See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/325108383

The Impact of Tourists' Perceptions on Revisit Intention

Conference Paper · November 2017

CITATIONS READS

0 292

3 authors, including:

Pınar Çelik Yunus Topsakal

Akdeniz University Adana Science and Technology University
24 PUBLICATIONS   13 CITATIONS    60 PUBLICATIONS   46 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Conference Papers View project

Article View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Yunus Topsakal on 12 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Proceedings Book - IX International Tourism Congress (ITC’17), 29-30 November 2017, Peniche, Portugal

The Impact of Tourists' Perceptions on Revisit Intention

Pinar Çelika, Nedim Yüzbaşioğlub and Yunus Topsakalc

a
Akdeniz University, Social Science Vocational School, Antalya, TURKEY
pnr.celik@gmail.com
b
Akdeniz University, Faculty of Tourism, Antalya, TURKEY
nedimy@akdeniz.edu.tr
c
Adana Science and Technology University, Faculty of Tourism, Adana, TURKEY
topsakal.yunus@gmail.com

Abstract
Revisiting intention to tourism destinations has become an important issue for the strategic
management and marketing of destinations. Destinations are now aware of the necessity that they need
to attractive product features to increase tourists revisiting and recommendation to others. The purpose
of the study is to put the tourist’s destination perceptions effects on revisit intention.
For this purpose, the data obtained from the questionnaires 1195 tourists who visited Antalya in
2014, which is the important tourism destination of Turkey, were used for the analysis. CHAID
analysis was applied because the relationship between the perceptions of tourists and the intention to
revisit the destination can both provide a visual dimension and allow the findings to be easily
understood and interpreted. Of the six terminal nodes produced by CHAID, two segments with
opposite trends were found, for which profiles were drawn. Results of the study will help the
destination managers to understand what are the characteristics of the destination products that are
effective in the revisit intention of the tourists.

Keywords:
Tourist destination, revisiting, recommendation, CHAID Analysis

1. Introduction

Oliver and Swan (1989) have expressed behavioral intention as a person's defining his/her
future behavior or being in expectation. So behavioral intention covers the behaviors customers would
perform within the framework of their opinions about the service after they receive it (Yücenur et al.,
2011:160). In behavioral studies related to behavioral intention, it is seen that the concept of
behavioral intention has been used in the same sense as concepts such as commitment (Bianchi and
Pike, 2011), revisit (Phillips and others, 2011; Bigne, Sanchez and Sanchez, 2001) and
recommendation (Bigne and others, 2001). In these studies, it is seen that mostly repurchasing and
recommending to others are the prominent aspects (Brady and Hult, 200; Varki and Colgate, 2001;
Chen, 2008). Within tourism literature, behavioral intention has been reviewed within the context of
the intention of repurchasing or revisiting the destination (Yoon and Uysal, 2005; Pratmininglish et al.,
2014).
Revisit intention is a cognitive state that reflects a tourist’s plan to return to a destination during
a projected period of time (Weaver & Lawton, 2011). Being satisfied with the destination visited and
wishing to see the destination again has generated the concept of the intention to revisit. To ensure
repeat visitors for the destination is an important criterion in the competitiveness of these destinations
(Alegra and Cladera, 2006:289). Stating the significance of repeat visitors for the first time, Gitelson
and Crompton (1984) have expressed that destinations needed repeat visitors. Intention to revisit a
tourism destination has been defined as an individual's readiness or willingness to make a repeat visit
to the same destination, providing the most accurate prediction of a decision to revisit, e.g. purchase of
a vacation package to the same destination (Han & Kim, 2010).

745
 Proceedings Book - IX International Tourism Congress (ITC’17), 29-30 November 2017, Peniche, Portugal

According to Kotler (2000), retaining customers and providing customer loyalty by creating
customer satisfaction under the circumstances of increasing competition is becoming a strategic
obligation in today's market. It is widely accepted that there is a connection between tourist
satisfaction (including the perceived quality and perceived values) and the intention to repurchase
(Rust and Oliver, 1994). In tourism industry, tourist satisfaction is a concept which is effective in
choosing a destination, consuming a product or service and deciding whether to revisit a destination
and it is often the subject of researches (Kozak and Rimmington, 2000).
Within the studies, there are some reasons regarding why the intention to revisit is so important
for the tourism industry. These reasons are explained as follows (Opperman, 1997, p. 178-179; Güngör,
conveying from Oppermann 2000, 2010:35):

• Repeated visit is an indication that the tourist satisfaction is realized.

