The Influence of National Culture On Their Behaviour On A Megasport Event

International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research
The influence of tourists’ national culture on their behaviors in a sport mega-event

Marcello Risitano, Ilaria Tutore, Annarita Sorrentino, Michele Quintano,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Marcello Risitano, Ilaria Tutore, Annarita Sorrentino, Michele Quintano, (2017) "The influence of tourists’ national culture on
their behaviors in a sport mega-event", International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 11 Issue: 2,
pp.193-210, https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-07-2015-0077
Permanent link to this document:
Downloaded by ACADEMIA DE STUDII ECONOMICE DIN BUCURESTI At 03:36 27 October 2018 (PT)
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-07-2015-0077
Downloaded on: 27 October 2018, At: 03:35 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 114 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 466 times since 2017*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2017),"Determinants of experienced tourists’ satisfaction and actual spending behavior: a PLS path modelling approach",
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 11 Iss 2 pp. 157-181 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/
IJCTHR-09-2015-0107">https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-09-2015-0107</a>
(2017),"Understanding the effects of multi-dimensional tourism experiences on tourists’ positive emotions and satisfaction in
the context of casino hotels", International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 11 Iss 2 pp. 142-156 <a
href="https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-05-2016-0050">https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-05-2016-0050</a>
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:526497 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The influence of tourists’ national culture
on their behaviors in a sport mega-event
Marcello Risitano, Ilaria Tutore, Annarita Sorrentino and Michele Quintano
Abstract Marcello Risitano is

Purpose – The impact of national culture on tourist behavior has been analyzed in several studies, but Assistant Professor,
none of them focused on its discriminating impact on behavioral intentions during a mega-event. Using Ilaria Tutore is Research
Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, this paper aims to explore the influence of national cultural values on Fellow,
tourist behaviors (experience, satisfaction and behavioral intentions) during the America’s Cup World Annarita Sorrentino is
Series (ACWS) in Naples. Research Fellow and
Design/methodology/approach – The paper presents a quantitative analysis of primary data Michele Quintano is Full
gathered through a survey of a convenience sample of tourists (n ⫽ 612) conducted during the ACWS
Professor, all at the
organized by the City of Naples in April 2013.
Department of
Findings – The findings confirm that national cultural clusters represent an important driver of
Management and
behavioral intentions: tourists from different geographic clusters showed different intention to return and
intention to recommend by word of mouth, caused by different levels of individualism and uncertainty Quantitative Studies,
avoidance. University of Naples
Practical implications – For destination marketing managers, this study throws light on how the Parthenope, Naples, Italy.
national culture of tourists may influence their experiences and behavioral intentions.
Originality/value – Despite the richness of works on the tourism experience, few studies have
investigated the effect of national culture on tourists’ experience, satisfaction and behavioral intentions
during and after a sport mega-event.
Keywords Behavioral intentions, America’s Cup World Series, Event experience, Event satisfaction,
National cultural dimension, Sport mega-event
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
The analysis of tourism behavior has been considered a relevant topic even in the event
marketing literature. Several authors have focused their studies on the determinants
(image, experience and satisfaction) of tourist behavior and have addressed the causal
relationships among them (Gallarza et al., 2009), as well as their effects on behavioral
intentions (Kaplanidou, 2009; Kaplanidou and Vogt, 2010; Chen and Funk, 2010;
Dongfeng, 2013; Chang et al., 2014).
In the literature on sporting events, it has been widely reported that image and satisfaction
(Gibson et al., 2008; Kaplanidou and Vogt, 2010; Chen and Funk, 2010; Dongfeng, 2013)
are determinants of tourist behavior but few authors have considered elements of the event
experience (and satisfaction) as antecedents of behavioral intentions to assess the impact
of a sport mega-event in destination management.
In relation to tourist consumption, behavioral intentions are considered to be a
multidimensional concept that includes reattendance intention, media consumptive
intention and the intention to buy licensed merchandise. Weed (2005) demonstrated that Received 24 July 2015
spectators who had a positive event experience would attend a future event but little Revised 5 February 2016
13 June 2016
studies have shown the impact of the event experience on the desire to revisit the 22 September 2016
destination (Fink et al., 2002; Kwon et al., 2007; Byon et al., 2010). Accepted 16 October 2016
DOI 10.1108/IJCTHR-07-2015-0077 VOL. 11 NO. 2 2017, pp. 193-210, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1750-6182 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH PAGE 193
Among the factors that affect tourist behavior, some studies have investigated the
cross-cultural dimensions, and have evaluated the effect of national culture in particular
(Pizam and Sussman, 1995; Reisinger and Turner, 2003; Richards, 2007; Kaplanidou,
2009) on both satisfaction and behavioral intentions. Although the influence of national
cultural on tourist behavior is well documented in the event marketing literature
(Kaplanidou, 2009; Dongfeng, 2013), the cross-cultural literature has not been able to
propose how dissatisfaction may accordingly be reduced or the willingness to recommend
or to return may be increased. Instead, the majority of studies have focused their attention
on the influence of national culture on tourist behavior (Kang and Moscardo, 2006; Kim and
McKercher, 2011; Manrai and Manrai, 2011) in relation to information search (Money and
Crotts, 2003; Litvin et al., 2004), decision making (Correia et al., 2011), satisfaction (Crotts
and Erdmann, 2000; Tsang and Ap, 2007;Turner et al., 2001) and perceptions (Reisinger
and Mavondo, 2006). Few authors have considered elements of event experience as
mediator of tourist behavioral intentions (Ayob et al., 2013; Lee and Min, 2016) and even
less have investigated the effect of national culture on tourist’s experience, satisfaction and
behavioral intention in the event context. This paper aims to increase the importance of
cross-cultural analysis in event management studies. Adopting Hofstede’s cultural
dimensions (2001), the work evaluates the impact of aspects of national culture on some
tourist behavioral dimensions (experience, satisfaction, intention to recommend and
intention to return); more specifically, it compares four national clusters (namely,
Anglo-Saxon, Latin, Nordic, Germanic) in an empirical case of a sport mega-event:
America’s Cup World Series in Naples in April 2013.
The paper is organized as follows: the theoretical background has been set on “Tourist
behavior in sport mega-events” and “Cross-cultural studies” as sub-headings by defining
the conceptual framework. Then, the empirical research is presented by describing
methods, data collection and the findings discussion. Finally, the last section shows the
limits and future research opportunities.
Tourist behavior in sport mega-event

