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

net/publication/318547847

The dimensions of rural tourism experience: impacts on arousal, memory, and

satisfaction

Article in Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing · July 2017

DOI: 10.1080/10548408.2017.1350617

CITATIONS
READS
15
1,492

4 authors:

Elisabeth Kastenholz
Maria João Carneiro
University of Aveiro
University of Aveiro
217 PUBLICATIONS 2,062
CITATIONS 107 PUBLICATIONS 682 CITATIONS

Carlos Peixeira Marques

Sandra Maria Correia Loureiro
Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro
ISCTE-Instituto Universitário de Lisboa
47 PUBLICATIONS 372 CITATIONS
251 PUBLICATIONS 1,817 CITATIONS

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

Study of needs for access to recreation, leisure and tourism of individuals with disabilities at the municipality of Lousã View project

accessible tourism View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Sandra Maria Correia Loureiro on 14 April 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING, 2017
https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2017.1350617

ARTICLE

The dimensions of rural tourism experience: impacts on arousal, memory,

and satisfaction
Elisabeth Kastenholza, Maria João Carneiroa, Carlos Peixeira Marquesb and Sandra Maria Correia Loureiroc
a
Department of Economics, Management, Industrial Engineering and Tourism, GOVCOPP Research Unit (Governance, Competitiveness and Public
Policies), Campus Universitário de Santiago, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal; bDepartment of Economics, Business and Sociology, CETRAD Research
Unit (The Centre for Transdisciplinary Development Studies), University of Tras-os-Montes and Alto Douro, 5000-801 Vila Real, Portugal;
c
Marketing, Operations and General Management Department, Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Business Research Unit (BRU/UNIDE),
Av. Forças Armadas,1649-026 Lisbon, Portugal

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Rural tourism is driven by the search for unique and memorable experiences in particular Received 7 December 2016
settings, but knowledge on visitors’ experiences in rural destinations is still scarce. This Revised 14 June 2017
paper analyzes the rural tourism experience of Portuguese tourists who answered an Accepted 28 June 2017
online survey (N = 252). The paper aims at validating, in the rural tourism context, a KEYWORDS
previously proposed tourist experience scale, and analyzing the relationships between the Rural tourism; experience
experience, arousal, memory, and satisfaction. Results reveal that the rural tourism economy; arousal; memory;
experience dimensions of education and esthetics positively predict rural tourists’ satisfaction; destination
arousal, whereas escapism and esthetics determine memorability. Finally, marketing
implications for rural tourism marketing are discussed.

Introduction management, and marketing debate. These authors

The consumption experience has received increasing
attention from marketing scholars in the generic
product domain, but particularly in the context of
services (Vargo & Lusch, 2004) and hedonic
products (Hirschman & Holbrook, 1982). Vargo,
Maglio, and Akaka (2008) stress the subjective and
experiential nature of “value co-crea- tion”, resulting
in effective “value in use” from the per- spective of
the service-dominant logic in marketing (Vargo &
Lusch, 2004). Hirschman and Holbrook (1982) suggest
the enrichment of the dominant information
processing approach in consumer behavior research by
raising issues such as product enjoyment, the pursuit
of pleasure, fantasy, and play. Hirschman (1984)
thus defends a subjectivist perspective of the
consumption experience and defines “experience
seeking” as a combi- nation of cognition, sensation,
and novelty-seeking. Schmitt (1999) also highlights
the multidimensional char- acter of the consumption
experience, arguing that it includes stimulation of
senses, generation of emotions, cognitive processes,
and the nurturing of relationships and engagement in
activities. It was mostly Pine and Gilmore’s (1998)
seminal work on the “experience econ- omy” that
popularized the concept of “consumption
experience” in the contemporaneous economics,
pro- posed two dimensions to describe the consumer
experi- ence: consumer participation (active versus
passive) and connection with the event (immersion
versus absorption). From the combination of these two
levels of each dimen- sion, Pine and Gilmore (1998)
derive the four experience realms: entertainment
(passive absorption); esthetics (pas- sive
immersion); education (active absorption); and
escap- ism (active immersion). The outstanding
role of “active participation” within this model may
be linked to the concept of “co-creation” (Campos,
Mendes, Oom do Valle, & Scott, 2015), with the
dimensions “education” and “escape” involving
higher levels of co-creation, con- trasting with the
rather passive “entertainment” and “esthetics”
experience realms.
In the tourism context, the tourist experience should
be recognized as the key to successful, innovative,
and competitive tourism supply (Ellis & Rossman,
2008; Stamboulis & Skayannis, 2003; Zehrer,
2009). In fact, tourists seek appealing, unique, and
memorable experi- ences in particular destination
contexts, conditioned by their motivations, prior travel
experiences, the destina- tion’s image, and
corresponding expectations, as well as by concrete
behaviors on site and ways of coping with the
environment, the specific travel context, and
circumstantial occurrences (Ellis & Rossman, 2008;