• Repeat tourists are the ones with high possibility to show the same behavior in the future.
• Repeat tourists can recommend the destination for their friends or relatives to visit.
• Marketing spending to impress the tourists visiting the same destination again is less than the
spending made for first-time tourists.
• Tourists visiting the same destination again stay shorter than first-time visitors and participate
in fewer activities, therefore more efforts should be made to gain first-time visitors so that they revisit.

Meeting the needs of tourists and tourist-oriented behaviors become important for the
promotion of the region and its chance of being revisited. So the possibility of the tourists who are
satisfied with the tourism activity to visit the same touristic region again is regarded high. Chen and
Tsai (2007) noted that to have provided satisfaction as a result of tourists' evaluations after the holiday
involving their travel experiences or their perceived quality and perceived value during the holiday
would make them come back in the future and recommend the place to others. It is seen that the level
of satisfaction in touristic regions and the number of the repeat visits have been increased and that the
visitors recommended the tourism destinations to their acquaintances.
Accurately defined motivation factors also create visitor satisfaction and positively influence the
intention to revisit the destination. Tourists' satisfaction with the destination positively affects their
intention to revisit. Oppermann (1999: 56) emphasized that satisfaction would not always be sufficient
to create loyalty for the destination. In other words, some tourists may want to have new experiences
and see different places apart from the places they have previously visited, so it is difficult to provide a
revisit for a destination (Kozak, 2000, s. 70). Even if a tourist is satisfied with the destination, he/she
may not want to visit the place again. For this reason, positive rumors about the destination from
mouth to mouth may be a more beneficial factor for the destination rather than a revisit (Baker and
Crompton, 2000, p. 799). Tourists' perceptions regarding the destination will allow for potential
tourists to be affected when they return to their countries. This will make the tourists express their
travel experiences to their acquaintances positively and be effective for the region to gain a positive
touristic image.
The aim of this study is to reveal the relation between the perception of the tourists who visit the
destination of Antalya regarding the destination and their intention to revisit Antalya. The objective is
to identify the effect of the perception of destination over the behavior of repeat visits by CHAID
analysis. The results of this research will help destination managers better understand the tourist
characteristics that are effective in revisiting and recommending Antalya destination.

2. Literature Review

The intention to revisit has been studied by relating to many topics in tourism literature. As it is
better to make the visitors revisit the destination instead of looking for new visitors, many researchers
have focused on the factors that contribute to reviewing the intention to revisit. Many researchers have
investigated the intention to revisit regarding travel motivation, satisfaction, service quality, past
experience and the number of revisits for a destination, destination image, perceived value, perceived
risk and tourist behavior. Within the studies on the intention to revisit and satisfaction, it is noted that
customer satisfaction is an important criterion for both re-purchasing and product or brand loyalty
(Petrick, 1999; Kozak, 2001; Petrick, Morais and Norman, 2001; Rittichainuwat, Qu and

