Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp.

1141–1158, 2006
0160-7383/$ - see front matter  2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Printed in Great Britain
www.elsevier.com/locate/atoures
doi:10.1016/j.annals.2006.06.003

ANTECEDENTS OF
REVISIT INTENTION
Seoho Um
Kyonggi University, Korea
Kaye Chon
Hong Kong Polytechnic University, China
YoungHee Ro
Kyonggi University, Korea

Abstract: Revisit intention has been regarded as an extension of satisfaction rather than an
initiator of revisit decisionmaking process. Some other independent variables, related to per-
ceived quality of performance during onsite and post-purchase periods as well as the destina-
tion’s distinctive nature, may contribute to revisit likelihood. This study explores antecedents
of this intention based on literature reviews and examines their significance based on the
results of 2000–2003 surveys of pleasure tourists in Hong Kong. Research findings reveal that
perceived attractiveness, rather than overall satisfaction, is the most important indicator.
Managerial and theoretical implications are also discussed. Keywords: revisit intention, over-
all satisfaction, perceived attractiveness.  2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Résumé: Antécédents de l’intention de revisiter. On a considéré l’intention de revisiter

comme un prolongement de la satisfaction plutôt que le début du processus de décision
de revisiter. D 0 autres variables indépendantes, liées à la perception de la qualité de perfor-
mance sur place et après-vente aussi bien que la nature distinctive de la destination, peuvent
contribuer à la probabilité de revisiter. L’article explore les antécédents de cette intention
d’après la littérature et examine l’importance des antécédents selon les résultats d 0 une
enquête menée en 2000–2003 parmi les visiteurs de loisirs à Hong Kong. Les résultats des
recherches révèlent que la perception de charme, plutôt que la satisfaction générale, est
l’indicateur le plus important. On discute aussi des implications pour la gestion et la théorie.
Mots-clés: intention de revisiter, satisfaction générale, perception de charme.  2006 Elsevier
Ltd. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION
Tourists to a destination consist of both first-timers and repeaters.
These together determine the annual number of arrivals. The propor-
tion of the two at the country level represents the lifecycle of a destina-
tion (Oppermann 1998). The proportion of the former in matured

Seoho Um is Professor of the College of Tourism Studies at Kyonggi University (Suwon,

443–760, Republic of Korea. Email <seohoum@kgu.ac.kr>). Kaye Chon is Chair Professor and
Head of the School of Hotel and Tourism Management at Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
YoungHee Ro is Instructor in the College of Tourism Studies at Kyonggi University, Korea.
They all have research interests in the field of destination marketing and tourism
communication.

1141
1142 REVISIT INTENTION

countries such as Hong Kong is relatively lower than in newly opened

countries (Leung and McKercher 2001).
Um (1997/8) reported that first-timers were motivated to visit a des-
tination as an outcome of its diffusion process in their societies;
whether they were early adopters or laggards, they are regarded as
adopters of destination opening innovation. On the other hand,
repeaters are the adopters of management innovation that has been
implemented by marketers since opening, including special events
and acquisition of new attractions, and other marketing promotion
strategies.
First-timers’ revisit intentions may be influenced mainly by destina-
tion performance as a whole because of their initial stay, while repeat-
ers’ intentions may be influenced largely by promotional efforts to
recall their positive memory and by disseminated information on new
attractions. The latter often show more diversified and detailed
demands for information and level of destination awareness (Opper-
mann 2000). This argument provides a relatively simple basis for seg-
menting tourists into first-timers and repeaters for efficient marketing
so that they may remain as repeaters. Many attractions and destinations
tend to rely heavily on repeat visitation since the cost to retain this
group is considered to be less expensive than to attract the other.
For more effective marketing, scholars have developed destination
selection models that integrated sources of information, consumer char-
acteristics, images, and attitude (Fakeye and Crompton 1991; Um and
Crompton 1990; Woodside and Lysonski 1989). The goal of these
models was to verify why and how tourists select a particular destination
over others and to predict their future destination selection behavior. All
these efforts aim to attract as many first-timers as possible to a certain des-
tination; however, few academic attempts have been made to identify
why and how tourists select a particular destination again.
The number of previous visits also has been regarded as one of the
influential factors for revisit intention (Court and Lupton 1997; Mazur-
sky 1989; Petrick et al 2001; Sampol 1996). Kozak (2001a) describe
earlier research, which has focused on the relationship between previ-
ous visits and the intention of choosing the same destination in the
future. Indeed, although the number of previous visits and the level
of overall satisfaction are considerable influences, the maturity of des-
tinations is also an important stimulus.
Destination familiarity affected by previous visits may also influence
potential tourists’ awareness sets and evoke sets of travel destinations
(Um and Crompton 1990). Previous research concerned with effects
of either destination familiarity or past experiences in the destination
selection process tend to ignore the systematic effects of such con-
structs as attractiveness, quality, customer value, and images on revisit
intention, which have been regarded as antecedents of the satisfaction
construct. Without any consideration of these constructs together, it is
hard to explain repeat visitation to a destination consistently and
theoretically.
The major stream of previous research on repeat visitation relates to
the satisfaction construct and its antecedents: revisit intention has been
 UM, CHON AND RO 1143