CONTACT Elisabeth Kastenholz elisabethk@ua.pt Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Management, Industrial Engineering and
Tourism, GOVCOPP Research Unit (Governance, Competitiveness and Public Policies), Campus Universitário de Santiago, 3810-193 Aveiro,
Portugal
© 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 E. KASTENHOLZ ET
AL.
Fiore, and Jeoung’s (2007) tourism experience scale in
Mossberg, 2007; Prebensen & Foss, 2011; Stamboulis the context of rural tourism, in a rural destination
& Skayannis, 2003). Tourist experiences must perspective; and
therefore be understood as highly subjective and
variable, marked by primarily affective, hedonic,
and symbolic facets (Otto & Ritchie, 1996),
eventually leading to positively felt arousal, traces
in memory (Martin, 2010; Morgan & Xu, 2009), and
overall satisfaction with the experience (Ali, Ryu, &
Hussain, 2016; Bigné, Andreu & Gnoth, 2005).
Enhancing tourist experiences is most important for
rural areas, which need to develop appealing and
distinctive offerings for a demanding and heteroge-
neous tourist market to succeed in the competitive
international context (Lane, 2009; Lane & Kastenholz,
2015). These areas and their actors in particular need
to position themselves competitively, since their actors
are frequently constrained by lack of scale and fragile
socio- economic context. On the other hand, rural
territories often present a rich set of unique
resources that allow, if well managed, multiple
appealing, “authentic”, and memorable tourist
experiences (Lane & Kastenholz, 2015). It is crucial
in this context to identify those experience
dimensions impacting the most on pleasant arousal,
memory, and satisfaction in order to improve the
tourist experience and ultimately customers’ yield.
As Ritchie and Hudson (2009, p. 111) remark,
one of
the challenges in the field of experience research is
to “understand the nature of specific kinds of
tourism experiences”. Several researchers have
already studied the tourist experience and its
impacts on other beha- vioral and attitudinal
variables for diverse attraction and destination
contexts. Gnoth, Bigné, and Andreu (2006) studied
these dynamics for the theme park and museum
experience; Mehmetoglu and Engen (2011) for a
music festival and museum context; Huang,
Scott, Ding, and Cheng (2012) for cultural perfor-
mances; Park, Oh, and Park (2010) for film festivals;
Song, Lee, Park, Hwang, and Reisinger (2015) for
temple stays; and Hosany and Witham (2010) f or
cruises; but no study has yet analyzed these
dynamics for country- side holidays, considering the
complex but geographi- cally and culturally delimited
rural destination context. Specifically, there is still
inconsistent evidence regard- ing the relation
between the particular experience dimensions and
overall satisfaction as well as regarding the role of
emotions and memory as mediators of this
relationship.
This study intends to bridge these gaps in the
rural
tourism and general tourist experience literature by
addressing the following main goals: (1) to review
and adapt the concept of the tourism experience
to the rural tourism context; (2) to validate Oh,
 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM 3
MARKETING
including traditional culture and a rural way of life
(3) to explore the effects of the tourism (Butler & Hall, 1998; Figueiredo, 2009; McCarthy,
experience dimensions on arousal and memory,
and indirectly on overall satisfaction, within the 2008). The personalized tourism have been
rural tourism context. The model proposed, encounter between the studied and found to be
which uses Oh et al.’s (2007) experience scale, is local people/culture and complex and diverse,
based upon the above referenced work by Pine guests, as provided in little is still known about
and Gilmore (1998) on the experience economy. rural accom- modation the way the rural tourism
It is suggested that particularly active and units but also in the experience is concretely
immersion-enhancing positive experiences lead to village context, may lived, what dimensions
vivid memories, further eliciting positively arousing also play a central role may be distinguished,
affect. Both effects are considered fundamental in the quality of the and how these relate to
to creating conditions for appealing and positively tourist experi- ence in positive emotions
out- standing tourism experiences (Kastenholz, these areas derived from the
Carneiro, & Marques, 2012) and to achieve overall (Kastenholz, Eusébio, experience, to
satisfaction (Oliver, 2009). Carneiro, & Figueiredo, memorability of the
The current study presents, after a literature 2013; Kastenholz & experience, and overall
review on the tourist experience in general, and Sparrer, 2009; Tucker, satisfaction.
the rural tourism experience in particular, an 2003). Frequently,
empirical study undertaken via an online survey tourists refer to the
Assessing the
directed at Portuguese tourists, regarding a past rural tourism
tourist
rural tourism experience. The proposed model of experience as positively
experience
rural tourism experience dimensions and their contrasting with the
and its
relationship with arou- sal, memory, and overall stress and other
outcomes
satisfaction is analyzed with a structural equation negatively perceived
model, using a partial least squares (PLS) approach. conditions of daily Despite the fact that the
Finally, the presence and relevance of each urban life, as reflected tourist experience is a
dimension in the rural tourism context are dis- in opposing affective rela- tively recent topic
cussed, and managerial implications as well as images of home and the of research, several
future avenues of research suggested. visited rural destination scales have already
(Kastenholz, Carneiro, been developed in an
Marques, & Lima, 2012; attempt to assess it in
Rural tourism experience
Kastenholz et al., 2012). different contexts. Some
According to Clemenson and Lane (1997), rural In other words, “their authors approach the
tourism refers to a series of niche activities within a positive experiences tourist experience by
larger niche activity (e.g. ecotourism, nature tourism, result from attractions deriving it from
farm, adven- ture, sports, food and wine, and and activities that may motivation to travel and
cultural tourism), resulting in a complex, be seen as sensorially, benefits sought. For
multifaceted activity, marked by continuously symbolically, or socially instance, based on
increasing diversity (Lane, 2009). Rural tourism opposed to urban life . . literature on consumer
experiences are, apparently, increasingly sought .” (Kastenholz et al., behavior, services
for a variety of reasons and purposes (Lane & 2012, p. 250). The marketing, leisure, and
Kastenholz, 2015). Diverse studies on benefits sought latter is sometimes tourism, as well as on
in rural areas (Frochot, 2005; Kastenholz, Davis, & associated with the interviewing customers
Paul, 1999; Molera & Albaladejo, 2007; Park & “search of authenticity”, of differ- ent service
Yoon, 2009), in diverse destination areas, reveal in a context of tensions types, Otto and Ritchie
strong evidence for a dominant motivation to be between the “global” (1996) developed a
close to nature, either for relaxation, recreational and the “local”, scale to measure the
and sports activities, or for gen- uine, even between nostalgic quality of the tourism
spiritual, nature experiences (Kline, Greenwood, images of an idealized service experience in
Swanson, & Cárdenas, 2014; Rodrigues, past and the demands of four dimensions –
Kastenholz, & Morais, 2012; Sharpley & Jeppson, stressful modern times hedonics, peace of
2011); an interest in being with friends and family (Figueiredo, 2004; mind, involvement, and
in a distinct environment (Molera & Albaladejo, Halfacree, 1995; recognition. Kim,
2007); an interest in independently exploring a Rodrigues et al., 2012). Ritchie, and McCormick
region (Kastenholz et al., 1999; Lane, 2009); as However, even if the (2012) developed a scale
well as a romantic search of the rural idyll, main benefits sought designed to assess
in rural
4 E. KASTENHOLZ ET
AL.
memorable tourist other experience relevant impact of
(see for example
experiences that realms did not education and
encompass some Hosany & Witham, present any particularly
dimensions previously 2010; Mehmetoglu & significant impact. esthetics over
included in other scales, Engen, 2011; Park et Mehmetoglu and
al., 2010; Quadri- memory on
namely hedonism, Engen’s (2011) study
Felitti & Fiore, 2013; satisfaction in the
novelty, local culture, confirmed sig- nificant
Song et al., 2015; Su et wine tourism con- text.
refreshment, meaning- effects of esthetics on
al., 2016) adopted Pine These results suggest
fulness, involvement, the satisfaction with
and Gilmore’s (1998) that, apart from an
and knowledge. both a museum and a
approach in diverse appar- ently prominent
Following Pine and music festival’s
tourism contexts (e.g. role of esthetics, the
Gilmore’s (1998) experience, but addi-
framework theme parks, museums, various experience
tionally found
regarding the cultural or music dimensions differ in
education to play a
consumption events, cruise trips, their effect in distinct
role for the museum
experience, Oh et al. wine tourism, or tourism con- texts.
and escapism for the These dynamics are
(2007) developed a temple stays), music festival
frequently using the unclear for the rural
scale to assess bed and experience. Hosany tourism context
breakfast (B&B) scale developed by Oh and Witham (2010) though.
accommodation et al. (2007) to assess confirmed again the The potential
experiences. Other the four experience outstanding role of consequences of this
researchers realms. Although Su et esthetics, while multidimensional
al. (2016) found experience analyzed by
entertainment also
significant impacts of diverse researchers
showed a relevant
all four experience (see for example
impact on pleasant
realms on pleasure or Hosany & Witham,
positive arousal for arousal for the
2010; Oh et al., 2007;
nature-based tourism cruise experience,
Su et al., 2016) range
which the authors
experiences, other from arousal, over
explain with the specific
studies revealed memory/memor- ability,
cruise experience
significant impacts of quality (perception) to
content. A study on
only some and distinct satisfaction. Marques
temple stays proved
experience realms, in (2006) highlights the
the significant impact
distinct contexts. Also, role of arousal driving
of all experience
Gnoth et al. (2006) tourist motivation,
dimen- sions, except
highlighted the since the expectation
for education, on an
moderating role of of positive arousal is
increase of the emo-
the type of tourist linked to positive
tional experience value,
attraction in the motivation to seek
closely linked to arousal
relations between experiences invol- ving a
(Song et al., 2015).
experience, arousal, Quadri-Felitti and Fiore certain degree of
and pleasantness (2013) identified a sensorial, intellectual, or
derived from the social
tourist experience,
when comparing the stimulation. Gnoth, ence is likely to have a
theme park and the Zins, Lengmueller, and positive impact on
museum experience. Boshoff (2000) arousal (see for example
Oh et al.’ s (2007) associate this kind of Hosany & Witham,
study on B&B positive affect obtained 2010; Oh et al., 2007;
experiences in the from the tourist Song et al., 2015; Su et
United States (US) experience with the al., 2016), with diverse
showed the individual’s traits experi- ence dimensions
prominent role of valuing curiosity, found to have a
esthetics impacting openness, or challenge in differential impact on
on arousal, memory, tourism and leisure pleasant arousal in
overall quality experiences. Findings distinct contexts, as
perception, and thus suggest that experi- mentioned before.
satisfaction, while the
 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM 5
MARKETING
Another experience show that, similar to the
outcome is memory, experien- tial impact on dimensions shows a Grappi & Montanari,
positive impact on 2011; Prayag et al.,
playing an important arousal, esthetics
visitors’ satisfac- tion. 2013) have been identi-
role in the experience stands out again as the
economy conceptuali- Esthetics has a fied as exercising an
dimension impacting
positive influence on influence on tourist
zation (Pine & Gilmore, most on memorability
satisfaction in Oh et satisfaction. Song et al.
1998). Linking memory of experi- ence, with al.’s (2007) research, (2015) specifically
to the experience differences found for as was also found by found, in a study on
underlines the other dimensions Mehmetoglu and temple experiences,
dynamic, holistic according to context. Engen (2011). The that the effect of
nature of the very Finally, consumer latter, however,
tourism experience, entertainment,
satisfaction has been additionally identified
which is felt before, the main focus of many escapism, and
escapism as
dur- ing, and after the studies in consumer impacting signifi- esthetics on
visit of a particular behavior research (see cantly on satisfaction satisfaction was
attraction or for example Loureiro & with the music festival, mediated by emotional
destination. Memories of González, 2008; Loureiro and edu- cation value, a construct close
past tourism experiences & Kastenholz, 2011; impacting on to “pleasant arou- sal”,
are important elements Oliver, 1977, 1980; satisfaction with the used in the present
for their pleasant recall Olshavsky & Miller, museum visit. In a film study. It is also
as well as the 1972). According to festival context (Park usually accepted that
construction of Loureiro’s (2006) et al., 2010), positive memories of
affective expectations, literature review three education, tourism experiences are
which, in turn, general components of esthetics, and associated with higher
condition future satisfaction may be dis- satisfaction levels (Ali
entertainment all
evaluation and memory tinguished: cognitive, et al., 2016; Kim et al.,
showed a positive sig-
(Cohen, Pham, & emotional, and 2012; Morgan & Xu,
nificant influence on
Andrade, 2008; behavioral response; satisfaction. 2009). There is
Goossens, 2000; each response refers to Besides these evidence (see for
Klaaren, Hodges, & a specific focus and is findings, some research example Kim, 2012;
Wilson, 1994; Tung & linked to a particular also suggests that the Mehmetoglu & Engen,
Ritchie, 2011). Kim’s situation (for example, influence of experience 2011) showing that
(2010) study on prior to purchase, after on satisfaction may be positively arousing
memorable experiences purchase, after mediated by other tourism experiences can
confirms that some consumption). constructs. Various lead to increased
experiential dimensions A variety of studies studies have shown satisfaction. However,
(here refreshment show that experience that emotions despite the recognition
and involvement) dimensions can, in experienced by that satisfaction may
particularly influence diverse contexts, consumers influ- ence be asso- ciated with
the ability to recol- lect contribute to their satisfaction (see positive emotions and
past travel experiences satisfaction. In the for example Dube & memory, the study of
or to retrieve vivid studies conducted by Menon, 2000; Han & the role of emotions
informa- tion about Semrad and Rivera Back, 2008; Hosany & and memory as
them. While in Su et (2016) and by Huang et Gilbert, 2010; Mano & mediators of the effect
al.’s(2016) study the al. (2012), in a music Oliver, 1993). In the of the tourism
four experience festival and another tourism field, both experience on
dimensions contribute cultural performance positive (see for satisfaction has been
to memorable example Bigné et al., neglected. Only a few
context respectively, an
experiences, this is 2005; Faullant, researchers devoted
experi- ence construct
only observed in the Matzler, & Mooradian, atten- tion to some of
integrating the four
case of educa- tion 2011; Loureiro & these effects and only
experience
Kastenholz, 2011; Mason in very specific settings,
and esthetics in
& Paggiaro, 2012; not considering the
Hosany and Witham’s
Prayag, Hosany, & whole tourism
(2010) research and
Odeh, 2013) and destination experience
mainly for esthetics (see for example Bigné
in Oh et al.’s (2007) negative emotions
(Faullant et al., 2011; et al., 2005; Huang et
study. These results
6 E. KASTENHOLZ ET
AL.
al., 2012; Oh et al.,
2007).

