Predicting place attachment through selfie
tourism, memorable tourism experience
and hedonic well-being
Okki Trinanda, Astri Yuza Sari, Efni Cerya and Tri Rachmat Riski
Okki Trinanda and
Astri Yuza Sari are both
based at the Department of
Management, Universitas
Negeri Padang, Padang,
Indonesia. Efni Cerya is
based at the Department of
Economics Education,
Universitas Negeri Padang,
Padang, Indonesia.
Tri Rachmat Riski is based
at the Department of
Management, Universitas
Dharma Andalas, Padang,
Indonesia.
Received 20 September 2020
Revised 30 January 2021
13 June 2021
Accepted 29 July 2021
© International Tourism Studies
Association.
The authors would like to thank
Lembaga Penelitian dan
Pengabdian Masyarakat
Universitas Negeri Padang for
funding this work with a
contract number: 1223/
UN35.13/LT/2020.
PAGE 412 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM CITIES j VOL. 8 NO. 2 2022, pp. 412-423, Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 2056-5607
Abstract
Purpose – Selfie tourism is a fast-growing phenomenon. Given the convenience of photo-snapping and
photo-sharing on social media, selfie tourism is seen as an emerging trend among travelers. This
phenomenon gave consequence toward travelers’ behavior, especially on how it can affect their
memorable tourism experience and place attachment. This paper aims to examine the relationship
between selfie tourism, memorable tourism experience, hedonic well-being and travelers’ place
attachment.
Design/methodology/approach – A self-administered survey method is used. This research was
carried out during the COVID-19 pandemic, consequently, the data were collected via Google Form
(online). The respondents are tourists who have visited various tourism destinations in West Sumatera,
Indonesia. To test the hypotheses of this study, questionnaires are distributed to 450 respondents. The
proposed model was tested using structural equation modeling.
Findings – The results of this study shows that selfie tourism has a positive and significant relationship
toward both memorable tourism experience and hedonic well-being. In addition, memorable tourism
experience and hedonic well-being also have a significant relationship with place attachment.
Research limitations/implications – The limitation of this study lies in the limited reference to the
relationship between selfie tourism and memorable tourism experience and hedonic well-being, because
this is the first study to examine the relationship of these variables. This study also has not tested the
direct relationship between selfie tourism and place attachment and has not considered eudaemonic
well-being as an antecedent of place attachment. Further research will discuss the direct effect of selfie
tourism and eudaemonic experience on place attachment, as well as the moderating effect of memorable
tourism and hedonic well-being.
Practical implications – This study shows the benefits obtained by tourism managers in preparing selfie
facilities, as well as the ability to create meaningful experiences. It provides tourism practitioners with an
understanding that tourist place attachment can be improved by both memorable tourism experience
and hedonic well-being. Furthermore, both memorable tourism experience and hedonic well-being can
be affected by selfie tourism. This understanding can enhance the tourism providers’ strategy to improve
services that fit the characteristics of today’s tourists. Therefore, selfie tourism, memorable tourism
experience and hedonic well-being can support tourism sustainability, especially in creating place
attachments.
Originality/value – To the authors’ knowledge, this is one of the first studies that investigated the
relationship between selfie tourism, memorable tourism experience and place attachment. From a
market-specific context, this is also the first study that investigated the antecedents of place attachment
on West Sumatera’s tourism.
Keywords Place attachment, Memorable tourism experience, Hedonic well-being, Selfie tourism
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Place attachments are essential in tourism marketing (Tsaur and Sun, 2009). By definition,
place attachment is a feeling of attachment of a tourist to a destination (Suzuki and Fujii, 2008;
DOI 10.1108/IJTC-09-2020-0188
Taberner, 2020; Williams and Roggenbuck, 1989). Place attachment can also be defined as a
positive feeling, an individual’s attachment to the environment (Wolf et al., 2014; Woosnam
et al., 2018). In conclusion, place attachment is a feeling of emotional attachment to a
traveler’s destination. Place attachments will generate many benefits for a tourist destination.
Travelers who have a strong place attachment will automatically be loyal and will return to the
place because they feel an emotional attachment (Yanju and Derong, 2016; Zhang et al.,
2019). Furthermore, a tourist who has a strong place attachment will actively promote the
tourist spot to others, through positive messages (Williams and Roggenbuck, 1989). In
marketing science, emotional attachment is a continuation of loyalty (Xu and Zhang, 2016). If
loyalty is the desire to keep visiting from time to time (Alves and Costa, 2015; Artal-Tur and
Sa
nchez-Casado, 2019), place attachment is more than that (Ramkissoon et al., 2014).
Travelers who have a place attachment will always feel the longing to return (Pham and Chen,
2015).
According to previous research, many factors can influence a tourist’s place attachment
(Qian et al., 2010; Ramkissoon and Mavondo, 2015). However, travelers’ experience has
the strongest influence (Vada et al., 2018). Conceptually, all the positive experiences that
tourists get are summarized in a concept known as the memorable tourism experience
(Shang et al., 2020). Memorable tourism experience is the positive memories that travelers
have after conducting tourism activities (Tsai, 2016; Vada et al., 2019). Memorable tourism
experience has a positive influence on place attachments (Voigt et al., 2010). Memorable
tourism experience is formed by experiences or activities carried out by tourists while in
tourist attractions (Souza et al., 2019). These activities may include taking documentation or
selfies, eating culinary delights, shopping or shopping, as well as meaningful activities such
as historical tracing, learning tours and so on. A good memorable tourism experience will
result in tourists happiness, satisfaction and joy known as well-being’ (Scannell et al., 2019).
There are two types of well-being, namely, hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being
(Sharma et al., 2017). Hedonic well-being is a feeling of pleasure or joy due to pleasant
activities, while eudaemonic well-being is a feeling of pleasure that arises from receiving
learning, increasing personal skills or knowledge (Son and Wilson, 2012; Stone et al., 1999;
Vada et al., 2019). In this study, by considering selfie activity as the initial antecedent, the
researchers only used hedonic wellbeing as a factor that affects place attachment.
Currently, research linking selfie tourism with memorable tourism experience and place
attachments are rarely published. Due to the limitations of research that discusses the
relationship between these variables, academics and tourism practitioners do not have
comprehensive information regarding current tourist behavior. The development of
technology creates changes in tourist behavior (Zhang and Dong, 2021; Ponsignon and
Derbaix, 2020), especially in terms of creating memorable experiences and a sense of
happiness when traveling (Bigne et al., 2020). This creates a gap in academic discussions
about the topic. This study aims to fill this gap, by formulating selfie tourism as an
antecedent of place attachments. Furthermore, this study also aims to examine the
relationship between memorable tourism experience, hedonic wellbeing and travelers’
place attachment. This paper is projected to expand academic discussion regarding the
factors that can influence the place attachment of a destination

