Tourism Management 53 (2016) 140e147

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tourism Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tourman

Holiday recovery experiences, tourism satisfaction and life satisfaction

e Is there a relationship?
Chun-Chu Chen a, *, Wei-Jue Huang b, James F. Petrick c
a
University of Idaho, Department of Movement Sciences, Moscow, ID, USA
b
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, School of Hotel & Tourism Management, 17 Science Museum Road, TST East, Kowloon, Hong Kong
c
Texas A&M University, Department of Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences, TAMU 2261, College Station, TX 77843, USA

h i g h l i g h t s

Holiday experiences help people relieve job stress.

Holiday experiences have positive effects on tourism satisfaction and overall life satisfaction.

The effects of holiday experiences are present regardless of the level of work strain people experience daily.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This research examines the relationships between holiday recovery experiences and life satisfaction
Received 4 November 2014 through mediating variables of tourism satisfaction. Derived from a sample of 777 American re-
Received in revised form spondents, it was found that individuals who were able to control what they want to do, feel relaxed and
15 September 2015
detached from work, and have new and challenging experiences during a holiday vacation were more
Accepted 25 September 2015
Available online 8 October 2015
likely to be satisfied with their holiday experiences and their life in general. The paper concludes with
recommendations for the success of tourism businesses as well as the enhancement of tourists' senses of
well-being.
Keywords:
Recovery experience
© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Tourism satisfaction
Life satisfaction
Tourism and wellness
Benefits of tourism
Tourism and quality of life

1. Introduction
Tourism satisfaction has received considerable attention from
tourism scholars. There are two streams of research regarding
tourism satisfaction. The first stream mainly focuses on how to
build customer satisfaction for business success. For example,
multiple studies have demonstrated that satisfied tourists are more
likely to repurchase the product or recommend it to others (Baker
& Crompton, 2000; Chi & Qu, 2008; Gallarza & Saura, 2006; Petrick,
2004; Williams & Soutar, 2009), while several determinants of
tourism satisfaction have been identified, including: perceived
value and quality (e.g., Gallarza & Saura, 2006; Petrick & Backman,
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: bchen@uidaho.edu (C.-C. Chen), sabrina.huang@polyu.edu.hk
(W.-J. Huang), jpetrick@tamu.edu (J.F. Petrick).
2002; Williams & Soutar, 2009), service recovery (e.g., Akamavi,
Mohamed, Pellmann, & Xu, 2015; Cano & Garcia, 2008; Kim, Kim,
& Kim, 2009), motivation (e.g., Devesa, Laguna, & Palacios, 2010;
Yoon & Uysal, 2005), and destination image (e.g., Chi & Qu, 2008).
The second stream of research has examined tourism satisfac-
tion from the perspective that leisure travel can contribute to
tourists' psychological wellness (Neal, Sirgy, & Uysal, 1999; Neal,
Uysal, & Sirgy, 2007; Sirgy, 2010; Sirgy, Kruger, Lee, & Yu, 2011).
Specifically, Neal and colleagues (Neal et al., 1999, 2007; Sirgy et al.
2011) have proposed that positive holiday experiences have spill-
over effects on how individuals evaluate various life domains
(such as health, work, leisure, and family) as well as their overall
satisfaction with life. These studies have demonstrated the effects
of tourism satisfaction on overall life satisfaction.
This research attempts to integrate two streams of research by
examining the relationship between holiday experiences associ-
ated with psychological recovery and life satisfaction through