Proposed model
and hypotheses
The above discussion
on the rural tourism
experience and
related variables leads
us to propose the
model shown in Figure
1. Considering the
theoretical back-
ground, the statistical
reliability of Oh et al.’s
(2007) scale, and
results from ongoing
qualitative research in
Portugal’s rural
areas, partly
supporting Pine and
Gilmore (1998)’s
experience realms
(Kastenholz &
 Absorptiv experience, as was also found in other studies (see
Entertainment Education for example Hosany & Witham, 2010; Oh et al.,
H1 H1 2007). We accordingly suggest the following:

Positive arousal
H3: Arousal positively influences rural tourists’ overall
satisfaction.
H1 H1
H3 If the diverse facets of rural tourism experience lead
to its enhanced memorability (H2), this enhanced
Passive Satisfaction Active memor- ability value should additionally trigger an
overall more satisfactory rural tourism experience
H4 since a positively lived recollection phase is still part of
H2 H2
the holistic tourist experience (Bryant, Smart, & King,
Positive memories 2005; 'Tung & Ritchie, 2011) and should lead to
increased satisfaction with the overall tourist
experience (Ali et al., 2016; Quadri-Felitti & Fiore,
H2 H2 2013). Thus, we formulate the following hypothesis:

Esthetics Escapism
Immersive H4: Memory positively influences rural tourists’ overall
satisfaction.

Figure 1. Proposed model of the rural tourist tourist experience are expected to feel satisfied
experience. with this
H: hypothesis.

Lima, 2011), this paper aims to validate the

experi- ence scale proposed by Oh et al. (2007) for
B&B in the larger context of the rural destination
experience and also clarify the role of each
experience realm in affect- ing arousal, memory,
and overall satisfaction. Following Pine and
Gilmore’s (1998) assumption that the four realms
could combine in a “sweet spot” that enhances the
experience, the tourism experience lived at a
rural destination, in its facets of an intellec- tual
stimulation (education), entertainment, esthetic
pleasure, or an experience of escape, is
hypothesized to have a direct effect on positive
arousal and mem- ories. Since the literature
review has proven this link between experience
dimensions and both arousal and memory (as
presented in the previous section), with mixed
results regarding the most relevant experience
dimensions, depending on tourism destination or
attraction context, we suggest in the first two
hypoth- eses (Hs):

H1: The rural tourism experience dimensions positively

influence rural tourists’ arousal.

H2: The rural tourism experience dimensions positively

influence rural tourists’ memory.