2. Literature review
2.1 Place attachment
The concept of place attachment has been discussed in various disciplines, such as tourism,
marketing, psychology and others. Particularly in tourism, this concept has been explored by
researchers as part of the understanding tourist behavior (Chen et al., 2018; Taberner, 2020;
Souza et al., 2019; Hosany et al., 2017; Wolf et al., 2014). In general, place attachment is
defined as an individual’s emotional attachment to a place (Cheng et al., 2013). As stated by

VOL. 8 NO. 2 2022 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM CITIES j PAGE 413

 Hidalgo and Hernandez (2001), place attachment is a bond or positive relationship between
individuals and the environment in which they live.
Place attachment experts point out that this concept stems from attachment theory (Hidalgo
and Hernandez, 2001). Attachment theory is based on the idea that babies form bonds with
mothers, which influence expectations and behavior as children develop (Vada et al.,
2019). Derived from this theory, place attachment is seen as a bond or relationship between
a person and a place. Lewicka (2011) has studied traveler engagement with a site for over
40 years in terms of concept development, its application across academic disciplines,
measurement problems, variables that appear to be associated with attachment
development and directions for future research.
Hosany et al. (2017) argues that destination marketers should make strengthening the
engagement of places by visitors a priority, through strategies such as increasing visitor
interaction with the physical setting of the destination, or promoting visitor and social
community settings interaction. Overall, there seems to be a consensus in the literature that
site placement is a multi-dimensional construct. Several authors have used the two-
dimensional frame of the place attachment including place dependencies and place
identities (Bernardo and Palma-Oliveira, 2013; Chow and Healey, 2008; Herna
ndez et al.,
2007). Place identity refers to the deep relationship between an individual’s personal
identity and a place (Qingjiu and Maliki, 2013). Place dependence recognizes the ability of
a place to meet individual functional needs that may not be met elsewhere (Davis, 2016).
Additional studies have included other dimensions of attachment such as social cohesion,
familiarity, ownership, rootedness, effective attachment, a memory of place and expectation
of place (Bernardo and Palma-Oliveira, 2013; Vada et al., 2019).
By using the Tripartite Organizing Framework, this study looks at the relationship between
Place attachment, Memorable Tourist Experience and Hedonic Well-Being (Scannell and
Gifford, 2010). Tourists feel a stronger Place Attachment when there is a personal memory.
These special memories, among others, are formed when there is a feeling of happiness
and joy while traveling. For tourists, what is considered significant is not the place itself, but
the memories about the place that creates meaning.
Furthermore, selfie tourism as an antecedent of Memorable Tourism Experience and
Hedonic Well-Being is the novelty of this research, and this study aims to fill the knowledge
gap. Conceptually, there is a relationship between selfie tourism on these two variables.
Selfie aims to save and create tourists’ memories and happiness. However, empirically, the
relationship between these variables has not been tested before.