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2015.09.016
0261-5177/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 C.-C. Chen et al. / Tourism Management 53 (2016) 140e147
mediating variables of tourism satisfaction. Building on the litera-
tures of stress relief (Hobfoll, 1998; Meijman & Mulder, 1998) and
leisure studies (Caldwell, 2005; Waters & Moore, 2002), this
research has three purposes: (1) examining how holiday experi-
ences associated with recovery affect life satisfaction after a leisure
travel; (2) assessing whether the effect of holiday recovery expe-
riences on life satisfaction are mediated by tourism satisfaction;
and, (3) assessing whether the effects of holiday recovery experi-
ences and tourism satisfaction on overall life satisfaction are
moderated by tourists' daily work strain.
Arguably, the current investigation can offer insights into how
holiday experiences can contribute to tourism satisfaction and
overall life satisfaction. In particular, this research focuses on the
recovery dimension of tourism experiences, which has been absent
in the tourism literature (Chen, Petrick, & Shahvali, 2014). More-
over, this research hypothesized that holiday recovery experiences
should have positive effects on tourism satisfaction as well as life
satisfaction. If the hypothesized relationships are supported, this
would suggest that tourism practitioners can make efforts towards
the wellness of tourists and the success of tourism businesses by
helping tourists relieve stress during their vacations.
2. Literature review
2.1. Tourism satisfaction and postepurchase behavior
Oliver (1997, p. 13), defined satisfaction as “the consumer's
fulfillment response” and “a judgment that a product or service
feature, or the product or service itself, provides a pleasurable level
of consumption-related fulfillment”. Although customer satisfac-
tion is one of the most basic concepts in consumer and marketing
research, it can be operationalized in different ways, resulting in
considerable debate in its meaning and application (Zeithaml,
Bitner, & Gremler, 2013). Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry
(1994) distinguished between customer satisfaction and service
quality by suggesting that satisfaction occurs after a particular
service episode, while quality is a long-term evaluation of a prod-
uct/service after multiple experiences. Olsen and Johnson (2003),
however, considered both temporary and cumulative perceptions
as satisfaction, but they also recognized the difference between
“transaction-specific satisfaction” towards a specific service
encounter and customer's “cumulative satisfaction” with the
overall performance of a service provider.
Within the field of leisure and tourism, Crompton and Love
(1995) analyzed alternative conceptualizations of quality and
satisfaction. They differentiated between “quality of opportunity”
and “quality of experience,” and considered satisfaction to be the
latter. Similarly, Baker and Crompton (2000) argued that quality of
opportunity refers to the product attributes that are performed by
tourism providers, while quality of experience refers to the tourists'
state of mind after experiencing such performances.
Satisfaction has also been considered cognitively as a post
consumption evaluation through the expectancy disconfirmation
paradigm (Oliver, 1980), and affectively as an emotional response to
a consumption experience (Spreng, MacKenzie, & Olshavsky, 1996).
Although previous scholars vary in their definition of and distinc-
tion between quality and satisfaction, it is evident that satisfaction
involves more than just customers' opinions towards a product/
service/firm, and includes their feelings during and after the
experience.
The concept of satisfaction has sustained the interest of both
researchers and practitioners because of its many positive out-
comes, such as profits, loyalty, and future purchases (Brady &
Robertson, 2001; Yu & Dean, 2001; Zeithaml et al., 2013). Within
tourism research, tourist satisfaction has also been a topic of
141
interest as it has been found to lead to positive postepurchase
behaviors and the overall success of a destination (Baker &
Crompton, 2000; Yoon & Uysal, 2005). Specifically, previous
studies have identified satisfaction as a determinant of destination
loyalty (e.g., Chi & Qu, 2008; Gallarza & Saura, 2006; Hernandez-
Lobato, Solis-Radilla, Moliner-Tena, & Sa nchez-García, 2006;
McDowall, 2010; Sun, Chi, & Xu, 2013; Yoon & Uysal, 2005),
intention to revisit or repurchase (e.g., Alegre & Garau, 2010;
Petrick, 2004; Prayag, 2009; Rittichainuwat, Qu, &
Mongknonvanit, 2002), and positive word-of-mouth (e.g., Hui,
Wan, & Ho, 2007; Prebensen, Skallerud, & Chen, 2010; Wang &
Hsu, 2010; Williams & Soutar, 2009).
2.2. Tourism satisfaction and life satisfaction
In addition to postepurchase behavioral intentions, tourism
satisfaction has also been identified as a determinant of overall life
satisfaction. It is not surprising that vacations, holidays, and other
forms of leisure travel can make people happy (Nawijn, 2011).
Gilbert and Abdullah (2004) found that people who go on holidays
experienced higher life satisfaction than those who didn't, both
before and after their trips, and the gap between the traveling and
non-traveling groups increased post travel.
Leisure travel does not only increase individual happiness, but
has also been found to improve tourists' subjective well-being and
the overall quality of life of a community (McCabe & Johnson, 2013).
Oppermann and Cooper (1999) also argued that airline price wars
could improve quality of life because the public has more desti-
nation choices when they travel. More recently, Sirgy et al. (2011)
examined how positive and negative affects associated with
travel experiences influence tourists' satisfaction with different
domains in life (e.g., family, work, social life), and how it then in-
fluences their overall sense of well-being.
Dolnicar, Yanamandram, and Cliff (2012) also found vacations to
be a life domain that contributed to quality of life. While vacations
were not found to be as important as health, money and family, its
importance was comparable to leisure and people. They thus
argued that vacations should not be considered as a sub-category of
leisure.
Although vacations have many positive outcomes, it should not
be assumed that leisure travel always improves one's happiness
and/or life satisfaction. Nawijn (2011) found that although people
were generally happier when they were on vacation than in
everyday life, factors such as attitude and holiday stress can influ-
ence their daily levels of happiness, and overall they found no
significant improvement in their respondents' life satisfaction.
Also investigating the relationship between vacations and well-
being, Chen, Lehto, and Cai (2013) found that vacation-taking had
an immediate yet temporary positive effect on Chinese tourists'
occasion-specific subjective well-being, while their chronic sub-
jective well-being did not improve after the trip. Therefore, while
leisure travel may contribute to tourists' psychological well-being
and quality of life, its impact would vary depending on different
factors, such as satisfaction with travel services, trip reflections,
different phases of the trip (Neal et al., 1999), length of stay (Neal,
Sirgy, & Uysal, 2004; Neal et al., 2007), and leisure travel goals
(Sirgy, 2010).
Neal et al. (1999) developed a scale to measure leisure travel
satisfaction and examine how it relates to life satisfaction. Using a
hierarchy model to explain how satisfaction with leisure could
vertically spill over to overall life satisfaction, they found that both
trip reflections and satisfaction with travel services have a direct
impact on life satisfaction. Neal et al. (2007) further explored the
moderation effect of length of stay on the relationship between
satisfaction with tourism services and quality of life. They found
142 C.-C. Chen et al. / Tourism Management 53 (2016) 140e147
significant moderating effects between satisfaction with tourism
experiences and satisfaction with leisure life, and between satis-
faction with leisure life and overall life satisfaction.
More recently, Sirgy (2010) proposed an alternative theory on
the relationship between leisure travel satisfaction and quality of
life by incorporating goal theory into a conceptual framework. He
hypothesized that the choice of leisure travel goals (e.g, intrinsic vs.
extrinsic, abstract vs. concrete) is important, because those with
more attractive and attainable travel goals and those who take
actions to implement their goals are more likely to experience
higher levels of subjective well-being as a consequence of their
leisure travel. Although previous studies generally support that
tourism satisfaction contributes to overall life satisfaction, the
complex relationship between leisure travel and quality of life
likely warrants further investigation.
2.3. Holiday experiences associated with recovery
The current study examines the association between leisure
travel and quality of life with a focus on the recovery dimension of
holiday experiences. Recovery can generally be defined as “a pro-
cess during which individual functional systems that have been
called upon during a stressful experience return to their pre-
stressor levels” (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2007, p.205). This research
focused on the recovery process for full-time employees. In fact, the
role of off-job activities (such as daily or weekend recreation ac-
tivities or vacations) in the recovery process has received consid-
erable attention in the field of organizational behavior (Derks &
Bakker, 2014; Fritz & Sonnentag, 2006; Sonnentag & Zijlstra,
2006). In particular, Effort-Recovery Theory and Conservation of
Resources Theory have been frequently applied to examine the
association between off-job activities and stress relief (Hobfoll,
1998).
According to Effort-Recovery Theory (Meijman & Mulder, 1998),
individuals who face stressful working conditions often have load
reactions which can turn into load effects, such as sickness or
absenteeism. The theory further suggests that when an employee is
no longer exposed to the stressful working condition, such as
watching a movie on the weekend or taking a vacation, load re-
actions can be reversed (Meijman & Mulder, 1998).
Similarly, Conservation of Resources Theory (Hobfoll, 1998)
suggests that people strive to gain and retain external resources
(i.e., cars or properties) as well as internal resources (i.e., a positive
mood or mental energy). The theory further proposes that while
off-job activities can contribute to the recovery process in two
different ways: (1) taking a rest from stressful work can prevent a
further depletion of internal resources, and (2) taking part in leisure
and recreation activities during off-job time can help employees
gain more internal resources.
Scholars in the field of leisure studies have also paid particular
attention to how leisure activities can contribute to the stress-
coping process (Caldwell, 2005). As demonstrated by multiple
studies, participating in leisure activities can: help people have
temporary relief from job stress, repair negative moods, and rein-
force family ties and friendship (Caltabiano, 1995; Coleman & Iso-
Ahola, 1993; Iwasaki & Mannell, 2000). Therefore, Iwasaki (2001)
concluded that leisure is “an important buffer against stress to
maintain good health” (p.128).
Empirical findings in the fields of organizational behavior and
leisure studies have also demonstrated that participating in leisure
activities during evening hours or weekends can contribute to re-
covery processes (Coleman & Iso-Ahola, 1993; Fritz & Sonnentag,
2006; Iwasaki & Mannell, 2000; Sonnentag & Zijlstra, 2006).
However, it has been argued that recovery is also very likely to
occur during vacations (Etzion, 2003) because vacations, defined as
pleasure trips outside an individual's usual environment, are rela-
tively long and uninterrupted periods of time away from work (de
Bloom et al., 2011). However, since most research has suggested
positive recovery effects, it is hypothesized that,
H1: Holiday recovery experiences will have a positive effect on life
satisfaction after a pleasure travel.
This research also investigates the mediating effect of tourism
satisfaction between holiday recovery experiences and life satis-
faction after a pleasure trip. As discussed before, tourism satisfac-
tion research has traditionally examined satisfaction as a predictor
of postepurchase behavior (Chi & Qu, 2008; Gallarza & Saura,
2006; Petrick, 2004; Williams & Soutar, 2009), while more recent
studies have demonstrated that positive tourism experiences can
have positive effects on how tourists evaluate their satisfaction
with leisure travel as well as their overall satisfaction with life (Neal
et al., 2007; Sirgy et al., 2011).
This research examines the mediating role of tourism satisfac-
tion with a focus on the recovery dimension of holiday experiences.
It is argued that the current investigation provides a new
perspective regarding how to manage tourism experiences. Spe-
cifically, if the proposed mediating effect is supported, this would
suggest that tourism practitioners should make efforts to assist
tourists in recovering from job-related stress during their vacations
because these efforts can contribute to the success of tourism
businesses as well as the wellness of customers. It is thus
hypothesized,
H2: Tourism recovery experience will have a positive effect on
tourism satisfaction.
H3: Tourism satisfaction will have a positive effect on life satis-
faction after the trip.
The literature on stress relief also suggests that employees with
high stress jobs are less likely to feel relaxed and detached from
work after hours and on weekends (Cropley & Millward, 2009; Van
Heck & Vingerhoets, 2007). This research thus hypothesized that,
H4: The total effect of tourism recovery experiences on life
satisfaction will be smaller among individuals who experience
higher levels of work strain.
3. Methods
As discussed, this research attempts to investigate the effects of
holiday recovery experiences on life satisfaction as well as the
mediating effects of tourism satisfaction. Thus, the main constructs
in this research include holiday recovery experiences, tourism
satisfaction, and life satisfaction. Respondents' recovery experience
during their most recent vacation was assessed with Sonnentag and
Fritz (2007) Recovery-Experience Scale. The 15-item, 5-point
Likert-type scale (1 ¼ strongly disagree to 5 ¼ strongly agree) has
four dimensions, including: (1) control, which refers to the degree
to which an individual can control what he or she can do during a
period of time away from work, (2) detachment, which can be
defined as the degree to which he or she can forget about job re-
sponsibilities during off-job time, (3) mastery, which refers to the
degree to which an individual is able to experience new and/or
challenging things during free time, and (4) relax, which refers to
the degree to which an individual is able to relax himself or herself
during free time.
Moreover, a 4-item, 10-point semantic differential developed
by Spreng et al. (1996) was adopted to assess the concept of
tourism satisfaction. Items measuring life satisfaction after re-
spondents' most recent vacation were adopted from Diener,
Emmons, Larson, and Griffin (1985) 5-item, 7-point Likert-type
Satisfaction With Life Scale (1 ¼ strongly disagree to
7 ¼ strongly agree). This research also examined the moderating
effects of work strain, which was assessed with a 5-point Likert-
 C.-C. Chen et al. / Tourism Management 53 (2016) 140e147 143

