1 factors affecting international event visitors behavioral intentions

Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing

ISSN: 1054-8408 (Print) 1540-7306 (Online) Journal homepage: />
Factors affecting international event visitors’
behavioral intentions: the moderating role of
attachment avoidance
Myung Ja Kim, Choong-Ki Lee, James F. Petrick & Sabena S. Hahn
To cite this article: Myung Ja Kim, Choong-Ki Lee, James F. Petrick & Sabena S.
Hahn (2018): Factors affecting international event visitors’ behavioral intentions: the
moderating role of attachment avoidance, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, DOI:
10.1080/10548408.2018.1468855
To link to this article: />
Published online: 07 May 2018.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 16

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
/>

JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING, 2018
/>
Factors affecting international event visitors’ behavioral intentions: the
moderating role of attachment avoidance
Myung Ja Kim
a

a

, Choong-Ki Leea, James F. Petrickb and Sabena S. Hahna

The College of Hotel & Tourism Management, Kyung Hee University, 26 Kyungheedae-ro, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul 02447, Republic of Korea;
Faculty of Department of Recreation, Park & Tourism Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2261, USA

b

ABSTRACT

ARTICLE HISTORY

This study developed and tested a theoretical framework of event quality, motivation, value, and
destination image in order to investigate visitors’ behavioral intentions to revisit an international
event, along with the moderating role of attachment avoidance. Results revealed that the
relationships among event quality, motivation, value, image, and behavioral intentions were
highly significant. Attachment avoidance was additionally found to moderate the relationships
between quality and value, motivation and value, value and destination image, and value and
behavioral intentions. Findings further provide specific implications for both theoretical insight
and marketing practice in the context of annual and international events.

Received 15 January 2018
Revised 20 March 2018
Accepted 18 April 2018

Introduction
International events are important as many generate
major economic benefits for host countries and their

residents (Han, Nelson, & Kim, 2015; Lee, 2000; Lee, Lee,
& Wicks, 2004; Lee & Taylor, 2005). With competition
growing for the attraction of visitors to events (Lee,
Petrick, & Crompton, 2007), it is becoming ever more
important to be able to identify the underlying reasons
why people choose to attend.
Individual and/or group motives typically initiate the
decision-making processes related to event visits
(Crompton & McKay, 1997). Thus, an understanding of
the underlying motivation factors which lead to the
decision to attend an international event has been
suggested to be crucial for event success (Formica &
Uysal, 1998). Studies on event motivation have shown
that exploration, socialization, family togetherness,
novelty, and escape are key factors that motivate visits
to cultural expositions (expos) (Kah, Lee, & Chung, 2010;
Lee, 2000; Lee et al., 2004).
Researchers have also asserted that quality plays a
critical role in the success of both sports events (Jin,
Lee, & Lee, 2013; Ko, Zhang, Cattani, & Pastore, 2011;
Moon, Ko, Connaughton, & Lee, 2013) and traditional
festivals (Yoon, Lee, & Lee, 2010). Further, in the context
of worldwide events, Richards and Wilson (2004)
revealed that the role of event motivations is significant
in creating innovative event value. Scholars have
CONTACT Choong-Ki Lee, Professor,

Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul 02447, Republic of Korea
© 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

KEYWORDS

Event; quality; motivation;
value; destination image;
behavioral intentions;
attachment avoidance;
formative indicator;
structural equation
modeling; Oriental context

further shown that event value influences destination
image and intentions to revisit cultural events (Richards
& Wilson, 2004) and recurring sports events (Kaplanidou
& Gibson, 2010).
In association with the literature cited above, the
relationships between quality, motivation, value,
image, and behavioral intention are recognized as
important constructs for understanding the decisionmaking processes of event attendees. However, little
research has examined these relationships for international events, especially, while trying to understand the
multiple dimensions of event motivation that could
exist for worldwide expos in Asia.
Another variable that is likely important for understanding the decision-making processes of event attendees is attachment avoidance. Attachment avoidance
has been defined as being insecure with regard to and/
or having difficulty in having an attachment (Bowlby,
1969). One of the many reasons that has been found to
cause attachment avoidance occurs when someone has
felt rejected by their earlier caregivers, especially during
times of need (Bowlby, 1969, 1977). Individuals who are
highly avoidant have been found to have great difficulty in trusting and depending on others and typically
become rigidly more self-reliant compared to their

counterparts (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007). Their goal of
avoiding dependence often produces a unique style of
regulating distress, involving suppressing attachment

The College of Hotel & Tourism Management, Kyung Hee University, 26 Kyungheedae-ro,


2

M. J. KIM ET AL.

needs and defensively disengaging from their partners
(Mikulincer & Shaver, 2003, 2007).
In an online context, Sabiote, Frías, and Castañeda
(2012) asserted that avoidance can have substantial
moderating impact on overall perceived value of tourism products and services purchased online. This
implies that tourists’ behaviors are also affected by
attachment avoidance. One’s level of attachment avoidance has also been found to influence relationship
quality (Mancini, Robinaugh, Shear, & Bonanno, 2009).
Research has further found that attachment avoidance
is associated with intimacy motivation (Edelstein,
Stanton, Henderson, & Sanders, 2010), motivation for
sex (Davis, Shaver, & Vernon, 2004), and academic motivation (Gore & Rogers, 2010). In addition, researchers
have shown that attachment avoidance is linked to
both behavioral intentions and actual behaviors
(Fraley & Davis, 1997; Geller & Bamberger, 2009; Jin &
Peña, 2010; Lee, 2013).
In the event tourism domain, researchers have
been considerably interested in event quality, perceived value, destination image, and attendees’ behavioral intention to revisit the event (Jin et al., 2013;
Moon et al., 2013). Also, in studies on events visitors’

motivations such as exploration, family togetherness,
novelty, escape, and socialization have been shown
to lead to a better understanding of potential tourists’ behavior (Kah et al., 2010; Yoon et al., 2010). In
addition, attachment avoidance research has identified differences between high and low levels of
attachment avoidance as a moderating effect has
been extensively studied (Lee, 2013; Mikulincer &
Shaver, 2007). In line with the literature review
above, research on the factors involved and how to
influence visitors’ behavior in terms of quality, multidimensional motivations, value, image, behavioral
intention, and attachment avoidance is believed to
be timely. In particular, even though attachment
avoidance has consistently been found to play a
moderating role in predicting individuals’ behaviors,
it has yet to be utilized to understand the behaviors
of event participants. Therefore, the primary purposes
of this research are to examine a proposed model
including quality, motivation, value, image, and behavioral intention, and then to investigate the moderating effects of attachment avoidance. Additionally,
with an annual event taking place in China every
year (Weifang China, 2016) and with annual visitor
numbers to the International Expo in China being
over 200,000 (China Chamber of International
Commerce, 2016) it is believed that the use of this
expo is a good case study for examining the study’s
purposes.

Literature review
Events
Events have been suggested to include “world fairs/
expos, carnivals/festivals, sports events, cultural/religious events, historical milestones, commercial/agricultural events, or political personage events” (Ritchie,
1984, p. 2). They have consistently been found to

have the potential to increase a destination’s competiveness with regard to attracting visitors (Getz, 2008).
Due to this, Richards and Wilson (2004) argued that
cities are increasingly hosting events (e.g. world fairs,
expos, sporting events, and festivals) to enhance their
image, encourage urban development, and to entice
visitors and encourage investment. Similarly, cultural
events at historical sites are becoming increasingly
important for promoting visits to destinations
(Formica & Uysal, 1998). In particular, international
events (Lee & Taylor, 2005) and world expos (Lee,
2000; Lee et al., 2004) have been found to be extremely
effective at luring international and domestic tourists.
For the purposes of the current study, an international event refers to an event that attracts a considerable number of international participants and
spectators, and generates significant short-term and
long-term economic, social, and cultural benefits for
the host country, providing international media coverage for tourism (Majorevents.govt.nz, 2016). Thus, this
study uses international event visitors (i.e. the China–
Japan–Korea Industries (CJK) Expo annually held in the
same place of Weifang China) as the population for
understanding visitors’ revisit intentions to the event.