Despite the importance of understanding tourist behavior at sporting events, the existing
tourism literature has examined only the causal relationship between the visitors’
post-consumption behaviors and its antecedents (Kaplanidou and Vogt, 2007a, 2007b;
Prayag, 2009; Chen and Funk, 2010).
The first research on this topic examined hedonistic aspects of sporting events, and
revealed that consumer satisfaction was directly linked to the quality of the facilities
(Wakefield and Blodgett, 1994). Later, Madrigal (1995) suggested that consumer
satisfaction at sporting events is based on cognitive and affective factors. Kaplanidou and
Vogt (2007a, 2007b; Kaplanidou, 2009, 2012) dedicated most of their papers to tourist
behavior at sport events, and demonstrated a positive relationship between image,
satisfaction and behavioral intentions. Dos Santos (2012) compared two models of tourist
behavior at sport events (planned behavior’ and “disconfirmation of expectations”) by
showing the importance of matching the two approaches to emphasize the role of emotions
experienced in defining the overall satisfaction. Tourist experience has been recently
introduced in the analysis of tourist behavior as a key determinant in the formation of tourist
satisfaction and perceptions of value. According to Ayob et al. (2013), visitors’ event
experiences influence their overall satisfaction, which in turn affects the visitors’ intention to
return. Similarly, Chang et al. (2014) have demonstrated that the on-site visit experience is
the most influential antecedent of revisit intention. In the next section, we review the
literature on the constructs defined in the theoretical framework used for the present study:
experience, satisfaction and behavioral intentions.
PAGE 194 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH VOL. 11 NO. 2 2017
Experience, satisfaction and behavioral intentions
The concept of experience has been introduced in event tourism studies only recently
(Kim et al., 2012; Tung and Ritchie, 2011). According to the consumer experience
model of Pine and Gilmore (1998), experiences formed at special events result from
interactions with the environment or responses to various stimuli, such as physical
things (products, facilities and the scenario), processes (services) and people (event
staff).
Volo (2009, p. 123) addressed experience from the tourist perspective by “emphasising the
role of the space and time continuum and by distinguishing experiences from any other
occurrence [that] may happen to a person when engaging tourism activities”. Based on
these premises, an event is likely to become an experience, whereas participation is rich
in sensations (positive emotions) and is able to engage consumers in a personal way
(Berridge, 2007; Lee et al., 2008; O’Sullivan and Spangler, 1998). However, despite this
common conception that the tourist experience is connected to something “positive”, the
perception of the environmental stimuli differs according to the kinds of people, providing
different modes of experience (Uriely, 2005). So, these tourist perceptions (sense, feelings,
etc) of a destination (or event) have a direct impact on behavioral intentions (e.g. revisit
intentions or intention to recommend by word of mouth [WOM]). In relation specifically to
sporting events, Weed (2005) demonstrated that spectators who had a positive event
experience would repeat it in the future. In the business marketing research, Brakus et al.
(2009) defined a model that conceptualized the brand experience as a consumer response
focused on four main dimensions: sense, feel, think and act. “Sense” is based on the
impact of marketing on personal five senses. “Feel” is related to the human affective
component, including memories and personal feelings. In parallel, “think” is related to
the human cognitive component, whereby the experience should move the thought. Finally,
“act” is the last step (maybe the most important from a marketing perspective) that reflects
whether the experience produces actions (such as purchase, recommendation or return).
This framework could fit the concept of the event experience, if it is thought of as a
subjective interaction with a set of sensory and emotional elements offered by the event
(Ayob et al., 2013). Moreover, as Ayob et al. (2013) demonstrated, spectators’ event
experiences influence overall satisfaction, which in turn affected the visitors’ intentions
regarding future events. Hence, overall satisfaction was found to act as a mediator between
the event experience and intention. The construct of satisfaction is usually measured in the
marketing literature with reference to a model of expectation/disconfirmation (Oliver, 1980;
Francken and van Raaij, 1981; Chon, 1989). In the tourism literature, to measure this
construct, a multi-item scale is usually applied (Pizam et al., 1978; Bigne et al., 2001; Kozak,
2003) or, alternatively, a single item is used to measure overall satisfaction (Tse and Wilton,
1988; Del Bosque and Martín, 2006). In line with the studies cited above, a positive event
experience has a direct impact on tourist satisfaction (Oh et al., 2007; Lee et al., 2011) and
behavioral intentions (Yoon and Uysal, 2005; Hui et al., 2007). Ayob et al. (2013)
conceptualized satisfaction as a consequence of the event experience, and highlighted
that a positive event experience produces positive overall satisfaction and positive
intentional judgments.
Although WOM has rarely been examined in a sport marketing context, we assumed that
tourist spectators would convey positive WOM (intention to recommend an event or
destination) and positive willingness to return (to an event or destination) based on their
overall experience. Therefore, in this study, behavioral intentions have been
operationalized as:
intention to recommend the destination or event (WOM); and
intention to revisit the destination or event.
VOL. 11 NO. 2 2017 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH PAGE 195
This operationalization is found in the general literature on marketing, tourism and
hospitality (Bigne et al., 2001; Prayag, 2009; Han et al., 2009; Liu and Jang, 2009), where
it has been used to evaluate the impact of an event on tourist flows.
As underlined above, most of the sport and tourism literature has confirmed a positive
relationship between tourist satisfaction and behavioral intentions (Bigne et al., 2001; Yoon
and Uysal, 2005; Kaplanidou and Gibson, 2010; Kaplanidou and Vogt, 2007; Prayag and
Grivel, 2014). However, it is not clear whether satisfaction with an event leads to positive
behavioral intentions for the event only, the destination only, or both. Kaplanidou and Vogt
(2007) found that satisfaction with an event did not significantly influence intentions to
revisit the destination. Other studies (Kaplanidou and Gibson (2010) showed that
satisfaction with an event directly influenced intentions to participate in the event again.
Moreover, some authors (Kozak, 2001; Del Chiappa et al., 2014) have also explored the
differences between first time and repeat visitors as proxies to evaluate the willingness to
recommend or revisit the destination.
Cross-cultural studies in the tourism marketing literature

Culture has been defined in many ways. Hofstede (1984) considers culture to be the
collective programming of the mind, which distinguishes the members of one category of
people from another (Hofstede, 1984). According to the author, culture consists of patterns,
explicit and implicit, of and for behavior acquired and transmitted by symbols, constituting
the distinctive achievements of human groups, including their embodiments in artifacts.
Culture is a multidimensional construct (Donthu and Yoo, 1998): accordingly, Hofstede
identified different universal dimensions of culture, which are independent of each other.
This framework envisages that cultural values which distinguish countries from each other
are grouped into five clusters, called dimensions of national culture (Hofstede, 2004):
Power Distance (PD) expresses tolerance of an unequal distribution of power;
Individualism/collectivism (IDV) refers to the extent to which individuals tend to take
care just of themselves or the extent to which they feel themselves to be a member of
a community and to take care of a particular group;
Masculinity/Femininity (MAS) is related to concerns with achievement, assertiveness
and competition, or a preference for cooperation, focusing on the quality of life, rather
than career;
Uncertainty Avoidance (UA) refers to the degree to which the members of society
tolerate risk, uncertainty and ambiguity; and
Long-term orientation (LTO) can be interpreted as dealing with society’s search for
virtue and is based on Confucian dynamism.
Since Hofstede’s original conceptualization, another cultural dimension has been inserted,
namely the Indulgence/Restraint: indulgence characterizes a society that allows relatively
free gratification of basic and natural human drives, while restraint characterizes a society
that suppresses gratification of needs, which is therefore regulated by means of strict social
norms (Hofstede, 2011).
Previous studies have used the Hofstede framework (1984) as one of the most relevant to the
field of tourism and cross-cultural research (Correia et al., 2011). This stream of research has
attempted to identify how each of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions influences tourist behaviors
and perceptions. From this perspective, Manrai and Manrai (2011) conducted a useful review
of studies which analyzed the effect of national cultural differences on tourist behaviors. In line
with the tourism marketing literature, the authors classified studies according to travelers’ three
main stages – before, during and after travel – to identify the effect of different cultural
dimensions during each stage. In particular, the so-called “social interaction-driven (SID) travel
behavior” determines post-visit behavior. From the perspective of the present paper, these
dimensions include tourist perceptions such as: destination evaluation, satisfaction,
experience, price/quality evaluation and repeat purchase/revisit intention. Furthermore, Manrai
and Manrai (2011) classified other studies of pre-visit behavior and the on-site tourist
experience, and highlighted the influence of Individualism/Collectivism and Uncertainty
Avoidance on social interaction and commercial transaction (Pizam and Sussman, 1995),
duration, itinerary, and travel frequency (Crotts and Litvin, 2003).
Using Hofstede’s framework, Hsu and Kang (2003) investigated differences in service
quality perception, destination image, satisfaction and revisit intention by using the level of
individualism/collectivism and power distance while comparing Asian and Western tourists.
Those authors envisaged that Western tourists developed higher level of destination image
(and satisfaction) than Asian ones, while the latter develop positive response intentions.
These contrasting results can be explained by analyzing the different levels of power
distance and individualism/collectivism of the two macro-regions. Collectivism and high

