Annals of Tourism Research 62 (2017) 13–25

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Annals of Tourism Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/atoures

Antecedents and consequences of destination image gap

Josefa D. Martín-Santana ⇑, Asunción Beerli-Palacio, Patrizio A. Nazzareno
Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The purpose of this study is to examine the antecedents that explain changes to the image
Received 22 April 2016 that first-time tourists have (pre- and post-visit image gap) of a destination and its impact
Revised 12 November 2016 on satisfaction and loyalty through the design and validation of a model. The research has
Accepted 14 November 2016
been carried out using a sample of 411 tourists in Tenerife (Spain). The involvement with
the trip, the time dedicated to the search for information, and the number of attractions
visited influence the change in cognitive image. The factors that explain the time spent
Keywords:
searching for information are uncertainty, involvement, and duration and intensity of
Tourism marketing
Destination image
the visit. The positive gap in the image generates greater satisfaction, which has a positive
Destination image gap impact in the loyalty.
Image gap formation Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Tourist satisfaction
Tourist loyalty

Introduction

The importance of image in the tourism development of a place is reflected by the interest shown in academia under dif-
ferent approaches. In this regard, Pike (2002), and Stepchenkova and Mills (2010), who have conducted reviews of the liter-
ature regarding the image of the tourism destination, identify different research areas in order to provide useful guidance to
researchers in respect to topics for analysis, and useful methodologies and research techniques, attempting, in turn, to iden-
tify emerging trends within studies. Most of the research works have focused on the ‘choosing a holiday’ stage (Hyde, 2008;
Pike & Ryan, 2004). Despite the interest shown in image in academic research, some authors agree that there is a scarcity of
studies regarding the evolution of the image at different phases of the journey: before, during and after the visit (Kim,
Mckercher, & Lee, 2009; Yilmaz, Yilmaz, Içigen, Ekin, & Utku, 2009). These studies have shown that the image can change,
more or less significantly, not only while travelling, but also after the travel experience is concluded, with effects on the level
of tourist satisfaction and the likelihood of recommending the destination, or making repeat visits (Kim et al., 2009; Yilmaz
et al., 2009).
A more comprehensive investigation into this line of research related to the evolution over time of the image of a desti-
nation in the development of the holiday-making process has important implications for the sector. Market operators and
those responsible for marketing may be able to create an image which more closely resembles reality in order to increase
customer satisfaction and take advantage of those elements of the image that have been shown, during and after the trip,
to be more prone to modifications that positively impact the level of satisfaction (Bigné, Sánchez, & Sanz, 2009).

⇑ Corresponding author at: Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Facultad de Economía, Empresa y Turismo, Edificio Departamental de
Empresariales-Módulo C, Campus de Tafira, 35017 Las Palmas de Gran, Canaria, Spain.
E-mail addresses: josefa.martin@ulpgc.es (J.D. Martín-Santana), suny.beerli@ulpgc.es (A. Beerli-Palacio), patrizionazzareno@hotmail.com
(P.A. Nazzareno).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2016.11.001
0160-7383/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
14 J.D. Martín-Santana et al. / Annals of Tourism Research 62 (2017) 13–25

We also note that there are very few studies that have developed models that explain the relationship between the image
and the multiple of factors that shape it (Beerli & Martín, 2004a, 2004b; Ryan & Cave, 2005; Tasci, 2007; Tasci & Gartner,
2007). These studies have examined the impact of primary and secondary sources of information and the personal charac-
teristics of tourists on the process of forming an image. However, there are no studies that have evaluated how these factors
influence the image gap, understood as the change in perception that occurs regarding the image during the different phases
of a holiday: pre- and post-visit. That is, what factors can explain the gap that occurs in the image after visiting. However,
Smith, Li, Pan, Witte, and Doherty (2015) carried out an exploratory study which indicates that the image tourists have of a
destination is dynamic and continuously evolving throughout their trip during several key moments (pre-trip, upon arrival,
halfway through, on departure, and post-trip), and that various incidents during the trip could have an impact on it.
Based on the above, this research aims to contribute to the improvement of knowledge about the antecedents and con-
sequences of the gap that occurs in the image after the visit. More specifically, the overall objective of this research is focused
on developing and empirically validating an explanatory model in order to determine what the antecedents and conse-
quences of the pre- and post-visit gap in the image are.