746
 Proceedings Book - IX International Tourism Congress (ITC’17), 29-30 November 2017, Peniche, Portugal

Mongknonvanit, 2002; Tomas, Scott and Crompton, 2002; Hui, Wan and Ho, 2007; Hong et al., 2009;
Güngör, 2010; Alegre and Garau, 2010; Som and Badarneh, 2011; Guntoro and Hui, 2013).
The main factors related to the intention to revisit, which is a subdimension of destination
loyalty are tourist satisfaction, the motivations that impel them to choose a destination and tourist
loyalty measured by the rate of repeat visits (Alegre and Cladera, 2009, p. 670; Boit, 2013, p. 19).
Petrick, Morais and Norman (2001) stated that the intention to revisit the destination might be
influenced by the level of the tourist's satisfaction, perceived value and past behavior. At the same
time, the number of visits by the tourists for the same destination also affects the intention to revisit. It
has been suggested in many studies that the tourists who have visited the destination before had a
higher intention to revisit compared to first-time visitors (Gitelson and Crompton, 1984; Kozak and
Rimmington, 2000). A positive destination image and its direct effect on tourists' intention to revisit
influence the decision to purchase (Kim & Yoon, 2003; Chi and Qu, 2008; Prayag, 2008; Bigne,
Sanchez, & Sanz, 2009; Assaker, Vinzi and O’Connor, 2011; Boit, 2013; Chew & Jahari, 2014;).
The main factors related to the intention to revisit, which is a subdimension of destination
loyalty are tourist satisfaction, the motivations that impel them to choose a destination and tourist
loyalty measured by the rate of repeat visits (Alegre and Cladera, 2009, p. 670; Boit, 2013, p. 19).
Petrick, Morais and Norman (2001) stated that the intention to revisit the destination might be
influenced by the level of the tourist's satisfaction, perceived value and past behavior. At the same
time, the number of visits by the tourists for the same destination also affects the intention to revisit. It
has been suggested in many studies that the tourists who have visited the destination before had a
higher intention to revisit compared to first-time visitors (Gitelson and Crompton, 1984; Kozak and
Rimmington, 2000). Hui et al. (2007) concluded that overall satisfaction influenced tourists' repeat
visits and recommendation for the destination.Raza et al. (2012) also examined the relationship
between service quality, perceived value, tourist satisfaction and the intention to revisit.
However, there are also research findings noting that tourists seeking novelty are not inclined to
revisit a destination due to their need for diversity and alternatives (Assaker & Hallak, 2013; Assaker,
Vinzi and O'Connor, 2011; Castro, Armario & Ruiz, 2007; Bigne, Sanchez & Andreu, 2009).

3. Methodology

In order to classify the effects of destination-related perceptions of tourists who visit the
destination of Antalya over their intention to revisit Antalya (dependent variable) as a whole, CHAID
(Chi-squared Automatic Interaction Detection) analysis, one of the "Decision Trees Methods", a
method of data mining was applied in this study. CHAID analysis is an explanatory method used in
studies that determine the relationships between a dependent variable and a set of independent
variables (Doğan and Özdamar, 2003). CHAID analysis is a decision tree algorithm. CHAID divides
data into subsets that best describe the dependent variable, and subsets are divided into fragments that
mutually exclude and include each other (Kass, 1980).
In the CHAID algorithm, the independent variable that affects the dependent variable the most
is determined using the F test if the dependent variable is continuous and using the Chi-square if the
dependent variable is categorical. It is the preferred algorithm for reasons such as its ability to work on
categorical and continuous variables and to divide the node in the tree into subgroups of more than
two (Akpınar, 2000, p.16).
The sample of the study consists of 1195 tourists who visited Antalya in 2014. The dependent
and independent variables used in the analysis are given in table 1.

747
 Proceedings Book - IX International Tourism Congress (ITC’17), 29-30 November 2017, Peniche, Portugal

Table I: Description of the variables

Criterion variable(s) or dependence variable(s) 1 = ‘yes’, 2 = ‘no’
Willingness to visit again the Antalya
Recommendation to others to visit Antalya
Predictor variables or independence variables 1-very bad’, 5 = ‘very
good’
The quality of service
The tourist product diversity
Hospitality
The beauty of the natural environment
Good value for money
The quality of hygiene and cleanliness
The quality of food and beverage
The quality and standard of accommodation facilities
Nightlife and entertainment opportunities
Sporting activities
Shopping possibilities
The quality of health services
The quality of services provided to children
The quality of the sea and the beach
The quality of the local transportation network and services
The quality of the telecommunication network
The quality of banking services
The quality of airports
The attractiveness of the cultural richness
The attractiveness of the historical riches
Overall attractiveness
The effectiveness of promotional and advertising policies