power distance are common in Asian cultures. These cultural dimensions may explain why
Eastern tourists tend to evaluate their travel experiences rather negatively. Moreover, they
also explain revisit intention. Presumably, such an intention is consistent with the notion of
“continuity” in the Asiatic value system and is then associated with the Confucian
dynamism dimension (the fifth one, Long-term orientation).
The impact of individualism on tourist perceptions is connected to tourist self-image. In fact,
tourists from individualistic countries may feel the need to be perceived as individualists
(Prebensen et al., 2003). The level of tourist satisfaction is expected to be greater where
there exists a congruity between tourists’ self-image and the destination image (Litvin and
Kar, 2004).
Crotts and Erdmann (2000) examined different tourist price/quality evaluations in a
masculine society. They found that respondents from masculine nations evaluated prices
as well as the overall travel service quality more negatively. Travelers also indicated having
less loyalty toward the chosen airline. In a further study, Crotts and Litvin (2003) argued that
masculine traits may result in higher levels of expectation and/or stricter standards of
evaluation. The rate of uncertainty avoidance of a culture did not influence all tourist
perceptions selected in that study. Generally, this latter cultural dimension exerts its
pressure on travel motivation, planning arrangements, preferences and travel mode, food
and activity chosen (Pizam and Sussman, 1995; Crotts and Litvin, 2003; Crotts, 2004; Litvin
et al., 2004). Definitively, destination image and travel satisfaction are indirectly related to
individuals’ rate of uncertainty avoidance. This dimension exercises more pressure on
intention to revisit the current destination, since, having gained the experience, tourists feel
they could exert more control over the unexpected during a future visit.
Overall, these studies have highlighted that national culture is able to affect tourist
behavior in its three main stages. Nevertheless, previous research has focused on the
comparison of two different cultures and on specific cultural dimensions; no studies
analyzed whether and in what way national culture is able to affect event experience
(Kim and Prideaux, 2005). Therefore, in line with the mainstream findings of
cross-cultural tourist marketing studies, which have already indicated that national
culture affects tourist behavior, we have conducted an in-depth analysis of the effect of
national culture on three tourist constructs: event experience, event satisfaction and
behavioral intentions. We then hypothesize that:
H1. National culture influences tourists’ experience of a sport mega-event.
H2. National culture influences tourists’ satisfaction with a sport mega-event.
H3. National culture influences tourists’ behavioral intentions to come back and to
recommend the destination/event after a sport mega-event.
Moreover, we investigate whether, if so how, Hofstede’s cultural dimensions affect these
three tourist constructs.
Because Hofstede’s sixth cultural dimension (Indulgence vs Restraint) is still relatively new
and fewer countries have been characterized on it than on the other five dimensions, we
excluded it from the analysis (Figure 1).
Empirical research
The profile of a sport mega-event: the “America’s Cup World Series”. The empirical case
adopted in this paper is a sport mega-event, the ACWS that took place in Naples in May
2013. The ACWS could be considered the most important sailing mega-event in the world.
The first was organized in 1851 (That one in Naples was the 34th edition). The ACWS
comprises a circuit of regattas, and brings the racing to top venues around the world. The
format consists of three main steps: the Louis Vuitton Cup, the America’s Cup Challenger
Series and the America’s Cup Finals.

On the event marketing side, the 34th America’s Cup had a new philosophy based on the
following concept: “Sailing is more than a sport”. The event Organizing Committee is the
America’s Cup Event Authority and it is committed to delivering a model sustainable
sporting event and in each local community hosting the event to leave a positive legacy for
the sport of sailing. Each event also must provide an opportunity to engage with the public
to deliver a positive message and raise environmental awareness. For a host destination
such as Naples in May 2013, the event represents a strategic marketing signal from the city
sent not only across Italy but worldwide. Moreover, the ACWS was only the first of the many
place-marketing projects aimed at a “rebirth” of the local area through the reinforcement of
its many strengths: food and music, culture and art, friendly people.
Methods and data collection

To analyze cross-cultural differences in tourist behavior, the paper uses a descriptive
research design and a quantitative analysis of the primary data. The data were gathered
through a survey during a sport mega-event: the ACWS which took place in Naples from 16
to 21 April 2013.
The city of Naples hosted two editions of the ACWS (April 2012 and April 2013). A first pilot
survey was carried out in 2012 to test the clarity of the questionnaire. The final survey was
conducted in 2013 administering a structured questionnaire to a convenience sample of
tourists (n ⫽ 612) in the Event Public Village Area by a group of 50 trained university
students. This initial sample was screened to derive a consistent group of respondents with
different behavioral intentions based on their nationality. The final sample (n ⫽ 246)
consists of four regional clusters: Anglo-Saxon (89), comprising tourists from the USA, the
UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and Canada; Germanic (34), comprising tourists from
Figure 1 The theoretical framework adopted in the research
Germany, Austria and Switzerland; Latin (100), comprising tourists from Italy, France, Spain
and Portugal; and Nordic (23), comprising tourists from Denmark, Sweden, Norway and
The Netherlands (Table I).
The first version of the questionnaire was disseminated during the ACWS which took place
in Naples in April 2012 (Yin, 1984). The piloting of the survey attempted to preclude errors
and to improve the clarity of the questions. The resulting multi-item questionnaire assessed
the constructs in the theoretical framework outlined above: event experience, event
satisfaction and behavioral intentions. A five-point Likert scale was used to measure all the
constructs. Event experience and behavioral intentions (intent to recommend and intent to
revisit) were measured in terms of agreement with a series of sentences related to the items
(1 ⫽ strongly disagree; 3 ⫽ either agree or disagree; 5 ⫽ strongly agree). Event satisfaction
was measured simply as the level of the satisfaction with the items (1 ⫽ not at all satisfied;
3 ⫽ either agree or satisfied; 5 ⫽ completely satisfied).
Operationalization of variables
Tourist constructs. The first step of the study was the identification of tourist constructs.
To construct indicators best able to summarize the tourist information, we employed
principal component analyses (PCA).
Principal component analysis is a weight aggregation system, widely used to define
synthetic measures because it has several advantages. The methodology enables good
representation of most of the information provided by survey responses with a limited
number of variables that are uncorrelated.
The final factor analysis (presented in Table II) yielded a three-factor solution, and the
factors were labeled “event experience”, “event satisfaction” and “behavioral intentions”.
The solution for the likelihood ratings presented by the three factors explains 55.48 per cent
of the phenomenon. According to the aforesaid theoretical background, the findings show
three different constructs, thus confirming the framework of tourist behavior. Reliability
analysis was conducted on the three factors. We also examined the effects on reliability of
eliminating any of the items from the factors and verified that none of the items greatly
reduced the value of the coefficient alpha when removed from the factor (Pett et al., 2003,
p. 195).
“Event experience” represents the 33.79 per cent of the phenomenon. The eight questions
comprising that factor have a high Cronbach’s ␣ (0.878).
Taking into account the questionnaire results, we consider that “event experience” is
related to the impact of a specific variety of positive physical and cognitive elements
(scenario, sport competition, atmosphere) on the senses, the feelings and the overall
response (“I feel like I want to sail”). The second factor has been named “event
satisfaction”. This factor comprises four questions with a Cronbach’s ␣ of 0.737.
Finally, “behavioral intentions” were measured by asking participants about their desire to
come back to the destination and their willing to recommend the destination to friends and
Table I Composition of the sample according to the different cultural cluster