type scale (1 ¼ very low to 5 ¼ very high), adopted from Fritz and including the low-strain model (n ¼ 256) and high-strain model
Sonnentag (2006). (n ¼ 243). The last hypothesis (H4) was tested by comparing the
The research population was defined as American residents regression weights of two models.
who were 18 or older at the time of data collection and an online
panel survey was employed to obtain a national representative 4. Results
sample from December 2011 to February 2012. The sample was
randomly selected from a list of panelists from a survey company's 4.1. Measurement model
database. A total of 1138 respondents completed the question-
naire. However, a number of responses (n ¼ 363) were not The fit of the data to the hypothesized model was tested by
included in the data analysis, because 50 respondents' most recent establishing a measurement model. The measurement model had
trip involved business and 313 respondents did not have a full- five correlated theoretical constructs, including relaxation (three
time job at the time of data collection. This resulted in a sample items), detachment (four items), control (four items), mastery (four
size of 777. items), tourism satisfaction (four items), and life satisfaction after
As shown in Table 1 approximately one half of respondents were the most recent travel (five items). Model fit was evaluated with
males (51.3%). Most respondents were aged between 20 and 59 several fit indices including the comparative fit index (CFI), the
(aged 20e29: 18.1%; aged 30e39: 27.3%; aged 40e49: 23.0%; aged goodness of fit index (GFI), the normed fit index (NFI), and the root
50e59: 18.4%). The mean age was 41.2 with a standard deviation of mean square error of approximation (RMSEA). Based on Byrne's
14.5. Table 1 also revealed that a majority of respondents pursued (1998) and Bollen's (1989) suggestions, a model was regarded as
higher education (college: 54.6%; graduate school: 25.6%). acceptable, if CFI exceeded .93, NFI and GFI exceeded .90, and
Regarding household incomes, most respondents reported that RMSEA was less than .80.
their household incomes were between $25,000 and $100,000 The results revealed that the initial measurement model had
($25,000e$49,999: 26.4%; $50,000e$74,999: 26.1%; somewhat acceptable fit indices (c2 ¼ 1254.71, df ¼ 237, CFI ¼ .94,
$75,000e$99,999: 13.0%). GFI ¼ .87, NFI ¼ .93, and RMSEA ¼ .074), as all indices were deemed
The analysis of survey data included multiple steps. Since acceptable with the exception of GFI which was lower than the
research hypotheses were tested using structural equation suggested threshold of .90. Thus, the measurement model was
modeling (SEM), normality assumptions were examined with further refined by deleting items associated with highest residuals
skewness-kurtosis tests. Skewness and kurtosis values between 1 and modification indices until a good model fit was achieved. It was
and 1 have been suggested to have uni-variate normality (Hair, found that the error terms of two items measuring tourism satis-
Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998). All 24 variables in the study faction were associated with the highest modification index
had skewness and kurtosis indices smaller or slightly larger than 1. (165.82). Thus, after deleting one of the tourism satisfaction items
Thus, the data did not appear to violate the assumptions of (delighted e terrible), the final measurement model was deemed to
normality. have a good fit (c2 ¼ 980.72, df ¼ 215, CFI ¼ .95, GFI ¼ .90, NFI ¼ .94,
The second step involved the assessment of the fit of measures and RMSEA ¼ .068).
by examining a measurement model with one 3-item factor As shown in Table 2, all 23 regression weights in the measure-
(relaxation), four 4-item factors (detachment, control, mastery, and ment model were significant (P < .001). The composite reliability
tourism satisfaction), and one 5-item factor (life satisfaction). The levels for all five constructs were also greater than the suggested
next step involved testing H1, H2, and H3 by establishing a path threshold of .80 (Netemeyer, Bearden, & Sharma, 2003), and the
model. Subsequently, two separate path models were built, average variance extracted estimates (AVE) for all five constructs
were greater than the suggested threshold of .50 (Netemeyer et al.,
2003). These findings suggest that the convergent validity of the
items measuring these theoretical constructs was validated.
Table 1
Profile of respondents. Further, the results also show that all five constructs in the
measurement model were significantly correlated (P < .001). The
Variables N %
correlation coefficients were ranged from .27 to .64, which suggest
Gender moderate correlations. Since the AVEs for all five constructs were
Male 399 51.4 higher than the squares of all correlation coefficients, the
Female 378 48.6
Total 777 100.0
discriminant validity was considered high.
Age
Under 20 20 2.6 4.2. Baseline path model
20e29 141 18.1
30e39 212 27.3
Subsequently, a path model was built to test H1, H2, and H3. The
40e49 179 23.0
50e59 143 18.4 path model consisted of three constructs, including: holiday re-
60e69 49 6.3 covery experiences as the independent variable, life satisfaction as
70 and over 33 4.3 the dependent variable, and tourism satisfaction as the mediation
Total 777 100.0 variable. In order to simplify the process of data analysis, the factor
Education
High school 154 19.8
scores of the four recovery-experience factors (relaxation, control,
College 424 54.6 mastery, and detachment) were used in the process of structural
Graduate school 199 25.6 modeling.
Total 777 100.0 The SEM results revealed that all of the three proposed paths
Income
(direct effects) were significant (P < .001). As shown in Table 3 and
Under $25,000 138 17.8
$25,000e49,999 205 26.4 Fig. 1, the direct effect of holiday experiences on life satisfaction was
$50,000e74,999 203 26.1 significant (b ¼ .40; P < .001), which suggests that H1 was sup-
$75,000e99,999 101 13.0 ported. Further, it was found that the direct effect of holiday ex-
More than $100,000 130 16.8 periences on tourism satisfaction was significant (b ¼ .57; P < .001),
Total 777 100.0
which supported H2. The third hypothesis (H3) was also found to
144 C.-C. Chen et al. / Tourism Management 53 (2016) 140e147