Tourists enjoying a pleasantly arousing rural


Methodology
Variables and measurement
In the present study, the 16 items considered
most relevant by Oh et al. (2007) for assessing the
experience dimensions were used as a scale to
assess the tourist experience (Tourist Experience
Scale – TES) in the rural tourism context. The
content validity of the items was reviewed to
identify potential sources of ambiguity. Minor
changes had to be introduced, given that this
survey was performed at home, after the travel
experi- ence, whereas the original approach took
place on site. Furthermore, the scale had to be
translated into Portuguese. The TES, as well as
the assessment scales for the constructs of arousal
had already participated in rural tourism. This
approach is chosen here since there is no sampling
framework available for the universe of Portuguese
who had spent holidays in rural areas, and seems
adequate for an exploratory study. To guarantee
the most significant reach of this administration,
the authors’ contact lists were used, integrating
persons from those urban areas known to generate
most rural tourists in Portugal (Lisbon, Porto, and
the densely populated coastal zone in between)
as well as owners of rural tourism units who were
asked to invite guests to participate in the survey.
In this questionnaire, respondents were asked to
report their responses to the last rural holiday they
had participated in during the previous two years.
The survey was administered between July and
October 2011, resulting in 252 usable responses.
The sample profile shows a majority of female
respondents (65.1%), with a tertiary education degree
(88.4%), which might have slightly biased
results, although the rural tourist market tends
to reveal a profile of highly educated travelers in
Portugal (Kastenholz, 2004; Ribeiro & Marques,
2002). The mean age was 36.5 years (median = 35,
range = 18–68). The mean duration of stay were
5.2 days (median = 3, range = 1–30 days). About
one-third of the respondents stayed at an officially
registered rural accommodation unit, and one-
quarter stayed with friends and relatives.
Data analysis
First, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses
(CFAs) were undertaken, using the software
SPSS.20 and LISREL 8.8 respectively, to estimate
the dimen- sionality of the rural experience
(four items) and memory (three items), were adapted
from Oh et al. (2007). Based on Anderson, Fornell, and
Lehmann (1994), overall satis- faction is regarded as
an overall evaluation regarding the total rural
tourism experience lived and remem- bered by
tourists after having spent a holiday at a rural
tourism destination. It was assessed with a sin- gle-
item scale, as proposed by Cronin and Taylor
(1992). All items were rated using a 7-point Likert-
type scale (from 1 – strongly disagree to 7 –
strongly agree). The questionnaire also included
background and beha- vior variables to profile the
respondents.
Sample and data collection
The questionnaire was administrated online, in a snow-
ball sampling approach, to residents in Portugal
who
construct and the related variables, arousal and
memory. Then, a struc- tural equation model
approach using PLS – specifi- cally SmartPLS 2.0 –
was used to test the hypotheses of this study. PLS
is based on an iterative combina- tion of principal
components analysis and regression; it aims to
explain the variance of the constructs in the
model (Chin, 1998). In terms of analysis advan-
tages, PLS simultaneously estimates path coefficients
and individual item loadings in the context of a
specified model. As a result, it enables researchers
to avoid biased and inconsistent parameter estimates.
Based on recent developments (Chin, Marcolin, &
Newsted, 2003), PLS has been found to be an
effec- tive analytical tool to test interactions by
reducing Type II errors. Therefore, we choose PLS
to accom- modate the presence of a large
number of manifest variables and a relatively
small sample size (Chin et al., 2003).
Results all correlations were lower than the square

An exploratory factor analysis was performed on

responses to select those items that correlated with
the measure as a whole and with the dimension to
which they were hypothesized to belong (Malhotra &
Birks, 2007), taking into consideration the items of
the rural tourism experience construct, as well as the
items used to assess arousal and memory. The
Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) mea- sure of sampling
adequacy with a value of 0.910 indicates that factor
analysis is appropriate. A six-factor solution emerged
in a principal axis factoring approach, followed by an
Oblimin rotation, which accounted for approxi-
mately 64% of the total variance, where only
factors with an eigenvalue of at least 1 were
considered. Principal axis factoring was used, as
recommended for consumer or behavioral research
(Iacobucci, 2001). The six-factor CFA model, using
LISREL 8.8, indicated the fol- lowing measures of
goodness of fit: χ2/df = 2.88, RMSEA = 0.07, SRMR
= 0.06, NFI = 0.95, NNFI = 0.96, and
CFI = 0.97. Table 1 shows the dimensions obtained with
related scale items and the range of factor
loadings for each dimension.
The PLS model was analyzed and interpreted in
two stages. First, the adequacy of the
measurements is assessed by evaluating the
reliability of the individual measures and the
constructs’ discriminant validity (Hulland, 1999).
After that, the structural model is appraised. Item
reliability is assessed by examining the loading of the
measures on their corresponding con- struct. Items
with loadings of 0.707 or higher should be
accepted, indicating that more than 50% of the
var- iance in the observed variable is explained by
the con- struct (Carmines & Zeller, 1979). In this
study, only one item (see Table 1) showed a
loading below 0.707 and was consequently
eliminated from the structural analy- sis. Composite
reliability was used to analyze the con- structs’
reliability since it has been considered to be a
more accurate measurement than Cronbach’s
alpha (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Table 1 indicates
that all con- structs are reliable, with composite
reliability values all above 0.8 (Nunnally, 1978).
The measures demonstrated convergent validity,
since the average variance of manifest variables
extracted (AVE) by each dimension was at least
0.5, indicating that more variance was explained than
unex- plained in the variables associated with a
given con- struct. The criterion used to assess
discriminant validity was proposed by Fornell and
Larcker (1981) and sug- gests that the square root
of AVE should be higher than the correlations
among the constructs in the model. In this study,
all constructs have discriminant validity because
Table 1. Measurement results.
Dimension Item Mean (S.D.) Item loading Composite reliability AVE
Education I learned a lot 4.8 (1.51) 0.858 0.92 0.73
(factor loadings = 0.59–0.74) The experience stimulated my curiosity to learn new things 5.0 (1.45) 0.858
It was a real learning experience 4.8 (1.48) 0.865
The experience has made me more knowledgable. 5.1 (1.31) 0.843
Entertainment Activities of others were fun to watch 4.8 (1.54) 0.888 0.92 0.74
(factor loadings = 0.64–0.88) I enjoyed watching what others were doing 4.9 (1.54) 0.898
Activities of others were amusing (pleasing) to watch 4.7 (1.46) 0.815
Watching others perform was captivating 4.5 (1.59) 0.838
Escapism I felt I played a different character there 4.3 (1.88) 0.855 0.84 0.64
(factor loadings = 0.42–0.79) The experience there let me imagine being someone else 3.1 (1.88) 0.707
I completely escaped from reality 3.3 (1.86) a
I felt like I was living in a different time or place 5.0 (1.57) 0.837
Esthetics The setting was very pleasant 6.0 (1.02) 0.849 0.88 0.65
(factor loadings = 0.50–0.87) The setting was very attractive 5.7 (1.09) 0.837
I felt a real sense of harmony 5.5 (1.29) 0.788
Just being there was very pleasant 5.9 (1.25) 0.751
Arousal My stay there was interesting 6.2 (1.02) 0.867 0.90 0.69
(factor loadings = 0.70–0.84) My stay there was enjoyable 6.3 (1.09) 0.853
My stay there was exciting 5.0 (1.29) 0.793
My stay there was stimulating 5.3 (1.25) 0.802 JO
Memory I have wonderful memories of the rural destination 5.9 (1.14) 0.846 0.88 0.72 U
(factor loadings = 0.74–0.80) I won’t forget my experience at that rural destination 5.6 (1.23) 0.852 R
I will remember many positive things about that rural 5.7 (1.22) 0.843 N
destination AL
Overall satisfaction Overall, I am satisfied with this rural experience 5.9 (1.09) b 1.00 b 1.00 b OF
a: item eliminated; b: construct with only one item; AVE: average variance extracted. TR
AV
EL
&
T
O
U
RI
S
M
M
AR

7
8 E. KASTENHOLZ ET
AL.

Table 2. Discriminant validity.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1-Entertainment 0.860
2-Escapism 0.464** 0.802
3-Esthetics 0.417** 0.471** 0.807
4-Education 0.618** 0.614** 0.631** 0.856
5-Arousal 0.453** 0.463** 0.734** 0.662** 0.829
6-Memory 0.492** 0.550** 0.760** 0.647** 0.693** 0.847
7-Overall satisfaction 0.220** 0.259** 0.487** 0.308** 0.491** 0.451** 1.000
Values on the diagonal (in bold) represent the square root of average variance extracted. Lower diagonal values indicate factor correlations; ** p
< 0.01.

