 .9408 .0041
1. Availability of written material in English .77522
2. Availability of brochures in English .74874
3. Availability of menu in English in
restaurants .73031
4. Availability of menu in English at
accommodation .69717
5. Availability of signposts in English at
the airport .67696
6. Level of language communication
in English .64560

Factor 4 (facilities and services at the

destination airport) 1.201 4.0 5.0277 9.0927 .9014 .0000
1. Cleanliness of the destination airport .78327
2. Speed of check-in/check-out at the
destination airport .78224
3. Facilities at the destination airport .73754
4. Distance between the resort and the
destination airport .68083
5. Comfort of traveling between the
destination airport and the resort .59653
Note: Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy = .92982; total variance explained at 71.1%.

due to the possibility of high correlations among variables.
The reason for taking into account the level of repeat busi-
ness was to investigate whether previous visits might have
affected tourist satisfaction or their future behavior with
respect to Mallorca as an off-season holiday destination. In
addition to factors, the reason for including the level of over-
all satisfaction as an independent variable in the model was
to investigate how likely it was to be a predictor of intention
to recommend and return.
Table 4 presents the influence of the four independent
variables on the level of respondents’ overall satisfaction
with their vacations in Mallorca. The model accounts for
71% of the variation in the dependent variable. Standardized
estimates (beta coefficients) of each variable reflect the rela-
tive importance of variables in the model. The larger the esti-
mate, the higher the importance of the variable in the model.
It was observed that only three independent variables—Fac-
tor 1 (destination attractiveness), Factor 2 (tourist attractions
and facilities), and Factor 4 (facilities and services at the des-
tination airport)—had beta coefficients that were statistically
significant (p < .001). Items loaded on Factor 3 (availability
of English language) and tourists’ past experiences did not
have any impact on the level of overall satisfaction of British
tourist groups (p > .05).
Table 5 clearly suggests that Factor 1 (destination attrac-
tiveness), Factor 4 (facilities and services at the destination

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 24, 2014

266 FEBRUARY 2000

airport), the level of overall satisfaction, and tourists’ previ- TABLE 4

ous experiences were strong indicators of British tourists’ FACTORS AFFECTING RESPONDENTS’
intentions to visit the resorts in Mallorca in the future. The OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH THEIR
beta coefficients indicate that Factor 1 (destination attrac- HOLIDAYS IN MALLORCA, BY TWO-STAGE
tiveness) had the strongest impact on the intention to return LEAST SQUARES REGRESSION ANALYSIS
(p < .01), whereas the level of overall satisfaction, Factor 4
(facilities and services at the destination airport), and tour- Standardized
ists’ previous experiences came next (p < .05). This suggests Variable Beta Coefficient t Significance t
that the probability of return will be increased significantly Factor 1 .507743 7.481 .0000
when tourists are satisfied with these two factor variables and Factor 2 .321022 5.035 .0000
are satisfied overall with the destination. However, Factor 2 Factor 4 .211517 3.067 .0027
(tourist attractions and facilities) and Factor 3 (availability of Factor 3 –.010613 –0.164 .8698
English language) did not appear to motivate them to visit Pre-visit .024679 0.361 .7184
again (p > .05). Constant 57.767 .0000
Table 6 gives the results of analyzing three factors and the Note: Multiple R = .71467; adjusted R2 = .49086; R2 = .51075;
level of overall satisfaction to explain the degree of tourists’ F = 25.681; significance F = .0000.