4. Findings

The tree diagram resulting from CHAID analysis regarding tourists' intention to revisit is given
in Figure 1. When Figure 1 is examined, it is seen that 85% of the tourists who have visited the
destination of Antalya, the subject to the survey, think that they will visit Antalya again. 14.9 % stated
that they did not consider visiting Antalya again. The variable that best explains a revisit is the service
quality. The ones who rated the service quality above average ranked the first place with a rate of
70.8%. This is followed by those who consider the service quality as average, with 20.1% and after
that comes those who rate it as below average, with 9.1%. While 91.1% of those who considered the
service quality above average stated that they thought they would revisit Antalya, 8.9% stated that they
did not consider revisiting although they liked the service quality. The best variable explaining the set
consisting of the ones who considered the service quality above average is the shopping opportunities
in Antalya. When we look at the distribution within this group of 70.8%, 40.0% consists of the ones
who find shopping opportunities of Antalya destination good and 30.8% consists of the ones who find
it better than good. While 94.8% of those who found it better than good stated that they thought they
would revisit, 5.2% stated that they did not consider to do so. Of those who found it good and below
the level of good, 88.3% stated that they considered revisiting. The variable that best explains the set
consisting of the ones who found the shopping opportunities in Antalya below the level of good is the
night life and recreational opportunities in Antalya. When we have a look at the distribution of this
group of 40.0%, we see that 31.0% found Antalya's nightlife and recreational opportunities above
average and 9.0% found it below average. It is also revealed that high proportions, with 90.3% of the
ones who found nightlife and recreational opportunities above average and 81.5% of the ones who
found them below average, considered revisiting.
The ones who found hospitality, the variable best explaining the group of 20.1% who found
service quality average, over the average constitute 8.5% and below the average constitute 11.6%. It is
seen that 77.5% of those who found the service quality average, 89.1% of those who found hospitality

748
 Proceedings Book - IX International Tourism Congress (ITC’17), 29-30 November 2017, Peniche, Portugal

over the average and 69.1% of those who found it below the average considered revisiting Antalya.
The ones who found historical richness, which is the variable best describing the group of 9.1%
who found the service quality below average, as below average constitute 4.7% and above average
constitute 4.4%. It is seen that 55.0% of the ones who found service quality below average, 41.5% of
the ones who found historical richness above average and 67,9% of the ones who found it below
average considered revisiting Antalya.

Figure 1 : CHAID Analysis of Thoughts of Tourists on Revisiting Antalya

5. Discussion and Conclusions

Perceiving that the products and services offered to tourists in tourism regions are of high
quality would play an active role in repeat visits of tourists and sharing their experiences with their
acquaintances. As such, the aim of this study is to reveal the relation between the perception of the
tourists who visit the destination of Antalya regarding the destination and their intention to revisit
Antalya. The effect of the perception of destination over the behavior of repeat visits has been
identified by CHAID analysis.
According to the results of the analysis, it is seen that the most effective reason for tourists'
intention to revisit Antalya is service quality and most of the ones who found service quality above
average were the ones who were interested in night life, although they found shopping opportunities
below the level of good.

749
 Proceedings Book - IX International Tourism Congress (ITC’17), 29-30 November 2017, Peniche, Portugal

On the other hand, although tour companies usually organize shopping tours, the reason why
they found quality of shopping below the level of good might be because the tourists do not leave the
hotel most of the time since the region of hotels in Antalya destination are away from the city centre,
high-quality shopping malls are away from this region and "all inclusive" system is implemented.
Among the ones who found service quality above the average, it is seen that the ones who found
shopping opportunities above the level of good are the most satisfied group, the most willing to revisit
Antalya.
It is understood that the ones who found service quality as average and hospitality above
average are largely satisfied with that. It is also understood that the willingness of those who found
hospitality below average to revisit Antalya resulted from other attractive variables which were not
included in the decision tree.
It is also understood that the high-rated willingness of those who found both service quality and
historical richness below average to revisit Antalya resulted from other attractive variables which were
not included in the decision tree.
Results of the research were formed in accordance with the responses of the tourists who visited
Antalya destination only. Studies for the tourists who visit other destinations in Turkey can also be
made and inter-destinational comparisons can be provided.