root of the variances extracted, showing that all However, as models yielding significant bootstrap
indica- tors are better explained by their respective sta- tistics can still be invalid in a predictive sense
constructs than by alternative constructs (Table 2). (Chin, 1998), measures of predictive validity (such as
Looking at descriptive statistics (see Table 1) the R2 and Q2) for focal endogenous constructs should
prominence of the esthetic realm is evident. be employed. All values of Q2 (chi-squared of the
Conversely, the escapist dimension is the least Stone–Geisser Criterion) are positive, so the relations in
impor- tant. Education and entertainment fall in- the model have predictive relevance (Fornell & Cha,
between. Overall, the rural tourist experience 1994). The model also demon- strates a good level of
seems to be very positive, given the high mean predictive power (R2) as the mod- eled constructs
values of the experience outcome variables, similar explain 61% of the variance for arousal and 65% of the
to those of esthetics. The structural results are variance for memory. Figure 2 also shows that
presented in Figure 2. In this study, a non- arousal has a higher impact than memory on
parametric bootstrapping procedure with 500 re- overall satisfaction (β = 0.343, p < 0.01 against
samples was performed to obtain the path coef- β = 0.213, p < 0.05). Given the depicted
ficients, their respective standard errors, and t-
coefficients, the esthetics dimension shows the
statistics (Chin, 1998; Fornell & Larcker, 1981),
strongest direct impact on both arousal and
including for pos- sible indirect effects. The path
coefficients are found to be significant at the 0.001, memory (at the 0.001 significance level), with
0.01, or 0.05 levels for the relationships presented education also significantly impacting on
in Figure 2. arousal, and escapism impacting on
memory (both at the 0.05 level). Additionally,
Entertainment esthetics reveals a considerable indirect effect
Absorptive on satisfaction, through the mediation of
Education
both arousal and memory (β = 0.298, p < 0.01),
0.295*
whereas the educational experience has a
relatively smaller indirect effect on satisfaction (β
Arousal
R2=.61; Q2=.68
= 0.130, p < 0.05) due to its smaller effect on
arousal.
0.522*** 0.343** 0.130* The results follow the pattern of those presented
by
Satisfaction
Oh et al. (2007): firstly, the mean values of
Passive Active
R2=.26; Q2=.24 experience realms are similarly ranked,
esthetics> education> enter- tainment>
0.298** 0.213* escapism; secondly, esthetics is the only realm
to impact on all the proposed experience outcomes.
Memory
R2=.65; Q2=.72
It is also noteworthy that the rank of means is
reproduced by the rank of path coefficients, that
is, esthetics has large effects on both arousal
0.558*** 0.156*
and memory and indirectly on satisfaction;
Esthetics
Immersive
Escapism education has a moderate effect on arousal
and indirectly on satisfaction; escapism has
Direct effect Indirect effect
a small effect on memory; entertainment,
though, shows no effect at all on experience
Figure 2. Structural results. outcome variables.
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.
 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM 9
MARKETING
suggested by Pine and Gilmore (1998) and
Conclusions, implications, and future operationalized by Oh et al. (2007) for the B&B
research experience, here for the rural destination experience,
by confirming the adequacy of the measurement
This research confirmed the four dimensions model with the data collected in this
study. This experience may integrate the rural evoking, pleasant scenery, both linked to natural and
accom- modation experience, within an intimistic, man-shaped landscapes (agricul- ture, typical country
personalized context (Kastenholz & Sparrer, 2009). houses, small villages) is frequently identified as a main
However, the pre- sent study considers a more motivation for seeking the country- side as well as a
complex experience, namely the overall relevant experience dimension (Carneiro, Lima, &
experience the tourist lives at the rural tourism Silva, 2015; Frochot, 2005; Kastenholz et al.,
destination, shaped by a multiplicity of sensations, 2012). However, a word of caution regarding the
encounters, interaction with local resources, people, operationalization of this dimension in the TES
environments, and themes (Kastenholz et al., suggested by Oh et al. (2007): there are some
2012). positive emotion-reflecting words (such as “pleasant” in
The suggested effects of the experience on
higher arousal and enduring positive memories
(H1 and H2) are partially supported, with
particularly the dimension esthetics standing out.
Significant, although lower, impacts of
education on arousal and of escapism on
memory were also found. Only
entertainment does not show any impact on the
experience outcome variables. The impacts of the
suggested mediators arousal and memory on
overall tourist satisfaction (H3 and H4) are fully
supported, thereby confirming these constructs’
role in explaining satisfactory tourist experiences.
This study also corroborates the findings of previous
research on the experience economy in tourism,
under- taken in distinct contexts, by confirming the
significant positive effect of: (1) esthetics on
arousal (Hosany & Witham, 2010; Oh et al.,
2007; Song et al., 2015; Su et al., 2016); (2)
education on arousal (Hosany & Witham, 2010;
Su et al., 2016); (3) esthetics on memory (Hosany
& Witham, 2010; Oh et al., 2007; Quadri-Felitti & Fiore,
2013; Su et al., 2016); (4) escapism on memory
(Su et al., 2016); (5) arousal as a mediator between
experi- ence and satisfaction (Song et al.,
2015); (6) memory as mediator between
experience and satisfaction (Ali et al., 2016;
Quadri-Felitti & Fiore, 2013).
We thus conclude that the rural tourist
experience seems to be of a particularly
esthetic and educational nature, with
correlation results further suggesting that these two
dimensions also induce higher levels of arou- sal
and satisfaction. Esthetics stands out as the
most marking experience realm. It represents an
immersive, passive realm of experience (Pine &
Gilmore, 1998). Its prominence in this study may be
interpreted, in the first place, as a confirmation of
the frequently referred-to “tourist gaze” (Urry, 2002)
also in rural tourism, where a beautiful, harmony-
1 E. KASTENHOLZ ET
AL.
two of the four items) that may contribute to
increase the scale’s correlation with the positive
outcomes. This may also partly explain the
generally outstanding role of the so-
operationalized dimension.
In the present study on rural tourism, particularly
the esthetic experience dimension stands out as
impacting significantly on both arousal and
memory, and indirectly on satisfaction. Other
studies in rural tourism suggest a similar trend,
where the esthetic appreciation, particu- larly of
nature and landscape, is a major theme
(Carneiro et al., 2015; Frochot, 2005; Kastenholz et
al., 1999; Molera & Albaladejo, 2007; Park & Yoon,
2009). Also, the discovery of the different, the
new, the authentic, in the rural tourism context,
being of educa- tional nature, seems to confirm
previous research on rural tourism (Butler & Hall,
1998; Figueiredo, 2009). The impact of
education on positive arousal is
noteworthy in the rural destination context as a
more active, engaging dimension, apparently
enhancing the tourist experience in the countryside
through interesting learning experi- ences in a
geographically, culturally, and socially dis- tinct
living context. This culturally enriching experience
has been previously identified as relevant for some
rural tourists in diverse contexts (see for example
Kastenholz, 2004; Molera & Albaladejo, 2007; Park
& Yoon, 2009).
However, due to the frequently suggested
operationalization of this dimension, following Oh et
al. (2007), seems to be too much linked to joyful
observa- tion of others, for example in show-like
performances, while this may not be the sole source
of entertainment in rural tourism (e.g. watching
certain animals or farm activities may also be
entertaining). A variant of this dimension may be
an interesting option for future research on the
rural destination experience.
Another construct that deserves further
investigation is arousal. In the present study, as
well as in the original scale, it is measured only
from a pleasurable perspec- tive and it is difficult to
say if the positive experiential outcome that is
being measured is in fact arousal or pleasure.
It would probably be more appropriate to
name it excitement, that is, a combination of
high levels of arousal and pleasure, which constitutes
the affective condition to develop lasting positive
memories from an experience (Koenig-Lewis &
Palmer, 2008).
As far as managerial implications are concerned,
the high impact of esthetics both on arousal
and memory high- lights the importance of
preserving features of the land- scape most
idealiza- tion of the rural idyll, we also expected the
dimension escapism to have an impact on positive
experience out- comes, which was here only
confirmed for memory. This may perhaps be due to
the relatively reduced period of time respondents
reported to have stayed in the rural area, making
such a transformational nature of the experience
less likely. On the other hand, maybe some
literature in the field tends to exaggerate the
relevance of the rural idyll when explaining rural
tourism, while many modern tourists integrate the
visit to rural and nature areas as a normal
extension of their urban lei- sure pursuits in a
distinct, basically more nature-based scenery, with
several studies revealing that the interest in the “rural
way of life”, the “rural culture”, “authenti- city” is
not a predominant search (Frochot, 2005;
Kastenholz, 2004; Kastenholz et al., 1999; Molera &
Albaladejo, 2007; Park & Yoon, 2009). Last but
not least, the extreme wording of two of the four
items may also have led to a less relevant role of
this dimension.
Finally, the lacking contribution of the dimension
entertainment to rural tourism experience
outcomes should be related to its rather passive,
absorbing nature (Pine & Gilmore, 1998), while
active participation has been suggested as leading
to engagement and an increased experience
impact (Campos et al., 2015; Kastenholz et al.,
2012). On the other hand, the
appreciated by tourists such as rural buildings, nature,
and agricultural landscape, and of emphasizing these
elements in the promotion of rural destinations. Rural
areas are also important learning environments, with
educational experiences in these areas
contributing to arousal. However, this kind of
experience seems not to be highly memorable.
Sometimes the wide array of educa- tional resources of
rural areas, related to these areas’ speci- ficities, is
dispersed and not properly explored (e.g. handicraft,
agricultural produce, farming tools). Therefore, those
engaged in managing tourism in rural areas should
present opportunities to appreciate and even actively
engage with these rural resources, in “co-creative experi-
ence settings”, which could provide really meaningful,
involving educational opportunities to tourists (Carvalho,
Lima, Kastenholz, & Sousa, 2016), eventually also
contribut- ing to escapism experiences. The experience
could also be enhanced by presenting tourists with the
opportunity to explore the rural territories with the five
senses – for exam- ple tasting rural products, smelling
characteristic odors, touching rural materials, listening to
characteristic sounds of the countryside.
The strong impact of arousal on satisfaction
suggests