intentions to recommend holidays in Mallorca to others. Fac-
tor 1 (destination attractiveness) had the greatest impact on
the intention to recommend to others (p < .001). Factor 2
(tourist attractions and facilities) and tourists’ past experi-
ences with the destination area did not appear to be signifi- TABLE 5
cant for explaining their relationship with the intention to FACTORS AFFECTING RESPONDENTS’
recommend to others (p > .05). INTENTIONS TO REPEAT THEIR VISITS TO
Even though tourist attractions and facilities were found MALLORCA IN THE FUTURE, BY TWO-STAGE
to be the second most powerful predictor of overall satisfac- LEAST SQUARES REGRESSION ANALYSIS
tion, they were not deemed by tourists to be important in their
intentions to revisit. As already stated, it is interesting to note Standardized
Variable Beta Coefficient t Significance t
that they also had no impact on intention to recommend to
others. This means that some attributes could be substantial Factor 1 .272916 3.091 .0025
for enhancing overall satisfaction, but they could not be the Overall
core elements for sustaining repeat visits and providing posi- satisfaction .264669 2.721 .0075
tive word-of-mouth communication. Factor 4 .183066 2.372 .0192
Pre-visit .169102 2.295 .0235
Factor 3 .099249 1.424 .1571
Overall Satisfaction, Repeat Business, Factor 2 –.025265 –0.335 .7384
and Word-of-Mouth Communication Constant 7.942 .0000

The mean scores for overall satisfaction, intention to rec- Note: Multiple R = .66347; adjusted R2 = .41243; R2 = .44019;
ommend to others, and intention to revisit were 4.99, 5.14, F = 15.85726; significance F = .0000.
and 5.17, respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficient
value suggests that the relationship between tourists’ percep-
tions of overall satisfaction and their intentions to revisit (r =
.6044, p < .001) and between tourists’ perceptions of overall TABLE 6
satisfaction and intention to recommend to others (r = .6927,
p < .001) were very strong. This means that, as proved by FACTORS AFFECTING RESPONDENTS’
INTENTIONS TO RECOMMEND HOLIDAYS
regression analysis, there was a relationship between tour-
IN MALLORCA TO THEIR FRIENDS AND
ists’ perceptions of overall satisfaction with the destination RELATIVES, BY TWO-STAGE LEAST
and their intentions to revisit it in the future, as well as SQUARES REGRESSION ANALYSIS
between tourists who are satisfied overall with the destina-
tion and their intentions to recommend it to others. In other Standardized
words, not surprisingly, the more tourist groups are satisfied, Variable Beta Coefficient t Significance t
the more they are likely to return and recommend to others. Factor 1 .367794 5.248 .0000
The correlation of the latter relationship is greater than that of Factor 3 .262903 4.760 .0000
the former relationship. This implies that satisfied tourists Overall
are more likely to recommend holidays in Mallorca than to satisfaction .294046 3.803 .0002
repeat their visits. However, a significant correlation Factor 4 .186210 3.045 .0029
between intention to recommend and intention to revisit was Factor 2 .105340 1.759 .0812
found (r = .7253, p < .001). This is important because it dem- Pre-visit .077220 1.332 .1855
onstrates that tourists are likely to recommend destinations Constant 9.620 .0000
with which they are mostly satisfied and also intend to visit Note: Multiple R = .80516; adjusted R2 = .63084; R2 = .64828;
again. F = 37.17102; significance F = .0000.

Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 24, 2014


DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
Previous tourism and travel satisfaction surveys have
identified and analyzed a number of destination attributes.
Some of these are more specific, whereas others are more
generic. The present research has focused on tourist satisfac-
tion with controllable items. Uncontrollable items such as
culture, scenery, and weather were not measured due to the
difficulty of taking action even when dissatisfaction exists.
Provided that there is good preholiday information, such
uncontrollable items normally will be reasons for choosing a
destination, not causes of dissatisfaction. They are related to
the marketing of a destination rather than its ongoing
management.
The outcomes of this study, therefore, are related to the
analysis of results investigating tourist satisfaction with Mal-
lorca as an off-season vacation destination and recommenda-
tions for destination management. Results confirmed that
Mallorca is an off-season holiday destination and is particu-
larly popular among senior citizen tourist groups. It is clear
that Mallorca is popular among middle-age tourists during
the summer season, whereas it is popular among senior citi-
zens during the winter season; preliminary findings of
another study, recently conducted among British tourists vis-
iting Mallorca during the summer of 1998, confirm this view.
Results also demonstrated that overall, respondents found
their winter holidays in Mallorca to be better than they had
expected (mean score = 3.55). They were likely to be satis-
fied overall, intended to visit the destination again, and
intended to recommend it to others. This supports the view
that Mallorca has the potential to maintain its position as a
favorite off-season overseas holiday destination.
Items grouped under Factor 1 (destination attractive-
ness), Factor 2 (tourist attractions and facilities), and Factor 4
(facilities and services at the destination airport) were found
to be critical for explaining the overall level of satisfaction.