6. References

Akpınar, H. (2000). Veri tabanlarında bilgi keşfi ve veri madenciliği. İÜ İşletme Fakültesi
Dergisi, 29(1), 1-22.
Alegre, J., & Cladera, M. (2006). Repeat visitation in mature sun and sand holiday
destinations. Journal of travel research, 44(3), 288-297.
Alegre, J., & Cladera, M. (2009). Analysing the effect of satisfaction and previous visits on tourist
intentions to return. European Journal of Marketing, 43(5/6), 670-685.
Alegre, J., & Garau, J. (2010). Tourist satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Annals of tourism
research, 37(1), 52-73.
Assaker, G., Vinzi, V. E., & O’Connor, P. (2011). Examining the effect of novelty seeking, satisfaction,
and destination image on tourists’ return pattern: A two factor, non-linear latent growth
model. Tourism management, 32(4), 890-901.
Assaker, G., & Hallak, R. (2013). Moderating effects of tourists’ novelty-seeking tendencies on
destination image, visitor satisfaction, and short-and long-term revisit intentions. Journal of Travel
Research, 52(5), 600-613.
Baker, D. A., & Crompton, J. L. (2000). Quality, satisfaction and behavioral intentions. Annals of
tourism research, 27(3), 785-804.
Bianchi, C., & Pike, S. (2011). Antecedents of destination brand loyalty for a long-haul market:
Australia's destination loyalty among Chilean travelers. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 28(7),
736-750.
Bigne, J. E., Sanchez, M. I., & Sanchez, J. (2001). Tourism image, evaluation variables and after
purchase behaviour: inter-relationship. Tourism management, 22(6), 607-616.
Bigné, E. J., Sanchez, I., & Andreu, L. (2009). The role of variety seeking in short and long run revisit
intentions in holiday destinations. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality
Research, 3(2), 103-115.
Boit, J. C. (2013). The role of destination attributes and visitor satisfaction on tourist repeat visit
intentions to Lake Nakuru National Park, Kenya. Western Illinois University.
Castro, C. B., Armario, E. M., & Ruiz, D. M. (2007). The influence of market heterogeneity on the
relationship between a destination's image and tourists’ future behaviour. Tourism management, 28(1),
175-187.
Chen, C. F. (2008). Investigating structural relationships between service quality, perceived value,
satisfaction, and behavioral intentions for air passengers: Evidence from Taiwan. Transportation
Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 42(4), 709-717.
Chen, C. F., & Tsai, D. (2007). How destination image and evaluative factors affect behavioral
intentions?. Tourism management, 28(4), 1115-1122.

750
 Proceedings Book - IX International Tourism Congress (ITC’17), 29-30 November 2017, Peniche, Portugal

Chew, E. Y. T., & Jahari, S. A. (2014). Destination image as a mediator between perceived risks and
revisit intention: A case of post-disaster Japan. Tourism Management, 40, 382-393.
Chi, C. G. Q., & Qu, H. (2008). Examining the structural relationships of destination image, tourist
satisfaction and destination loyalty: An integrated approach. Tourism management, 29(4), 624-636.
Cronin, J. J., Brady, M. K., & Hult, G. T. M. (2000). Assessing the effects of quality, value, and
customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environments. Journal of
retailing, 76(2), 193-218.
Doğan, N., & Özdamar, K. (2003). CHAİD Analizi Ve Aile Planlaması İle İlgiliBir Uygulama. Turkiye
Klinikleri Journal of Medical Sciences, 23(5), 392-397.
Gitelson, R. J., & Crompton, J. L. (1984). Insights into the repeat vacation phenomenon. Annals of
tourism Research, 11(2), 199-217.
Güngör, E. (2010). Turistik Yörelerden Memnuniyet ve Geleceğe Yönelik Ziyaretçi Davranışları:
Antalya Örneği, PHD, Erciyes University, Turkey.
Guntoro, B., & Hui, T. K. (2013). Travel satisfaction and revisit intention of Chinese visitors: The
Case of Singapore. In Advances in hospitality and leisure (pp. 29-47). Emerald Group Publishing
Limited.
Han, H., & Kim, Y. (2010). An investigation of green hotel customers’ decision formation: Developing
an extended model of the theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 29(4), 659-668.
Hong, S. K., Lee, S. W., Lee, S., & Jang, H. (2009). Selecting revisited destinations. Annals of Tourism
Research, 36(2), 268-294.
Hui, T. K., Wan, D., & Ho, A. (2007). Tourists’ satisfaction, recommendation and revisiting
Singapore. Tourism management, 28(4), 965-975.
Kass, G. V. (1980). An exploratory technique for investigating large quantities of categorical
data. Applied statistics, 119-127.
Kim, S., & Yoon, Y. (2003). The hierarchical effects of affective and cognitive components on tourism
destination image. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 14(2), 1-22.
Kotler, P. (2000). Marketing management: The millennium edition. Marketing Management, 23(6),
188-193.
Kozak, M., & Rimmington, M. (2000). Tourist satisfaction with Mallorca, Spain, as an off-season
holiday destination. Journal of travel research, 38(3), 260-269.
Kozak, M. (2000). Comparative assessment of tourist satisfaction with destinations across two
nationalities. Tourism management, 22(4), 391-401.
Kozak, M. (2001). Repeaters' behavior at two distinct destinations. Annals of tourism research, 28(3),
784-807.
Oliver, R. L., & Swan, J. E. (1989). Consumer perceptions of interpersonal equity and satisfaction in
transactions: a field survey approach. The Journal of Marketing, 21-35.
Oppermann, M. (1997). Rural tourism in Germany: Farm and rural tourism operators. The business of
rural tourism: International perspectives, 108-119.
Oppermann, M. (1999). Predicting destination choice—A discussion of destination loyalty. Journal of
Vacation Marketing, 5(1), 51-65.
Oppermann, M. (2000). Tourism destination loyalty. Journal of travel research, 39(1), 78-84.
Petrick, J. F. (1999). An examination of the relationship between golf travelers' satisfaction, perceived
value and loyalty and their intentions to revisit. PhD Dissertation in Parks, Recreation and Tourism
Management, Clemson University.
Petrick, J. F., Morais, D. D., & Norman, W. C. (2001). An examination of the determinants of
entertainment vacationers’ intentions to revisit. Journal of Travel Research, 40(1), 41-48.
Phillips, W. J., Wolfe, K., Hodur, N., & Leistritz, F. L. (2013). Tourist word of mouth and revisit
intentions to rural tourism destinations: A case of North Dakota, USA. International journal of tourism
research, 15(1), 93-104.
Pizam, A., Neumann, Y., & Reichel, A. (1978). Dimentions of tourist satisfaction with a destination
area. Annals of tourism Research, 5(3), 314-322.
Pratminingsih, S. A., Rudatin, C. L., & Rimenta, T. (2014). Roles of motivation and destination image
in predicting tourist revisit intention: A case of Bandung-Indonesia. International Journal of
Innovation, Management and Technology, 5(1), 19.