2.2 Memorable tourism experience

Memorable Tourism Experience is an impression that tourists will keep on remembering
after their visit is over (Tsai, 2016). Not all experiences are considered memorable.
Therefore, destination managers must be able to identify factors that can generate positive
memories for tourists. The ability of a tourist destination in maximizing this strategy will bring
advantages (Aroeira et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2018). First, tourists are willing to spend
money to gain experience and memory during their visit. Furthermore, a memorable
experience will also create loyalty and place attachments for tourists.
Place attachment is also influenced by the experiences that make up the feeling of pleasure
or well-being (Chen and Rahman, 2018; Dwyer et al., 2019). Chen et al. (2014) in their study
also confirmed that memories of stories associated with a place (place memory) were one
of the predictors of place attachment. Theoretically, this experience is called a memorable
tourism experience. Memorable tourism experiences can be in the form of learning
experiences at tourist attractions, taking documentation or selfies (hence selfie tourism),
culinary experiences and so on (Zhang et al., 2018).

PAGE 414 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM CITIES j VOL. 8 NO. 2 2022

Based on the studies above, this study examines and analyzes the factors that influence
Place Attachment, namely, Memorable Tourism Experience and Hedonic Well Being.
To reach a more comprehensive conclusion, this study also examines and analyzes the
relationship between Memorable Tourism Experience and Hedonic Well Being. Empirical
research supports the relationship between Memorable Tourism and Hedonic Well-Being
(Bigne et al., 2020; Coelho et al., 2018). It is suggested that positive and memorable tourism
experiences can contribute to hedonic well-being (Sirgy, 2012). Holiday-taking has the
potential to enhance the level of happiness of those enjoying it thus leading to hedonic well-
being (Chen and Yoon, 2018).
Consistent with the foregoing discussion, the following hypotheses are offered:
H1. Memorable tourism experience has a significant and positive effect on hedonic well
being
H2. Memorable tourism experience has a significant and positive effect on the place
attachment

2.3 Hedonic well-being

There are various factors that influence the place attachment. But among these various
factors, the feeling of happiness (well-being) is the biggest factor (Vada et al., 2019). There
are two types of well-being, including hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being
(Highhouse, 2001; Kim et al., 2017). Hedonic well-being is a feeling of a pleasant sensation
or joy due to a pleasant activity, while eudaimonic well-being is a feeling of pleasure that
arises from a learning experience, an increase in personal skills or knowledge (Layard,
2010; McCabe et al., 2010):
H3. Hedonic well-being has a significant and positive effect on place attachment

2.4 Selfie tourism

Although selfie activity is a “mandatory” traveler activity, academic discussions on selfie
tourism are still rarely published. Selfie tourism can be interpreted as a strategy where
destinations provide various beautiful spots to be photographed and uploaded to social
media (Trinanda and Sari, 2019a, Ozansoy Çadırcı and Sag  kaya Güngör, 2019). This
strategy is a response to changes in travelers’ behavior in the internet and social media era
(Trinanda and Sari, 2019b).
Technological advances have made it possible for every traveler to bring a personal
camera, which is a standard feature of smartphones (Cheah et al., 2019). Nowadays,
photos can be taken independently with a relatively unlimited number. The photos are then
uploaded to social media in the hope of getting likes. The more likes, the higher the
satisfaction (Ozansoy Çadırcı and Sag  kaya Güngör, 2019), hence hedonic well-being.
Therefore, selfie activity is used as one of the motivations for traveling and can determine
the experience that tourists feel (Dinhopl and Gretzel, 2015; Mkwizu and Mtae, 2018).
Although the term “selfie tourism” is rarely used in academic discussions, this concept has
been acknowledged by Urry and Larssen in their literature, Tourist Gaze 3.0. Urry and
Larrsen explains that tourist professionals help to construct the tourist gaze by creating
scenarios, viewing platforms that serve to direct what they want the tourist to see, how they
wish them to see, and what they are allowed to see (Urry and Larsen, 2011). Photography is
an important part of Tourist Gaze. Tourists visit locations to get the full experience through
their multi-sensory capacities and collect the various sights through various documentation.
In the documentation, the tourists act like what they have seen in various media or take a
selfie.

VOL. 8 NO. 2 2022 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM CITIES j PAGE 415

 In this study, selfie tourism is used as an antecedent of memorable tourism experience and
hedonic well-being, and finally it is indirectly related to placing attachment. Consistent with
this suggestion and foregoing discussion, the following hypothesis is offered:
H4. Selfie tourism has a significant and positive effect on memorable tourist experience.
H5. Selfie tourism has a significant and positive effect on hedonic well-being.
The research framework is shown in Figure 1.

3. Research methodology
3.1 Population, sample and data collection procedures
The respondent of this study are tourists’ that have visited destinations in Indonesia,
specifically in West Sumatera. This research was conducted at the time of the COVID-19
pandemic; therefore, the questionnaire was distributed online via Google Forms. There
were 450 respondents who filled out the questionnaire, which met the specified sample size
criteria. The number of respondents has met Weston and Gore (2006) recommendation to
have a minimum sample size of 200 for any SEM analysis. SEM is mostly used for research
that is designed to confirm a research study design rather than to explore or explain a
phenomenon (Fan et al., 2016). The respondents were West Sumatera tourists’ during the
data collection and agreed to participate. The respondent also should be interested to visit
West Sumatera in the future, which describes their place attachments. Before filling out the
questionnaire, there was one control question to ensure that the respondents were the right
person for the study, namely, whether they would revisit West Sumatra in the future. If the
answer is “yes,” the respondent will be asked to fill out a questionnaire.