Factor 1, Factor 4, the level of overall satisfaction, and the
frequency of previous experiences were found to be stronger
indicators of tourists’ intentions to revisit Mallorca. Items
loaded in Factor 1 demonstrate important strengths of the
tourism industry in Mallorca (see Figure 1). The level of
accommodation services, customer care and hospitality,
safety and security, hygiene and sanitation, quality and vari-
ety of food, cleanliness of beaches, overall value for money,
natural environment, and attitudes of staff working in tour-
ism were some of the items clustered in this group. They are
critical elements affecting the overall satisfaction of tourists
and their future behavior. Destination management should
pay much attention to maintaining and further developing
these items because these are the strengths of winter tourism
in Mallorca.
However, repeat business might not be as significant for
destinations as it is for some other businesses. Even where
the destination fulfills tourist expectations, consumers might
look for similar but new experiences with different destina-
tions (McDougall and Munro 1994). Some nonreturning
tourists simply prefer a completely new destination for every
holiday. Alternatively, they might have been dissatisfied
with their holidays as a result of things that happened outside
the destination (e.g., flight delays, problems with the tour
operator) (Goodall 1990). In such cases, positive word-of-
mouth communication will be considerably more important
Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 24, 2014
JOURNAL OF TRAVEL RESEARCH 267
FIGURE 1
IMPACTS OF VARIABLES (FACTORS, PREVIOUS
VISITS, AND OVERALL SATISFACTION) ON
OVERALL SATISFACTION, INTENTION TO REVISIT,
AND INTENTION TO RECOMMEND TO OTHERS
for the destination than will gaining high levels of repeat
tourists. The position of word-of-mouth communication in
CS or tourism marketing in general is critical because the
spread of negative communication is faster than that of posi-
tive communication (Cadotte and Turgeon 1988; Lewis
1983). Similarly, it has been reported that satisfied tourists
are most likely to recommend destinations they have visited
to their friends and relatives (Beeho and Prentice 1997; Ross
1993). In this study, with the exceptions of Factor 2 and the
level of previous experiences, factor items and overall satis-
faction had a significant impact on tourists’ intentions to rec-
ommend holidays in Mallorca. Moreover, their impact on the
intention to recommend was greater than that over the inten-
tion to return. This means that all of these items are likely to
be important for maintaining positive word-of-mouth com-
munication (see Figure 1).
The two-stage least squares regression results suggest
that previous visits did not have an impact on the intention to
recommend and overall satisfaction. However, as expected,
previous experiences did affect the willingness to revisit
(even though it was lowest). Undoubtedly, some tourists are
very loyal and visit the same destinations on many occasions.
First-time tourists’ satisfaction levels with all attributes
were lower than those of repeat tourists. Young tourist
groups (ages 15-24) and students were less likely to be satis-
fied with all attributes. Their intentions to either return or rec-
ommend the resort to others also were weaker. Previous
research findings already have proven that elderly tourists
visiting the area were most likely to be satisfied with their
holidays (Juaneda 1996; Ryan 1995a). This is another main
point that destination management should consider.
Moreover, findings presented here parallel those of ongo-
ing research prepared by the University of Balearic Islands.
This research breaks down the tourism season in Mallorca
into three categories: summer, mid (spring and autumn), and
winter. Then, tourist satisfaction with each seasonal category
is measured by collecting monthly data. The preliminary
results of the winter 1997 survey recorded high satisfaction
among British tourists, even though the techniques used for
268 FEBRUARY 2000
the analysis of data are different (Ministry of Tourism of
Balearics 1997). Results also are consistent with the findings
of additional research conducted in the Balearic Islands dem-
onstrating that tourists’ positive opinions about their holi-
days were likely to increase the possibility of their return
(Juaneda 1996).
Implications drawn from this study could be helpful to
other destinations offering similar winter season products in
the international market (e.g., Spain, Portugal, Greece, Tur-
key). This could enable them not only to improve their prog-
ress but also to restructure their winter tourism markets. In
Mallorca, for example, the availability of sports and shop-
ping facilities, the availability and suitability of nightlife and
entertainment, and the ease of getting to museums and his-
torical places need to be improved during the winter season.
Such developments could stimulate subsequent visits and
gain new customers by word-of-mouth communication.