regarded as a consequence of a tourist satisfaction model (Bigne et al

2001). In this case, this intention has been treated only as a criterion
validity related variable of satisfaction measure rather than as a depen-
dent variable of the research problem. In other words, the intention
has been regarded as an extension of satisfaction rather than as an ini-
tiator of the revisit decisionmaking process.
From a destination marketing perspective, the questions, ‘‘what are
the antecedents of the intention, and how they do differently affect
revisits to a pleasure travel destination?’’ still remain elusive concepts
due to a lack of theoretical and empirical evidence. Motivated by a
similar research problem, Oh (1999) proposed an integrative model
of service quality, customer value, and customer satisfaction using a
sample from hotel users. Bigne et al (2001) selected such constructs
as destination image, perceived quality, and satisfaction to explain
intention to return to destinations in Spain and tested the model using
convenient sampling. This type of research at the country level at a des-
tination may show different results than at the attraction level of a
country including hotels. This is because tourist experiences at the
country level are more multifaceted and dynamic than at the attraction
level. In addition, the purchase decision for a long-haul tour package
requires more consideration of time and cost than the purchase of a
hotel product, resulting in different patterns of repeat visitation.
The purpose of this paper is to identify the relative weights of tourist
evaluation constructs affecting revisit intention to Hong Kong as a plea-
sure destination. This requires two steps: one, to describe a hypothe-
sized model based on the evaluation constructs which are selected by
theoretical consideration and, two, to compare the relative weights of
four selected evaluation constructs as independent variables of revisit
intention using a randomly selected sample of pleasure tourists to
Hong Kong. Based on these results, this study presents implications
for destination marketing strategies.

ANTECEDENTS OF REVISIT INTENTION

Tourist evaluation is one of the research topics preferred by
researchers, with tourist perception including image and attitude.
Based on the consumer behavior model (Assael 1998), their experi-
ence may be evaluated during and after using products or services
and just before post-purchasing behavior. Depending on either criteria
or timing of evaluation, different types of constructs can be formulated
by tourists. Recent research issues have focused on the relationships
among the tourist evaluation constructs to describe their behaviors.
Satisfaction, in addition to previous visit, has been regarded as one of
the most preferred evaluation constructs to explain revisit intention
(Bigne et al 2001; Bowen 2001; Kozak 2001a; Kozak and Rimmington
2000; Mazursky 1989; Oh 1999). Oh (1999) proposed a holistic model
of evaluation constructs including the satisfaction construct for
explaining post-purchasing behavior. Service quality, perceived price,
perceptions of company performance, and customer value were
1144 REVISIT INTENTION

included in the model as antecedents of customer satisfaction. Bigne

et al (2001) developed a LISREL model to identify tourism image,
and quality variables were significant in affecting intention to return
and recommendations to others. Kozak (2001a) identified level of sat-
isfaction as one of the most influential variables in explaining inten-
tion to visit either the same or other destinations in Mallorca and
Turkey. The level of overall satisfaction, number of previous visits,
and perceived performances of destination attributes were selected
as independent variables.
Satisfaction is a subjective judgment and can be assessed after each
purchase and consumption experience. The disconfirmation paradigm
has been widely used as a framework in which this factor is evaluated by
comparing perceived performance of a product with expectations.
Kozak (2001b) distinguished satisfaction from attitude in that the latter
is a pre-decision construct which can be changed as a result of a satis-
faction. Consequently, overall satisfaction might be an accumulated
experience of a customer’s expectation, purchase, and consumption
experiences (Andreassen 1995). Therefore, satisfaction is a final con-
struct of the purchase decisionmaking process. Although revisit inten-
tion is generally measured at the same time as satisfaction, this is not
only a predictor of overall satisfaction but also a consequence of
revised attitude which affects the revisit decisionmaking process.
Therefore, it is not appropriate that the intention has been merely re-
garded as an extension of satisfactions rather than as a key variable in
revisit research. In addition, tourism satisfaction constructs have not
been fully conceptualized to include other possible variables from on-
site and post-purchase periods as well as preconsumption periods to
find the antecedents of revisit intention.

Quality of Performance as Antecedent of Satisfaction

Bitner and Hubbert (1994) pointed out a customer’s overall dissatis-
faction or satisfaction is derived from every service transaction and is
perceived via the total service experience. Therefore, overall satisfac-
tion should be differentiated from its components found in every
service example. Bowen (2001) conceptualized the process as anteced-
ents being filtered through the specific and general context and
leading to the development of ‘‘within tour customer satisfaction/
dissatisfaction’’ among the consumers. The specific context filtering
satisfaction/dissatisfaction comprises tour itinerary, other tourists in
the group, and the tour operator particular to the situation. On the
other hand, general context is related to the characteristics of the ser-
vice industry, tourism, and the tour operation—all providing a struc-
tural view of the satisfaction construct.
Yi (1991) addressed the definitions of satisfaction both as an out-
come and as a process, distinguishing satisfaction with the service offer-
ing from the same with the consumption experience. Tourists are
satisfied with what they experienced as well as with how they were
treated and served at a destination. Chan (2001) proposed a model
 UM, CHON AND RO 1145