Table 2
Results of CFA.

Factors/items Factor loadings Error variances Composite reliability AVE

Control .93 .76

I decided my own schedule. .91 .17
I determined for myself how I would spend my time. .93 .14
I took care of things the way that I wanted them done. .81 .34
I felt like I could decide for myself what to do. .82 .32
Detachment .90 .70
I didn't think about work at all. .81 .34
I forgot about work. .87 .24
I distanced myself from the demands of work. .89 .21
I got a break from the demands of work. .77 .41
Mastery .89 .67
I did things that challenged me. .85 .28
I did things to broaden my horizons. .86 .25
I sought out intellectual challenges. .80 .36
I learned new things. .75 .44
Relaxation .93 .80
I used the time to relax. .91 .18
I did relaxing things. .90 .19
I took time for leisure. .88 .22

Tourism satisfaction .93 .82

TS1: Pleased e displeased .97 .07
TS2: Contended e frustrated .84 .29
TS3: Satisfied e dissatisfied .91 .18

Life satisfaction .93 .73

LS1: The conditions of my life were excellent. .94 .11
LS2: I was satisfied with my life. .92 .15
LS3: In most ways my life was close to my ideal. .87 .25
LS4: I felt I had the important things I wanted in life. .81 .35
LS5: If I could have lived my life over, I would change almost nothing. .70 .51

Note: 1 All factor loadings were significant at the .001 levels.