Limitations
Implications drawn here also are subject to several limita-
tions. First, this study encompassed only British tourists.
Therefore, it should be replicated among other groups of
tourists representing larger populations and other main
tourist-generating markets. Differences in culture and
nationality might have an impact on attitudes and percep-
tions. Second, motivations affecting tourists’ intentions to
visit the area could have been taken into account while evalu-
ating the level of tourist satisfaction. Third, a similar type of
survey should be conducted among other tourist groups
going on vacations to Mallorca during the summer season so
as to make a comparison with the findings presented in this
article. Finally, tourists’ perceptions of climate were missing
in this study because they were considered to be an uncon-
trollable item for destination management. However, it also
is true that climate could be significant in attracting tourism
demand to the area. Therefore, it might be important when
considering destination marketing strategies.
CONCLUSION
It seems that Mallorca is a favorite off-season overseas
holiday destination as well as a popular summer holiday des-
tination. Using data obtained from a questionnaire survey
conducted among British tourists visiting Mallorca during
the winter season, this study examined the extent to which
particular destination attributes are significant. Their impact
on respondents’ overall satisfaction, likelihood to make sub-
sequent visits to Mallorca in the future, and likelihood to rec-
ommend these holiday experiences to others were explored.
The level of overall satisfaction with the destination and pre-
vious visits also were considered as additional independent
variables for the measurement of future behavior. This study
found that destination attributes such as overall value for
money, quality standard of accommodation, level of service
at accommodation, feelings of safety and security, hospital-
ity, cleanliness, hygiene and sanitation, and quality and vari-
ety of food had the greatest impacts on the three dependent
variables. The availability (or lack) of facilities and activities
such as sports and shopping, nightlife and entertainment,
daily tours to other main resorts and attractions, and the vari-
ety of attractions had both the weakest impact and lowest
Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 24, 2014
satisfaction scores. The extent to which respondents were
satisfied overall also is significant in terms of their future
behavior. Destination management also should attempt to
keep their customers satisfied with all attractions, facilities,
and services within the area so as to gain a high level of
word-of-mouth recommendation. Satisfied people do not
necessarily return, but they still can help the destination to
attract new customers.
The tourism industry, with 58% of gross national prod-
uct, makes a high level of contribution to Mallorca’s national
economy. The local government recently released new poli-
cies with respect to the management and marketing of tour-
ism in Mallorca. For example, old-fashioned accommoda-
tion establishments are being replaced with new buildings,
much attention is being paid to the local infrastructure to
make it better and more efficient, and high priority is being
given to protect existing “green” areas and improve new
ones.
It is hoped that these survey results will be valuable to
tourism organizations and businesses in Mallorca in evaluat-
ing their existing performance levels and designing their
future management and marketing strategies. These findings
can be used as a benchmark element to make a comparison
with other research studies to be undertaken during the sum-
mer season. Depending on the positive or negative direction
of results, destination management can be advised to take
further actions.
REFERENCES
Ahmed, Zafar U. (1991). “The Influence of the Components of a State’s
Tourist Image on Product Positioning Strategy.” Tourism Manage-
ment, 12: 331-40.
Almanza, Barbara A., William Jaffe, and Lingchun Lin (1994). “Use of the
Service Attribute Matrix to Measure Customer Satisfaction.” Hospi-
tality Research Journal, 17 (2): 63-75.
Beeho, A. J., and Richard C. Prentice (1997). “Conceptualizing the Experi-
ences of Heritage Tourists: A Case Study of New Lanark World Heri-
tage Village.” Tourism Management, 18 (2): 75-87.
Bojanic, David C. (1996). “Consumer Perceptions of Price, Value, and Sat-
isfaction in the Hotel Industry: An Exploratory Study.” Journal of
Hospitality and Leisure Marketing, 14 (1): 5-22.
Bordas, Eulogio (1994). “Competitiveness of Tourist Destinations in Long
Distance Markets.” Tourist Review, 3: 3-9.
Boulding, William, Ajay Kalra, Richard Staeling, and Valeria A. Zeithaml
(1993). “A Dynamic Process Model of Service Quality: From Expec-
tations to Behavioral Intentions.” Journal of Marketing Research, 30:
7-27.