Figure 1 Research model

Memorable
Tourism
Experience
H4
H2

Place
Selfie Tourism H1 Aachment

H5

Hedonic Well H3
Being

Table 1 Variable measurement

Variable Total indicator Reference

Selfie tourism 3 Trinanda and Sari (2019a)

Memorable tourism experience 6 Vada et al. (2019)
Hedonic well being 4 Vada et al. (2019)
Place attachment 5 Vada et al. (2019)
Total indicator 18 –

PAGE 416 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM CITIES j VOL. 8 NO. 2 2022

Respondents were contacted via email, WhatsApp messages, Instagram/Facebook direct
messages and others. Information about respondents was obtained from search results on
social media, regarding tourists who prior to this research had been recent to West Sumatra
and posted selfies on the internet. To get a response, the researchers provided incentives
in the form of an internet package for 10.000 rupiahs (equal to 0.71 USD) so that they are
willing to fill out the questionnaire. If a respondent refuses to fill out the questionnaire, the
questionnaire is diverted to another person. Therefore, this study gets 100% of responses.
This study used 4 variables with 18 measurement items. Hair et al. (2010) criteria were used
and met, where the number of the samples should be between 5 and 20 times the number
of variables/items. Of all the questionnaire distributed, 450 responses are usable after the
primary tests, including missing value, outlier, normality and heteroscedasticity test.

3.2 Construct Measurement and questionnaire

The measurement items used in this study were based on several prior studies. To ensure that
the respondents understood the questions accurately, a back-translation procedure was used
for the questionnaire translation (Sekaran and Bougie, 2013). Likert’s scales with five options
from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5) as the measurement scale was used. In this
study, four variable constructs were used, including selfie tourism, memorable tourism
experience, hedonic well-being and place attachment. This study adapted measurement items,
i.e. selfie tourism measurements was adapted from Trinanda and Sari (2019a). Trinanda and
Sari’s research proves that Selfie Tourism is an antecedent of tourist’s revisit intention. Selfie
tourism items in detail can be found in Table 2. Memorable tourism experience, hedonic well-
being and place attachment measurement were adapted to the study by Vada et al. (2019).
Vada research is the main reference of this research, where the research proves the relationship
between tourism experience and well-being on place attachment. Memorable tourism
experience, hedonic well-being and place attachment measurement items in detail can be
found in Table 2. Table 1 shows the details of the measurement items.

Table 2 Loading factor, construct validity and reliability

Construct Items Mean SD Loading A CR AVE

Place attachment 0.924 0.924 0.709

I feel as part of this place 4.05 0.79 0.82
Emotionally, I can’t get away from this place 4.03 0.82 0.85
This is the best place for me to visit 4.02 0.85 0.85
this is a special place for me personally 4.06 0.81 0.84
This place is second to none 4.04 0.79 0.85
Memorable tourism experience 0.770 0.864 0.515
I found meaningful experiences in this place 4.08 0.77 0.68
I always remember my experience in this place 3.93 0.78 0.67
I had a unique experience in this place 3.87 0.77 0.75
I did not find the same experience elsewhere 4.07 0.68 0.72
The feeling of visiting this place is different 3.95 0.72 0.72
from other places
I found new experiences at this place 3.96 0.77 0.76
Hedonic well-being 0.861 0.860 0.608
This is an ideal trip for me 3.94 0.79 0.79
It is a fun trip for me 3.94 0.80 0.78
I got what I hoped for on this trip 4.02 0.78 0.85
I feel satisfied with this trip 3.80 0.83 0.69
Selfie tourism 0.849 0.849 0.652
I like to take selfies when I travel 4.01 0.74 0.85
I take a selfie to indicate that I have been to 4.01 0.77 0.78
a certain location
A good selfie gives me pleasure 3.91 0.83 0.79

VOL. 8 NO. 2 2022 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM CITIES j PAGE 417