of tour performance evaluation. In this case, customer satisfaction with

tour experience and with tour service are related to behavioral inten-
tion concerning repurchasing and brand loyalty. If antecedents of sat-
isfaction are selected based on ‘‘what’’ and ‘‘how’’ concepts of service
performance, described by Grönroos (1984:39), it is possible to infer
marketing implications from the research findings. For instance, what
a tourist is seeing or using in a hotel is an example of ‘‘what’’ while how
a tourist guide or a front office staff approaches the customer is the
example of ‘‘how’’. In other words, the former can be an indicator
of ‘‘product performance’’ and the latter of ‘‘service performance’’.
Another feature of previous research on modeling revisit intention is
that relatively little discussion has been made of the distinction be-
tween the constructs of quality of performance and measurement of
satisfaction. Baker and Crompton (2000) distinguish between these
two in describing intended behavior. Their conceptualization of these
is notable enough to argue for interchangeable use of the constructs in
the models of tourist behavior. The quality construct was defined as a
quality of a performance or opportunity that refers to the attributes of
a service controlled by a supplier. On the other hand, the satisfaction
construct was defined as a quality of experience that refers to an emo-
tional state of mind after exposure to the opportunity.
Tourist satisfaction has been often measured by a multi-item scale,
which refers to the sum of tourist evaluation of each destination attri-
bute (Kozak and Rimmington 2000; Tribe and Snaith 1998). In their
study, level of satisfaction was directly related to tourist evaluations of
destination attributes, which included the natural environment, physi-
cal attractions, accommodation, restaurants, shops, cultural events,
heritage, and so on. This kind of satisfaction measurement could not
be regarded differently from quality of destination performance. Baker
and Crompton (2000) even noted that image research in the literature
measures actually perceived quality of destination attributes (or
expected destination performance). A destination is a package of tour-
ism facilities and services, which, like any other goods and services, is
composed of a number of multidestination attributes that together
determine its attractiveness to a particular tourist in a given travel
situation (Kim 1998).

Revisit Intention with Satisfaction as a Mediator

For this study, overall tourist satisfaction is included as a mediating
variable in the path analysis to predict revisit intention for Hong Kong.
According to Baker and Crompton (2000), perceived attractiveness is
also included in the path analysis as an independent variable to repre-
sent a quality of destination performance, while overall satisfaction is
regarded a variable to represent a quality of experience. On the other
hand, Cole and Scott (2004) differentiate overall satisfaction from
experience quality even though the latter was defined as those benefits
or outcomes that people experience as a result of a visit. In their study,
experience quality could not be different from performance quality
1146 REVISIT INTENTION

except that the former was measured at the whole attraction level the
letter at the level of each attraction attribute.
Perceived attractiveness has been regarded as one of the evaluation
constructs of destination performance as well as one of the determi-
nants that affect pleasure destination choice. While attractiveness has
been measured objectively and qualitatively, perceived appeal has been
measured subjectively by multi-item scale as an attitude toward a desti-
nation for its selection (Um and Crompton 1990). This perception is
formed at the post-purchasing stage, image at the pre-purchasing stage.
Perceived attractiveness measured at that stage could be regarded as a
cognitive evaluation of destination attributes which are performed on
site. The literature describes the attractiveness of a destination as
one that reflects the feelings, beliefs, images, and opinions that individ-
uals have about the perceived capacity of a destination to provide sat-
isfaction (Hu and Ritchie 1993).
The growing interest in destination competitiveness has focused on
the definition and description of a destination product, and on how
the tourist perceives the relative values. It is proposed that a better
understanding of the antecedents and determinants of perceived value
would be beneficial to tourism providers, as they want to understand
the decisionmaking behavior. Perceived value has been defined as
‘‘the consumer’s overall assessment of the utility of a product based
on perceptions of what is received and what is given’’ (Zeithaml
1988:14). For this study, perceived value for money is also included
as one of the antecedents of revisit intention. This is defined as
consumers’ perceived value of what they receive in return for both
monetary and nonmonetary efforts.
Another antecedent of revisit intention for this study is the perceived
quality of service. This is determined by customers’ perception, accord-
ing to the literature (Parasuramann et al 1985). It is argued that per-
ceptions about quality are based on long-term, cognitive evaluations
of a firm’s service delivery, whereas customer satisfaction is a short-term
emotional reaction to a specific experience (Rust et al 1999). Service
quality has been one of the frequently used antecedents for tourist sat-
isfaction (Tribe and Snaith 1998). However, there is an ongoing debate
whether this is an antecedent or a consequence of satisfaction. Ekinci
(2004) investigated the relationships among quality, customer satisfac-
tion, attitude, and behavioral intention and found that the data fit the
model not with service quality as consequence of satisfaction as an ante-
cedent. For this study, both value for money and service quality are
included in the path analysis as antecedents of revisit intention to rep-
resent service performance while perceived attractiveness is included in
the path analysis as an antecedent to represent product performance.
Mayo and Jarvis (1981) noted that culture causes different national-
ities to perceive fulfillment differently. As such, people who grow up in
varied environments perceive things variously because they interpret
causes differently. For this study, to control possible cross-cultural ef-
fects among pleasure tourists in Hong Kong, survey respondents are
categorized into two groups based on the travel distance, also reflecting
the effect of distance decay on revisit intention: Asia/Australia and
 UM, CHON AND RO 1147

Europe/North America. A model of revisit intention was developed for

each group and the analysis results were compared with each other.
Ultimately, four tourist evaluation constructs—perceived attractive-
ness of Hong Kong, perceived quality of service provided, perceived
value of money paid for purchasing goods and services in Hong Kong,
and overall tourist satisfaction—are selected as antecedents of revisit
intention (Figure 1).