Gender Age
M F 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 Over 65
Anglo-Saxon Cluster 39 50 10 19 21 17 14 8
Germanic Cluster 18 16 1 10 9 7 5 2
Latin Cluster 51 49 12 38 18 23 7 2
Nordic Cluster 9 14 3 5 2 3 6 4
Table II Questionnaire items loading into each of the three factors reduced from principal components analysis, and
the measure of internal consistency for each factor (Cronbach’s ␣)
Items Factor name (%) Loading Cronbach’s ␣
The regatta has a strong impact on my senses Event Experience 33.791 0.739 0.878
Watching the regatta gives me a pleasant sensation 0.792
I am passionate to see the regatta 0.774
ACWS Naples 2013 atmosphere is exciting 0.702
ACWS Naples 2013 stimulates my curiosity about 0.673
sailing sports
ACWS Naples 2013 enhances my sportive and 0.639
technical knowledge about sailing
Attend ACWS Naples 2013 makes me want to sail 0.644
ACWS Naples 2013 makes me feel more sporty and 0.636
active
Availability of tourism information and facilities Event satisfaction 12.214 0.530 0.737
Availability of eating and drinking services 0.651

Interesting expositions 0.643
Entertainment and recreation activities 0.492
I will come back to this tourist area in next two/three Behavioral intentions 9.476 0.452 0.681
years
I will recommend this tourist area to my friends and 0.535
relatives
Note: aFactor loadings and the percentage of variance explained are based on the rotated solution
relatives. This last factor is the sum from just two questions (with a Cronbach’s ␣ value of
0.681) related to the intentions of tourists in relation to the destination. Consistent with the
theoretical background, these two dimensions – willingness to recommend and revisit the
destination – are relevant to develop free publicity and the destination reputation (Lee et al.,
2005; Chen and Tsai, 2007).
All of these groupings showed a high internal reliability (Cronbach’s alpha ⬎ 0.600).
After having verified the main three constructs through PCA, the second step of the study
was the analysis of the effects of national culture on event experience, event satisfaction
and behavioral intentions, as defined in the hypotheses set out above.
Measures of national culture. This research focuses on the role played by national culture
in shaping tourist behavior by using Hofstede’s cultural dimensions to verify the effect of
national culture on the aforesaid tourism constructs. In particular, we have used the five
national cultural dimensions provided by Hofstede, namely, the Power Distance,
Individualism, Masculinity, Uncertainty Avoidance and Long-Term Orientation. For each
cultural dimension, we considered the average score of each geographic cluster.
Descriptive statistics of these dimensions are provided in Table III.
The Latin cluster culture has the highest Power Distance and Uncertainty Avoidance score,
since people from these countries are more inclined to tolerate an unequal distribution of
power and tend to feel uncomfortable in unstructured situations. The Anglo-Saxon cluster
reveals high individualistic traits: in this cluster, individuals are more self-oriented. They
Table III Average values of cultural dimension of geographic clusters

PD IND MAS UA LTO
Anglo-Saxon Cluster 35.60 84.00 61.80 43.00 30.20

Germanic Cluster 26.67 63.33 71.67 64.33 34.00
Latin Cluster 59.50 56.25 46.50 87.75 30.50
Nordic Cluster 29.00 75.00 11.67 35.00 36.67
take care of themselves by evaluating in depth their individual needs. In contrast, the
Germanic cluster is the most Masculine society, as it is characterized by a high level of
assertiveness, materialism/material success, self-centeredness, power, strength and
individual achievements. The average score for Long-Term Orientation is similar in all four
cultural clusters considered. These results suggest that, even if the majority of tourists
come from European countries, national culture differs considerably according to the
various clusters across the aforementioned cultural dimensions.
Results and discussion

Main results
To test the hypotheses, a series of statistical procedures have been employed. For all
analyses, the level of significance was set to 0.05. In the first part of the study, we tested
whether the presence of different tourist behaviors is explained by the different country of
origin (cultural cluster) by employing a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) analysis

(Table IV).
People in the Latin and Nordic clusters recorded overall higher scores for event experience
and event satisfaction than people in the other two clusters, although the differences are
not statistically significant. The behavioral intentions factor did, though, very significantly
across the identified geographic clusters (p-value ⬍ 0.05). Tourists from Anglo-Saxon and
Nordic countries gave a lower score for intention to return to the destination and to make
a positive WOM recommendation. In particular, the score of people from the Anglo-Saxon
cluster is quite low, while tourists from Germanic and Latin countries show a greater
intention to return to the destination.
These preliminary findings of differences between tourists from the r regional (national
culture) clusters pushed us to go further with the analysis and use the national cultural
values as a mean to analyze differences in tourist behavior. In particular, consistent with
previous studies in this field, we employ the national cultural values provided by Hofstede.
To evaluate the effect of the cultural dimensions on tourist behaviors, we have analyzed the
correlation index among the aforesaid variables (Table V). The first important result is that,
consistent with cross-cultural studies literature, the cultural dimensions are correlated with
Table IV Differences among geographic clusters according to the one-way ANOVA

results
Event experience Event satisfaction Behavioral intentions
Anglo-Saxon Cluster
Mean ⫺0.053 ⫺0.086 ⫺0.236
SD 1.030 1.029 1.080
Germanic Cluster
Mean ⫺0.140 ⫺0.010 0.112
SD 0.932 0.984 0.836
Latin Cluster
Mean 0.069 0.036 0.187
SD 1.009 1.004 0.958
Nordic Cluster
Mean 0.142 0.220 ⫺0.098
SD 0.969 0.903 0.954
Variance
F 0.550 0.527 2.837
p 0.648 0.664 0.039*
Note: *p-value ⬍ 0.05
Table V Pearson’s correlation
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
(1) PD 1
(2) IND ⫺0.712** 1
(3) MAS ⫺0.254** 0.223** 1
(4) UA 0.860** ⫺0.942** ⫺0.052 1
(5) LTO ⫺0.546** ⫺0.038 ⫺0.454** ⫺0.300** 1
(6) Event experience 0.057 ⫺0.037 ⫺0.079 0.034 0.002 1
(7) Event satisfaction 0.018 ⫺0.043 ⫺0.074 0.023 0.056 0.000 1
(8) Behavioral intentions 0.128 ⫺0.193** ⫺0.040 0.180** 0.017 0.000 0.000 1
Notes: N ⫽ 247; **p-value ⬍ 0.01 (2-tails); *p-value ⬍ 0.05 (2-tails)
each other, giving the opportunity to better explore the relationship between the
phenomenon and the cultural constructs.