Butler, Richard, and Baodi Mao (1997). “Seasonality in Tourism: Problems
and Measurement.” In Quality Management in Urban Tourism, edited
by Peter E. Murphy. Chichester, UK: Wiley, pp. 9-24.
Cadotte, Ernest R., and Normand Turgeon (1988). “Key Factors in Guest
Satisfaction.” Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quar-
terly, 28 (4): 45-51.
Cardozo, Richard N. (1965). “An Experimental Study of Customer Effort,
Expectation, and Satisfaction.” Journal of Marketing Research, 11:
244-49.
Carminas, Edward G., and Richard A. Zeller (1979). Reliability and Validity
Assessment. Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences series,
No. 17. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Chon, Kaye S., and Michael D. Olsen (1991). “Functional and Symbolic
Approaches to Consumer Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction in Tourism.”
Journal of the International Academy of Hospitality Research, 28:
1-20.
Cronin, J. Joseph, and Steven A. Taylor (1992). “Measuring Service Qual-
ity: A Re-examination and Extension.” Journal of Marketing, 56 (3):
55-68.
Czepiel, John A., Larry J. Rosenberg, and Adebayo Akerele (1974). “Per-
spectives on Consumer Satisfaction.” In 1974 Combined Proceedings
Series, No. 36, edited by R. C. Curhan. Chicago: American Marketing
Association, pp. 119-23.
Danaher, Peter J., and Nicole Arweiler (1996). “Customer Satisfaction in the
Tourist Industry: A Case Study of Visitors to New Zealand.” Journal
of Travel Research, 34 (Summer): 89-93.

Danaher, Peter J., and Vanessa Haddrell (1996). “A Comparison of Ques-
tion Scales for Measuring Customer Satisfaction.” International Jour-
nal of Service Industry Management, 7 (4): 4-26.
Dorfman, Peter W. (1979). “Measurement and Meaning of Recreation Satis-
faction: A Case Study in Camping.” Environment and Behavior, 11
(4): 483-510.
Duke, Charles R., and Margaret A. Persia (1994). “Foreign and Domestic
Escorted Tour Expectations of American Travelers.” In Global Tour-
ist Behavior, edited by Muzaffer Uysal. New York: International Busi-
ness Press, pp. 61-78.
 (1996). “Consumer-Defined Dimensions for the Escorted Tour In-
dustry Segment: Expectations, Satisfaction, and Importance.” Journal
of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 5 (1-2): 77-99.
Echtner, Charlotte M., and J. R. Brent Ritchie (1991). “The Meaning and
Measurement of Destination Image.” Journal of Tourism Studies, 2
(2): 2-12.
Engledow, J. L. (1977). “Was Customer Satisfaction a Pig in a Poke?” Busi-
ness Horizons, 20 (2): 87-94.
Fick, G. R., and J. R. Brent Ritchie (1991). “Measuring Service Quality in
the Travel and Tourism Industry.” Journal of Travel Research, 30 (2):
2-9.
Fornell, Claes (1992). “A National Customer Satisfaction Barometer: The
Swedish Experience.” Journal of Marketing, 56 (January): 6-21.
Goodall, Brian (1990). “Opportunity Sets as Analytical Marketing Instru-
ments: A Destination Area View.” In Marketing Tourism Places, ed-
ited by Gregory Ashworth and Brian Goodall. London: Routledge,
pp. 63-84.
Goodrich, Jonathan N. (1977). “Differences in Perceived Similarity of Tour-
ism Regions: A Spatial Analysis.” Journal of Travel Research, 16
(Summer): 10-13.
 (1978). “The Relationship between Preferences for and Perceptions
of Vacation Destinations: Application of a Choice Model.” Journal of
Travel Research, 17 (Fall): 8-13.
Gorden, Raymond L. (1987). Interviewing: Strategy, Techniques, and Tac-
tics. 4th ed. Chicago: Dorsey.
Gronroos, Christian (1990). Service Management and Marketing: Manag-
ing the Moments of Truth in Service Competition. Lexington, MA:
Lexington Books.
Gyte, Douglas M., and Angela Phelps (1989). “Patterns of Destination Re-
peat Business: British Tourists in Mallorca, Spain.” Journal of Travel
Research, 28 (Summer): 24-28.