Motivation theory
Motives have been defined as internal factors that
arouse persons’ behaviors, and key tourism motivations
have been suggested to include: personal competence,
interpersonal diversion, positive interpersonal development, and avoidance of one’s daily routine and problems (Iso-Ahola, 1982). Motivations for pleasure travel
have been found to include “socio-psychological
motives (escape, exploration, relaxation, regression,
prestige, kinship relationships, and socialization) and
cultural motives (novelty and education)” (Crompton,

1979, p. 408).
Push motives are those internal to the tourists, which
push them toward desiring to participate in an activity,
while pull factors are the features of a destination/
attraction that are created to increase the desirability
of a destination (Crompton, 1979). Crompton (1979)
further found that push motivations include: the desire


JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

for adventure/social interaction, escape/avoidance, rest/
relaxation, excitement, prestige, health/fitness, and
family togetherness. Pull factors can include the attractiveness of a destination: cultural attractions, recreation
facilities, entertainment, natural scenery, and beaches
(Yoon & Uysal, 2005).
Motivations to attend an international cultural–historical
event have been found to include: group togetherness,
attraction/excitement, cultural/historical factors, family
togetherness, socialization/entertainment, and novelty
(Formica & Uysal, 1998). Similarly, it has been found that
motivations to attend international expo events include:
family togetherness, exploration, escape (recover equilibrium), novelty, attractions, known-group socialization,
and external group socialization (Lee, 2000; Lee et al.,
2004). For global expo events in Asia, motivations of visitors
have been found to include: family togetherness, exploration, novelty, socialization, and escape (Kah et al., 2010).
Based on the above cited literature, the current study
operationalizes visitors’ motivations to include exploration,
socialization, family togetherness, novelty, and escape.

Attachment avoidance
From a psychological view, attachment has been
defined as “the tendency of people to make secure
affectional bonds to particular individuals and objects”
(Bowlby, 1977, p. 201). Attachment avoidance occurs
when people deny and or avoid attachment to others
or things (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). Those who
are attachment avoidant tend to feel subjective distress
and discomfort when they become close to others
(Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). Attachment avoidance has been found to be negatively related to the
tendency to form attachment bonds with peers as well
as romantic partners, as attachment avoidant individuals tend to think their partners are insecure (Fraley
& Davis, 1997). Attachment avoidance has further been
found to be negatively associated with emotional and
sexual closeness (Davis et al., 2004).
Much of the tourism literature has shown that seeking novelty (Lee & Crompton, 1992; Snepenger, 1987),
and/or trying to escape one’s normal environment (IsoAhola, 1982; Kozak, 2001) are primary reasons people
travel. This suggests that new and/or spontaneous
behaviors are important elements of touristic behaviors.
Yet, the attachment avoidance literature has consistently found that persons who are attachment avoidant
have difficulty in performing spontaneous or new behaviors (Simpson, Rholes, & Nelligan, 1992). This has been
suggested to occur because highly avoidant persons
have different needs regarding seeking/giving emotional support, physical contact, and supportive

3

comments (Simpson et al., 1992). Drawing upon the
literature review, it is anticipated that attachment
avoidance will have a moderating role in predicting
mega-event visitors’ behaviors. Thus, this study regards

attachment avoidance as a potentially important moderator for explaining event consumers’ behaviors.

Hypotheses development
Relationship between quality and value
Event quality has been defined as “the quality of opportunity provided by the elements of a festival that are
under the control of the promoting organization”
(Crompton, 2003, p. 306). Experience quality has been
found to have significant impacts on the perceived
value, satisfaction, and water park image for water
park patrons, which in turn directly and indirectly influenced their behavioral intentions (Jin, Lee, & Lee, 2015).
In the context of a major league baseball game, event
quality has also been suggested to assist event managers in succeeding and maintaining a competitive
edge within the event marketplace (Ko et al., 2011).
Moreover, research has suggested that event quality is
related to the physical environment and pertains to the
spectators’ evaluations of physical facilities (Jin et al.,
2013). Elements of the physical environment that have
been found to be important include: ambience, equipment, facilitation, layout, and function (Bitner, 1992;
Westerbeek, 2000). Thus, in association with the literature cited above, this research regards the quality of an
event’s physical environment (e.g. ambience, facility,
design, cleanliness) as an important antecedent of perceived value.
Perceived value has been argued to be the comparison of what somebody gets for what they give
(Zeithaml, 1988). Dimensions of what somebody gets
have been found to include quality, reputation, and
emotional response, while dimensions of what somebody gives can include both a monetary and a behavioral price (Petrick, 2002). Customer value has been
argued to be a source of competitive advantage that
directly leads to customer satisfaction, loyalty, and
purchase (Parasuraman, 1997). Perceived value has
been further suggested to not only influence customer selection behavior pre-purchase, but also satisfaction and intent to recommend and repurchase
post-purchase (Lee, Yoon, & Lee, 2007; Parasuraman

& Grewal, 2000).
In an international sporting event, perceived value
has been found to play an important role in understanding the relationships between quality, destination
image, and behavioral intentions (Jin et al., 2013). Also,
based on an international event study, perceived value


4

M. J. KIM ET AL.

has been conceptualized as having hedonic, economic,
social, and altruistic items (Moon et al., 2013). Thus, for
the current study, event value includes the following
factors: hedonic, economic, and overall value in the
context of the CJK Expo.
From a travel and tourism marketing perspective,
several studies have shown that quality perceptions
are significantly related to perceptions of value (Jin
et al., 2013, 2015; Moon et al., 2013; Petrick, 2004b;
Yoon et al., 2010). Specifically, quality has been
found to have a significant effect on perceptions of
value for cruise passengers (Petrick, 2004b), festival
attendees (Yoon et al., 2010), water park patrons (Jin
et al., 2015), and bicycle racers (Moon et al., 2013).
Hence, in line with the literature cited above, the
following hypothesis (H) is proposed for an international event.
H1: Event quality has a positive effect on event value.

Relationship between motivation and value

Crompton and McKay (1997) and Lee, Lee, Bernhard,
and Lee (2009) asserted that motivations are closely
related to satisfaction. Thus, it is likely that festival
managers should attempt to understand attendees’
motives. They also argued that motivation is useful for
segmenting target markets, which can help marketers
develop effective promotion strategies. Crompton and
McKay (1997) specifically identified six motive domains
for attending festivals including: cultural exploration,
novelty/regression, recover equilibrium, known group
socialization, external interaction/socialization, and gregariousness. Similarly, in a study of worldwide expo
visitors, Lee, Kang, and Lee (2013) identified the following motivations: cultural exploration, family togetherness, event attractions, socialization, novelty, and
escape.
Multiple motivations have been found in various
studies (Kim, Kim, & Wachter, 2013; Prebensen, Woo,
Chen, & Uysal, 2013; Redondo-Carretero, CamareroIzquierdo, Gutiérrez-Arranz, & Rodríguez-Pinto, 2017;
Woratschek, Durchholz, Maier, & Strưbel, 2017) that
positively influence perceptions of value. For example,
hedonic and social motivations have been found to
have a significant effect on perceived value to engage
in using a smartphone that leads to satisfaction and
mobile engagement intention (Kim, Kim, et al., 2013).
Also, motives to learn a language have been found to
be related to tourists’ perceived value (RedondoCarretero et al., 2017), and nature tourists’ motivations
for relaxation and socialization have been found to
positively influence their perceived value of destination

experience (Prebensen et al., 2013). Further, Woratschek
et al. (2017) suggested that event visitors’ motivations
for socializing and intercultural contact are key factors

that can lead to value at sport events. In association
with the literature cited above, the following hypothesis
is posited for an international expo:
H2: Event motivation has a positive effect on event
value.

Relationship between value and destination image
Destination image has been defined as “the perception of individual attributes or destination features
(e.g. local cuisine) known as cognitive images and
mental pictures or place imagery based on both
cognitive (e.g. safe for family) and affective images
(e.g. enjoyable experience)” (Prayag & Ryan, 2012,
p. 343). The image of an event destination has consistently been found to be a key determinant for
attracting attendees (Richards & Wilson, 2004).
Marketers, including those promoting events, thus
attempt to develop promotions that aid in building
an attractive image for a destination to draw potential tourists.
In addition, destination image has been found to significantly mediate the relationships between risks (i.e. perceived sociopsychological and financial risks) and revisit
intention in the context of post-disaster Japan tourism
(Chew & Jahari, 2014). Destination image has been further
found to partially mediate the relationship between service
quality and behavioral intention, while destination image
has been found to fully mediate the relationship between
perceived value and behavioral intentions in an international event (Moon et al., 2013). In association with the
literature review above, this study assumes that destination
image will significantly mediate the relationship between
value and behavioral intention in an international event
context.
Perceived image of a destination has been suggested to be formed through the image projected by
individuals’ own needs and values (Gartner, 1994).

Moreover, perceptions of value have consistently been
found to significantly influence tourists’ image of a
destination (Baloglu & McCleary, 1999; Bramwell &
Rawding, 1996; Moon et al., 2013; Um & Crompton,
1990). Thus, in association with the literature cited
above, we posit the following hypothesis in an international event:
H3: Event value has a positive effect on destination
image.


JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

Relationship between value and behavioral
intentions
Behavioral intentions have been defined as an assertion
of the likelihood of initiating a certain action (Oliver,
2010). Zeithaml, Berry, and Parasuraman (1996, p. 34)
referred to behavioral intentions by stating, “when customers praise the firm, express preference for the company over others, increase the volume of their
purchases, or agreeably pay a price premium, they are
indicating behaviorally that they are bonding with the
company”. Because actual behavior is not easy to measure, behavioral intentions have often been used as a
proxy variable for predicting actual consumer behavior.
Two of the most common behavioral intentions examined in the tourism and event literatures are likely
intention to visit/revisit an event and intention to
spread positive word-of-mouth (Chen & Petrick, 2015;
Li & Petrick, 2010; Petrick, 2004a). In event contexts,
behavioral intentions can consist of coming back to
the destination in the future, recommending the destination to friends or others, and telling other people
positive things about this destination (Jin et al., 2013).
Therefore, behavioral intentions in this study are operationalized as intentions to revisit, recommend the

event to friends or others, and say positive things
about the event.
The relationship between perceived value and loyalty has been found to be positive and significant for
tropical island visitors (Song, Su, & Li, 2013). Among
cruise passengers, perceived value has been found to
be the most important indicator of future purchase
intentions for repeat visitors (Petrick, 2004a). Perceived
value has further been found to be related to the
behavioral intentions of water park visitors (Jin et al.,
2015), event attendees (Jin et al., 2013), and festival
attendees (Lee, Petrick, et al., 2007). Thus, the following
hypothesis is proposed in the context of an event:
H4: Event value has a positive effect on behavioral
intentions to revisit the event.

Relationship between image and behavioral
intentions
The tourism and event literature has also consistently
found a significant relationship between the image that
potential visitors have of a destination and their behavioral intentions to attend future events (Kaplanidou &
Gibson, 2010). These include studies of sporting events
(Kaplanidou & Gibson, 2010; Moon et al., 2013), visitors
to a tropical international island resort (Song et al.,
2013), city tour visitors (Kim, Holland, & Han, 2013),
water park visitors (Jin et al., 2015), and Malaysian

5

tourists to Japan (Chew & Jahari, 2014). Thus, in association with the literature cited above, this study posits
the following hypothesis:

H5: Destination image of an event has a positive effect
on behavioral intentions to revisit the event.

Moderating role of attachment avoidance
Even though attachment avoidance has consistently
been found to be related to and/or moderate loyaltytype behaviors, it has received scant attention in the
tourism literature. Specifically, Mikulincer and Shaver
(2007) found that highly avoidant persons tend to use
more deactivating schemes to cope with relationship
problem than individuals with low attachment avoidance. Additionally, Jin and Peña (2010) found that in
comparison with lower attachment avoidant persons,
higher attachment avoidant persons were less likely to
call or text others. It has further been found that interpersonal tasks (i.e. helping and caregiving) are different
depending on individuals’ levels of attachment avoidance (Geller & Bamberger, 2009). Lower attachment
avoidant persons have further been found to have
more negative views of others (Bartholomew, 1990)
and to fear intimacy (Bartholomew, 1990; Edelstein
et al., 2010).
Attachment avoidance has also been found to moderate coping with loss and marital adjustment (Mancini
et al., 2009), the perceptions of value and quality of
online tourism services (Sabiote et al., 2012), the relationship between body image and sexual activity (La
Rocque & Cioe, 2011), academic motivations (Gore &
Rogers, 2010), and social media behaviors (Lee, 2013).
Moreover, individuals having high attachment avoidance have been found to be more likely to be distant
from other people but to not feel as lonely as compared
with their counterparts (Hazan & Shaver, 1987). Since
the literature review above has consistently found
attachment avoidance to moderate the relationships
between antecedents and behaviors, this study postulates the following:
H6: Attachment avoidance has a significant moderating effect on quality, motivation, value, image, and

behavioral intentions to revisit the event.
Together with the study hypotheses, the proposed theoretical model is presented in Figure 1. This model displays
the proposed relationships between quality, motivation,
value, image, and behavioral intentions realting to the
event as well as the postulated moderating role of attachment avoidance.


6

M. J. KIM ET AL.

The moderating role of attachment avoidance (H6)

Destination
image

Quality
H1
H3

H2

Value

Motivation

H5

H4

Behavioral
intention

First-order factor
Exploration

Family
togetherness

Novelty

Escape

Socialization
Second -order factor

Figure 1. Proposed research model.
H: hypothesis.

Methods
Study site
As an annual global event, the second CJK Expo was
held at the Shandong-Taiwan Convention and
Exhibition Center in Weifang, China, from September
23–25, 2016. Located in the middle of the Shandong
Peninsula and having a population of over nine million
residents, Weifang is well-known for its international
Kite Festival and for being a leading tourism destination
in China (Weifang China, 2016). The city hosted the CJK
Expo in 2016, which included 2000 booths, exhibitors

from 14 countries including China, Japan, and Korea,
and over 200,000 visitors from 41 countries (China
Chamber of International Commerce, 2016). Exhibitors
from foreign companies accounted for 55% of the total
1000 companies at the expo (China Daily, 2017).

Measurements
Each construct in this study utilized multi-item measures in order to avoid measurement errors related to
the use of single-item measures (Churchill, 1979).
Additionally, to help ensure the validity and reliability
of measures, only previously validated measures were
used after adapting them to the context of this study.
Ten constructs were included in this study as shown in
Table 1. Quality was evaluated with four items adapted
from Crompton (2003), Ko et al. (2011), Petrick (2004b),
and Yoon et al. (2010). Motivation was measured with
20 items adapted from previous research (Crompton,
1979; Crompton & McKay, 1997; Formica & Uysal, 1998;
Kah et al., 2010; Lee, 2000; Lee et al., 2004; Yoon &
Uysal, 2005): with four items each used to measure

exploration, novelty, family togetherness, escape, and
socialization. Value was assessed with four items drawn
from previous studies (Jin et al., 2015; Parasuraman,
1997; Petrick, 2002; Zeithaml et al., 1996). Image was
assessed using four items derived from Kaplanidou and
Gibson (2010), Moon et al. (2013), Prayag and Ryan
(2012), and Richards and Wilson (2004). To assess behavioral intentions, four questions were generated from
Jin et al. (2013), Lee, Petrick, et al. (2007), Oliver (2010),
and Zeithaml et al. (1996). Finally, to measure attachment avoidance, four questions were derived from previous studies (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Davis

et al., 2004; Hazan & Shaver, 1987; Lee, 2013;
Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007; Simpson et al., 1992). All 40
items were assessed using a 5-point Likert-type scale
ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).
In addition, some sociodemographics were included in
the questionnaire.
The questionnaire was initially developed in English
and then translated into Chinese by two professionals
who are proficient in both languages. To aid in establishing content validity, three academic experts familiar
with the topic under study assessed the measurement
items. In addition, three field experts in events were
asked to evaluate whether the measurement items
were appropriately assessed in the context of the
expo. As a result, one item of behavioral intention was
deleted as it was suggested to have a meaning overlapping with that of another item (i.e. “I intend to come
back to the expo in the future”), and one item of
exploration was added to the questionnaire (i.e. “To
know about the expo”). Three general questions related
to expos (i.e. information source, the purpose of visiting
the expo, and field of interest) were also added.


JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

7

Table 1. Measurement sources and contexts.
Construct
Quality
(four items)

Sources
Crompton (2003)
Ko et al. (2011)
Petrick (2004b)
Yoon et al. (2010)
Motivation (exploration (four Crompton (1979)
items); family
togetherness (four items); Crompton & McKay (1997)
novelty (four items);
escape (four items);
Formica & Uysal (1998)
socialization (four items))
Kah et al. (2010)
Lee (2000)
Lee et al. (2004)
Value
(four items)

Image
(four items)

Behavioral
intention
(four items)
Attachment
avoidance
(four items)

Yoon & Uysal, 2005

Jin et al. (2015)
Parasuraman (1997)
Petrick (2002)
Zeithaml (1988)
Kaplanidou & Gibson (2010)
Moon et al. (2013)
Prayag & Ryan (2012)
Richards & Wilson (2004)
Jin et al. (2013)
Lee, Petrick, et al. (2007)
Oliver (2010)
Zeithaml et al. (1996)
Bartholomew & Horowitz (1991)
Davis et al. (2004)
Hazan and Shaver (1987)
Lee (2013)
Mikulincer & Shaver (2007)
Simpson et al. (1992)

Contexts/Delineated factors
Event; ambience; source of information; comfort amenities; vendor interaction; parking
Event; game; augment service; interaction; outcome; environment
Cruise passenger; outstanding; reliable; dependable; consistent
Festival; program; souvenirs; facilities; food
Vacation; escape; exploration; relaxation; prestige; regression; kinship relationships;
social interaction
Event; cultural exploration; novelty/regression; recover equilibrium; known group
socialization; external interaction/socialization; gregariousness
Event; socialization/entertainment; attraction; excitement; group/family togetherness;
cultural/historical; novelty

Exposition; exploration; family togetherness; novelty; escape; socialization
Exposition; exploration; family togetherness; escape, novelty; external/internal group
socialization; attractions
Exposition; exploration; family togetherness; novelty; escape; event attractions;
socialization
Tourist motivation; eight push factors; 10 pull factors
Water park; reasonable price; good reputation; quality of service
Customer value; utility; worth; benefits; quality
Behavioral price; monetary price; emotional response; quality; reputation
Low price; whatever I want in a product; quality I get for the price; what I get for what I
give
Event; overall image of the destination as a vacation destination
Event; ease of communication; hospitality; friendliness; receptiveness; night-time and
entertainment
Attractions; diversity; accommodation; accessibility; exoticism
Event; architecture; multicultural; dynamic; shopping; cozy; safe
Event; come back to this destination; recommend; tell other people positive things
Festival; say positive things; re-attend the festival; recommend to others; encourage
friends and relatives to go the festival; the first choice among festivals
Behavioral perspective; loyalty; long-term effects of satisfaction
Loyalty; switch; pay more; and external/internal response
A downplaying of the importance of close relationships; restricted emotionality; an
emphasis on independence and self-reliance; a lack of clarity or credibility in
discussing relationships
Attachment-related avoidance was measured by representative subsets that comprise
the experiences in close relationships
Uncomfortable being close to others; difficult to trust others completely; difficult to
allow myself to depend on others; nervous when anyone gets too close
Uncomfortable having to depend on others; don’t like people getting too close to me;
uncomfortable being too close to others; difficult to trust others; nervous whenever

anyone gets too close to me
Attachment; avoidance (structure, dynamics, and change); avoidance dimensions
I find it relatively easy to get close to others; I’m comfortable having others depend on
me; others often want me to be more intimate than I feel comfortable being

A pilot test was conducted with 20 Chinese students
who had visited international expos in the past. This process resulted in the revision of several items on motivation
to ensure clarity of meaning. For example, escape motivation items were rewritten (i.e. “I want a change from my
ordinary life” and “To relieve daily stress” from “To avoid my
ordinary life” and “To avoid my stress”). Also, some items of
quality were found to be ambiguous and thus, were
reworded to help ensure clarity. For instance, “The ambience of the expo is what I’m looking for” and “I am
impressed with the design of the facility” were rewritten
from “The ambience of the expo is a spectator-setting” and
“The design of the facility is impressive.”

Data collection
Due to the difficulty of conducting random sampling on
site at the expo, convenience sampling of persons

attending the CJK Expo 2016 in Weifang, China, between
September 23 and September 25, 2016 was used. Visitors
were intercepted at a booth in the expo by four trained
field researchers. Before starting the survey, the field
researchers were trained specifically on how to complete
a questionnaire. When intercepting potential respondents,
a screening question was asked as to whether or not
individuals were visiting the host city from out of town.
Individuals indicating “yes” were then asked to identify the
primary purpose of their visit to Weifang, China.

The field researchers described the purpose of the
research, guaranteed anonymity of all qualified
responses, and distributed questionnaires only to
respondents who agreed to take part in the survey. In
order to attempt to increase the response rate, a pack
of cosmetic facial masks was given to attendees who
finished the questionnaire as a token of gratitude.
Approximately 750 persons were approached to take


8

M. J. KIM ET AL.

the survey, of which 450 passed the screening question,
and agreed to participate. Of these, 444 finished the
survey. Due to incomplete responses, 19 samples were
removed from the data set during the data refinement
stage (giving an estimated response rate of 56.2%).
After an additional 19 responses were deleted due to
outliers (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 2006), a
total of 406 questionnaires were coded for the analysis.

Data analysis
Partial least squares–structural equation modeling (PLSSEM) was applied to analyze the data using a component-based approach. This approach has been extensively utilized for theory confirmation and testing (Chin,
1998), and has been suggested to be more appropriate
for complicated models or multi-group analysis than
traditional SEMs based on covariance (Hair, Sarstedt,
Ringle, & Mena, 2012). Further, PLS-SEM has been
recommended when formative as second-order factor

constructs are included (Chin, Marcolin, & Newsted,
2003). In this study, the proposed model utilized a
formative construct of motivation, along with reflective
constructs. Additionally, a multi-group approach was
needed in order to be able to assess differences in
attachment between high- and low-avoidance groups.
Moreover, since the resultant data did not meet multivariate normality, the non-normality technique of bootstrapping of PLS was employed (Stevens, 2009). Thus,
SmartPLS 3.2.6 was applied to analyze the measurement and structural models (Ringle, Wende, & Becker,
2015).
Since respondents were asked to rate all survey
questions at once, common method variance was a
potential issue. Thus, precautions were taken using
several procedural remedies to address common
method bias (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff,
2003). First, the introduction section included a description of the study’s purpose, followed by a statement
assuring all respondents of their anonymity. Second, to
decrease respondent apprehension, survey instructions
noted that there were no right or wrong answers to the
questions. Third, the definition of each construct was
clearly explained at the beginning of the survey to help
ensure response validity. Fourth, the questionnaire consisted of three parts: the first part included general
information, the second included measurement items
related to the research model, and the third included
personal questions about demographic characteristics.
Harman’s single-factor test was performed to confirm if common method variance was present in the
resultant data set (Podsakoff et al., 2003). That is, all
self-reported survey items were entered into an

exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Using this process, if
a single factor emerges or one factor accounts for more

than 50% of the variance in the variables, common
method variance is deemed present (Harman, 1967).
The EFA results showed that seven factors were delineated (eigenvalues >1), with the first factor accounting
for 20.81% of the variance. Subsequent factors
explained 14.66%, 8.52%, 8.49%, 8.01%. 9.91%, and
7.01% of the variance respectively. Since the singlefactor test has been found to have some limitations
(Podsakoff & Organ, 1986), a marker-variable approach
was also employed. For this procedure, a PLS algorithm
was applied. A marker variable (negative emotional
response) was used to estimate the correlations on
every theoretical construct in the PLS path model. The
corrections between the marker variable and all the
constructs in the PLS path model were small and insignificant, including quality (−0.04), exploration (−0.03),
family togetherness (0.15), novelty (0.01), escape
(0.31), socialization (0.06), value (−0.02), destination
image (−0.01), behavioral intentions (−0.03), and attachment avoidance (0.53). The resultant average of the
squared multiple corrections was 0.04 for the 10 theoretical constructs. Accordingly, both the traditional single-factor test and the marker-variable approach
suggested that common method bias was not an
issue in the study (Podsakoff et al., 2003).
Multiple past studies have employed and suggested
the use of second-order (formative constructs) factor
analysis when research models are complicated (e.g.
Bock, Zmud, Kim, Lee, & Kong, 2005; Kim, Lee, & Bonn,
2016; Kim, Lee, & Chung, 2013). Formative measurement theory is based on the assumption that the measured variables cause the construct, where each
indicator is a cause of the construct (Hair et al., 2006).
This formative approach, with the use of PLS-SEM, has
been argued to fit well when identifying multiple attributes in order to predict visitor behavior, including
specific dimensions in the event tourism field
(Ahrholdt, Gudergan, & Ringle, 2017). Therefore, in this
study, motivation was measured as a formative construct of a composite factor as well as a second-order

construct, including the five subdimensions of exploration, family togetherness, novelty, escape, and socialization among event attendees using PLS-SEM.