Literature review

The decision-making process involved in arranging a holiday consists of several stages during which prospective tourists,
faced with a number of alternative inputs, act in a certain way that leads them to make certain decisions. According to Van
Raaij and Francken (1984), this process takes place during three fundamental moments – that is, before, during and after the
visit to the destination – and is divided into five stages: the general decision to travel, searching information, choosing a hol-
iday, the travel experience and, finally, the feeling of satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the holiday taken.
The pre-visit stages are particularly important and critical to the success of a destination and, therefore, have been given
special attention in the literature and among market operators (Decrop & Snelders, 2004; Gursoy & Mccleary, 2004; Hyde,
2008; Kerstetter & Cho, 2004). In the literature, works can be found in which the need to understand the behavior of prospec-
tive tourists before they make a trip to a destination is highlighted such as, for example, the strategy employed during the
search for information, since it allows market operators to successfully develop offers which are more consistent with the
client segment being targeted (Gursoy & Mccleary, 2004; Hyde, 2008). In this sense, Gursoy and Mccleary (2004) declare that
the process of searching for information is a key factor in the whole decision-making process of organizing a trip, as it rep-
resents the initial phase of activation of the behavior of prospective tourists trying to reduce the perceived risk of buying an
intangible product. This process of looking for information is more intense among tourists visiting a destination for the first
time (Li, Cheng, Kim, & Petrick, 2008).
With regard to the concept of image, there is widespread agreement in the tourism marketing literature (Baloglu &
Brinberg, 1997; Baloglu & Mangaloglu, 2001; Baloglu & Mccleary, 1999a, 1999b; Beerli & Martín, 2004a, 2004b; Chen &
Uysal, 2002; Gartner, 1993; Hosany, Ekinci, & Uysal, 2006; Pike, 2009; Pike & Ryan, 2004) in considering the image as the
result of three closely interrelated components: (1) perceptual/cognitive, which is related to the beliefs of individuals on
the attributes that characterize a destination; (2) emotional/affective, which refers to emotional response or the feelings that
individuals express about the place; and (3) global, which corresponds to the overall positive or negative impression of the
place. In addition, the cognitive component is an antecedent of the affective, as emotions are also influenced by rational ele-
ments. The cognitive component directly affects the global perception of the image and indirectly affects it through the con-
tribution of the affective component (Anand, Holbrook, & Stephens, 1988; Beerli & Martín, 2004a, 2004b; Stern & Krakover,
1993).
The antecedents of the pre- and post-visit gap in the image can be classified according to their relationship with the pro-
cess of searching for information before visiting the destination and with the characteristics of the holiday during the stay at
the destination.
In relation to the antecedents of the gap in the image prior to visiting, the time spent on the search for information from
secondary sources is a key variable in the creation or modification of the image by a prospective tourist (Fodness & Murray,
1997, 1999; Gursoy & Mccleary, 2004; Schmidt & Spreng, 1996), which influences the formation of the perceived image
before a visit (Baloglu & Mccleary, 1999a, 1999b). It is therefore essential to know what factors determine it and, hence,
the specific efforts made by the prospective tourist to search for information before they choose to visit a particular
destination.
First, the time spent on the search for secondary information derives from availability of time and the pressure that a lack
of time has on the browser. Thus, the value perceived by expectant tourists who are under pressure due to their imminent
departure to a destination is greater than the value attributed by those who do not find themselves in this situation. Mean-
while, the search for sources of secondary information will be greater, the more time there is available (Beatty & Smith, 1987;
Schmidt & Spreng, 1996). Therefore, the longer the time spent by prospective tourists on gathering information, the greater
the amount of information collected, thus providing them with a more complete and detailed image before their visit
(Baloglu & McCleary, 1999a, 1999b).
Second, the need to seek information before making a purchase is typical behavior for consumers, who through this activ-
ity reduce the uncertainty and risk inherent in making purchases. Because of its intangible nature, the purchase of a holiday
has a high level of uncertainty. Thus, the prospective tourist is motivated to seek external sources of information. As evi-
 J.D. Martín-Santana et al. / Annals of Tourism Research 62 (2017) 13–25 15