The Pearson’s correlations confirm the previous one-way ANOVA results: cultural values
(here operationalized as the regional group to which tourists belong) exert an impact on
behavioral intentions. In particular, this latter construct appears significantly related to both
the level of Individualism (negatively) and Uncertainty Avoidance (positively). These
statistical results are commented on in the next section.
Discussion of the empirical findings

The first important result of our study is that nationality, or, in particular, national culture, does
not exert a significant effect on tourist experience and satisfaction. These two tourist constructs
are mainly related to the event rather than the destination. It means that the whole of the
mega-event provided different levels of satisfaction among tourists but these differences were
not due to the tourists’ nationality. Probably other variables play into this evaluation, such as the
organization of the event, the regatta village or membership of a specific type of sailing group.
This first result suggests new avenues of research that could better analyze the effects of
specific sailing subcultures as a factor in tourists’ overall satisfaction.
Nonetheless, the statistical analyses have provided some evidence that culture and/or
cultural difference can be an important discriminator of just one element of tourists’
behavior.
Indeed, the first analysis revealed that tourists from different geographic clusters differ in
terms of behavioral intentions, namely, intention to come back and intention to recommend
by WOM.
These behaviors are more related to the destination itself rather than the event. Thus, the
higher rate of Individualism of respondents is linked to a lower score on the factor
“behavioral intentions”.
Consistent with previous literature (Hsu and Kang, 2003), which asserts that people from
individualistic countries present less positive behavioral intentions in relation to a destination,
our study reveals that individualistic people – who mainly come from Anglo-Saxon countries –
are less willing to come back to the destination or to recommend it.
Travelers from cultures with higher individualism or lower uncertainty avoidance (i.e.
Anglo-Saxon countries) did not tend to praise a destination, even when they received
high-quality services. Moreover, they are often adventurous, risk-taking people: this
behavioral attitude can be translated into a willingness to explore new destinations rather
than to return to the same one (Correia et al., 2011).
In contrast, people from collectivist societies tend to be more brand and price conscious, and
to make decisions on after consulting a wider range of information sources than people from
individualist societies (Manrai et al., 2001; Zhou and Nakamoto, 2001); for this reason, they are
in general more willing to recommend a destination.
In the same way, people who come from a country with a lower toleration of risk are more
inclined to suggest a destination. This means that people who do not like taking risks are
more willing to promote a destination if their evaluation has been positive.
Our results are consistent with previous research that suggests that Uncertainty Avoidance has
an effect on travel motivation, planning arrangements, preferences and travel mode, food and
activity chosen (Pizam and Sussman, 1995; Crotts and Litvin, 2003; Crotts, 2004; Litvin et al.,
2004). Moreover, these studies highlight that this national cultural dimension exercises a
stronger effect on intention to revisit a destination because people who score highly on this
dimension feel they can exert more control over the unexpected during a future visit.
In summary, the statistical analysis confirmed only H3, while H1 and H2 were not supported
by our findings.
Conclusion
This paper represents an attempt to analyze the influence of national culture on tourists’
behaviors. We have started by assuming and then demonstrating the existence of three
different constructs to evaluate tourist behaviors, namely, event experience and event
satisfaction, in relation to a sport mega-event; and behavioral intentions, related to tourists’
willing to return to and/or to recommend the destination. The main finding of the study,
consistent with previous research in this field, is that national culture is a determinant of
tourist behavior. The statistical analysis demonstrated that national culture is able to affect
tourists’ behavioral intentions, and in particular that this dimension is higher in cultures with
a higher level of uncertainty avoidance and lower in individualistic countries.
The analysis of cultural influence on tourist satisfaction could provide a valuable support for
destination management to understand tourists’ values, preferences and behaviors (Kozak
et al., 2004) to implement effective positioning and market segmentation strategies
(Reisinger and Turner, 2003) and to reduce the risk of dissatisfaction. In particular, the
identification of the above-mentioned dimensions in the experience model based on the
four dimensions – sense, feel, think and act – should be used in marketing strategies to
build experiential values related to the culture of origin. In particular, the findings of this
study show that the ACWS, as a sport mega-event, had a strong impact on the “sense”
experiential dimension. This can be used as primary strategy to create value for a
destination. In so doing, destinations should design their “tourist products” on sensorial
experience – through sight, taste, hearing, touch, smell – and improve their communication
and branding strategies accordingly.
Thus, this paper has several implications at both the theoretical and the practical levels. On
the theoretical side, the results suggest fertile areas for future research. It extends prior
research in the field of tourism targeting: our study confirms previous studies reporting that
national culture, and in particular the levels of Individualism and Uncertainty Avoidance
(Crotts and Litvin, 2003; Crotts, 2004; Hsu and Kang, 2003; Litvin et al., 2004; Pizam and
Sussman, 1995), affects behavioral intentions as regards a specific destination.
Moreover, our analysis relates specifically to a sport mega-event that took place in Naples.
The ACWS regattas take place in different locations but with the same format. Tourists who
came to Naples to join the regatta evaluated their experience in a globalized context – the
regatta format – that is far from traditional destination tourism.
Thus, our study opens the path to a deepening of a subject still little studied. In fact, there
are few works in tourism management that consider the effect of national culture during a
mega-event and that employ Hofstede’s cultural dimensions.
Our study also reveals that national culture is able to exert an effect on tourists’ behavioral
intentions in relation to a destination. The appreciation of the event is not related to national
or cultural differences.
At a practical level, such considerations provide useful insights for tourism managers and
public authorities, as the results make it possible to understand and appreciate cultural
differences and to translate these understandings into effective communications, product
offerings and appropriate management and marketing strategies.
Business operators who organize mega-events should know that the national culture is not a
determinant of tourists’ level of satisfaction with an event. Their evaluation of the event is more
related to other features, such as their membership of a specific subculture, the event
organization, and the accessory events. These results confirm the need for parallel international
marketing efforts for sport mega-events (Funk and Bruun, 2007): convergent marketing
strategies to target specific segments in sport communities and divergent cultural marketing
strategies to target potential participants from different cultural backgrounds.