Results
Profile of the respondents
As shown in Table 2, the majority (66.2%) of respondents were female, and 37.0% of respondents were
between 20 and 29 years old. Further, respondents


JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

9

Table 2. Demographic and general characteristics of respondents.
Characteristics
Gender
Male
Female
Missing value
Age (years)
Less than 20
20–29
30–39
40–49
50–59
60 and over
Missing value
Educational level
High school or less
2-year college
University

Graduate school or higher
Missing value
Marital status
Single
Married
Missing value
Monthly household income (CNY)
Less than 2,999 *
3,000 – 4,999
5,000 – 5,999
6,000 – 6,999
7,000 – 7,999
8,000 – 8,999
9,000 – 9,999
10,000 and above
Missing value

N
(406)

%
(100)

114
269
23

28.1
66.2
5.7

36
150
111
60
33
2
14

8.9
37.0
27.3
14.8
8.1
0.5
3.4

68
103
199
20
16

16.7
25.4
49.1
4.9
3.9

165

225
16

40.6
55.5
3.9

84
128
65
31
11
4
3
24
59

20.0
31.6
16.0
7.6
2.7
1.0
0.7
5.9
14.5

Characteristics
Occupation
Professional/Engineer

Business owner/Self-employed
Service worker
Office worker
Civil servant
Home maker
Student
Retiree/Unemployed
Other
Missing value
Information source**
Through acquaintance
TV/Newspapers/Radio
Internet/Websites/Social network sites
Public relation materials
Other
Missing value
Purpose of visiting exposition**
Curiosity/Fun
Business trip
Academic
Trends of industries
State of the art/Cutting edge
New ideas for businesses
Other
Interesting fields**
Smart manufacturing/Electronics
New energy/Environment protection
Modern agriculture/Food safety
Healthcare and beauty
Cultural–creative industries

N
(406)

%
(100)

40
44
21
102
38
23
81
11
29
17

9.9
10.8
5.2
25.0
9.4
5.7
20.0
2.7
7.1
4.2

147

58
84
55
26
1

36.2
14.3
20.7
13.5
6.4
0.3

161
30
47
41
120
37
34

39.7
7.4
11.6
10.1
29.6
9.1
8.4

52

77
80
242
126

12.8
19.0
19.7
59.6
31.0

*US $1 = 6.756 CNY; **multiple response.

who had attended a university and earned university
degrees accounted for half of respondents (49.1%), and
almost one third (31.6%) reported a monthly household
income between CNY 3000 and CNY 4000 (US$ 1 is
equivalent to CNY 6756). Additionally, the majority of
respondents were married (55.5%), and one fourth
(25%) were office workers. More than one third got
information about the CJK Expo from acquaintances
(36.5%) and had participated in the CJK Expo out of
curiosity and for fun (39.7%). Furthermore, the majority
of respondents were Chinese (93.2%), followed by
minorities (e.g. Tibet, Manchu, Hui) (3.4%) and unknown
(3.4%).

Group check
In order to test H6, the sample (n = 406) was separated
into high and low attachment avoidance groups. The

attachment avoidance construct (Cronbach’s α = 0.923)
was assessed using four questions which can be found
in Table 3. When grouping cases have similar traits and
the sample size represents 200 or more responses, the
K-means cluster method has been suggested to be
appropriate as K-means algorithms allow researchers
to specify the number of clusters (Hair et al., 2006).

The K-means clustering resulted in partitioning the
406 observations into two clusters in which each observation belonged to the cluster with the nearest mean.
The resultant groups were named high (n = 185;
mean = 4.2) and low (n = 221; mean = 2.2) attachment
avoidance.

Measurement model
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted on
the measurement model (Kline, 2011). One item of
exploration was found to share residual variance with
other items for being dropped (i.e. the factor loading
was below 0.5). In addition, one item for of exploration,
family togetherness, novelty, escape, and socialization
was dropped because of the low average variance
extracted (AVE) of motivation. That is, the AVE of motivation prior to dropping the items was 0.489 and then
improved up to 0.503.
The remaining 34 items were used for the analysis
(see Table 3). Assessments in terms of reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity were subsequently performed (Hair et al., 2006; Stevens, 2009). As
illustrated in Table 4, the Cronbach’s α and composite
reliability of each construct was larger than 0.70,

10

M. J. KIM ET AL.

Table 3. Results of confirmatory factor analysis.
Construct
Quality

1.
2.
3.
4.
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
3.

4.
1.
2.
3.
4.
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
3.
4.

Exploration motivation
Family togetherness motivation
Novelty motivation
Escape motivation
Socialization motivation
Value

Destination image

Behavioral intention
Attachment avoidance

Items
The ambience of the expo is what I’m looking for.
The facility is clean and well-maintained.
I am impressed with the design of the facility.
The facility is safe.

To experience local customs and cultures.
To enjoy events and exhibition.
To increase my knowledge of the expo.
To spend time with my family together.
I thought the entire family would enjoy it.
To help my family learn more about the expo.
I am curious.
I seek novelty.
I seek adventure.
To escape from routine life.
To relieve boredom.
To relieve daily stress.
To be with people who are enjoying themselves.
To be with people who enjoy the same things I enjoy.
To see the event with a group together.
The time I spent at this event makes me feel good.
The quality of the event is outstanding.
The fees for this event are fair.
Overall, the CJK Expo is worth it.
The people in Weifang are friendly and interesting.
Weifang offers suitable accommodations.
I am not concerned about personal safety in Weifang.
The structure of the expo is well-built.
I would like to come back to the expo in the future.
I would recommend the expo to my friends or others.
I want to tell other people positive things about the expo.
I’m not comfortable when I have to depend on other people.
I don’t like people who get close to me.
I’m very uncomfortable when I am close to others.
I find it difficult to trust others completely.

Table 4. Reliability and discriminant validity.
Correlation of the constructs
Construct
(1)
(2)
(1) Quality
0.913
(2) Motivation
0.633 0.709
(3) Value
0.689 0.658
(4) Destination image
0.768 0.633
(5) Behavioral intention
0.759 0.571
Cronbach’s alpha (α)
0.933 0.928
Composite reliability
0.952 0.937
Average variance extracted (AVE) 0.834 0.503
Mean
4.410 3.941
Standard deviation
0.691 0.731

(3)

(4)

(5)

0.906
0.648
0.609
0.927
0.948
0.821
4.214
0.777

0.890
0.798
0.912
0.938
0.792
4.323
0.721

0.925
0.915
0.946
0.855
4.388
0.743

All bold-faced diagonal elements appearing in the correlation of the constructs
matrix indicate the square roots of AVEs.
All correlations are significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed).

indicating internal consistency and validating the reliability (Campbell & Fiske, 1959). Furthermore, convergent validity was confirmed as each item's factor
loading and each construct’s AVE were larger than 0.5
(Hair et al., 2006). Discriminant validity was further confirmed because the square root of the AVE of each
construct was larger than each correlation coefficient
(Fornell & Larcker, 1981).
The use of a formative approach has been argued
to allow for the identification of multiple attributes,
including specific dimensions (Ahrholdt et al., 2017).
In the current study motivation was measured as a

Factor loading
0.912
0.918
0.919
0.903
0.937
0.934
0.913
0.917
0.931
0.916
0.888
0.902
0.883
0.917
0.947
0.891
0.931
0.937
0.871

0.910
0.922
0.896
0.896
0.911
0.899
0.850
0.899
0.889
0.944
0.940
0.828
0.939
0.936
0.898

formative variable comprised of five dimensions.
Hence, five subconstructs of motivation (i.e. exploration, family togetherness, novelty, escape, and socialization), each having three indicators, were used for
the formative construct as a second-order factor. The
weights of the five submotivations, as explained by
beta (β) coefficients derived from a standard regression, were used to verify the validity of their respective formative indicators (Kuan & Bock, 2007). The
weights as well as t-statistics of the formative constructs are presented in Figure 2. It was found that
each indicator weight for the formative construct had
significant t-statistics and was hence deemed valid.

Structural model
Figure 2 displays the results of the PLS-SEM, which
evaluated the theoretical research model. Each of the
endogenous variables had ample variance explained
(R2): value (55.7%), image (42.0%), and behavioral intentions (65.1%). The higher the value of R2, the better the

prediction of the dependent variable (Hair et al., 2006).
The path estimates as well as t-statistics were estimated
for the hypotheses using a bootstrapping technique
since the data were not found to have multivariate


JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

Destination
image
R2=0.420

0.454***
(8.547)

Quality

0.694***
(16.333)

0.648***
(15.592)
0.371***
(8.098)

Motivation

0.293***
(28.912)

0.267***
(25.640)

Exploration

Family
togetherness

Value
R2=0.557

Novelty

0.159***
(3.450)

Behavioral
intention
R2=0.651

0.278***
(30.002)

0.169***
(12.328)

0.264***
(28.018)

11

Escape

Socialization

***p < 0.001.

Figure 2. Results of path analysis.
p < 0.001.

normality (Stevens, 2009). Results indicated that the
relationships between quality and value (ɣ = 0.454,
t-value = 8.547, p < 0.001), motivation and value
(ɣ = 0.371, t-value = 8.098, p < 0.001), value and
image (β = 0.648, t-value = 15.592, p < 0.001), value
and behavioral intentions (β = 0.159, t-value = 3.450,
p < 0.001), and image and behavioral intentions
(β = 0.694, t-value = 16.333, p < 0.001) were all significant. Thus, H1, H2, H3, H4, and H5, as presented in
Figure 2, were supported.
In order to test the moderating role of attachment
avoidance, H6a, b, c, d and e were assessed (Table 5).
From the associated regression results, comparison of the
explained variance (R2) revealed differences between two
groups (Hair et al., 2006). It was found that more variance
was explained for both value (13.4% more) and image
(5.9% more) in the low attachment avoidance group in
comparison with the high attachment avoidance group,
while slightly more variance was explained for behavioral
intentions (1.8%) in the high avoidance group than in its
counterparts.