 3.3 Data analysis
Covariance-based structural equation modeling by using AMOS 24 as the software
package was applied in this study (Byrne, 2010). This study also considered the Goodness
of Fit criteria (GoF). This study used some GoF criteria, such as normed Chi-square (CMIN/
DF), adjusted Goodness of Fit index (AGFI), Goodness of Fit index (GFI), comparative fit
index (CFI), Tucker–Lewis index (TLI), with root mean square error of approximation
(RMSEA) (Byrne, 2010). The cutoff point < 5 for CMIN/DF,  0.90 for CFI, TLI and GFI, 
0.80 for AGFI, and  0.08 for RMSEA were applied in this study (Bentler and Bonett, 1980).
This study has also conducted some preliminary analyses, including outliers, normality,
multicollinearity and heteroscedasticity test (Pallant, 2013). The preliminary test was
conducted in February 2020 on 30 respondents.
The results shows that the data were free from those issues. Moreover, this research also
examined the validity and reliability of the data. By using loading factor cutoff point > 0.5,
Table 2 describes the construct reliability and validity (Hair et al., 2010). In addition, it is also
found that the average variance extracted (AVE) value > 0.5, Cronbach’s alpha > 0.7 and
composite reliability (CR) > 0.7. Hence, the data have a high validity and reliability value
(Hair et al., 2010). By using Fornell–Larcker’s criterion, this research also administered the
discriminant validity (Hair et al., 2010). The data had excellent discriminant validity where
the square root of AVE was greater than the cross-loading value as shown in Table 3.
Harman’s single factor method has been implemented in this study to check the common
method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003).

4. Results
After data collection that has been carried out from March to Juli 2020, it was found that all
of the respondents were Indonesians, and most of them were female (56.5%). In terms of
respondent’s age, most of them were under 40 years old (88,4%). In terms of average
expenditure, most of the respondents had spent  5 million rupiahs (equal to 350 us
dollars). Then, most of the respondents had traveled 5 times in a year (45.7%). In terms of
educational level, most of them were graduated from senior high school (53.3%).
This study found that all the relationships are significant. Table 4 shows the hypothesis
testing for the relationships. It shows that most the relationship has significant value of 0,000
except for H3. This means that all the hypothesis are accepted. It can be seen in Figure 2.

4.1 Discussions
Selfie tourism as an antecedent of tourist behavior is the novelty of this research. This study
found selfie tourism has a positive and significant effect on memorable tourism and hedonic
well-being (H4 and H5). Although the discussion of the relationship between these variables
is relatively new in tourism marketing theory, several previous studies have explained selfie
tourism as a concept. Mostafanezhad and Norum (2018) mention that the travelers purpose
is to satisfy their emotional feelings through Facebook posts. Photography is an integral

Table 3 Correlation matrix

Variable MTE HWB Selfie PA

Memorable Tourism Experience ,455

Hedonic Well Being ,273 ,343
Selfie Tourism ,131 ,226 ,328
Place Attachment ,245 ,310 ,228 ,390
Note: diagonal (in italic) is the square root of AVE; for the discriminant validity, the square root of AVE
should be higher than off-diagonal elements

PAGE 418 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM CITIES j VOL. 8 NO. 2 2022

 Table 4 Hypotheses testing
Hypothesis Standardized Path Coefficient ( b ) SE CR Sig


H1 memorable tourism experience ! hedonic well being 0.819 0.081 10.155

H2 memorable tourism experience ! place attachment 0.796 0.091 8.785

H3 hedonic well-being ! place attachment 0.138 0.062 2.225

H4 selfie tourism! memorable tourism experience 0.600 0.044 13.642

H5 selfie tourism ! hedonic well being 0.203 0.055 3.711
Notes:  p < 0.05;  p < 0.10; S.E = Standard Error; CR = Critical Ratio; Sig = Significance probability

Figure 2 Research model

Memorable
Tourism
Experience

0.796***
0.600***

0.819*** Place
Selfie Tourism Aachment

0.203*** 0.138**

Hedonic
Well Being

component of the contemporary tourist experience (Weiler et al., 2021). The results of this
study open up opportunities for a wider discussion.
Furthermore, a memorable tourism experience also has a significant effect on hedonic well-
being (H3). This means that the pleasure felt by travelers, among other factors, is
determined by how meaningful the experience is (Aroeira et al., 2016). Also, this study
proposes a positive and significant relationship between memorable tourism and hedonic
well-being toward place attachments. The results of the study support the two proposed
relationships, memorable tourism experience and hedonic well on place attachments (H1
and H2). These findings confirm and reinforce the results of recent studies, which suggest
emotional feelings toward a tourist destination are determined by these two variables
(Aroeira et al., 2016; Johari and Anuar, 2020; Tsai, 2016).
Although place attachment is multi-dimensional, through this research we understand that
the strategy of creating meaningful experiences, as well as travelers well-being in tourism
activities, are the right determinants of creating place attachments. Among the various
activities that produce meaningful experiences, one of which is the selfie activity.
Based on hypothesis testing, it was found that all research objectives have been met. This
research has implications for both academics and tourism practitioners. First, academics
can expand the discussion about memorable tourism experiences and hedonic well-being
with selfie tourism. This understanding can increase the study of traveler’s motivation when
making visits. Second, for tourism practitioners and tourism stakeholders, this research
provides resources that can be applied in developing a tourism marketing strategy. Tourist
destination managers who want to create a memorable experience and pleasure for their
visitors can provide various facilities that support selfie activities (Dinhopl and Gretzel, 2015;

VOL. 8 NO. 2 2022 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM CITIES j PAGE 419

 Isdarmanto et al., 2019). Destination managers can implement the findings from this study
by adapting their marketing strategies. This study found that selfie facilities must be
available to satisfy tourist activities at tourist sites. Selfie objects do not have to be beautiful
natural scenery, but can also be artificial “eye-catchy” objects. Therefore, it is important to
consider the layout strategy and visual experience.