Study Methods
A questionnaire consisting of three sections was structured for the
purpose of delivering the omnibus survey of Hong Kong inbound tour-
ists. The first section included questions concerning general trip
profile such as duration, frequency of visiting Hong Kong, main desti-
nation, itinerary, trip purpose, types of accommodation, and so on. In
addition to this part, one-item questions concerning each tourist eval-
uation construct were included. The third section collected demo-
graphic data such as general expenditure, education level, age, sex,
and annual household income.
The approach used for data collection was to ensure a representative
sample of respondents from the seven target source markets: Mainland
China, Chinese Taipei, Singapore, Malaysia, the United States, Canada
(or Western Europe), and Australia. Japan and Korea were not
included in the sample because a qualified interviewer could not be
found for the given time and budget. It was considered almost impos-
sible to deliver a purely random sample feasibly. Actually, the sampling
method used for data collection could be named as a multistage cluster
sampling design with stratification (Leung and McKercher 2001).

Perceived
Attractiveness

Revisit
Perceived Quality of
Intention
Service Satisfaction

Perceived Value for

Money

Figure 1. A Study Model of Revisit Intention

1148 REVISIT INTENTION

The first stage involved a nonrandom sampling design based on

judgment criteria to select the seven targeted countries. There are a
limited number of flights daily to the United States, Canada, Australia,
and Singapore, while many flights to China and Taiwan were available.
To interview tourists of seven different origins, each flight was selected
repeatedly over the survey period.
After this stage, a systematic sampling method was applied to select
potential respondents on each flight to the United States, Australia,
and Singapore. Staffs were allocated one of two daily shifts, seven days
a week. Each interviewer was assigned a specific schedule based on
which flights were targeted in each shift, and given a random number
every day to indicate the counting interval between target respondents
for systematic sampling. However, the systematic sampling of flights to
China and Taiwan did not work out as well as expected because of a
large number of Hong Kong residents and transit passengers. There-
fore, on many of these flights the sample ended up being more conve-
nience-based as the staff worked their way through the passengers until
they found a receptive passenger. Respondents were given a small
token of appreciation for their participation.
The actual data collection was from 3 October to 7 November 2000.
During this time, a total of 2,115 tourists were interviewed in the depar-
ture lounge area of the Hong Kong International airport. However,
this study used 812 samples from pleasure tourists that visited Hong
Kong. In similar manner, the omnibus survey was delivered: 740
samples in 2001, 681 in 2002, and 450 in 2003. The longitudinal data
were analyzed to make up for the deficiency of one item measure’s
validity. This omnibus survey has also been delivered by internet since
2004.
Based on the reactions of survey respondents’ in the four years’ data,
the following profile was derived. In the year 2000, the respondents
consisted of 36.3% United States residents, 13.9% Taiwanese, 13.5%
Australians, 12.5% Canadians, 9.6% Chinese, 8.1% Singaporeans,
and 6.0% Malaysians. Nearly 1/3 of respondents are from the USA,
about 20% from Taiwan and China. However, in 2001, 22.6% of
respondents were Western European, and only 21.6% were US resi-
dents. The proportion of the latter was higher than any other country
of residents in 2002 and 2003. The proportion of repeaters in 2000 was
51.9% while proportions of first-timers were higher than the repeaters
in 2001, 2002, and 2003. A frequency of the mode of travel consistently
showed the highest proportion of nonpackaged/independent tours.
The mode of a frequency distribution of length of stay in Hong Kong
was four nights or more. While the proportion of gender was slightly
different, age groups were evenly distributed over four years.

Construct Measurement
In order to avoid personal bias and suitably quantify the qualitative
data, instruments with larger scale, a 7-point scale, have been used in this
research. Although a 5-point scale seems to be acceptable, larger ones
 UM, CHON AND RO 1149

aim to carry out an effective comparison analysis to clearly show the dif-
ferences between scores (Kozak 2001b). A 7-point scale ranging from
very unattractive (1) to very attractive(7) was structured to measure
perceived attractiveness by asking the respondents, ‘‘At the present time,
how would you rate Hong Kong’s attractiveness as a place to visit?’’ Tour-
ists’ overall satisfaction with Hong Kong was measured on a single-item
scale by asking ‘‘Based on the experiences you had in Hong Kong,
how satisfied were you with this visit?’’ Respondents were asked to rate
along a 7-point scale (1 = very dissatisfied to 7 = very satisfied).
A 7-point scale ranging from very poor to very good was developed to
measure perceived quality of service by asking the respondents, ‘‘Based
on the experiences you had in Hong Kong, how would you rate the
overall service quality on the following scale?’’ Perceived value for
money was measured using a 7-point scale (1-strongly disagree to
7-strongly agree), asking ‘‘Do you think the good(s) and/or the ser-
vice(s) you purchased in Hong Kong is/are good value for money?’’
Revisit intention was measured by a single 7-point item ranging from
very unlikely to very likely, by asking ‘‘How likely would you return
to Hong Kong for pleasure travel?’’
To cope with validity issues of five constructs measured by a single item
scale in the omnibus survey, predictive validity of the five tourist evalua-
tion constructs was tested based on the assumption that repeaters’ eval-
uation could be different from the first-timers’. Since the former’s
evaluations of destination performance might be fortified or specified
depending upon their frequency of visits (Oppermann 2000), their
evaluations of five constructs should be different from the first-timers’
evaluations. Table 1 shows that the repeaters’ evaluations are consis-
tently and significantly different from their counterparts’ with the same
directions, implying validation of the five one-item measures. Especially,
the repeaters’ intentions to revisit were found to be greater than the first-
timers’, fortifying previous research findings.