PLS-SEM was used to perform multi-group analysis in
order to compare the five relationships across the high and
low attachment avoidance groups. As revealed in Table 5,
with the exception of the association between image and
behavioral intention (H6e), the coefficients of the other four
paths showed significant differences between the two
groups. These findings supported H6a, H6b, H6c, and
H6d. The difference in magnitude of the coefficients
between quality and value (ɣ = 0.505 > ɣ = 0.371) and
value and image (β = 0.665 > β = 0.620) was significantly
larger in the high avoidance respondents than in their
counterparts. Conversely, the difference in magnitude of
the coefficients between motivation and value
(ɣ = 0.317 < ɣ = 0.390) and value and behavioral intention

(β = 0.163 < β = 0.182) was larger in the low avoidance
group than in its counterpart.

Mediating effects
An additional analysis was performed to investigate
whether value and image mediate within the research
framework. PLS bootstrapping of the 500 re-samples
was applied to examine the relationships between quality and image, quality and behavioral intention, motivation and image, motivation and behavioral intention,
and value and behavioral intention. As shown in
Table 6, quality had significant positive indirect effects
on image (ɣ = 0.294, t-value = 6.267, p < 0.001) and
motivation had a significant and positive indirect effect
on image (ɣ = 0.240, t-value = 6.920, p < 0.001) through
the mediating role of value. Also, quality was found to
have a significant positive indirect effect on behavioral

intentions (ɣ = 0.277, t-value = 5.862, p < 0.001) and
motivation had a significant and positive indirect influence on behavioral intentions (ɣ = 0.226, t-value = 7.023,
p < 0.001) through the meditating roles of value and
image. In particular, value had a highly and significantly
positive indirect effect on behavioral intentions
(β = 0.450, t-value = 10.419, p < 0.001) as image was
found to partially mediate the relationship between
value and behavioral intentions. Thus, value and
image played significant mediating roles in the research
model.

Conclusion and implications
The current research examined the theoretical foundations for understanding the determinants of event consumers’ behavioral intentions with inclusion of the


12

M. J. KIM ET AL.

Table 5. Comparison of path coefficients between low and high attachment avoidance groups.
Low
group (B)

t-value
(A–B)

p-value
(A–B)

Test of

hypothesis

Quality → Value
0.505***
0.371***.
Motivation → Value
0.317***
0.390***
Value → Destination image
0.665***
0.620***
Value → Behavioral intention
0.163*
0.182**
Image → Behavioral intention
0.686***
0.690***
Exploration → Motivation
0.318***
0.274***
Family togetherness → Motivation
0.292***
0.251***
Novelty → Motivation
0.286***
0.249***
Escape → Motivation
0.098***
0.246***
Socialization → Motivation

0.286***
0.275***
R2: Coefficient of determination (variance explained)
The low group: value (57.3%), destination image (44.3%), and behavioral intention (64.6%).
The high group: value (43.9%), destination image (38.4%), and behavioral intention (66.4%).

17.861
−11.054
8.529
−2.831
−0.668
28.540
24.276
25.658
−62.652
6.921

<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
<0.01
n.s.
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001

Supported
Supported

Supported
Supported
Not supported

H6

Path

High group (A)

H6a
H6b
H6c
H6d
H6e

***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.05; n.s. = non-significant; H: hypothesis.

Table 6. Mediating effects.
Path
Quality → Value
Quality → Image
Quality → Behavioral intention
Motivation → Value
Motivation → Image
Motivation → Behavioral
intention
Value → Image
Value → Behavioral intention
Image → Behavioral intention

Direct
effect
0.454***

Indirect
effect
(mediating)
0.294***
0.277***

0.371***
0.240***
0.226***
0.648***
0.159***
0.694***

0.450***

Total
effect
0.454***
0.294***
0.277***
0.371***
0.240***
0.226***
0.648***
0.609***

0.694***

***p < 0.001.

moderating role of attachment avoidance. It is believed
that the current analysis provides a more thorough understanding of the relationships between event quality, motivation, value, image, and behavioral intentions, along with
attachment avoidance as moderator, which may be utilized by event managers to better understand potential
event consumers’ behavior. This knowledge could be useful in determining the most important variables to measure, and how to create events that can maximize the
probability of intentions to revisit the event.

Theoretical contributions
The majority of studies that have examined megaevents have focused on each dimension of motivation
for event visitors separately. It is thus believed that
this study theoretically contributes to the literature by
combining multiple dimensions of motivations to
investigate visitors’ behavioral intentions, applying
the formative approach as a second-order factor. In
addition, there has been scant research on the role of
attachment styles and the effect they have on tourists. It is therefore believed that this study also contributes to the literature by providing empirical

evidence that visitors’ attachment styles can be utilized to help understand event goers’ behavioral
intentions, along with antecedents (quality and motivation) and mediators (value and image) in an Asian
context. Moreover, the proposed comprehensive
model helps to better explain event consumers’ behaviors, demonstrating that the role of attachment style
is not limited to the field of psychology. Results
revealed that destination image highly and positively
mediates the relationship between value and behavioral intention. Thus, it is believed that this new
understanding of the mediating role of destination
image in visitors’ decision-making processes provides
new knowledge for event research.

It was further found that event quality, motivation,
value, image, and attachment avoidance have significant effects with regard to explaining visitors’ behavioral intentions. Each of the relationships found
confirms past findings highlighted in the research, and
further confirms that they can be generalized to an
international event. The study also found that motivation can be operationalized as a formative construct
consisting of exploration, socialization, family togetherness, novelty, and escape. It was further found that
exploration had the largest impact followed by socialization, novelty, family togetherness, and escape.
Most likely the largest theoretical contribution of the
study is that attachment avoidance was found to have a
moderating effect on the variables that help explain
visitors’ behavioral intentions. It was revealed that the
associations of quality and value as well as value and
image were greater in visitors with high avoidance than
their counterparts. Further, the relationships between
motivation and value and value and behavioral intentions were greater in visitors with low avoidance than
their counterparts. These findings broaden the conceptual findings of previous studies (Fraley & Davis, 1997;
Gore & Rogers, 2010; La Rocque & Cioe, 2011) and


JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

further suggest that attachment avoidance is an important variable for event managers and researchers to
understand. These findings thus suggest that quality
and image are more important for understanding perceptions of value to high attachment avoidance visitors,
while motivation and behavioral intentions are more
important for understanding perceptions of value to
low avoidance visitors. These findings further suggest
that value is important in understanding both low and
high avoidance groups.
It is further believed that this study contributes to a

better understanding of the determinants of event visitors’ behavioral intentions while confirming the results
of past studies. Specifically, the findings confirm the
significant effect event quality has on perceptions of
value (e.g. Jin et al., 2013; Moon et al., 2013), and the
relationship between motivation and value as important antecedents in understanding attendees’ behaviors
(e.g. Kah et al., 2010; Lee et al., 2004; Prebensen et al.,
2013; Woratschek et al., 2017). The current study also
found the strongest relationship to be between value
and image, which is believed to expand previous
research findings (e.g. Baloglu & McCleary, 1999; Um &
Crompton, 1990). Moreover, destination image was
found to have the strongest effect on event attendees’
behavioral intention in the model, which is also in
accordance with past research (e.g. Chew & Jahari,
2014; Moon et al., 2013).