that rural destination managers should pay special atten-
tion to designing emotion-generating experience
settings. This may be achieved through opportunities for
tourists to come into contact with rural residents, either
by encoura- ging tourists to go beyond the frontiers of
the most well- known and sometimes “touristified” sites
of the rural (e.g. in rural accommodation and restaurant
context) and to visit places where they may come into
contact with locals in their daily life (e.g. agricultural
lands, small-scale rural
JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM 1
MARKETING
production sites or companies such as mills,
traditional cheese making) or by encouraging the
residents them- selves to sometimes assume the role of
tourist guides dur- ing the tourists’ destination visit.
Host–guest relations have, in fact, been found to
significantly enhance the quality of the rural tourist
experience (Kastenholz et al., 2013). Another strategy
for inducing positive arousal during rural tourism
experiences is to promote the co-creation of these
experiences by ensuring a higher involvement of tourists
with the rural life, either by participating in
agricultural activities or by actively participating in
part of the produc- tion of specific handicraft or food
(Carvalho et al., 2016).
The present study has some limitations, mainly
due to the online sampling approach, referring to
experiences lived in diverse contexts and after
different periods of time. For example, tourists may
not be able to remember details of their tourism
experiences if they have visited the rural area a long
time ago. A one-year on-site data collection would be
preferable including both national and interna- tional
visitors, to capture different perspectives of the rural
tourist experience lived. An adapted TES may also
yield better results revealing the role of particular
experience dimensions, and additional qualitative
measures should also enhance understanding of the
tourist experience at a rural destination. It would also be
interesting to validate the experience scale with on-
site surveys carried out in other countries. This would
permit a broader validation of the scale and a
comparison of the rural tourism experience across
countries.
The proposed model was restricted to the rural
tour- ism experience dimensions and some of their
potential outcomes. It would be useful to
understand the factors that may influence the rural
tourism experience, such as tourists’ motivations,
sociodemographic profile, and tourists’ behavior in
the rural area visited.
Acknowledgments
This paper was developed within the three-year research
project (2010–2013) “The overall rural tourism
experience and sustainable local community
development”.
The authors would also like to acknowledge the
relevant comments and suggestions of three anonymous
reviewers, helping them to substantially improve this
article.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the
authors.
1 E. KASTENHOLZ ET
AL.
Funding Ciência e Tecnologia [PTDC/CS-GEO/104894/2008] and co-
financed by COMPETE, QREN, and FEDER.
This work was supported by the Fundação para a
References nature and role of affect in consumer behavior. In C. P.
Haugtvedt, P. Herr, & F. R. Kardes (Eds.), Handbook of
Ali, F., Ryu, K., & Hussain, K. (2016). Influence of experiences consumer psychology (pp. 297–348). New York, NY:
on memories, satisfaction and behavioral intentions: A Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
study of creative tourism. Journal of Travel & Cronin, J. J. Jr., & Taylor, S. A. (1992). Measuring service
Tourism Marketing, 33(1), 85–100. quality: A reexamination and extension. Journal of
doi:10.1080/10548408.2015.1038418 Marketing, 56(3), 55–68. doi:10.2307/1252296
Anderson, E. W., Fornell, C., & Lehmann, D. R. (1994,
July). Customer satisfaction, market share, and
profitability: Findings from Sweden. Journal of
Marketing, 58, 53–66. doi:10.2307/1252310
Bigné, J. E., Andreu, L., & Gnoth, J. (2005). The theme
park experience: An analysis of pleasure, arousal and
satisfac- tion. Tourism Management, 26(6), 833–
843. doi:10.1016/j. tourman.2004.05.006
Bryant, F. B., Smart, C. M., & King, S. P. (2005). Using the
past to enhance the present: Boosting happiness through
positive reminiscence. Journal of Happiness
Studies, 6, 227–260. doi:10.1007/s10902-005-
3889-4
Butler, R. H., & Hall, C. M. (1998). Image and reimaging of
rural areas. In R. H. Butler, C. M. Hall, & J. M. Jenkins
(Eds.), Tourism and recreation in rural areas
(pp. 115–122). Chichester: Willey.
Campos, A. C., Mendes, J., Oom do Valle, P., & Scott, N.
(2015). Co-creation of tourist experiences: A literature
review. Current Issues in Tourism, 1–32.
doi:10.1080/ 13683500.2015.1081158
Carmines, E. G., & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability
and validity assessment. London: Sage.
Carneiro, M. J., Lima, J., & Silva, A. L. (2015). Landscape and
the rural tourism experience: Identifying key elements,
addres- sing potential, and implications for the
future. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23(8–9),
1217–1235. doi:10.1080/
09669582.2015.1037840
Carvalho, M., Lima, J., Kastenholz, E., & Sousa, A. J. (2016).
Co- creative rural tourism experiences - Connecting
tourists, community and local resources. In E.
Kastenholz, M. J. Carneiro, C. Eusébio, & E.
Figueiredo (Eds.), Meeting chal- lenges for rural
tourism through co-creation of sustainable
tourist experiences (pp. 79–101). Newcastle
upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Chin, W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to
struc- tural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides
(Ed.), Modern methods for business research
(pp. 295–336). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Publisher.
Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003). A
partial least squares latent variable modelling
approach for mea- suring interaction effects: Results
from a Monte Carlo simu- lation study and an
electronic mail adoption study. Information
Systems Research, 14(2), 189–217. doi:10.1287/
isre.14.2.189.16018
Clemenson, H. A., & Lane, B. (1997). Niche markets,
niche marketing and rural employment. In R. D.
Bollman & J. M. Bryden (Eds.), Rural employment:
An international perspec- tive (pp. 410–426).
Wallingford: CAB International.
Cohen, J. B., Pham, M. T., & Andrade, E. B. (2008). The