Analysis and Result

Path analysis using the statistical package SPSS 10.0 (AMOS) was
implemented to test the model of revisit intention. Conventional linear
regression including path analysis with use of AMOS0 4.0 could be imple-
mented using single item measures as either dependent or independent
variables (Arbuckle and Worthke 1999). Thus, path analysis showed the
relative weights of such antecedents of revisit intention as perceived
attractiveness, perceived service quality, value for money, and overall
satisfaction. To identify cross-cultural effects as well as distance decay ef-
fects on revisit intention to Hong Kong, respondents are categorized
into two groups based on the travel distance: Asia/Australia and
Europe/North America. Path analysis was delivered for each group
and the analysis results were compared to find differences between
them. In addition, to mitigate the validity and reliability issue of each
construct measured by a single-item scale in the omnibus survey, the sta-
tistical findings of four years’ models were compared with each other.
1150 REVISIT INTENTION

Table 1. Independent T-Test between First-timers and Repeaters

Evaluation Measure TypenYear 2000 2001 2002 2003

Perceived Attractiveness of Hong Kong First comers 5.85 5.96 5.94 6.04
Repeaters 5.65 5.70 5.68 5.66
t-value 2.52a 2.92b 3.04b 3.62b
Perceived Quality of Service in Hong Kong First comers 5.95 6.05 5.97 6.21
Repeaters 5.73 5.84 5.80 5.83
t-value 2.76b 2.64b 1.86 4.28b
Overall Satisfaction of Hong Kong First comers 5.92 5.87 5.97 6.18
Repeaters 5.53 5.60 5.57 5.72
t-value 4.55b 4.27b 4.38b 4.68b
Perceived Value for Money First comers 4.89 4.86 5.04 5.57
Repeaters 4.73 4.68 4.83 5.09
t-value 1.48 1.49 1.89 3.94b
Revisit Intention First comers 4.89 5.22 4.84 5.46
Repeaters 5.54 5.64 5.63 5.84
t-value 5.79b 3.80b 6.91b 3.01b

a b
Significance <.05; Significance <.01.

As a previous step to the path analysis by AMOS, the relationships

between each pair of variables as suggested in the model were exam-
ined by the Pearson correlation coefficient. A significant relationship
was found between any pair of variables at the 1% level. The relation-
ship between perceived attractiveness and satisfaction showed the
strongest correlation coefficient (.60), while the relationship between
perceived quality of service and revisit intention showed the weakest
correlation coefficient (.14) for the year of 2000 data.
The hypothesized model of revisit intention was path analyzed via the
Maximum likelihood estimator of AMOS 4.0. At its first run, the hypoth-
esized model of revisit intention turned out to be a saturated one with no
degree of freedom, in which the number of estimated parameters equals
the number of data points. For an empirical test, a hypothesized model
with one degree of freedom was derived by deleting the path from the
perceived quality of service to visit intention in the saturated model since
the parameter estimate of perceived quality of service was the only one
which was insignificant at the 5% level in predicting revisit intention.
Fit indices for the model are shown in Figure 2. Although the chi-
square value for the model was statistically significant, (v2 = 7.89, df =
1, p = .005), other fit indices, such as GFI, AGFI, CFI, NFI were all above
.90, and RMR was .037, indicating the model had a good fit to the data
(Hatcher 1994). Since the chi-square statistic is very sensitive to sample
size and departures from multivariate normality, Wang et al. (1996) indi-
cate that these fit indices seem robust for a sample size of 500 or more
with the skewed data.
All the paths in the hypothesized model of the year 2000 (Figure 2)
were found to be significant at the 5% level. The model explained
 UM, CHON AND RO 1151

Perceived
Attractiveness
a
.24(5.83)
.41(13.85)
.46
.33 b
14%
47%
.31(10.51)
Perceived .12(2.78)
Revisit
quality of Satisfaction
Intention
service

.34 .14(4.85)

.11(2.96)
Perceived
value for
money

a Standardized regression coefficient with its t-value in parenthesis

(It also stands for standardized direct effects of the model.)
b The amount of variance explained: R2
2 =7.89, df=1, p=.005, G FI=.996, AGFI=.942, CFI=.993, NFI=.992, RMR=.037

Figure 2. A Hypothesized Model of Revisit Intention (2000)

only 14% of variance in revisit intention. Perceived attractiveness was

the most influential antecedent of revisit intention in terms of the
magnitude of standardized coefficient. Interestingly, satisfaction less
affected revisit intention than did perceived attractiveness. Perceived
attractiveness, quality, and value for money were significant indicators
of satisfaction, accounting for 47% of its variances. Perceived attrac-
tiveness was the most influential antecedent of satisfaction in terms
of the magnitude of the standardized coefficient. Perceived quality
of service was influential in affecting satisfaction; however, it was
not a significant antecedent to revisit intention. Perceived value for
money was a significant variable in affecting both revisit intention
and satisfaction.
These findings could be confirmed by the path analysis results of the
years of 2001, 2002, and 2003. Table 2 shows that each year’s data pro-
duces the same result: that perceived attractiveness affects revisit inten-
tion more than satisfaction. Satisfaction was even insignificant in
predicting revisit intention for the year of 2001, 2002, and 2003 data.
In addition, among three destination performance evaluation con-
structs, perceived attractiveness was the most effective antecedent to
satisfaction. It was also found that perceived quality of service was influ-
ential in affecting satisfaction; however, it was an insignificant anteced-
ent to revisit intention. Magnitudes of coefficients of three antecedents
to satisfaction were found fairly consistent over the four years’ data.
1152 REVISIT INTENTION

Table 2. Fit Statistics and Standardized Regression Coefficients of the Models

Fit StatisticsnYear 2000 2001 2002 2003

N 812 740 681 450

X2/df 7.888a/1 1.808/1 4.256a/1 3.963a/1
GFI .996 .999 .997 .996
AGFI .942 .985 .962 .947
CFI .993 .999 .997 .995
NFI .992 .998 .996 .993
RMR .037 .017 .027 .026
R2 Satisfaction .47 .51 .54 .47
Revisit Intention .14 .14 .14 .08
Impact on Overall Satisfaction Attractiveness .41a .41a .42a .34a
Service Quality .31a .34a .34a .36a
Value for Money .14a .13a .14a .15a
Impact on Revisit Intention Attractiveness .24a .20a .28a .22a
Satisfaction .12a .08 .03 .02
Value for Money .11a .19a .14a .10

a
Significance <.05.