Practical contributions
The results of this research also provide practical implications for event organizers and tourism marketers of
mega-events. One key implication is that destination
image was found to play an important role in forming
behavioral intentions to revisit the event. Accordingly,
event organizers and the host city should focus on
building favorable images of their destination for
world events. Based on the resultant image items
used in the current study, event marketers should promote their destination with positive images, including
those that suggest the people are friendly and interesting, the place offers suitable accommodations, the destination is safe, and the facilities are well built.
Additionally, destination image was found to play a
significant mediating role between value and behavioral intentions for international event attendees. This
suggests that destination marketing organizers shouldstrive to promote the destination as an environmentally
friendly and politically stable place in order to better

attract potential visitors.
It was further found that value is a strong predictor
of destination image and that it also aids image with

13

regard to understanding the intentions of event visitors.
Thus, changes to events that either increase what people get (i.e. quality, reputation, etc.) or decrease what
they have to give (i.e. monetary and non-monetary
costs) will likely strengthen the image visitors have of
the event destination and the likelihood to visit in the
future.
It was further found that quality was highly related
to perceptions of value, which in turn led to visitors’
behavioral intentions to revisit the event. Thus, based
on resultant quality items in the current study, international events should be designed to enhance the ambience, they should: be clean/well-maintained, have an
impressive appearance, and be developed with safety
in mind. Furthermore, since event motivation was
found to be important for positive event value, event
organizers should develop their attractions to pull visitors to their events, based on push motivations. Thus,
event organizers should focus on pull factors that correspond to the following push factors: exploration,
socialization, novelty, family togetherness, and escape.
The results further provide managerial direction
related to the effect attachment avoidance has on visitors’ behavioral intentions. It was found that it is important for management to be aware that potential
visitors, who differ in their level of attachment avoidance, have their intentions explained differently. For
those with high avoidance, event quality is more important in understanding perceptions of value. Thus, quality plays a more important role in the determination of
value and image for visitors with high attachment
avoidance. Accordingly, enhancing event quality will
likely be more attractive to those with high attachment
avoidance.

Conversely, event operators should concentrate on
the motivations of visitors if they want to increase the
behavioral intentions of low attachment avoidance visitors. The findings further reveal that perceptions of
value of low attachment avoidance visitors are more
important for getting them to return, and that knowing
their motivations is key to providing value. Thus, for low
attachment avoidance visitors, management should
focus on determining the most important motivating
factors for these visitors and create events that have
pull factors related to these motivations.
Results of the current study suggest that if event
organizers want to target potential attendees exhibiting
strong attachment avoidance, they should create event
quality that increases attendees’ perceived value.
Specifically, event organizations should enhance the
ambience of the event and have clean and safe facilities. Also, when event marketers desire to attract individuals with a higher attachment avoidance, marketers


14

M. J. KIM ET AL.

could focus on promoting their event’s value in order to
highlight the destination image. For example, event
marketers could advertise how their event evokes
good feelings for visitors, providing exceptional quality,
and that the costs are fair. This could be done through
online and mobile social media as well as their websites, applying virtual reality experiences. On the other
hand, if event managers try to bring people in with low
attachment avoidance, they should gear advertising

toward visitors’ motivation with perceived value. That
is, event practitioners should promote their event as an
opportunity for family togetherness, socialization, and
interaction with others via national and international
media.

Limitations and future research directions
The sample of this study was limited to attendees at the
annual CJK Expo in Weifang China. Thus, in order to
increase the generalizability of the findings, future studies
should examine the research model in the context of other
mega-events and settings. In addition, this study did not
include a measurement of how frequently respondents
had visited the host city. Visiting frequency could impact
visitor perceptions of event quality, motivation, value,
image, and behavioral intention. Thus, future studies
should try to understand the moderating effect visit frequency has on the model examined. Moreover, to broaden
the understanding of visitors’ behavior, other potential
moderators such as anxiety attachment or personality traits
should also be considered in future research. Further, since
the current sample consisted of only Chinese visitors, future
research may need to carry out surveys of visitors from
other countries in order to better understand international
event attendees’ behaviors.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

ORCID
Myung Ja Kim

/>
References
Ahrholdt, D. C., Gudergan, S. P., & Ringle, C. M. (2017). Enhancing
service loyalty: The roles of delight, satisfaction, and service
quality. Journal of Travel Research, 56(4), 436–450.
Baloglu, S., & McCleary, K. W. (1999). A model of destination
image formation. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(4), 868–897.
Bartholomew, K. (1990). Avoidance of intimacy: An attachment perspective. Journal of Social and Personal
Relationships, 7(2), 147–178.

Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles
among young adults: A test of a four-category model.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 226–244.
Bitner, M. J. (1992). Servicescapes: The impact of physical
surroundings on customers and employees. Journal of
Marketing, 56(2), 57–71.
Bock, G. W., Zmud, R. W., Kim, Y. G., Lee, J. N., & Kong, H. (2005).
Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing:
Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological
forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 87–111.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Attachment (Vol. 1).
New York, NY: Basic Books.
Bowlby, J. (1977). The making and breaking of affectional
bonds. I. Aetiology and psychopathology in the light of
attachment theory. An expanded version of the Fiftieth
Maudsley Lecture, delivered before the Royal College of
Psychiatrists, 19 November 1976. The British Journal of
Psychiatry, 130(3), 201–210.
Bramwell, B., & Rawding, L. (1996). Tourism marketing images of

industrial cities. Annals of Tourism Research, 23(1), 201–221.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.
Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105.
Chen, -C.-C., & Petrick, J. F. (2015). The discriminant effect of
perceived value on travel intention: Visitors versus nonvisitors
of Florida keys. Tourism Review International, 19(3), 175–178.
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.
Chin, W. W. (1998). Overview of the PLS method. Retrieved
August 1, 2017, from .
Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003). A Partial
Least Squares Latent Variable Modeling Approach For
Measuring Interaction Effects: Results from a Monte Carlo
Simulation Study and an Electronic-Mail Emotion/Adoption
Study. Information Systems Research, 14(2), 189–217.
China Chamber of International Commerce. (2016). ChinaJapan-Korea industries Expo 2016. Retrieved August 1,
2017, from />Churchill, G. A. Jr. (1979). A paradigm for developing better
measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing
Research, 16(1), 64–73.
Crompton, J. L. (1979). Motivations for pleasure vacation.
Annals of Tourism Research, 6(4), 408–424.
Crompton, J. L. (2003). Adapting Herzberg: A conceptualization of the effects of hygiene and motivator attributes on
perceptions of event quality. Journal of Travel Research, 41
(3), 305–310.
Crompton, J. L., & McKay, S. L. (1997). Motives of visitors attending festival events. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(2), 425–439.
Daily, C. (2017). Expo to boost trade ties between China,
Japan, ROK - Business - Chinadaily.com.cn. Retrieved
February 25, 2018, from />ness/2017-07/22/content_30209785.htm
Davis, D., Shaver, P. R., & Vernon, M. L. (2004). Attachment

style and subjective motivations for sex. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(8), 1076–1090.
Edelstein, R. S., Stanton, S. J., Henderson, M. M., & Sanders, M.
R. (2010). Endogenous estradiol levels are associated with
attachment avoidance and implicit intimacy motivation.
Hormones and Behavior, 57(2), 230–236.


JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING

Formica, S., & Uysal, M. (1998). Market segmentation of an
international cultural-historical event in Italy. Journal of
Travel Research, 36(4), 16–24.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation
models with unobservable variables and measurement
error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
Fraley, R. C., & Davis, K. E. (1997). Attachment formation and
transfer in young adults’ close friendships and romantic
relationships. Personal Relationships, 4(2), 131–144.
Gartner, W. C. (1994). Image formation process. Journal of
Travel & Tourism Marketing, 2(2–3), 191–216.
Geller, D., & Bamberger, P. (2009). Bringing avoidance and anxiety
to the job: Attachment style and instrumental helping behavior
among co-workers. Human Relations, 62(12), 1803–1827.
Getz, D. (2008). Event tourism: Definition, evolution, and
research. Tourism Management, 29(3), 403–428.
Gore, J., & Rogers, M. (2010). Why do I study? The moderating
effect of attachment style on academic motivation. The
Journal of Social Psychology, 150(5), 560–578.
Hair, J. F. Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., &

Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.).
Upper Saddle River NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012). An
assessment of the use of partial least squares structural
equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 40(3), 414–433.
Han, J. H., Nelson, C. M., & Kim, C. (2015). Pro-environmental
behavior in sport event tourism: Roles of event attendees
and destinations. Tourism Geographies, 17(5), 719–737.
Harman, D. (1967). A single factor test of common method
variance. Journal of Psychology, 35, 359–378.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized
as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 52(3), 511–524.
Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1982). Toward a social psychological theory of
tourism motivation: A rejoinder. Annals of Tourism Research, 9
(2), 256–262.
Jin, B., & Peña, J. F. (2010). Mobile communication in romantic
relationships: Mobile phone use, relational uncertainty, love,
commitment, and attachment styles. Communication Reports,
23(1), 39–51.
Jin, N., Lee, H., & Lee, S. (2013). Event quality, perceived value,
destination image, and behavioral intention of sports events:
The case of the IAAF world championship, Daegu, 2011. Asia
Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 18(8), 849–864.
Jin, N. P., Lee, S., & Lee, H. (2015). The effect of experience quality
on perceived value, satisfaction, image and behavioral intention of water park patrons: New versus repeat visitors.
International Journal of Tourism Research, 17(1), 82–95.
Kah, J. A., Lee, C., & Chung, N. (2010). Evaluating travel website
motivational communication using a structural equation

modelling approach. International Journal of Tourism
Research, 12(6), 787–802.
Kaplanidou, K., & Gibson, H. J. (2010). Predicting behavioral
intentions of active event sport tourists: The case of a
small-scale recurring sports event. Journal of Sport &
Tourism, 15(2), 163–179.
Kim, M.-J., Lee, C.-K., & Bonn, M. (2016). The effect of social
capital and altruism on seniors’ revisit intention to social
network sites for tourism-related purposes. Tourism
Management, 53, 96–107.