denced by Gitelson and Crompton (1983), the individual seeks information about the destination because: (1) it is a product
whose purchase is high risk; and (2) it is a product that cannot be observed directly before purchase due to its intangible
nature. In general, a holiday involves a considerable outlay of money and a large investment of time and energy for the
holiday-maker (Bonn, Furr, & Sussking, 1998); therefore, the process of searching for information is considered a critical
moment for reducing the uncertainty inherent in the purchase (Quintal, Lee, & Soutar, 2010).
During the process of searching for information, recognition of need is the first step on the part of the prospective tourist
(Moutinho, 1987) and arises from previous experiences and the memories accumulated by them. These internal resources
are elements referred to as prior knowledge (Kerstetter & Cho, 2004). People who are dissatisfied with their level of prior
knowledge and recognize that they face a decision characterized by uncertainty take the necessary steps to obtain additional
information (Crotts, 1999; Quintal et al., 2010).
Quintal et al. (2010) analyzed the influence of risk (which occurs when the probable outcome is known) and uncertainty
(which exists when the probable outcome is unknown) on the effort devoted to finding information. The authors have shown
that, during the search for information about a destination, the potential tourist still does not know what the end result will
be and, therefore, the only thing they perceive is uncertainty. In this regard, the extent of the search for information varies
according to the degree of uncertainty and not so much to the level of risk. The risk variable has an effect at a later time – at
the evaluation of alternatives stage – that is, when all the information about the destination necessary to imagine the pos-
sible scenarios of the visit is collected. Therefore, each time a potential tourist recognizes the desire to travel but is aware of
the uncertainty inherent in the purchase of a holiday, they will spend time to search for information.
Moreover, Gursoy and Gavcar (2003) note that because a holiday is a product characterized by its intangibility and uncer-
tainty, holiday-makers, during consumption, generally exhibit a greater level of involvement than they do with respect to
any other product. Such involvement is even higher among tourists visiting a destination for the first time (Li et al.,
2008). The level of involvement of holiday-makers on holiday has been investigated since it explains in good measure their
behavior at the search for information stage, during their visit to the destination and their intention to return in future. In
this regard, we can identify in the literature possible consequences that derive directly from involvement, such as a greater
motivational intensity, a greater familiarity with the destination, a reduction in perceived risk, the modification of the image
of the destination, the ability to absorb new information, and the building up of a feeling of affiliation with a place (Fodness &
Murray, 1997; Pearce & Kang, 2009; Ratchford & Vaughn, 1989; Vogt & Andereck, 2003).
Regarding the influence of involvement on the image, Martín, Cossio, and Martín (2008) have shown that tourists with a
high level of psychological involvement (high level of motivation to travel), but with a low level of situational involvement –
that is, with the destination itself – still retain a positive image: they are willing to recommend the destination to others but
not to repeat the visit. On the other hand, tourists with an overall high level of involvement – psychological and situational –
have a positive image: they will be happy to recommend the destination to others and repeat the experience themselves.
Meanwhile, Gursoy and Mccleary (2004) point out that an individual with a high level of involvement will be more willing
to spend time to search information, to accept fewer alternatives, to attach more importance to information, to process more
detailed information, and also to assess related products of a chosen destination. As the authors suggest, the greater the level
of involvement, the greater the likelihood that they will devote more time to searching for information, which will therefore
influence the gap in the cognitive image.
Based on the above in this section, the following hypotheses concerning the effort devoted to the search for information
on the part of prospective tourists before visiting a destination are proposed:

H1. The greater the level of uncertainty perceived by the prospective tourist, the longer will be the time spent searching for
information.

H2. The greater the level of involvement of the prospective tourist, the longer will be the time spent searching for
information.

H3. The time spent searching for information directly influences the pre- and post-visit gap in cognitive image.

H4. The level of involvement of the tourist directly influences the pre- and post-visit gap in cognitive image.