2 Model fit indices: c2 ¼ 980.72, df ¼ 215, GFI ¼ .90, CFI ¼ .95, NFI ¼ .94, and RMSEA ¼ .068.

Table 3
Results of path analysis.

Effects Direct effects Indirect effects Total effects

Baseline (n ¼ 777)
Holiday experiences / life satisfaction (H1) .40*** .13 .53
Holiday experiences / tourism satisfaction (H2) .57***
Tourism satisfaction liday / life satisfaction (H3) .22***
Low strain (n ¼ 339)
Holiday experiences / life satisfaction .48*** .10 .58
Holiday experiences / tourism satisfaction .60***
Tourism satisfaction / life satisfaction .17***
High strain (n ¼ 438)
Holiday experiences / life satisfaction .39*** .13 .52
H experiences / tourism satisfaction .54***
Tourism satisfaction / life satisfaction .23***

Note: 1* p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

be supported in that the direct effect of tourism satisfaction on life
satisfaction was significant (b ¼ .22; P < .001). The independent
variable (tourism experience) had a total effect of .53 on the
dependent variable (life satisfaction), which suggested a moderate
association of strength (r2 ¼ .28). As the model had a good fit
(c2 ¼ 223.20, df ¼ 51, GFI ¼ .95, CFI ¼ .98, NFI ¼ .97, and
RMSEA ¼ .066), no further modifications were made.
4.3. Multi-group comparison
In the last step of the data analysis, H4 was tested by developing
two separate path models for individuals who reported having high
and low strain of daily work, and comparing the structural weights
between the two models. Among the 777 respondents, a total of
415 respondents reported that they had either high or very high
strain of daily work, 226 reported as having neither high nor low
strain, and 113 reported as having either low or very low strain.
Since multi-group comparison analysis requires nearly equal
numbers of respondents in each group (Bollen, 1989), respondents
who reported as having neither high nor low strain were catego-
rized into the low-strain group (n ¼ 339).
As shown in Table 3, the direct effects of holiday experiences on
life satisfaction were significant in both models (low-strain:
b ¼ .48; P < .001; high-strain: b ¼ .39; P < .001). Similarly, the direct
effects of holiday experiences on tourism satisfaction were signif-
icant in the low-strain model (b ¼ .60; P < .001) and the high-strain
model (b ¼ .54; P < .001). The direct effects of tourism satisfaction
on life satisfaction were also found to be significant in both models
(low-strain: b ¼ .17; P < .001; high-strain: b ¼ .23; P < .001). In the
low-strain model, the total effects of holiday experiences on life
 C.-C. Chen et al. / Tourism Management 53 (2016) 140e147 145

Fig. 1. Results of path analysis.

Table 4
Results of multi-group comparison.

Models c2 df Dc2 Ddf GFI CFI NFI RMSEA

Baseline 223.20 51 .95 .98 .97 .066

Low strain 152.28 51 .93 .97 .95 .077
High strain 157.70 51 .94 .97 .96 .069
Unconstrained 575.00 124 .90 .95 .93 .069
H0: Structural weights 581.00 127 6.00 3 .90 .95 .93 .068
H0: Tourism experience / life satisfaction 576.99 125 1.99 2 .90 .95 .93 .068
H0: Tourism experience / tourism satisfaction 575.03 125 .30 2 .90 .95 .93 .068
H0: Tourism satisfaction / life satisfaction 575.80 125 .80 2 .90 .95 .93 .068