Business operators and policy makers who promote a destination should take into account
tourist nationality. In relation to Naples, people from Individualistic countries tended to
demonstrate negative behavioral intentions in relation to the destination. To increase the
number of tourist from these countries, practitioners should leverage the specific aspects
that they did like during their stay. Business operators can also develop tourism marketing
strategies that focus on people from more collectivist societies who like the destination.
Tour operators can work in partnership with public entities based in countries that show a
better fit in terms of national culture or can define a specific product offering to match the
specific characteristics of target tourists. For example, the development of partnerships
with tour operators from high Uncertainty Avoidance countries or specific marketing
campaigns to improve a destination’s image could help to reduce the perceived risks
associated with a destination.
The present study does have some limitations, although these in themselves open several
opportunities for future research. First, our study was based on a convenience sample, thus
findings cannot be generalized. Moreover, we did not detect if respondents were repeaters or
first-time visitors, as it was done in prior studies (cite one or two examples), thus missing the
opportunity to analyze the moderator effect that prior experience with the event could exert on
behavioral intentions (Kozak, 2001; Del Chiappa et al., 2014). Second, the behavioral
dimensions were studied exclusively on-site, without consideration being given to previous
destination image formation or other influential factors (e.g. travel motivation, subculture). It
would be interesting to arrange the empirical research in the three main stages of vacation:
before, during and after. Finally, it would be very interesting to evaluate the role of sub-cultures
as well – and not merely national-level clustering – in the analysis of differential tourist
behaviors. Accordingly, as a second step in our research, we are processing other data to
assess whether the “culture and practice of sailing sports” may influence tourist behaviors in
mega-events.
References
Ayob, N., Wahid, N.A. and Omar, A. (2013), “Mediating effect of visitors’ event experiences in relation
to event features and post-consumption behaviors”, Journal of Convention & Event Tourism, Vol. 14
No. 3, pp. 177-192.
Berridge, G. (2007), Events Design and Experience, Routledge.
Bigne, E., Sanchez, M.I. and Sanchesz, J. (2001), “Tourism image, evaluation variables and after
purchase behavior: inter-relationship”, Tourism Management, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 607-616.
Brakus, J.J., Schmitt, B.H. and Zarantonello, L. (2009), “Brand experience: what is it? How is it
measured? Does it affect loyalty?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 73 No. 3, pp. 52-68.
Byon, K.K., Zhang, J.J. and Connaughton, D.P. (2010), “Dimensions of general market demand
associated with professional team sports: development of a scale”, Sport Management Review, Vol. 13
No. 2, pp. 142-157.
Chang, L.L., F. Backman, K. and Chih Huang, Y. (2014), “Creative tourism: a preliminary examination
of creative tourists’ motivation, experience, perceived value and revisit intention”, International Journal
of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 401-419.
Chen, C. and Tsai, D. (2007), “How destination image and evaluative factors affect behavioral
intentions?”, Tourism Management, Vol. 28, pp. 1115-1122.
Chen, N. and Funk, D.C. (2010), “Exploring destination image, experience and revisit intention: a
comparison of sport and non-sport tourist perceptions”, Journal of Sport and Tourism, Vol. 15,
pp. 239-259.
Chon, K. (1989), “Understanding recreational travelers’ motivation, attitude and satisfaction”, Tourism
Review, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 3-7.
Correia, A., Kozak, M., Ferradeira, J. (2011), “Impact of culture on tourist decision-making styles”,
International Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 13 No. 5, pp. 433-446.
Crotts, J.C. (2004), “The effect of cultural distance on overseas travel behaviors”, Journal of Travel
Research, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 83-88.
Crotts, J. and Erdmann, R. (2000), “‘Does national culture influence consumers’ evaluation of travel
services? A test of Hofstede’s model of cross-cultural differences”, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 10
No. 6, pp. 410-419.
Crotts, J.C. and Litvin, S. (2003), “Cross-cultural research: are researchers better served by knowing
respondents’ country of birth, residence, or citizenship?”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 42 No. 2,
pp. 186-190.
Del Bosque, I.R. and Martín, H.S. (2008), “Tourist satisfaction a cognitive-affective model”, Annals of
tourism research, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 551-573.
Del Chiappa, G., Tinaz, C. and Michele Turco, D. (2014), “Driving first-time and repeat spectators to
a motor sport event”, International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 8 No. 4,
pp. 388-400.
Dongfeng, L. (2013), “Major sports events, destination image and intention to revisit from the foreign
tourist’s perspective”, International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, Vol. 14 No. 3,
pp. 23-34.
Donthu, N. and Yoo, B. (1998), “Cultural influences on service quality expectations”, Journal of Service
Dos Santos, M.A. (2012), “An attendance behavior model at sports events: comparison and constrast
of two models”, Sport Science Review, Vol. 21 Nos 1/2, pp. 21-36.
Fink, J.S., Trail, G.T. and Anderson, D.F. (2002), “Environmental factors associated with spectator
attendance and sport consumption behavior: gender and team differences”, Sport Marketing
Quarterly, Vol. 11 No. 1.
Francken, D.A. and van Raaij, W.F. (1981), “Satisfaction with leisure time activities”, Journal of Leisure
Funk, D.C. and Bruun, T.J. (2007), “The role of socio-psychological and culture-education motives in
marketing international sport tourism: a cross-cultural perspective”, Tourism Management, Vol. 28
No. 3, pp. 806-819.
Gallarza, M.G., Arteaga, F., Floristán, E. and Gil, I. (2009), “Consumer behavior in a religious event
experience: an empirical assessment of value dimensionality among volunteers”, International Journal
of Culture, Tourism And Hospitality Research, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 165-180.
Gibson, H.J., Qi, C.X. and Zhang, J.J. (2008), “Destination image and intent to visit China and the 2008
Beijing Olympic games”, Journal of Sport Management, Vol. 22, pp. 427-450.
Han, H., Back, K.J. and Barrett, B. (2009), “Influencing factors on restaurant customers’ revisit
intention: the roles of emotions and switching barriers”, International Journal of Hospitality
Management, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 563-572.
Hofstede, G. (1984), Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values, Sage
Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.
Hofstede, G. (2001), Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, McGraw-Hill, London.
Hofstede, G. (2004), “Personality and culture revisited: linking traits and dimensions of culture”,
Cross-Cultural Research, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 52-88.
Hofstede, G. (2011), “Dimensionalizing cultures: the hofstede model in context”, Online Readings in
Psychology and Culture, Vol. 2 No. 1.
Hsu, C.H. and Kang, S.K. (2003), “Profiling Asian and Western family independent travelers (FITS): an
exploratory study”, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 58-71.
Hui, T.K., Wan, D. and Ho, A. (2007), “Tourists’ satisfaction, recommendation and revisiting
Singapore”, Tourism Management, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 965-975.
Kang, M. and Moscardo, G. (2006), “Exploring cross-cultural differences in attitudes towards