751
 Proceedings Book - IX International Tourism Congress (ITC’17), 29-30 November 2017, Peniche, Portugal

Prayag, G. (2008). Image, satisfaction and loyalty—The case of Cape Town. Anatolia, 19(2), 205-224.
Raza, M. A., Siddiquei, A. N., Awan, H. M., & Bukhari, K. (2012). Relationship between service
quality, perceived value, satisfaction and revisit intention in hotel industry. Interdisciplinary journal of
contemporary research in business, 4(8), 788-805.
Rittichainuwat, B. N., Qu, H., & Mongknonvanit, C. (2002). A study of the impactof travel satisfaction
on the likelihood of travelers to revisit Thailand. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 12(2-3),
19-43.
Rust, R.T. & Oliver, R.L. (1994). Service quality: insights and managerial implications from the
frontier. In Service Quality: New Directions in Theory and Practice (pp. 1-19). Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Som, A. P. M., & Badarneh, M. B. (2011). Tourist satisfaction and repeat visitation; toward a new
comprehensive model. International Journal of Human and Social Sciences, 6(1), 38-45.
Tomas, S., Scott, D., & Crompton, J. (2002). An investigation of the relationships between quality of
service performance, benefits sought, satisfaction and future intention to visit among visitors to a
zoo. Managing Leisure, 7(4), 239-250.
Varki, S., & Colgate, M. (2001). The role of price perceptions in an integrated model of behavioral
intentions. Journal of Service Research, 3(3), 232-240.
Weaver, D. B., & Lawton, L. J. (2011). Visitor loyalty at a private South Carolina protected
area. Journal of Travel Research, 50(3), 335-346.
Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction on
destination loyalty: a structural model. Tourism management, 26(1), 45-56.
Yücenur, G. N., Demirel, N. Ç., Ceylan, C., & Demirel, T. (2011). Hizmet değerinin müşterilerin
davranışsal niyetleri üzerindeki etkisinin yapısal eşitlik modeli ile ölçülmesi. Doğuş Üniversitesi
Dergisi , 12 (1), 156-168.

752

View publication stats