As has already been mentioned above, another type of antecedent of the image is related to the characteristics of the hol-
iday. In this sense, there are several studies that have analyzed how the characteristics of a holiday influence the image, hav-
ing studied, among other variables, the duration, purpose, and intensity of the trip (Beerli & Martín, 2004a, 2004b; Fodness &
Murray, 1997, 1999; Gitelson & Crompton, 1983; Hyde, 2008; Hyde & Lawson, 2003). Broadly speaking, it is stated that: (1)
planning a short break, in contrast to planning a longer holiday, involves a different set of behaviors on the part of the
prospective tourist during the search for information stage, which may have effects on the perception of the image of the
destination; (2) travelling for pleasure entails a different attitude than travelling for business purposes, both during the pre-
liminary phase and during the visit, hence it can be said that the image may be affected; and finally, (3) the level of intensity
of the visit on the part of the tourist may have effects on the perceived image of a place, causing changes in the initial
16 J.D. Martín-Santana et al. / Annals of Tourism Research 62 (2017) 13–25

perception to occur. These characteristics of the holiday have an influence on two different phases of travel: before and dur-
ing the visit to the destination. When referring to the phase before the visit is made, the influence of two of these variables in
the process of searching for information is usually analyzed – that is, the length and purpose of the visit (Hyde, 2008; Hyde &
Lawson, 2003); whereas when the influence of the characteristics of the holiday during the visit is analyzed, the analysis
adheres more closely to how the intensity of the visit affects the image (Beerli & Martín, 2004a, 2004b).
Hyde and Lawson (2003) affirm the existence of a relationship between the duration of a holiday and its planning to the
extent that the longer the duration, the less comprehensive will be the effort devoted to planning. In particular, holiday-
makers interested in short breaks tend to maximize the time available and, therefore, plan their trip in detail spending more
time to search information. By contrast, the tourist who has an extended period of time available for travel prefers to adopt a
flexible itinerary, spending less time to search information. This result shows that the time available for holiday-making
affects the process of searching for information. In fact, Hyde and Lawson (2003) indicate that, for short breaks, holiday-
makers tend to consult a lot of information in order to optimize their stay at the destination and therefore – from our point
of view-this will indirectly influence the pre- and post-visit gap in the image.
In addition, when an individual visits somewhere and experiences it first hand, the image becomes more realistic, com-
plex and differentiated (Gartner & Hunt, 1987; Phelps, 1986). The experience of the place reduces preconceptions and leads
to a change in the perceived image, transforming what could be considered as a stage of simple ‘‘black and white” percep-
tions to one of a more defined and comprehensive view (Beerli & Martín, 2004a, 2004b). Obviously, these developments can
lead to three situations: the image becomes simpler, the image becomes more complex, or the image remains the same as it
was before the visit (Fakeye & Crompton, 1991). This experience with the place is one of the main factors impacting on the
image during and after the trip and is based primarily on the intensity of the visit or the level of interaction that has taken
place. Along this line, Smith et al. (2015) show that the image is altered throughout a tourist’s experience. In the work of
Beerli and Martín (2004a, 2004b), the intensity of the visit is associated with the number of places of interest visited. In con-
trast, other authors have linked the intensity of the visit with the direct experience of the destination or, in other words, the
time and energy spent on active, behavioral and emotional involvement with the place (Fesenmaier & Johnson, 1989; Gursoy
& Gavcar, 2003; Martín et al., 2008).
There are no works that have tried to analyze how the intensity of the visit influences the image, although it is logical to
assume that it can have a modifying effect since the level of interaction that one has with a place determines how a new
perception of the image forms, which can be relatively distant from that which had initially formed (Beerli & Martín,
2004a, 2004b). Starting from these considerations, this paper argues that the intensity of the visit can directly influence
the pre- and post-visit gap in the image in its three dimensions, because if a tourist does not fully interact with a place, this
relationship will not be affected and will not take place in the same way as it will with tourists who pursue a more intense
level of interaction.
Based on the above, the following hypotheses concerning the antecedents of the pre- and post-visit gap in the image
related to the characteristics of the holiday are presented:

H5. The longer the duration of the holiday, the shorter will be the time spent searching for information.

H6a. The intensity of the visit directly affects the pre- and post-visit gap in cognitive image.

H6b. The intensity of the visit directly affects the pre- and post-visit gap in affective image.

H6c. The intensity of the visit directly affects the pre- and post-visit gap in global image.