satisfaction were .58, while the effects of tourism experiences on
life satisfaction were .52 in the high-strain model.
Table 4 further revealed that the differences between two
models were not significant (p > .05). As can be seen, the chi-square
value was slightly lower when the three direct effects were
assumed to be equal in the two models (Ddf ¼ 3; Dc2 ¼ 6.0; P > .05).
This suggests that two models were similar. Moreover, the results of
multi-group analysis provided no evidence to reject the assump-
tions that the direct effects of holiday experiences on life satisfac-
tion for the two models were equal (Ddf ¼ 2; Dc2 ¼ 1.99; P > .05),
the directs effects of tourism experience on tourism satisfaction in
the two models were equal (Ddf ¼ 2; Dc2 ¼ .3; P > .05), or the direct
effects of tourism satisfaction on life satisfaction in the two models
were equal (Ddf ¼ 2; Dc2 ¼ .8; P > .05).
Therefore, even though the direct and total effects of holiday
experiences on life satisfaction appeared to be larger in the low-
strain model, the differences between the two models were not
statistically significant (P < .05), which suggests that H4 should be
rejected.
5. Discussions and implications
Tourism scholars have examined the concept of leisure travel
satisfaction from two distinct perspectives: (1) tourism satisfaction
as a predictor of postepurchase behavior, such as repurchase or
recommend to others (Baker & Crompton, 2000; Petrick, 2004;
Williams & Soutar, 2009), and (2) tourism satisfaction as a pre-
dictor of overall life satisfaction after leisure travel (Neal et al., 1999,
2007; Sirgy et al., 2011). The current study intended to integrate the
two streams of research by examining the relationship between
holiday experiences associated with psychological recovery and life
satisfaction through mediating variables of tourism satisfaction.
The study results showed that holiday recovery experiences have a
direct effect on life satisfaction as well as an indirect effect on life
satisfaction through tourism satisfaction. It was also found that
holiday recovery experiences have a positive effect on tourism
satisfaction and overall life satisfaction even for American re-
spondents with higher levels of work strain. These research find-
ings have theoretical and practical implications.
First, as previous research has demonstrated the connection
between tourism satisfaction and tourists' senses of well-being
(Neal et al., 1999; Sirgy, 2010; Sirgy et al., 2011), this research
further identified the recovery dimension of holiday experiences as
a key factor in the connection. Specifically, based on Sonnentag and
Frtiz's (2007) conceptualization of recovery experience, this
research found that individuals who are able to control what they
want to do (control), feel relaxed (relaxation), feel detached from
work (detachment), and experience something new and/or chal-
lenging (mastery) during a vacation are more likely to be satisfied
with their vacation and life in general. These are arguably impor-
tant findings because they provide a new perspective on how
tourism practitioners can manager their customers' experiences.
For example, tourism service providers targeting families should
consider providing a variety of activities for individual family
members (such as fathers, mothers, small children, teenagers, and
aging members). In this way, every family member would be better
able to control what they want to do during their vacation. It is also
recommended to provide activities that can help customers expe-
rience something new and challenging (mastery experience) as it
can also lead to trip and life satisfaction. Moreover, given that
detachment is an important dimension of tourism recovery expe-
rience, tourism service providers should encourage customers to
not stay connected with their work during their vacation as a
number of studies have shown that work-related smartphone use
after hours can obstruct the stress relief process (Derks & Bakker,
2014; Derks, Brummelhuis, Zecic, & Bakker, 2014).
146 C.-C. Chen et al. / Tourism Management 53 (2016) 140e147
Second, the literatures of organizational behavior (Hobfoll,
1998; Meijman & Mulder, 1998; Sonnentag & Zijlstra, 2006) and
leisure studies (Coleman & Iso-Ahola, 1993; Iwasaki & Mannell,
2000; Waters & Moore, 2002) have shown that participating in
leisure activities during evening hours or on the weekend can
contribute to the stress-recovery process, while individuals with
higher levels of work strain are less likely to benefit from off-job
activities (Cropley & Millward, 2009; Van Heck & Vingerhoets,
2007). This study further demonstrated that taking a vacation,
which is a relatively long and uninterrupted period of time outside
an individual's usual environment, can also help individuals
working full-time relief from job stress, and contribute to their
overall life satisfaction after a vacation. This was found regardless of
the level of work strain that full-time employees experienced on a
daily basis. These findings have important practical implications for
human resources management, particularly in the United States.
Specifically, Americans workers earned only 14 vacation days on
average in 2012, while workers in many European countries earned
more than 25 vacation days (Expedia, 2013). Moreover, according to
a national survey conducted by the U. S. Travel Association (2014),
40% of American workers do not take all of their paid vacation days
each year because a majority of them are not encouraged by their
company to take paid vacations. As this research demonstrated that
taking vacations can potentially help full-time employees relieve
work-related stress, contributing to their life satisfaction and well-
being, it is important for both employers and employees to know
the benefits of leisure travel.
Furthermore, this research provides some new thoughts
regarding tourism and wellness. In particular, tourism academics
and practitioners have paid particular attention to how tourism
businesses can provide special activities or services (such as yoga,
spa, or hot springs) to a niche market (Chen, Prebensen, & Huan,
2008; Lehto, Brown, Chen, & Morrison, 2006; Mueller &
Kaufmann, 2001). However, the results of this study suggest that
it is the experience that matters. Also, this research demonstrates
that all full-time employees can benefit from participating in lei-
sure travel, even though the general public might not be well aware
of the health and wellness benefits of tourism (Dolnicar et al.,
2012).
Moreover, the mediating effect of tourism satisfaction between
tourism recovery experience and overall life satisfaction was sup-
ported in this study. This finding suggests that tourism practi-
tioners should make efforts to ensure the success of tourism
businesses as well as to enhance the wellness of tourists by man-
aging customers' recovery experiences during their vacations,
which ties into the concept of quality-of-life (QOL) marketing (Lee
& Sirgy, 2004). QOL marketing, according to Lee and Sirgy (2004), is
marketing practices “designed to enhance customer well-being
while preserving the well-being of the firm's other stakeholders”
(p.45).
As can be seen from the definition, the concept of QOL mar-
keting provides guidelines to help businesses implement market-
ing plans in a socially responsible way (Lee & Sirgy, 2004), which