Dube, L., & Menon, K. (2000). Multiple roles of
consumption emotions in post-purchase satisfaction
with extended ser- vice transactions.
International Journal of Service Industry
Management, 11(3), 287–304. doi:10.1108/
09564230010340788
Ellis, G. D., & Rossman, J. R. (2008). Creating value for
partici- pants through experience staging: Parks,
recreation, and tourism in the experience
industry. Journal of Park and Recreation
Administration, 26(4), 1–20.
Faullant, R., Matzler, K., & Mooradian, T. A. (2011).
Personality, basic emotions, and satisfaction: Primary
emotions in the mountaineering experience. Tourism
Management, 32, 1423–1430.
doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.01.004
Figueiredo, E. (2004). Imagined rural - tourism
and the social (re)construction of rural
spaces. XI World Congress of Rural Sociology -
Globalization, Risks and Resistance in Rural
Economies and Societies, Trondheim, Norway.
Figueiredo, E. (2009). One rural, two visions -
environmental issues and images on rural areas in
Portugal. Journal of European Countryside,
1(1), 9–21.
Fornell, C., & Cha, J. (1994). Partial least squares. In
R. P. Bagozzi (Ed.), Advanced methods of
marketing research (pp. 52–78). Cambridge,
England: Blackwell.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural
equa- tion models with unobservable variables and
measurement error. Journal of Marketing
Research, 18(1), 39–50. doi:10.2307/3151312
Frochot, I. (2005). A benefit segmentation of tourists in
rural areas: A Scottish perspective. Tourism
Management, 26(3), 335–346.
doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2003.11.016
of Travel Research, 49(4), 513–526.
doi:10.1177/
0047287509349267
Hosany, S., & Witham, M. (2010). Dimensions of cruisers’
experiences, satisfaction, and intention to recommend.
Journal of Travel Research, 49(3), 351–364.
doi:10.1177/ 0047287509346859
Huang, Y., Scott, N., Ding, P., & Cheng, D. (2012). Impression
of Liusanjie: Effect of mood on experience and
satisfaction. International Journal of Tourism
Research, 14(1), 91–102. doi:10.1002/jtr.v14.1
Hulland, J. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in
strategic management research: A review of four
recent studies. Strategic Management Journal,
20, 195–204. doi:10.1002/ (ISSN)1097-0266
Iacobucci, D. (2001). Factor analysis. Journal of
Consumer Psychology, 10(1&2), 75–82.
Kastenholz, E. (2004). Management of demand as a tool
in sustainable tourist destination development.
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12(5), 388–
408. doi:10.1080/
09669580408667246
Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., & Marques, C. (2012).
Marketing the rural tourism experience. In R. H.
Tsiotsou & R. E. Goldsmith (Eds.), Strategic
marketing in tourism services (pp. 247–264).
Bingley: Emerald.
JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM 1
MARKETING
Gnoth, J., Bigné, J. E., & Andreu, L. (2006). Waiting time
effects on the leisure experience and visitor emotions.
In M. Kozak & L. Andreu (Eds.), Progress in
tourism marketing (pp. 255– 267). Amsterdam,
Oxford: Elsevier.
Gnoth, J., Zins, A. H., Lengmueller, R., & Boshoff, C.
(2000). Emotions, mood, flow and motivations to
travel. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing,
9(3), 23–34. doi:10.1300/ J073v09n03_02
Goossens, C. (2000). Tourism information and pleasure moti-
vation. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(2),
301–321. doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00067-5
Grappi, S., & Montanari, F. (2011). The role of social
identifica- tion and hedonism in affecting tourist re-
patronizing beha- viours: The case of an Italian festival.
Tourism Management, 32(5), 1128–1140.
doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2010.10.001
Halfacree, K. (1995). Talking about Rurality: Social
representa- tions of the Rural as expressed by residents
of six English parishes. Journal of Rural Studies,
11, 1–20. doi:10.1016/ 0743-0167(94)00039-C
Han, H., & Back, K.-J. (2008). Assessing customers’ emotional
experiences influencing their satisfaction in the lodging
industry. Journal of Travel & Tourism
Marketing, 23(1), 43– 56.
doi:10.1300/J073v23n01_04
Hirschman, E. C. (1984). Experience seeking: A
subjectivist perspective of consumption. Journal
of Business Research, 12(1), 115–136.
doi:10.1016/0148-2963(84)90042-0
Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic
consump- tion: Emerging concepts, methods and
propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 92–
101. doi:10.2307/1251707
Hosany, S., & Gilbert, D. (2010). Measuring tourists’
emotional experiences toward hedonic holiday
destinations. Journal
Kastenholz, E., Carneiro, M. J., Marques, C. P., & Lima, J.
(2012). Understanding and managing the rural tourism
experience
- The case of a historical village in Portugal.
Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 207–214.
doi:10.1016/j. tmp.2012.08.009
Kastenholz, E., Davis, D., & Paul, G. (1999). Segmenting
tourism in rural areas: The case of north and central
Portugal. Journal of Travel Research, 37(4), 353–
363. doi:10.1177/ 004728759903700405
Kastenholz, E., Eusébio, C., Carneiro, M., & Figueiredo, E.
(2013). Host-Guest relationships in rural tourism - evidence
from two Portuguese villages. Anatolia: An
International Journal of Tourism and
Hospitality Research, 24(3), 367– 380.
doi:10.1080/13032917.2013.769016
Kastenholz, E., & Lima, J. (2011). The integral rural tourism
experience from the tourist’s point of view – a
qualitative analysis of its nature and meaning.
Tourism & Management Studies, 7, 62–74.
Kastenholz, E., & Sparrer, M. (2009). Rural dimensions of
the commercial home. In P. Lynch, A. J. MacIntosh, & H.
Tucker (Eds.), Commercial homes in tourism: An
international per- spective (pp. 138–149).
London: Routledge.
Kim, J.-H. (2010). Determining the factors affecting the mem-
orable nature of travel experiences. Journal of
1 E. KASTENHOLZ ET
AL.
Travel & Tourism Marketing, 27(8), 780–796. decision-making. Social Cognition, 12(2), 77–
doi:10.1080/ 101. doi:10.1521/soco.1994.12.2.77
10548408.2010.526897
Kline, C. S., Greenwood, J. B., Swanson, J., & Cárdenas,
Kim, J.-H., Ritchie, J. R. B., & McCormick, B. (2012).
D. (2014). Paddler market segments: Expanding
Development of a scale to measure memorable
experience use history segmentation. Journal of
tourism experiences. Journal of Travel
Destination Marketing & Management, 2, 228–240.
Research, 51(1), 12–25. doi:10.1016/j.jdmm.2013.10.004
doi:10.1177/0047287510385467 Koenig-Lewis, N., & Palmer, A. (2008). Experiential values
Kim, S. (2012). The relationships of on-site film-tourism over time - a comparison of measures of satisfaction
experi- ences, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions: The
and emo- tion. Journal of Marketing
case of Asian audience’s responses to a Korean historical
Management, 24(1–2), 69–85.
TV drama. Journal of Travel & Tourism
doi:10.1362/026725708X273920
Marketing, 29(5), 472–484. Lane, B. (2009). Rural tourism: An overview. In T. Jamal &
doi:10.1080/10548408.2012.691399
M. Robinson (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of
Klaaren, K. J., Hodges, S. D., & Wilson, T. D. (1994). The
tourism studies (pp. 354–370). London: Sage.
role of affective expectations in subjective experience
Lane, B., & Kastenholz, E. (2015). Rural tourism: The
and
evolution of practice and research approaches -
towards a new gen- eration concept? Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 23(8–9), 1133–1156.
doi:10.1080/09669582.2015.1083997
Loureiro, S. M. C. (2006). Gestión de la Calidad
en el Turismo Rural (PhD dissertation). Universidad
Extremadura/Spain, base TESEO and registered at New
University of Lisbon on 28 of June of 2007 (No
registration UNL 14/2006) DR, 2nd series, No. 178,
September 14, 2007.