Haley, Russell I., and Peter B. Case (1979). “Testing Thirteen Attitude
Scales for Agreement and Brand Discrimination.” Journal of Market-
ing, 43 (Fall): 20-32.
Hallowell, R. (1996). “The Relationship of Customer Satisfaction, Cus-
tomer Loyalty, Profitability: An Empirical Study.” International Jour-
nal of Service Industry Management, 7 (4): 27-42.
Hsieh, Sheauhsing, Joseph T. O’Leary, and Alastair M. Morrison (1994). “A
Comparison of Package and Non-Package Travelers from the United
Kingdom.” In Global Tourist Behavior, edited by Muzaffer Uysal.
New York: International Business Press, pp. 79-100.
Hughes, Karen (1991). “Tourist Satisfaction: A Guided Cultural Tour in
North Queensland.” Australian Psychologist, 26 (3): 166-71.
Ibatur (1996). Balearic Islands: General Information. Palma de Mallorca,
Spain: Instituto Balear de Promocion del Turismo.
Juaneda, Catalina (1996). “Estimating the Probability of Return Visits Us-
ing a Survey of Tourist Expenditure in the Balearic Islands.” Tourism
Economics, 2 (4): 339-52.
Kozak, Metin, and Mike Rimmington (1998). “Developing a Benchmarking
Model for Tourist Destinations.” In Proceedings of Third Annual
Graduate Education and Graduate Students Research Conference in
Hospitality and Tourism. Houston, TX: University of Houston, pp.
40-52.
Laws, Eric (1995). Tourist Destination Management: Issues, Analysis, and
Policies. New York: Routledge.
LeBlanc, Gaston (1992). “Factors Affecting Customer Evaluation of Serv-
ice Quality in Travel Agencies: An Investigation of Customer Percep-
tions.” Journal of Travel Research, 32 (Spring): 10-16.
Lewis, Barbara R. (1991). “Service Quality: An International Comparison
of Bank Customers’ Expectations and Perceptions.” Journal of Mar-
keting Management, 7 (1): 47-62.
Lewis, Richard C. (1983). “When Guests Complain.” Cornell Hotel and
Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 24 (August): 23-32.
Loundsbury, J. W., and L. L. Hoopes (1985). “An Investigation of Factors
Associated with Vacation Satisfaction.” Journal of Leisure Research,
17: 1-13.
Maddox, R. Neil (1985). “Measuring Satisfaction with Tourism.” Journal of
Travel Research, 25 (Winter): 2-5.
Mayo, Edward J., and Lance P. Jarvis (1981). The Psychology of Leisure
Travel: Effective Marketing and Selling of Travel Services. Boston:
CBI.
McDougall, Gordon H. G., and Hugh Munro (1994). “Scaling and Attitude
Measurement in Travel and Tourism Research.” In Travel and Hospi-
tality Research: A Handbook for Managers and Researchers, 2nd ed.,
Downloaded from jtr.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 24, 2014
JOURNAL OF TRAVEL RESEARCH 269
edited by J. R. Brent Ritchie and Charles R. Goeldner. New York:
Wiley, pp. 115-29.
Meyer, Anton, and Peter Westerbarkey (1996). “Measuring and Managing
Hotel Guest Satisfaction.” In Service Quality in Hospitality Organisa-
tions, edited by Michael D. Olsen, Richard Teare, and Edward Gum-
messon. London: Cassell, pp. 185-203.
Mill, Robert C., and Alastair M. Morrison (1992). The Tourism System: An
Introductory Text. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Ministry of Tourism of Balearics (1997). El Gasto Turistico en Baleares
(Tourism Expenditure in the Balearics). Palma de Mallorca, Spain:
Ministry of Tourism of Balearics.
Murphy, Peter E., and Mark Pritchard (1997). “Destination Price-Value Per-
ceptions: An Examination of Origin and Seasonal Influences.” Jour-
nal of Travel Research, 35 (Winter): 16-22.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Oh, Haemoon, and Sarah C. Parks (1997). “Customer Satisfaction and Serv-
ice Quality: A Critical Review of the Literature and Research Implica-
tions.” Hospitality Research Journal, 20 (3): 35-64.
Oliver, Richard L. (1980). “A Cognitive Model for the Antecedents and
Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions.” Journal of Marketing Re-
search, 27: 460-69.