Perceived value for money was also significant in affecting both satisfac-
tion and revisit intention. Satisfaction was found to be not a good indi-
cator of revisit intention.
It is notable that revisit visitation was affected more by perceived attrac-
tiveness than overall satisfaction. In other words, tourists’ revisit inten-
tion could be determined more by what they were actually attracted to
than by what they were satisfied with. Compared with satisfaction and
value for money, perceived attractiveness has very subjective and hedo-
nic aspects. Hedonic evaluation designates the multisensory, fantasy,
and emotive aspects of consumers’ experience with a product or service
(Hirschman and Holbrook 1982). Hedonic value is more subjective and
personal than its utilitarian counterpart and results more from fun and
playfulness than from task completion.
Perceived attractiveness is also identified by Kozak and Rimmington
(2000) as among four factors in measuring satisfaction, and the ‘‘destina-
tion attractiveness’’ factor was the most significant in explaining overall
satisfaction. It was noted that the destination attractiveness factor was the
most significant antecedent of revisit intention even with satisfaction as
an independent variable. As Bigne et al (2001) described, the satisfaction
variable was insignificant in describing intention to return in the case of
path analysis for Penascola, while it was less significant than perceived
quality of stay in the case of Torrevieja. If image is a key factor in destina-
tion choice to first-timers (Echtner and Ritchie 1991; Um and Crompton
1990), perceived attractiveness could be a key factor for the repeaters.
After visiting a destination, perceived attractiveness rather than destina-
tion image could be effective on revisit intention.
To identify either cross-cultural effects or distance decay effects for
pleasure tourists to Hong Kong, each path analysis was implemented
 UM, CHON AND RO 1153

Table 3. Path Analysis for Two Groups of the Year 2000

Europe and N. America Asia and Australia

Standardized Beta t-value Standardized Beta t-value

(I) Impact on Overall Satisfaction

Attractiveness fi satisfaction .407 9.470a .410 9.612a
Service of quality fi satisfaction .302 7.212a .270 6.313a
Value for money fi satisfaction .152 3.730a .126 3.090a
R2 = .454 R2 = .392
(II) Impact on Revisit Intention
Attractiveness fi revisit intention .168 2.802a .325 6.311a
Satisfaction fi revisit intention .118 1.937 .181 3.472a
Value for money fi revisit intention .140 2.657a .118 2.613a
R2 = .115 R2 = .252

Fit Statistics. v2 = 4.705, df = 1, p = .030 GFI = .995, AGFI = .928 CFI = .991, NFI = .989
RMR = .038. v2 = .098, df = 1, p = .754. GFI = .1.000, AGFI = .999. CFI = .1.000, NFI = .1.000.
RMR = .006.
a
Significance <.05.

for two groups for the 2000 data: Asia/Australia and Europe/North
America. Table 3 shows that there was no difference in that satisfaction
was an insignificant predictor of revisit intention for the latter group,
while it was significant for the former, implying that travel distance
functions differently in this model. To investigate more closely cultural
and distance effects, path analysis results for each group of four years’
data were compared. The results show that satisfaction was insignificant
in affecting revisit intention for the group of Europe and North Amer-
ica. In addition, for the group of Asia and Australia, satisfaction was not
found to be a significant antecedent to revisit intention. However, it
was obvious that satisfactions of Europe and North America tourists
are less likely to affect their revisit intentions than satisfactions of their
counterparts are. This finding could be supported in that the R square
of the revisit intention model was shown greater in the Asia and Austra-
lia rather than the other group, implying that travel distance is more
likely to be a determining factor rather than cultural effect.

CONCLUSION
The research findings indicate that repeat visitation was affected
more by quality of destination performance than overall satisfaction.
Tourists seemed to tell their intentions to revisit Hong Kong based
on their evaluations of destination performance more than levels of
satisfaction. In other words, their revisit intention could be determined
more from what they were actually attracted to than by satisfied them.
Perceived attractiveness as a subconstruct of performance quality was
the most influential predictor of revisit intention. Satisfaction was
1154 REVISIT INTENTION

not a powerful mediator of revisit intention in this particular study:

Perceived attractiveness was the strongest indicator of satisfaction as
well as the most influential antecedent of revisit intention. Satisfaction
is considered to be a psychological state as a mediator of attitude
change (Yi 1991), while quality of performance is regarded as an out-
come resulting directly from destination opportunities (Baker and
Crompton 2000).
Among the subconstructs of performance quality, quality of service
was found to be an insignificant variable in explaining revisit intention.
This finding seems to be caused mainly by measurement because per-
ceived quality of service was measured not by any type of SERVQUAL
measures but by asking respondents, ‘‘ Based on the experiences you
had in Hong Kong, how would you rate its overall service quality on
the following scale?’’ For this study, the variable was intended as ‘‘per-
ceived quality of service provided’’ rather than service quality, because
respondents might interpret the latter as ‘‘overall quality of service pro-
vided’’. It is understandable that perceived quality provided in Hong
Kong could not affect revisit intention although it is a significant indi-
cator of tourist satisfaction.
In describing satisfaction and revisit intention, the ‘‘what’’ dimen-
sion of quality of performance was more influential than the ‘‘how’’
dimension, showing that tourist evaluation was influenced more by
what they received than by how. Grönroos (1984) stated two dimen-
sions of quality: the ‘‘technical quality’’ of what the consumer gets
and the functional quality of how he or she gets it. Tourist satisfaction
and revisit intention might be affected more by technical quality than
by functional quality. Especially, perceived quality provided was found
very important as an antecedent of satisfaction, next to perceived
attractiveness even though it did not significantly affect revisit
intention.
Perceived value for money was found to be a significant predictor of
revisit intention as well as satisfaction. It is not unusual for tourists to
have difficulty remembering how much was paid exactly. Instead, they
often encode prices in ways that are meaningful to them (Zeithaml
1988). Perceived value is a combination of monetary price and
nonmonetary price, including other factors such as time, search costs,
and convenience, and this significantly affected revisit intention to
Hong Kong in this study.
In addition, travel distance slightly affects the role of satisfaction on
revisit intention, implying that this factor from long distances are likely
to be less affected by satisfaction than tourists’ traveling short distances.
In other words, pleasure tourists from European countries are less
likely to revisit Hong Kong than those from Asian countries, even
though both are satisfied, because of distance. This finding implies
that the intention should be considered as an initiator of a revisit deci-
sionmaking process rather than an output of it. Actually, the study
model only explains less than 15% of total variances, implying that
other determining factors related to travel ability should be included.
 UM, CHON AND RO 1155

Until now, revisit intention has not been studied as a decisionmaking

process. Findings of this study support the research focus on modeling
a revisit decisionmaking process in the same way as modeling a destina-
tion choice process.
Based on the study findings, to retain tourists as repeaters, marketing
efforts should be made for providing diverse opportunities to experi-
ence Hong Kong in many different ways. Special pricing strategy for
brand loyalty (a frequent flyer program) might be prepared at the
country level. Shopping centers in the city might be segmented
depending upon the target group in order to increase familiarity with
goods and services. In addition, new attractions might be periodically
developed and distributed as a management innovation to retain
repeaters, either via the internet or a brochure.
This study has a limitation in measuring each evaluation construct.
Each was selected as an antecedent of revisit intention based on the
conceptual framework and measured by a single-item scale. Because
the study instrument was included in the omnibus survey, it inevitably
had shortened questions. To support the validity and reliability issue of
this single-item measure, an independent t-test for first-timers and
repeaters groups was implemented and path analysis was delivered
both for two groups and for four years’ data. In spite of these efforts,
validity and reliability of one-item measures of tourist evaluation
constructs still remain less than clear.
For further study, a multi-item scale to measure perceived attractive-
ness could be developed and included into the model for better pre-
diction of revisit intention. Further, since the data were collected
from a heterogeneous sampling group, for further study, some implica-
tions relative to cross-cultural issues could be examined specifically.
Indeed, in the pursuit of studying revisit intentions, it is necessary to
systematize all recent researches that have significantly improved on
service quality and consumer satisfaction as well as beyond satisfaction.
Despite these limitations, it seems that this research on repeat visitation
should be desirable for destination marketing. It is obvious that
measuring and utilizing a destination’s perceived attractiveness is
another very important topic of revisit research.
This research on repeat visitation may be seen to blend with the so-
cial science concept of measuring tourists’ satisfaction. The more at-
tracted they are by destination performance, the more likely they are
to revisit it. Especially in the case of overseas travel, even though satis-
fied with their trip, they are unlikely to revisit the destination unless
very attracted by its performance, because of reduced novelty and
opportunity costs.
Revisit intention as an outcome of satisfaction at the stage of post-
purchase evaluation is often questioned, but it acts as a proxy of the
satisfaction variable. Therefore, satisfaction might explain more vari-
ances of revisit intention than any independent variable in a regression
model, even though validity of measurement is also likely to affect the
role of satisfaction in this prediction.
1156 REVISIT INTENTION