4.2 Conclusions

4.2.1 Theoretical contributions. The significance of this research is on selfie tourism as an

antecedent of memorable tourism and hedonic well-being. This study suggests that selfie
tourism contributes to both memorable tourism experience and hedonic well-being. To the
best of the authors’ knowledge, these results have not been tested and discussed in
previous studies. Furthermore, it also examines the relationship between memorable
tourism experience, hedonic well-being and travelers’ place attachment. Referring to the
place attachment theory, this study examines the effect of memorable tourism experience
and hedonic well-being on place attachment on tourism. It confirmed previous study that
both memorable tourism experience and hedonic well-being are the determinants of place
attachment.

4.2.2 Practical contributions. This study shows the benefits obtained by tourism managers
in preparing selfie facilities, as well as the ability to create meaningful experiences. It
provides tourism practitioners with an understanding that tourist place attachment
can be improved by both memorable tourism experience and hedonic well-being.
Furthermore, both memorable tourism experience and hedonic well-being can be
affected by selfie tourism. This understanding can enhance the tourism providers
strategy to improve services that fit the characteristics of today’s tourists. Therefore,
selfie tourism, memorable tourism experience, and hedonic well-being can support
tourism sustainability, especially in creating place attachments.

4.3 Limitation and further research

The limitation of this study lies in the limited reference to the relationship between selfie
tourism and memorable tourism experience and hedonic well-being because this is the first
study to examine the relationship of these variables. This study also has not tested the
direct relationship between selfie tourism and place attachment and has not considered
eudaemonic well-being as an antecedent of place attachment. Further research will discuss
the direct effect of selfie tourism and eudaemonic experience on place attachment, as well
as the moderating effect of memorable tourism and hedonic well-being.

References
Alves, A. and Costa, P.D. (2015), “Tourist destination loyalty: a multidimensional perspective”, available
at: search.proquest.com
Aroeira, T., Dantas, A.C. and Gosling, M.S. (2016), “Memorable tourist experience, cognitive perception,
reputation and loyalty to the destination: an empirical model”, Turismo: Visão e Ação, Vol. 18 No. 3,
pp. 584-610.
Artal-Tur, A. and Sa
nchez-Casado, N. (2019), “Exploring tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty”,
Tourist Destination Management, Springer, Cham, pp. 75-99.
Bentler, P.M. and Bonett, D.G. (1980), “Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of
covariance structures”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 88 No. 3, pp. 588-606.
Bernardo, F. and Palma-Oliveira, J. (2013), “Place identity, place attachment and the scale of place: the
impact of place salience”, Psyecology, Vol. 4 No. 2.

PAGE 420 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM CITIES j VOL. 8 NO. 2 2022