Loureiro, S. M. C., & González, F. J. M. (2008). The
importance of quality, satisfaction, trust, and image in
relation to rural tourism loyalty. Journal of Travel
and Tourism Marketing, 25 (2), 117–136.
doi:10.1080/10548400802402321
Loureiro, S. M. C., & Kastenholz, E. (2011). Corporate
reputa- tion, satisfaction, delight, and loyalty towards
rural lodging units. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 30, 575–583.
doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.10.007
Malhotra, N. K., & Birks, D. F. (2007). Marketing
research: An applied approach (3rd European
ed.). Harlow: Prentice Hall/ Financial Times.
Mano, H., & Oliver, R. L. (1993). Assessing the dimensionality
and structure of the consumption experience: Evaluation,
feeling, and satisfaction. Journal of Consumer
Research, 20 (3), 451–466.
doi:10.1086/jcr.1993.20.issue-3
Marques, C. P. (2006). Seeking to escape: Sights over
approach-avoidance dialectics. In M. Kozak & L. Andreu
(Eds.), Progress in tourism marketing (pp. 191–
205). Amsterdam, Oxford: Elsevier.
Martin, D. (2010). Uncovering unconscious memories and
myths for understanding international tourism
behavior. Journal of Business Research, 63(4),
372–383. doi:10.1016/j. jbusres.2009.04.020
Mason, M. C., & Paggiaro, A. (2012). Investigating the
role of festival scape in culinary tourism: The case of
food and wine events. Tourism Management, 33,
1329–1336. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.12.016
McCarthy, J. (2008). Rural geography: Globalizing the
country- side. Progress in Human Geography,
32(1), 129–137. doi:10.1177/0309132507082559
Mehmetoglu, M., & Engen, M. (2011). Pine and Gilmore’s
con- cept of experience economy and its dimensions: An
empiri- cal examination in tourism. Journal of
Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism,
12(4), 237–255. doi:10.1080/
 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM 1
MARKETING
1528008X.2011.541847 Tourism Management, 28(3), 757–767.
Molera, L., & Albaladejo, I. P. (2007). Profiling segments doi:10.1016/j. tourman.2006.05.006
of tourists in rural areas of South-Eastern Spain.
Morgan, M., & Xu, F. (2009). Student travel rhetoric and practice. International Journal of
experiences: Memories and dreams. Journal of Tourism Research, 4(3), 211–220.
Hospitality Marketing & Management, 18(2), doi:10.1002/jtr.377
216–236. doi:10.1080/ Ritchie, J. R. B., & Hudson, S. (2009). Understanding and meet-
19368620802591967 ing the challenges of consumer/tourist experience
Mossberg, L. (2007). A marketing approach to the
tourist experience. Scandinavian Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism, 7(1), 59–74.
doi:10.1080/15022250701231915
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd
ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Oh, H., Fiore, A. M., & Jeoung, M. (2007). Measuring
experience economy concepts: Tourism applications.
Journal of Travel Research, 46(2), 119–132.
doi:10.1177/0047287507304039
Oliver, R. L. (1977). Effect of expectation and disconfirmation
on post-exposure product evaluations: An alternative
inter- pretation. Journal of Applied Psychology,
62(4), 480–486. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.62.4.480
Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of antecedents and
consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal
of Marketing Research, 17(4), 460–469.
doi:10.2307/3150499
Oliver, R. L. (2009). Satisfaction: A behavioral
perspective on the consumer (2nd ed.).
Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Olshavsky, R. W., & Miller, J. A. (1972). Consumer
expectations, product performance, and perceived
product quality. Journal of Marketing Research,
9(1), 19–21. doi:10.2307/3149600
Otto, J. E., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (1996). The service
experience in tourism. Tourism Management,
17(3), 165–174. doi:10.1016/
0261-5177(96)00003-9
Park, D.-B., & Yoon, Y.-S. (2009). Segmentation by
motivation in rural tourism: A Korean case study.
Tourism Management, 30(1), 99–108.
doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2008.03.011
Park, M., Oh, H., & Park, J. (2010). Measuring the
experience economy of film festival participants.
International Journal of Tourism Sciences,
10(2), 35–54. doi:10.1080/
15980634.2010.11434625
Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1998). Welcome to the
experience economy. Harvard Business Review,
76(4), 97–105.
Prayag, G., Hosany, S., & Odeh, K. (2013). The role of
tourists’ emotional experiences and satisfaction in
understanding behavioral intentions. Journal of
Destination Marketing & Management, 2, 118–
127. doi:10.1016/j.jdmm.2013.05.001
Prebensen, N. K., & Foss, L. (2011). Coping and co-
creating in tourist experiences. International
Journal of Tourism Research, 13(1), 54–67.
doi:10.1002/jtr.v13.1
Quadri-Felitti, D. L., & Fiore, A. M. (2013). Destination loyalty:
Effects of wine tourists’ experiences, memories, and satis-
faction on intentions. Tourism and Hospitality
Research, 13 (1), 47–62.
doi:10.1177/1467358413510017
Ribeiro, M., & Marques, C. (2002). Rural tourism and the
devel- opment of less favoured areas - between
 1 E. KASTENHOLZ ET
AL.
research. International Journal of Tourism
Research, 11(2), 111–126.
doi:10.1002/jtr.v11:2
Rodrigues, A. L. O., Kastenholz, E., & Morais, D. (2012).
Travel constraints and nostalgia as determinants of
cross-Atlantic legacy tourism. In H. Pechlaner, T. G.
Lee, & G. D. Bò (Eds.), New minorities and
tourism - Proceedings of the international
scientific workshop on new minorities and
tourism (pp. 75– 92). Bozen: European
Academy of Bolzano/Bozen.
Schmitt, B. (1999). Experiential marketing. Journal of
Marketing Management, 15(1–3), 53–67.
doi:10.1362/
026725799784870496
Semrad, K. J., & Rivera, M. (2016). Advancing the 5E’s in
festival experience for the Gen Y framework in the
context of eWOM. Journal of Destination
Marketing & Management.
doi:10.1016/j.jdmm.2016.08.003
Sharpley, R., & Jeppson, D. (2011). RURAL TOURISM A
spiritual experience? Annals of Tourism
Research, 38(1), 52–71.
doi:10.1016/j.annals.2010.05.002
Song, H. J., Lee, C.-K., Park, J. A., Hwang, Y. H., &
Reisinger, Y. (2015). The influence of tourist
experience on perceived value and satisfaction with
temple stays: The experience economy theory.
Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 32
(4), 401–415. doi:10.1080/10548408.2014.898606
Stamboulis, Y., & Skayannis, P. (2003). Innovation
View publication stats
strategies and technology for experience-based
tourism. Tourism Management, 24(1), 35–43.
doi:10.1016/S0261-5177(02) 00047-X
Su, C.-J., Lebrun, A.-M., Bouchet, P., Wang, J.-R., Lorgnier, N.,
& Yang, J.-H. (2016). Tourists’ participation and
preference- related belief in co-creating value of
experience: A nature- based perspective. Services
Bus, 10, 823–846. doi:10.1007/ s11628-015-0292-z
Tucker, H. (2003). The Host-Guest relationship and its
implica- tions in Rural Tourism. In D. L. Roberts & M.
Mitchell (Eds.), New directions in rural tourism
(pp. 80–89). Aldershot: Ashgate.
Tung, C. W. S., & Ritchie, J. R. (2011). Exploring the
essence of memorable tourism experiences. Annals
of Tourism Research, 38(4), 1367–1386.
doi:10.1016/j. annals.2011.03.009
Urry, J. (2002). The tourist gaze (2nd ed.). London:
Sage Publications.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new
dominant logic for marketing. Journal of
Marketing, 68(1), 1–17.
doi:10.1509/jmkg.68.1.1.24036
Vargo, S. L., Maglio, P. P., & Akaka, M. A. (2008). On value
and value co-creation: A service systems and service logic
per- spective. European Management Journal,
26(3), 145–152. doi:10.1016/j.emj.2008.04.003
Zehrer, A. (2009). Service experience and service design:
Concepts and application in tourism SMEs.
Managing Service Quality, 19(3), 332–349.
doi:10.1108/
09604520910955339