responsible tourist behaviour: a comparison of Korean, British and Australian tourists”, Asia Pacific
Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 303-320.
Kaplanidou, K. (2009), “Relationships among behavioral intentions, cognitive event and destination
images among different geographic regions of olympic games spectators”, Journal of Sport and
Tourism, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 249-272.
Kaplanidou, K. (2012), “The importance of legacy outcomes for Olympic Games four summer host cities
residents’ quality of life: 1996-2008”, European Sport Management Quarterly, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 397-433.
Kaplanidou, K. and 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, Vol. 15 No. 2,
pp. 163-179.
Kaplanidou, K. and Gibson, H. (2012), “Differences between first time and repeat spectator tourists of a
youth soccer event: intentions and image approaches”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 15 No. 5,
pp. 477-487.
Kaplanidou, K. and Vogt, C. (2007a), “The interrelationship between sport event and destination image
and sport tourists’ behaviors”, Journal of Sport and Tourism, Vol. 12 Nos 3/4, pp. 183-206.
Kaplanidou, K. and Vogt, C. (2007b), “Path analysis of sport event image influence on spectators’
intentions to revisit the hosting destination”, North American Society for Sport Management
Conference, Luaderdale, FL, 30 May-2 June, pp. 379-380.
Kaplanidou, K. and Vogt, C. (2010), “The meaning and measurement of a sport event experience
among active sport tourists”, Journal of Sport Management, Vol. 12, pp. 544-566.
Kim, A.K. and Brown, G. (2012), “Understanding the relationships between perceived travel
experiences, overall satisfaction, and destination loyalty”, Anatolia, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 328-347.
Kim, S.S. and McKercher, B. (2011), “The collective effect of national culture and tourist culture on
tourist behavior”, Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 145-164.
Kim, S.S. and Prideaux, B. (2005), “Marketing implications arising from a comparative study of
international pleasure tourist motivations and other travel-related characteristics of visitors to Korea”,
Tourism Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 347-357.
Kozak, M. (2001), “Repeaters’ behavior at two distinct destinations”, Annals of Tourism Research,
Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 784-807.
Kozak, M. (2003), “Measuring tourist satisfaction with multiple destination attributes”, Tourism Analysis,
Vol. 7 No. 3-4, pp. 229-240.
Kozak, M., Bigné, E. and Andreu, L. (2004), “Limitations of cross-cultural customer satisfaction
research and recommending alternative methods”, Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality and
Tourism, Vol. 4 Nos 3/4, pp. 37-59.
Kwon, H.H., Trail, G. and James, J.D. (2007), “The mediating role of perceived value: team
identification and purchase intention of team-licensed apparel”, Journal of Sport Management, Vol. 21
No. 4, pp. 540-554.
Lee, C.K., Lee, Y.K. and Lee, B. (2005), “Korea’s destination image formed by the 2002 World Cup”,
Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 839-858.
Lee, J.S. and Min, C.K. (2016), “Examining the quality antecedents and moderating effects of experiential
value in a mega-event”, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 326-347.
Lee, S., Jeon, S. and Kim, D. (2011), “The impact of tour quality and tourist satisfaction on tourist
loyalty: the case of Chinese tourists in Korea”, Tourism Management, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 1115-1124.
Lee, Y.K., Lee, C.K., Lee, S.K. and Babin, B.J. (2008), “Festivalscapes and patrons’ emotions,
satisfaction, and loyalty”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 56-64.
Litvin, S.W. and Kar, G.H. (2004), “Individualism/collectivism as a moderating factor to the selfimage
congruity concept”, Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 23-32.
Litvin, S., Crotts, J. and Hefner, F. (2004), “‘Cross-cultural tourist behaviour: a replication and extension
involving Hofstede’s uncertainty avoidance dimension’”, International Journal of Tourism Research,
Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 29-37.
Liu, Y. and Jang, S.S. (2009), “Perceptions of Chinese restaurants in the US: what affects customer
satisfaction and behavioral intentions?”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 28 No. 3,
pp. 338-348.
Madrigal, R. (1995), “Cognitive and affective determinants of fan satisfaction with sporting event
attendance”, Journal of Leisure Research, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 205-227.
Manrai, L. and Manrai, A. (2011), “Hofstede’s cultural dimensions and tourist behaviors: a review and
conceptual framework”, Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science, Vol. 16 No. 31,
pp. 23-48.
Manrai, L., Lascu, D., Manrai, A. and Babb, H. (2001), “A crosscultural comparison of style in Eastern
Europe emerging markets”, International Journal Review, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 270-285.
Money, R.B. and Crotts, J.C. (2003), “The effect of uncertainty avoidance on information search,
planning, and purchases of international travel vacations”, Tourism Management, Vol. 24 No. 1,
pp. 191-202.
Oh, H., Fiore, A.M. and Jeoung, M. (2007), “Measuring experience economy concepts: tourism
applications”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 119-132.
Oliver, R.L. (1980), “A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction
decisions”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 460-469.
O’Sullivan, E.L. and Spangler, K.J. (1998), Experience Marketing: Strategies for the New Millennium,
Venture Publishing.
Pett, M.A., Lackey, N.R. and Sullivan, J.J. (2003), Making Sense of Factor Analysis: The Use of Factor
Analysis for Instrument Development in Health Care Research, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Pine, B.J. and Gilmore, J.H. (1998), “Welcome to the experience economy”, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 76, pp. 97-105.
Pizam, A. and Sussman, S. (1995), “Does nationality affect tourist behavior?”, Annals of Tourism
Pizam, A., Neumann, Y. and Reichel, A. (1978), “Dimentions of tourist satisfaction with a destination
area”, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 314-322.
Prayag, G. (2009), “Tourists’ evaluations of destination image, satisfaction, and future behavioral
intentions – the case of Mauritius”, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, Vol. 26 No. 8, pp. 836-853.
Prayag, G. and Grivel, E. (2014), “Motivation, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions: segmenting youth
participants at the Interamnia World Cup 2012”, Sport Marketing Quarterly, Vol. 23 No. 3, p. 148.
Prebensen, N.K., Larsen, S. and Abelsen, B. (2003), “I’m not a typical tourist: German tourists’
self-perception, activities, and motivations”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 416-420.
Reisinger, Y. and Mavondo, F. (2006), “Cultural differences in travel risk perception”, Journal of Travel
and Tourism Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 13-31.
Reisinger, Y. and Turner, L.W. (2003), Cross-Cultural Behaviour in Tourism: Concepts and Analysis,
Elsevier.
Richards, G. (2007), “Culture and authenticity in a traditional event: the views of producers, residents,
and visitors in Barcelona”, Event Management, Vol. 11 Nos 1/2, pp. 33-44.
Tsang, N.K.F. and Ap, J. (2007), “Tourists perceptions of relational quality service attributes: a
cross-cultural study’”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 355-363.
Tse, D.K. and Wilton, P.C. (1988), “Models of consumer satisfaction formation: an extension”, Journal
of marketing research, pp. 204-212.
Tung, V.W.S. and Ritchie, J.R. (2011), “Exploring the essence of memorable tourism experiences”,
Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 1367-1386.
Turner, L., Reisinger, Y. and McQuilken, L. (2001), “How cultural differences cause dimensions of
tourism satisfaction”, Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 79-101.
Uriely, N. (2005), “The tourist experience: conceptual developments”, Annals of Tourism Research,
Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 199-216.
Volo, S. (2009), “Conceptualizing experience: a tourist based approach”, Journal of Hospitality