15

Kim, M.-J., Lee, C.-K., & Chung, N. (2013). Investigating the role of
trust and gender in online tourism shopping in South Korea.
Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 37(3), 377–401.
Kim, S., Holland, S., & Han, H. (2013). A structural model for
examining how destination image, perceived value, and service quality affect destination loyalty: A case study of Orlando.
International Journal of Tourism Research, 15(4), 313–328.
Kim, Y. H., Kim, D. J., & Wachter, K. (2013). A study of mobile
user engagement (MoEN): Engagement motivations, perceived value, satisfaction, and continued engagement
intention. Decision Support Systems, 56(1), 361–370.
Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation
modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford.
Ko, Y. J., Zhang, J., Cattani, K., & Pastore, D. (2011). Assessment
of event quality in major spectator sports. Managing Service
Quality, 21(3), 304–322.
Kozak, M. (2001). Repeater’s behavior at two distinct destinations. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(3), 784–807.
Kuan, H.-H., & Bock, G.-W. (2007). Trust transference in brick
and click retailers: An investigation of the before-onlinevisit phase. Information & Management, 44(2), 175–187.

La Rocque, C. L., & Cioe, J. (2011). An evaluation of the
relationship between body image and sexual avoidance.
Journal of Sex Research, 48(4), 397–408.
Lee, C.-K. (2000). A comparative study of Caucasian and Asian
visitors to a cultural expo in an Asian setting. Tourism
Management, 21(2), 169–176.
Lee, C.-K., Lee, Y., & Wicks, B. E. (2004). Segmentation of
festival motivation by nationality and satisfaction. Tourism
Management, 25(1), 61–70.
Lee, C.-K., Kang, S. K., & Lee, Y.-K. (2013). Segmentation of mega
event motivation: The case of Expo 2010 Shanghai China. Asia
Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 18(6), 637–660.
Lee, C.-K., Lee, B., Bernhard, B. J., & Lee, T.-K. (2009). A comparative study of involvement and motivation among
casino gamblers. Psychiatry Investigation, 6(3), 141–149.
Lee, C.-K., & Taylor, T. (2005). Critical reflections on the economic impact assessment of a mega-event: The case of
2002 FIFA world cup. Tourism Management, 26(4), 595–603.
Lee, C.-K., Yoon, Y.-S., & Lee, S.-K. (2007). Investigating the
relationships among perceived value, satisfaction, and
recommendations: The case of the Korean DMZ. Tourism
Management, 28(1), 204–214.
Lee, D. Y. (2013). The role of attachment style in building
social capital from a social networking site: The interplay
of anxiety and avoidance. Computers in Human Behavior, 29
(4), 1499–1509.
Lee, S. Y., Petrick, J. F., & Crompton, J. L. (2007). The roles of
quality and intermediary constructs in determining festival
attendees‘ behavioral intentions. Journal of Travel Research,
45(4), 402–412.
Lee, T.-H., & Crompton, J. (1992). Measuring novelty seeking in
tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 19(4), 732–751.

Li, R., & Petrick, J. F. (2010). Towards an integrative model of
loyalty formation: The role of quality and value. Leisure
Sciences, 32(3), 201–221.
Majorevents.govt.nz. (2016). Definition major events.
Retrieved February 25, 2018, from ore
vents.govt.nz/new-zealand-major-events/definition.
Mancini, A. D., Robinaugh, D., Shear, K., & Bonanno, G. A.
(2009). Does attachment avoidance help people cope


16

M. J. KIM ET AL.

with loss? The moderating effects of relationship quality. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 65(10), 1127–1136.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2003). The attachment behavioral system in adulthood: Activation, psychodynamics,
and interpersonal processes. Advances in Experimental
Social Psychology, 35, 53–152.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in adulthood:
Structure, dynamics, and change. New York: Guilford.
Moon, K., Ko, Y. J., Connaughton, D. P., & Lee, J. (2013). A
mediating role of destination image in the relationship
between event quality, perceived value, and behavioral
intention. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 18(1), 49–66.
Oliver, R. L. (2010). Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the
consumer (2nd ed.). New York: ME Sharpe.
Parasuraman, A. (1997). Reflections on gaining competitive
advantage through customer value. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 25(2), 154–161.
Parasuraman, A., & Grewal, D. (2000). The impact of technology on the quality-value-loyalty chain: A research agenda.

Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(1), 168–174.
Petrick, J. F. (2002). Development of a multi-dimensional scale
for measuring the perceived value of a service. Journal of
Leisure Research, 34(2), 119–134.
Petrick, J. F. (2004a). First timers’ and repeaters’ perceived
value. Journal of Travel Research, 43(1), 29–38.
Petrick, J. F. (2004b). The roles of quality, value and satisfaction in predicting cruise passengers’ behavioral intentions.
Journal of Travel Research, 42(4), 397–407.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P.
(2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A
critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of
Management, 12(4), 531–544.
Prayag, G., & Ryan, C. (2012). Antecedents of tourists’ loyalty
to Mauritius: The role and influence of destination image,
place attachment, personal involvement, and satisfaction.
Journal of Travel Research, 51(3), 342–356.
Prebensen, N. K., Woo, E., Chen, J. S., & Uysal, M. (2013).
Motivation and involvement as antecedents of the perceived value of the destination experience. Journal of
Travel Research, 52(2), 253–264.
Redondo-Carretero, M., Camarero-Izquierdo, C., Gutiérrez-Arranz,
A., & Rodríguez-Pinto, J. (2017). Language tourism destinations:
A case study of motivations, perceived value and tourists
expenditure. Journal of Cultural Economics, 41, 155–172.
Richards, G., & Wilson, J. (2004). The impact of cultural events
on city image: Rotterdam, cultural capital of Europe 2001.
Urban Studies, 41(10), 1931–1951.

Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J. M. (2015). SmartPLS 3.2.6.
Retrieved from

Ritchie, J. R. B. (1984). Assessing the impact of hallmark
events: Conceptual and research issues. Journal of Travel
Research, 23(1), 2–11.
Sabiote, C. M., Frías, D. M., & Casteda, J. A. (2012). The
moderating effect of uncertainty-avoidance on overall perceived value of a service purchased online. Internet
Research, 22(2), 180–198.
Simpson, J. A., Rholes, W. S., & Nelligan, J. S. (1992). Support
seeking and support giving within couples in an anxietyprovoking situation: The role of attachment styles.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(3), 434–
446.
Snepenger, D. J. (1987). Segmenting the vacation market by
novelty-seeking role. Journal of Travel Research, 26(2), 8–
14.
Song, Z., Su, X., & Li, L. (2013). The indirect effects of destination image on destination loyalty intention through tourist
satisfaction and perceived value: The bootstrap approach.
Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 30(4), 386–409.
Stevens, J. (2009). Applied multivariate statistics for the social
sciences (5th ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.
Um, S., & Crompton, J. (1990). Attitude determinants in tourism destination choice. Annals of Tourism Research, 17(3),
432–448.
Weifang China. (2016). Briefings of Weifang. Retrieved August
1, 2017, from />WFGKEN/GKXXEN/201104/t20110405_966782.htm.
Westerbeek, H. (2000). The influence of frequency of attendance and age on “place” – Specific dimensions of service
quality at Australian rules football matches. Sport Marketing
Quarterly, 9(4), 194–202.
Woratschek, H., Durchholz, C., Maier, C., & Ströbel, T. (2017).
Innovations in sport management: The role of motivations
and value cocreation at public viewing events. Event
Management, 21(1), 1–12.
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.
Yoon, Y.-S., Lee, J.-S., & Lee, C.-K. (2010). Measuring festival
quality and value affecting visitors’ satisfaction and loyalty
using a structural approach. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 29(2), 335–342.
Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality
and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence.
Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 48–62.
Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The
behavioral consequences of service quality. Journal of
Marketing, 60(2), 31–46.