Bigne, E., Fuentes-Medina, M.L. and Morini-Marrero, S. (2020), “Memorable tourist experiences versus
ordinary tourist experiences analysed through user-generated content”, Journal of Hospitality and
Tourism Management, Vol. 45, pp. 308-319.
Byrne, B.M. (2010), Structural Equation Modeling with Amos: Basic Concepts, Applications, and
Programming, Routledge.
Cheah, J.H., Ting, H., Cham, T.H. and Memon, M.A. (2019), “The effect of selfie promotion and celebrity
endorsed advertisement on decision-making processes”, Internet Research, Vol. 29 No. 3.
Chen, H. and Rahman, I. (2018), “Cultural tourism: an analysis of engagement, cultural contact,
memorable tourism experience and destination loyalty”, Tourism Management Perspectives, Vol. 26,
pp. 153-163.
Chen, C.-C. and Yoon, S. (2018), “Tourism as a pathway to the good life: comparing the top–down and
bottom–up effects”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 58 No. 5, pp. 866-876.
Chen, N., Dwyer, L. and Firth, T. (2014), “Conceptualization and measurement of dimensionality of place
attachment”, Tourism Analysis, Vol. 19 No. 3.
Chen, N.C., Dwyer, L. and Firth, T. (2018), “Residents’ place attachment and word-of-mouth behaviours:
a tale of two cities”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 36, pp. 1-11.
Cheng, T.M., Wu, H.C., Huang, L.M. (2013), “The influence of place attachment on the relationship
between destination attractiveness and environmentally responsible behavior for island tourism in
Penghu . . .”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 21 No. 8.
Chow, K. and Healey, M. (2008), “Place attachment and place identity: first-year undergraduates making
the transition from home to university”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 28 No. 4.
Coelho, M.D F., Gosling, M. D S. and Almeida, A.S.A.D. (2018), “Tourism experiences: core processes of
memorable trips”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 37, pp. 11-22.
Davis, A. (2016), “Experiential places or places of experience? Place identity and place attachment as
mechanisms for creating festival environment”, Tourism Management, Vol. 55.
Dinhopl, A. and Gretzel, U. (2015), “Selfie-taking as touristic looking”, Annals of Tourism Research,
Vol. 57, pp. 126-139.
Dwyer, L., Chen, N.C. and Lee, J.J. (2019), “The role of place attachment in tourism research”, Journal of
Travel & Tourism Marketing, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 645-652.
Fan, Y., Chen, J., Shirkey, G., John, R., Wu, S.R., Park, H. and Shao, C. (2016), “Applications of structural
equation modeling (SEM) in ecological studies: an updated review”, Ecological Processes, Vol. 5 No. 1,
p. 19.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis, Prentice Hall,
NJ.
Herna
ndez, B., Hidalgo, M.C. and Salazar-Laplace, M.E. (2007), “Place attachment and place identity in
natives and non-natives”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 310-319.
Hidalgo, M.C. and Hernandez, B. (2001), “Place attachment: conceptual and empirical questions”,
Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 21 No. 3.
Highhouse, S. (2001), “Well-being: the foundations of hedonic psychology”, Personnel Psychology,
Vol. 54 No. 1, p. 204.
Hosany, S., Prayag, G., Veen, R.V.D., Huang, S. and Deesilatham, S. (2017), “Mediating effects of place
attachment and satisfaction on the relationship between tourists’ emotions and intention to recommend”,.
Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 56 No. 8, pp. 1079-1093.
Isdarmanto, I., Riantiarno, A. and Maftucha, M. (2019), “Renewable effects of the culture selfie model in
the perspective of global tourism development”, Kepariwisataan: Jurnal Ilmiah, Vol. 13 No. 2.
Johari, S.I. and Anuar, N.A.M. (2020), “Appraising the role of memorable tourism experience between the
relationship of destination image and Melaka domestic tourists’ revisit intention”, Journal of Tourism,
Hospitality & Culinary Arts (JTHCA), Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 1-22.
Kim, J., Kim, Y. and Kim, D. (2017), “Improving well-being through hedonic, eudaimonic, and social
needs fulfillment in sport media consumption”, Sport Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 3.
Layard, R. (2010), “Measuring subjective well-being”, Science, Vol. 327 No. 5965.

VOL. 8 NO. 2 2022 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM CITIES j PAGE 421

 Lewicka, M. (2011), “Place attachment: how far have we come in the last 40 years?”, Journal of
Environmental Psychology, Vol. 31 No. 3.
McCabe, S., Joldersma, T. and Li, C. (2010), “Understanding the benefits of social tourism: linking
participation to subjective well-being and quality of life”, International Journal of Tourism Research,
Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 761-773.
Mkwizu, K.H. and Mtae, H.G. (2018), “Selfie and marketing of domestic tourism”, International Journal of
Research & Methodology in Social Science, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 77-87.
Mostafanezhad, M. and Norum, R. (2018), “Tourism in the post-selfie era”, Annals of Tourism Research,
Vol. 70.
Ozansoy Çadırcı, T. and Sag  kaya Güngör, A. (2019), “Love my selfie: selfies in managing impressions on
social networks”, Journal of Marketing Communications, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 268-287.
Pallant, J. (2013), SPSS Survival Manual: A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis Using IBM SPSS,
McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead.
Pham, T.S., Chen, H.B. (2015), “The relationship among destination image, place attachment, tourist
satisfaction, tourist loyalty and revisit intention on . . .”, Asian Tourism Management,
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.
Ponsignon, F. and Derbaix, M. (2020), “The impact of interactive technologies on the social
experience: an empirical study in a cultural tourism context”, Tourism Management Perspectives,
Vol. 35.
Qian, S., Su, Q. and Zhu, L. (2010), “Effect of place attachment on historic district tourists’ shopping
behavior: a case study on tunxi old street”, Resources Science.
Qingjiu, S. and Maliki, N.Z. (2013), “Place attachment and place identity: undergraduate students’ place
bonding on campus”, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences.
Ramkissoon, H. and Mavondo, F.T. (2015), “The satisfaction–place attachment relationship: potential
mediators and moderators”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 68 No. 12, pp. 2593-2602.
Ramkissoon, H., Smith, L.D.G. and Kneebone, S. (2014), “Visitor satisfaction and place attachment in
national parks”, Tourism Analysis, Vol. 19 No. 3.
Scannell, L. and Gifford, R. (2010), “Defining place attachment: a tripartite organizing framework”,
Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 1-10.
Scannell, L., Tan, L.Q., Cox, R.S. and Gifford, R. (2019), “Place attachment, Well-Being, and resilience”,
The Routledge Handbook of People and Place in the 21st-Century City, Routledge, pp. 243-251.
Sekaran, U. and Bougie, R.J. (2013), Research Methods for Business: A Skill-Building Approach, Wiley,
Chichester, Hoboken, NJ.
Shang, W., Qiao, G. and Chen, N. (2020), “Tourist experience of slow tourism: from authenticity to place
attachment–a mixed-method study based on the case of slow city in China”, Asia Pacific Journal of
Tourism Research, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 170-188.
Sharma, S., Conduit, J. and Hill, S.R. (2017), “Hedonic and eudaimonic well-being outcomes from co-
creation roles: a study of vulnerable customers”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 31 Nos 4/5.
Sirgy, M.J. (2012), “Consequences of hedonic Well-Being, life satisfaction, and eudaimonia”, The
Psychology of Quality of Life, pp. 45-60.
Son, J. and Wilson, J. (2012), “Volunteer work and hedonic, eudemonic, and social well-being”,
Sociological Forum, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 658-681.