might be applicable to the tourism and hospitality industry. For
example, tourism and hospitality service providers should ensure
the quality of the foods for their customers and the safety of cus-
tomers when they participate in various leisure and recreation
activities. More importantly, this research suggests that taking a
vacation can contribute to full-time employees' well-being by
helping them relieve job-related stress. Therefore, based on the
concept of QOL marketing and the results of the current study, it is
believed the tourism industry should encourage people to take a
vacation by communicating the benefits of tourism to them.
It is also worth noting some of the limitations of the study. As
this research focuses on the holiday recovery experiences in
general, several factors influencing tourism satisfaction were not
included in the research design, including: the length and type of
leisure travel, the size of travel party, and travel companion.
Moreover, this research attempted to examine full time employees'
travel experiences, while their job titles and positions were not
examined. It is thus recommended that future research should
consider these variables.
In summary, this research examines the role of holiday recovery
experiences in determining leisure travel satisfaction and overall
life satisfaction after leisure travel. The study results suggest that
tourism practitioners could better manage their customers' expe-
rience during their vacations by aiding the process of stress relief.
These efforts will arguably contribute to the wellness of customers
and the success of tourism businesses.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data related to this article can be found at http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2015.09.016.
References
Akamavi, R. K., Mohamed, E., Pellmann, K., & Xu, Y. (2015). Key determinants of
passenger loyalty in the low-cost airline business. Tourism Management, 46,
528e545.
Alegre, J., & Garau, J. (2010). Tourist satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Annals of
Tourism Research, 37(1), 52e73.
Baker, D., & Crompton, J. (2000). Quality, satisfaction and behavioral intentions.
Annals of Tourism Research, 27(3), 785e804.
de Bloom, J., Geurts, S. A. E., Sonnentag, S., Taris, T., de Weerth, C., & Kompier, M. A. J.
(2011). How does a vacation from work affect employee health and well-being?
Psychology & Health, 26(12), 1606e1622.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
Brady, M. K., & Robertson, C. J. (2001). Searching for a consensus on the antecedent
role of service quality and satisfaction: an exploratory cross-national study.
Journal of Business Research, 51(1), 53e60.
Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS:
Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Caldwell, L. L. (2005). Leisure and health: why is leisure therapeutic? British Journal
of Guidance & Counselling, 33(1), 7e26.
Caltabiano, M. L. (1995). Main and stress-moderating health benefits of leisure.
Society & Leisure, 18(1), 33e51.
Cano, L. M., & Garcia, J. A. M. (2008). Developing a multidimensional and hierar-
chical service quality model for the travel agency industry. Tourism Manage-
ment, 29(4), 706e720.
Chen, Y., Lehto, X. Y., & Cai, L. (2013). Vacation and well-being: a study of Chinese
tourists. Annals of Tourism Research, 42, 284e310.
Chen, C.-C., Petrick, J. F., & Shahvali, M. (2014). Tourism experiences as a stress
reliever: examining the effects of tourism recovery experiences on life satis-
faction. Journal of Travel Research. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0047287514546223.
Published online before print.
Chen, J. S., Prebensen, N., & Huan, T. C. (2008). Determining the motivation of
wellness travelers. Anatolia, 19(10), 103e115.
Chi, C. G.-Q., & Qu, H. (2008). Examining the structural relationships of destination
image, tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty: an integrated approach.
Tourism Management, 29(4), 624e636.
Coleman, D., & Iso-Ahola, S. (1993). Leisure and health: the role of social support
and self-determination. Journal of Leisure Research, 25(2), 111e128.
Crompton, J. L., & Love, L. L. (1995). The predictive validity of alternative approaches
to evaluating quality of a festival. Journal of Travel Research, 34(1), 11e24.
Cropley, M., & Millward, L. J. (2009). How do individuals ' switch-off' from work
during leisure? A qualitative description of the unwinding process in high and
low ruminators. Leisure Studies, 28(3), 333e347.
Derks, D., & Bakker, A. B. (2014). Smartphone use, work-home interference, and
burnout: a diary study on the role of recovery. Applied Psychology, 63(3),
411e440.
Derks, D., Brummelhuis, L. L., Zecic, D., & Bakker, A. B. (2014). Switching on and
off…: does smartphone use obstruct the possibility to engage in recovery ac-
tivities? European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23(10), 80e90.
Devesa, M., Laguna, M., & Palacios, A. (2010). The role of motivation in visitor
satisfaction: empirical evidence in rural tourism. Tourism Management, 31(4),
547e552.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larson, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life
scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71e75.
Dolnicar, S., Yanamandram, V., & Cliff, K. (2012). The contribution of vacations to
quality of life. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1), 59e83.
Etzion, D. (2003). Annual vacation: duration of relief from job stressors and
 C.-C. Chen et al. / Tourism Management 53 (2016) 140e147
burnout. Anxiety, Stress & Coping: An International Journal, 16(2), 213e226.
Expedia. (2013). Expedia vacation deprivation study. Retrieved May 1, 2015 from
http://images.trvlmedia.com/media/content/expus/graphics/other/pdf/
ExpediaVacationDeprivation2012.pdf.
Fritz, C., & Sonnentag, S. (2006). Recovery, well-being, and performance-related
outcomes: the role of workload and vacation experiences. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 91(4), 936e945.
Gallarza, M. G., & Saura, I. G. (2006). Value dimensions, perceived value, satisfaction
and loyalty: an investigation of university students' travel behaviour. Tourism
Management, 27(3), 437e452.
Gilbert, D., & Abdullah, J. (2004). Holidaytaking and the sense of well-being. Annals
of Tourism Research, 31(1), 103e121.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data
analysis. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Herna ndez-Lobato, L., Solis-Radilla, M. M., Moliner-Tena, M. A., & S anchez-García, J.
(2006). Tourism destination image, satisfaction and loyalty: a study in Ixtapa-
Zihuatanejo, Mexico. Tourism Geographies: An International Journal of Tourism
Space, Place and Environment, 8(4), 343e358.
Hobfoll, S. E. (1998). Stress, culture, and community: the psychology and physiology of
stress. New York: Plenum Press.
Hui, T. K., Wan, D., & Ho, A. (2007). Tourists' satisfaction, recommendation and
revisiting Singapore. Tourism Management, 28(4), 965e975.
Iwasaki, Y. (2001). Contributions of leisure to coping with daily hassles in university
students' lives. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 33(2), 169e187.
Iwasaki, Y., & Mannell, R. C. (2000). Hierarchal dimensions of leisure stress-coping.
Leisure Sciences, 22(3), 163e181.
Kim, T. T., Kim, W. G., & Kim, H.-b (2009). The effects of perceived justice on re-