Marketing & Management, Vol. 18 Nos 2/3, pp. 111-126.
Wakefield, K.L. and Blodgett, J.G. (1994), “The importance of servicescapes in leisure service
settings”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 66-76.
Weed, M. (2005), “Sports tourism theory and method – Concepts, issues and epistemologies”,
European Sport Management Quarterly, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 229-242.
Yin, R.K. (1984), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage Publications, Beverley Hills, CA.
Yoon, Y. and Uysal, M. (2005), “An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction on
destination loyalty: a structural model”, Tourism Management, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 45-56.
Zhou, Z. and Nakamoto, K. (2001), “Price perceptions: a cross-national study between American and
Chinese young consumers”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 28, pp. 161-168.
Further reading
Alegre, J. and Garau, J. (2010), “Tourist satisfaction and dissatisfaction”, Annals of Tourism Research,
Vol. 37, pp. 52-73.
Andrades, L. and Dimanche, F. (2014), “Co-creation of experience value: a tourist behavior approach”,
in Prebensen, N., Chen, J. and Uysal, M. (Eds), Creating Experience Value in Tourism, CABI, London,
pp. 95-112.
Baloglu, S. and McCleary, K.W. (1999), “A model of destination image formation”, Annals of Tourism
Research, Vol. 26, pp. 868-897.
Bramwell, B. (1997), “Strategic planning before and after a mega-event”, Tourism Management,
Vol. 18, pp. 167-176.
Chi, C. and Qu, H. (2008), “Examining the structural relationships of destination image, tourist satisfaction
and destination loyalty: an integrated approach”, Tourism Management, Vol. 29, pp. 624-636.
Cohen, S.A., Prayag, G. and Moital, M. (2014), “Consumer behaviour in tourism: concepts, influences
and opportunities”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 17 No. 10, pp. 872-909.
Crompton, J.L. (1979), “An assessment of the image of Mexico as a vacation destination and the
influence of geographical location upon that image”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 17, pp. 18-23.
Echtner, C.M. and Ritchie, J.B. (2003), “The meaning and measurement of destination image”, Journal
of Tourism Studies, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 37-48.
Frias, D.M., Rodriguez, M.A. and Castañeda, J.A. (2008), “Internet vs travel agencies on pre-visit
destination image formation: an information processing view”, Tourism Management, Vol. 29 No. 1,
pp. 163-179.
Grappi, S. and Montanari, F. (2011), “The role of social identification and hedonism in affecting tourist
re-patronizing behaviours: the case of an Italian festival”, Tourism Management, Vol. 32 No. 5,
pp. 1128-1140.
Hudson, S. and Ritchie, J.R. (2009), “Branding a memorable destination experience: the case of
‘Brand Canada’”, International Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 217-228.
Kim, J.H., Ritchie, J.B. and McCormick, B. (2012), “Development of a scale to measure memorable
tourism experiences”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 12-25.
Kim, S.S. and Morrison, A.M. (2005), “Change of images of South Korea among foreign tourists after
the 2002 FIFA World Cup”, Tourism Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 233-247.
Kotler, P., Bowen, J.T. and Makens, J.C. (2009), Marketing for Hospitality and Tourism, 5th ed., Pearson
Education.
Kozak, M. (2001), “Repeaters’ behavior at two distinct destinations”, Annals of Tourism Research,
Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 784-807.
Lee, J.S., Lee, C.K. and Choi, Y. (2011), “Examining the role of emotional and functional values in
festival evaluation”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 50, pp. 685-696.
Lee, J.J., Kyle, G. and Scott, D. (2012), “The mediating effect of place attachment on the relationship
between festival satisfaction and loyalty to the festival hosting destination”, Journal of Travel Research,
Vol. 51 No. 6, pp. 754-767.
Lee, T.H. (2009), “A structural model to examine how destination image, attitude, and motivation affect
the future behavior of tourists”, Leisure Sciences, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 215-236.
Li, M. and Cai, L.A. (2012), “The effects of personal values on travel motivation and behavioral
intention”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 51, pp. 473-487.
Mano, H. and Oliver, R.L. (1993), “Assessing the dimensionality and structure of the consumption
experience: evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20 No. 3,
pp. 451-466.
Mehmetoglu, M. and Normann, Ø. (2013), “What influences tourists’ overall holiday experience? Tourism
company products versus destination products”, European Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 6 No. 2,
pp. 183-191.
Mitchell, R. and Hall, C.M. (2004), “The post-visit consumer behaviour of New Zealand winery visitors”,
Journal of Wine Research, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 39-49.
Moutinho, L. (1987), “Consumer behaviour in tourism”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 21 No. 10, pp. 5-44.
Prayag, G. and 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
Quan, S. and Wang, N. (2004), “Towards a structural model of the tourist experience: an illustration
from food experiences in tourism”, Tourism Management, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 297-305.
Ritchie, J.B. and Smith, B.H. (1991), “The impact of a mega-event on host region awareness: a
longitudinal study”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 30, pp. 3-10.
Ryan, C. (1997), The Tourist Experience: A New Introduction, Cassell plc.
Schmitt, B., Zarantonello, L. and Brakus, J. (2009), “Brand experience: what is it? How is it measured?
Does it affect loyalty?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 73 No. 3, pp. 52-68.
Swan, J.E. and Combs, L.J. (1976), “Product performance and consumer satisfaction: a new concept”,
The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 25-33.
Swarbrooke, J. and Horner, S. (2007), Consumer Behaviour in Tourism, Routledge.
Uysal, M. and Noe, F. (2003), “Satisfaction in outdoor recreation and tourism settings”, in Laws, E.
(Ed.), Case Studies in Tourism Marketing, Continuum Publisher, London, pp. 140-158.
Verhoef, P.C., Lemon, K.N., Parasuraman, A., Roggeveen, A., Tsiros, M. and Schlesinger, L.A. (2009),
“Customer experience creation: determinants, dynamics and management strategies”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 85 No. 1, pp. 31-41.
Voss, K.E., Spangenberg, E.R. and Grohmann, B. (2003), “Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian
dimensions of consumer attitude”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 310-320.
Woodall, T. (2003), “Conceptualising value for the customer: an attributional, structural and
dispositional analysis”, Academy of Marketing Science Review, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 1-42.
Corresponding author
Marcello Risitano can be contacted at: marcello.risitano@uniparthenope.it
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
This article has been cited by:
1. ErgünGözde Seval, Gözde Seval Ergün, KitapciOlgun, Olgun Kitapci. 2018. The impact of cultural dimensions on customer
complaint behaviours: an exploratory study in Antalya/Manavgat tourism region. International Journal of Culture, Tourism
and Hospitality Research 12:1, 59-79. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

The Influence of National Culture On Their Behaviour On A Megasport Event

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Influence of National Culture On Their Behaviour On A Megasport Event

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research

The influence of tourists’ national culture on their behaviors in a sport mega-event

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Abstract Marcello Risitano is

Tourist behavior in sport mega-event

Cross-cultural studies in the tourism marketing literature

distance and individualism/collectivism of the two macro-regions. Collectivism and high

Series and the America’s Cup Finals.

Methods and data collection

Figure 1 The theoretical framework adopted in the research

Table I Composition of the sample according to the different cultural cluster

Availability of eating and drinking services 0.651

Table III Average values of cultural dimension of geographic clusters

Anglo-Saxon Cluster 35.60 84.00 61.80 43.00 30.20

Results and discussion

origin (cultural cluster) by employing a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) analysis

Table IV Differences among geographic clusters according to the one-way ANOVA

phenomenon and the cultural constructs.

Discussion of the empirical findings

strategies to target potential participants from different cultural backgrounds.

Berridge, G. (2007), Events Design and Experience, Routledge.

Kang, M. and Moscardo, G. (2006), “Exploring cross-cultural differences in attitudes towards

Volo, S. (2009), “Conceptualizing experience: a tourist based approach”, Journal of Hospitality

Ryan, C. (1997), The Tourist Experience: A New Introduction, Cassell plc.

Swarbrooke, J. and Horner, S. (2007), Consumer Behaviour in Tourism, Routledge.

You might also like