REFERENCES
Andreassen, T.
1995 Dissatisfaction with Public Services: The Case of Public Transportation.
Journal of Services Marketing 9(5):30–41.
Arbuckle, J., and W. Worthke
1999 Amos 4.0 User’s Guide. Chicago: SmallWaters Corporation.
Assael, H.
1998 Consumer Behavior and Marketing Action (6th ed.). Cincinnati: South-
Western Publishing.
Baker, D., and J. Crompton
2000 Quality, Satisfaction, and Behavioral Intentions. Annals of Tourism
Research 27:785–804.
Bigne, J., M. Sanchez, and J. Sanchez
2001 Tourism Image, Evaluation Variables and After Purchase Behavior: Inter-
relationship. Tourism Management 22:607–616.
Bitner, M., and A. Hubbert
1994 Encounter Satisfaction versus Overall Satisfaction versus Service Quality:
The Consumer’s Voice. In Service Quality: New Directions in Theory and
Practice, R. Rust and R. Oliver, eds., pp. 72–94. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Bowen, D.
2001 Antecedents of Consumer Satisfaction and Dis-satisfaction(CS/D) on
Long-Haul Inclusive Tours: A Reality Check on Theoretical Considerations.
Tourism Management 22:49–61.
Chan, W.
2001 Customer Satisfaction and Behavioral Intentions: Impact of Tour Service
Performance on Group Cohesion (PhD dissertation proposal in Tourism
Management). Hong Kong: The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
Court, B., and R. Lupton
1997 Customer Portfolio Development: Modeling Destination Adopters,
Inactives, and Rejecters. Journal of Travel Research 36(1):35–43.
Cole, S., and D. Scott
2004 Examining the Mediating Role of Experience Quality in a Model of
Tourist Experiences. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing 16(1):79–90.
Echtner, C., and J. Ritchie
1991 The Meaning and Measurement of Destination Image. The Journal of
Tourism Studies 2(2):2–12.
Ekinci, Y.
2004 An Investigation of the Determinants of Customer Satisfaction. Tourism
Analysis 8:197–203.
Fakeye, P., and J. Crompton
1991 Images Differences between Prospective, First-Time and Repeat Visi-
tors to the Lower Rio Grande Valley. Journal of Travel Research 30(2):10–16.
Grönroos, C.
1984 A Service Quality Model and Its Marketing Implications. European
Journal of Marketing 18(4):36–44.
Hatcher, L.
1994 A Step-by-Step Approach to Using the SAS System for Factor Analysis and
Structural Equation Modeling. Cary: SAS Institute.
Hirschman, E., and M. Holbrook
1982 Hedonic consumption: Emerging Concepts, Methods, and Propositions.
Journal of Marketing 46(3):92–101.
Hu, Y., and J. Ritchie
1993 Measuring Destination Attractiveness: A Contextual Approach. Journal
of Tourism Research 32(2):25–34.
Kim, H.
1998 Perceived Attractiveness of Korean Destinations. Annals of Tourism
Research 25:340–361.
Kozak, M.
2001a Repeaters’ Behavior at two Distinct Destinations. Annals of Tourism
Research 28:784–807.
 UM, CHON AND RO 1157

2001b A Critical Review of Approaches to Measure Satisfaction with Tourist

Destinations. In Consumer Psychology of Tourism Hospitality and Leisure
(Vol. 2), A. Woodside, G. Crouch, J. Mazanec, M. Oppermann and M. Sakai,
eds., pp.303–320. New York: CABI Publishing.
Kozak, M., and M. Rimmington
2000 Tourist Satisfaction with Mallorca, Spain, as an Off-season Holiday
Destination. Journal of Travel Research 38:260–269.
Leung, E., and B. McKercher
2001 Operational Issues in Marketing Research: An Example of the Omnibus
Tourism Survey. Pacific Tourism Review 5(1):5–13.
Mayo, E., and L. Jarvis
1981 The Psychology of Leisure Travel: Effective Marketing and Selling of
Travel Services. Boston: CBI.
Mazursky, D.
1989 Past Experience and Future Tourism Decisions. Annals of Tourism
Research 16:333–344.
Oh, H.
1999 Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction, and Customer Value: A Holistic
Perspective. International Journal of Hospitality Management 18:67–82.
Oppermann, M.
1998 Destination Threshold Potential and the Law of Repeat Visitation.
Journal of Travel Research 37(2):131–137.
2000 Tourism Destination Loyalty. Journal of Travel Research 39(1):78–84.
Parasuramann, A., V. Zeithaml, and L. Berry
1985 A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future
Research. Journal of Marketing 49(4):41–50.
Petrick, J., D. Morais, and W. Norman
2001 An Examination of the Determinants of Entertainment Vacationers’
Intention to Revisit. Journal of Travel Research 40(1):41–48.
Rust, R., P. Danaher, and S. Varki
1999 Comparative Service Quality and Business Outcomes. Working Paper,
Center for Service Marketing. Nashville: Vanderbilt University.
Sampol, C.
1996 Estimating the Probability of Return Visits Using a Survey of Tourist
Expenditure in the Balearic Islands. Tourism Economics 2:339–352.
Tribe, J., and T. Snaith
1998 From SERVQUAL to HOLSAT: Holiday Satisfaction in Varadero, Cuba.
Tourism Management 19:25–34.
Um, S.
1997/8 Decomposing Annual Visitation to Amusement Parks into the Cate-
gories of Initial Visitor and Revisitors: Application of Bass’s Model of Diffusion
Process. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 2(1):43–50.
Um, S., and J. Crompton
1990 Attitude Determinants of Tourism Destination Choice. Annals of
Tourism Research 17:432–448.
Wang, L., X. Fan, and V. Willson
1996 Effects of Nonnormal Data on Parameter Estimates and Fit Indices for a
Model with Latent and Manifest Variables: An Empirical Study. Structural
Equation Modeling 3:228–247.
Woodside, A., and S. Lysonski
1989 A General Model of Traveler Destination Choice. Journal of Travel
Research 27(4):8–14.
Yi, Y.
1991 A Critical Review of Consumer Satisfaction. In Review of Marketing, V.
Zeithaml, ed., pp. 78–123. Chicago: American Marketing Association.
Zeithaml, V.
1988 Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality and Value: A Means-End Model
and Synthesis of Evidence. Journal of Marketing 52(July):2–22.
1158 REVISIT INTENTION

Submitted 27 May 2004. Resubmitted 15 February 2005. Resubmitted 22 September 2005.

Resubmitted 8 February 2006. Resubmitted 4 April 2006. Final version 4 April 2006.
Accepted 21 May 2006. Refereed anonymously. Coordinating Editor: Muzzo Uysal