covery satisfaction, trust, word-of-mouth, and revisit intention in upscale ho-
tels. Tourism Management, 30(1), 51e62.
Lee, D.-J., & Sirgy, M. J. (2004). Quality-of-life (QOL) marketing: proposed ante-
cedents and consequences. Journal of Macromarketing, 24(1), 44e58.
Lehto, X. Y., Brown, S., Chen, Y. I., & Morrison, A. M. (2006). Yoga tourism as a niche
within the wellness tourism market. Tourism Recreation Research, 31(1), 25e35.
McCabe, S., & Johnson, S. (2013). The happiness factor in tourism: subjective well-
being and social tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 41, 42e65.
McDowall, S. (2010). International tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty:
Bangkok, Thailand. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 15(1), 21e42.
Meijman, T. F., & Mulder, G. (1998). Psychological aspects of workload. In
P. J. D. Drenth, H. Thierry, & C. J. De Wolff (Eds.), Handbook of work and orga-
nizational psychology (vol. 2: work psychology (pp. 5e33). Hove, England: Psy-
chology Press.
Mueller, H., & Kaufmann, E. L. (2001). Wellness tourism: market analysis of a special
health tourism segment and implications for the hotel industry. Journal of
Vacation Marketing, 7(1), 5e17.
Nawijn, J. (2011). Determinants of daily happiness on vacation. Journal of Travel
Research, 50(5), 559e566.
Neal, J. D., Sirgy, M. J., & Uysal, M. (1999). The role of satisfaction with leisure travel/
tourism services and experiences in satisfaction with leisure life and overall life.
Journal of Business Research, 44(3), 153e164.
Neal, J. D., Sirgy, M. J., & Uysal, M. (2004). Measuring the effect of tourism services
on travelers' quality of life: further validation. Social Indicators Research, 69(3),
243e277.
Neal, J. D., Uysal, M., & Sirgy, M. J. (2007). The effect of tourism services on travelers'
quality of life. Journal of Travel Research, 46(2), 154e163.
Netemeyer, R. G., Bearden, W. O., & Sharma, S. (2003). Scaling procedures: Issues and
applications. Sage Publications.
Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of
satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 460e469.
Oliver, R. L. (1997). Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the consumer. New York,
NY: McGraw-Hill.
Olsen, L. L., & Johnson, M. D. (2003). Service equity, satisfaction, and loyalty: from
transaction-specific to cumulative evaluations. Journal of Service Research, 5(3),
184e195.
Oppermann, M., & Cooper, M. (1999). Outbound travel and quality of life: the effect
of airline price wars. Journal of Business Research, 44(3), 179e188.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1994). Reassessment of expectations
as a comparison standard in measuring service quality: implications for future
research. Journal of Marketing, 58(1), 111e124.
Petrick, J. F. (2004). The roles of quality, value, and satisfaction in predicting cruise
passengers' behavioral intentions. Journal of Travel Research, 42(4), 397e407.
Petrick, J. F., & Backman, S. J. (2002). An examination of the determinants of golf
travelers' satisfaction. Journal of Travel Research, 40(3), 252e258.
Prayag, G. (2009). Tourists' evaluations of destination image, satisfaction, and future
behavioral intentions: the case of Mauritius. Journal of Travel & Tourism Mar-
keting, 26(8), 836e853.
Prebensen, N., Skallerud, K., & Chen, J. S. (2010). Tourist motivation with sun and
sand destinations: satisfaction and the WOM-effect. Journal of Travel & Tourism
Marketing, 27(8), 858e873.
Rittichainuwat, B. N., Qu, H., & Mongknonvanit, C. (2002). A study of the impact of
travel satisfaction on the likelihood of travelers to revisit Thailand. Journal of
147
Travel & Tourism Marketing, 12(2/3), 19e43.
Sirgy, M. J. (2010). Toward a quality-of-life theory of leisure travel satisfaction.
Journal of Travel Research, 49(2), 246e260.
Sirgy, M. J., Kruger, P. S., Lee, D.-J., & Yu, G. B. (2011). How does a travel trip affect
tourists' life satisfaction? Journal of Travel Research, 50(3), 261e275.
Sonnentag, S., & Fritz, C. (2007). The recovery experience questionnaire: develop-
ment and validation of a measure for assessing recuperation and unwinding
from work. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12(3), 204e221.
Sonnentag, S., & Zijlstra, F. R. H. (2006). Job characteristics and off-job activities as
predictors of need for recovery, well-being, and fatigue. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 91, 330e350.
Spreng, R. A., MacKenzie, S. B., & Olshavsky, R. W. (1996). A reexamination of the
determinants of consumer satisfaction. Journal of Marketing, 60(3), 15e32.
Sun, X., Chi, C. G.-Q., & Xu, H. (2013). Developing destination loyalty: the case of
Hainan Island. Annals of Tourism Research, 43, 547e577.
U. S. Travel Association. (2014). Overwhelmed America: Why don't we use our earned
leave. Retrieved May 1, 2015 from http://www.projecttimeoff.com/sites/default/
files/PTO_OverwhelmedAmericaReport.pdf.
Van Heck, G. L., & Vingerhoets, A. J. J. M. (2007). Leisure sickness: a biopsychosocial
perspective. Psihologijske Teme, 16(2), 187e200.
Wang, C.-Y., & Hsu, M. K. (2010). The relationships of destination image, satisfaction,
and behavioral intentions: an integrated model. Journal of Travel & Tourism
Marketing, 27(8), 829e843.
Waters, L. E., & Moore, K. A. (2002). Reducing latent deprivation during employ-
ment: the role of meaningful leisure activity. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 75(1), 15e32.
Williams, P., & Soutar, G. N. (2009). Value, satisfaction and behavioral intentions in
an adventure tourism context. Annals of Tourism Research, 36(3), 413e438.
Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and
satisfaction on destination loyalty: a structural model. Tourism Management,
26(1), 45e56.
Yu, Y.-T., & Dean, A. (2001). The contribution of emotional satisfaction to consumer
loyalty. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 12(3), 234e250.
Zeithaml, V. A., Bitner, M. J., & Gremler, D. D. (2013). Services marketing: Integrating
customer focus across the firm. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Chun-Chu (Bamboo) Chen is an Assistant Professor of
Recreation in the Department of Movement Sciences at the
University of Idaho. His research interests include psy-
chological and physiological benefits of tourism experi-
ences, tourism marketing, and tourism and quality of life.
Wei-Jue Huang is an Assistant Professor in the School of
Hotel and Tourism Management at The Hong Kong Poly-
technic University. Her research interests include cultural
and heritage tourism, urban tourism, globalization and
tourism development, tourist behavior and typology, and
destination image.
Jim Petrick is a Full Professor and Research fellow at Texas
A&M University. His research explores the determinants of
tourists' purchase behaviors. In the past eleven years, he
has been awarded more than $2 million in research grants
and has been recognized for his research abilities with the
following awards: Emerging Scholar of Distinction e from
the International Academy for the Study of Tourism
(2009), Agri-life Research Fellow (2008), Most Outstanding
Conference Paper (TTRA National Conference, 2001),
Holland America Line Westours Research Award (2004 &
2000), American Society of Travel Agents Future Tourism
Leader Award (1999), and the Excellence in Research
Award from RCRA (1998).