Souza, L.H., Kastenholz, E. and Barbosa, M.L.A. (2019), “Tourist experience, perceived authenticity,
place attachment and loyalty when staying in a peer-to-peer accommodation”, International Journal of
Tourism Cities, Vol. 6 No. 1.
Stone, A.A., Shiffman, S.S., DeVries, M.W., Kahneman, D. (1999), Well-Being: The Foundations of
Hedonic Psychology, Russell Sage Foundation . . ..

Suzuki, H. and Fujii, S. (2008), “Study on effects of place attachment on cooperative behavior local area”,
Infrastructure Planning Review, Vol. 25.

PAGE 422 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM CITIES j VOL. 8 NO. 2 2022

Taberner, J.G. (2020), “Tourist satisfaction, dissatisfaction and place attachment at sun and sand mass
tourism destinations”, available at: dspace.uib.es

Trinanda, O. and Sari, A.Y. (2019a), “# MeTourism: how selfies affect re-visit intention in narcissistic age”,
1st International Conference on Economics, Business, Entrepreneurship, and Finance (ICEBEF 2018),
Atlantis Press, pp. 593-597.

Trinanda, O. and Sari, A.Y. (2019b), “Selfie tourism dan electronic word of mouth sebagai anteseden re-
visit intention”, Jurnal Benefita, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 526-535.
Tsai, C.T. (2016), “Memorable tourist experiences and place attachment when consuming local food”,
International Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 18 No. 6.
Tsaur, S.H. and Sun, C.Y. (2009), “Antecedents and consequences of place attachment”, Journal of
Geographical Science, Vol. 55, pp. 43-63.
Urry, J. and Larsen, J. (2011), The Tourist Gaze 3.0, Sage Publication, London.

Vada, S., Prentice, C. and Hsiao, A. (2018), “The influence of tourism experience and well-being on place
attachment”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 47, pp. 322-330.
Vada, S., Prentice, C. and Hsiao, A. (2019), “The influence of tourism experience and well-being on place
attachment”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 47.
Voigt, C., Howat, G. and Brown, G. (2010), “Hedonic and eudaimonic experiences among wellness
tourists: an exploratory enquiry”, Annals of Leisure Research, Vol. 13 No. 3.
Weiler, B., Gstaettner, A.M. and Scherrer, P. (2021), “Selfies to die for: a review of research on self-
photography associated with injury/death in tourism and recreation”, Tourism Management Perspectives,
Vol. 37.
Weston, R. and Gore, P.A.G. (2006), “A brief guide to structural equation modeling”, The Counseling
Psychologist, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 719-751.
Williams, D.R. and Roggenbuck, J.W. (1989), “Measuring place attachment: some preliminary results”,
NRPA Symposium on Leisure Research, San Antonio, TX, Vol. 9.

Wolf, K.L., Krueger, S., Flora, K. (2014), “Place Attachment and meaning-A Literature Review,“ Green
Cities: Good Health, available at: www.greenhealth . . ..
Woosnam, K.M., Aleshinloye, K.D., Ribeiro, M.A. (2018), “Social determinants of place attachment at a
world heritage Site”, Tourism, . . ..
Xu, Z. and Zhang, J. (2016), “Antecedents and consequences of place attachment: a comparison of
Chinese and Western urban tourists in Hangzhou, China”, Journal of Destination Marketing &
Management, Vol. 5 No. 2.
Yanju, J. and Derong, L. (2016), Tourists’ Perception of Urban Service, Place Attachment and Loyal
Behaviors: A Case Study of Xiamen, Geographical Research.

Zhang, J. and Dong, L. (2021), “Image monitoring and management of hot tourism destination based on
data mining technology in big data environment”, Microprocessors and Microsystems, Vol. 8, p. 103515.
Zhang, C.X., Fong, L.H.N. and Li, S.N. (2019), “Co-creation experience and place attachment: festival
evaluation”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 81, pp. 193-204.
Zhang, H., Wu, Y. and Buhalis, D. (2018), “A model of perceived image, memorable tourism experiences
and revisit intention”, Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, Vol. 8, pp. 326-336.

Corresponding author
Okki Trinanda can be contacted at: okki.trinanda@fe.unp.ac.id

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

VOL. 8 NO. 2 2022 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM CITIES j PAGE 423