Olshavsky, Richard W., and John A. Miller (1972). “Consumer Expecta-
tions, Product Performance, and Perceived Product Quality.” Journal
of Marketing Research, 9: 19-21.
Parasuraman, A., Valeria A. Zeithaml, and Leonard L. Berry (1985). “A
Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future
Research.” Journal of Marketing, 49 (Fall): 41-50.
Pearce, Philip L. (1980). “A Favorability-Satisfaction Model of Tourists’
Evaluations.” Journal of Travel Research, 19 (Summer): 13-17.
 (1982). “Perceived Changes in Holiday Destinations.” Annals of
Tourism Research, 9: 145-64.
Peter, L., and J. L. Olson (1987). Consumer Behavior: Marketing Strategy
Perspectives. Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin.
Pizam, Abraham (1994). “Monitoring Customer Satisfaction.” In Food and
Beverage Management: A Selection of Readings, edited by Bernard
David and Andrew Lockwood. Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann,
pp. 231-47.
Pizam, Abraham, and A. Milman (1993). “Predicting Satisfaction among
First-Time Visitors to a Destination by Using the Expectancy Discon-
firmation Theory.” International Journal of Hospitality Management,
12 (2): 197-209.
Pizam, Abraham, Yoram Neumann, and Arie Reichel (1978). “Dimensions
of Tourist Satisfaction with a Destination.” Annals of Tourism Re-
search, 5: 314-22.
Reisinger, Yvette, and Robert Waryszak (1995). “Japanese Tourists’ Per-
ceptions of their Tour Guides: Australian Experience.” Journal of Va-
cation Marketing, 1 (1): 28-40.
Ross, Elizabeth L. D., and Seppo E. Iso-Ahola (1991). “Sightseeing Tour-
ists’ Motivation and Satisfaction.” Annals of Tourism Research, 18:
226-37.
Ross, Glenn (1993). “Destination Evaluation and Vacation Preferences.”
Annals of Tourism Research, 20: 477-89.
Rust, Roland T., Anthony J. Zahorik, and Timothy L. Keiningham (1996).
Service Marketing. New York: HarperCollins.
Ryan, Chris (1995a). “Learning about Tourists from Conversations: The
over 55s in Majorca.” Tourism Management, 16 (3): 207-15.
 (1995b). Researching Tourist Satisfaction. London: Routledge.
Saleh, Farouk, and Chris Ryan (1992). “Client Perceptions of Hotels.” Tour-
ism Management, 13 (June): 163-68.
Shulman, A. (1973). “A Comparison of Two Scales on Extremity Response
Bias.” Public Opinion Quarterly, 37 (Fall): 407-12.
Stevens, Blair F. (1992). “Price Value Perceptions of Travelers.” Journal of
Travel Research, 31 (Fall): 44-48.
van Raaij, W. Fred, and Dick A. Francken (1984). “Vacation Decisions, Ac-
tivities, and Satisfactions.” Annals of Tourism Research, 11: 101-12.
Vogt, Christine A., and Daniel R. Fesenmaier (1995). “Tourists’ and Retail-
ers’ Perceptions of Services.” Annals of Tourism Research, 22 (4):
763-80.
Westbrook, Robert A. (1980). “A Rating Scale for Measuring Product/Serv-
ice Satisfaction.” Journal of Marketing, 44 (Fall): 68-72.
Westbrook, Robert A., and John W. Newman (1978). “An Analysis of Shop-
per Dissatisfaction for Major Household Appliances.” Journal of Mar-
keting Research, 15: 456-66.
Westbrook, Robert A., and Richard L. Oliver (1991). “The Dimensionality
of Consumption Emotion Patterns and Consumer Satisfaction.” Jour-
nal of Consumer Research, 18: 84-91.
Whipple, Thomas W., and Sharon V. Thach (1988). “Group Tour Manage-
ment: Does Good Service Produce Satisfied Customers?” Journal of
Travel Research, 28 (Fall): 16-21.
Woodruff, Robert B., Ernest R. Cadotte, and Roger I. Jenkins (1983). “Mod-
eling Consumer Satisfaction Processes Using Experience-Based
Norms.” Journal of Marketing Research, 20: 296-304.