With regard to the consequence of the pre- and post-visit gap in the image, when the perceived image of a destination is
consistent and conforms to reality, and the holiday experience is positive, the result is a high level of satisfaction and strong
intention to revisit the destination (Kim, Hallb, & Kim, 2012; Ross, 1993).
Loyalty to a tourism destination has been the subject of intense debate (Baker & Crompton, 2000; Oppermann, 2000; Yoon
& Uysal, 2005), especially in regards to its measurement. However, most of the studies on the loyalty distinguish between the
intention to return to a destination and the generation of positive word-of-mouth communication (Bigné, Sánchez, & Sánchez,
2001; Chi & Qu, 2008; Ozdemir et al., 2012; Prayag & Ryan, 2012; Yoon & Uysal, 2005). That is why studies on tourist loyalty
commonly distinguish between two types of loyalty: a behavioral loyalty, which translates to repeat purchase; and attitudinal
loyalty, which translates to a favorable attitude toward the product/destination. The first is usually measured in terms of the
frequency with which a product is bought or destination visited, and the second is typically assessed through the intention by
an individual to recommend the product/destination (Barroso, Martín, & Martín, 2007; Oppermann, 2000).
There is general agreement in the literature when one considers that satisfaction is the main antecedent of loyalty
(Alexandris, Kouthouris, & Meligdis, 2006; Bramwell, 1998; Oppermann, 2000; Pritchard & Howard, 1997). In the context
of tourism, satisfaction arises when, in comparing expectations with the reality of the experience, a holiday results in expec-
tations being exceeded (Chon, 1991; Kim & Perdue, 2011; Lee, Jeon, & Kim, 2011). The literature on the image of destinations
considers the perceived image before the visit as a fundamental element in the development of expectations, as the perceived
 J.D. Martín-Santana et al. / Annals of Tourism Research 62 (2017) 13–25 17

image that a prospective tourist has of the destination forms their expectations about the experience to come, which will then
serve as the basis for comparison once the holiday is realized (Prayag & Ryan, 2012; Wang, Zhang, Gu, & Zhen, 2009). These
results lead us to affirm that there is a direct relationship between the pre- and post-visit gap in the image and satisfaction.
Therefore, the process of confirmation of expectations, or otherwise, arises whenever the tourist compares their preconceived
image with its reality, and the subsequent perception of the image that is formed once their visit is complete. In this way,
every time this process takes on a negative aspect, dissatisfaction is generated (Yilmaz et al., 2009).
In the work of Govers, Go, and Kumar (2007), special emphasis is placed on the need for those responsible for the pro-
motion of a tourism destination to project an image that corresponds to the reality of that destination in order to ensure
tourist satisfaction. This is because, as pointed out by Fairweather and Swaffield (2001), when tourists experience situations
that differ markedly from the expectations generated by the projected image, their evaluation of the experience turns out to
be very negative. In this regard, not only does it cancel out any effect on loyalty, but it also produces negative word-of-mouth
communication that can affect the image of the destination.
In short, we can conclude that a negative pre- and post-visit gap in the image generates dissatisfaction within the tourist,
which will have a negative impact on loyalty, while a positive gap (or confirmation of the image during the trip) generates
satisfaction and positive effects on loyalty. This leads us to pose the following hypothesis regarding the consequences of the
pre- and post-visit gap in the image:

H7. The more positive the pre- and post-visit gap in the global image, the greater will be the degree of satisfaction and the
higher will be the level of loyalty to the destination.

Materials and methods

The population studied in this research focuses on leisure tourists to Tenerife (The Canary Islands, Spain), the unit of anal-
ysis being tourists of both sexes, 16 or more years of age, and visiting the island of Tenerife for the first time from abroad and
from the rest of Spain.
The sample was generated by applied quota sampling as this technique provides a sample structure similar to that of the
population. The sample was obtained at the end of the tourists’ stay in Tenerife, ensuring that their experience was recent
and complete. Therefore, only those tourists returning to their home countries the day after the completion of the survey
were surveyed. The questionnaires were responded to by means of personal interviews carried out at bars and cafes in
the places of interest most frequented by tourists in Tenerife. The final sample was 411 participants. With the number of
responses obtained and for a 95% confidence interval in the case of estimations of a proportion where p = q = 0.5, and assum-
ing a simple random sampling, the sample error was ±4.93%. The fieldwork was carried out between June and July of 2015.
The profile of the respondents was similar to the travel profile of visitors to Tenerife collected from statistical sources pro-
vided by official agencies (ISTAC, 2015). There was an almost equal number of females (54%) and males (46%). Most respon-
dents were either between the ages of 25 and 44 (45.40%) or 45 and 64 (30.50%), followed by those under 24 (11.20%) and 65
or older (12.90%). With respect to the country-of-origin of the tourists, most were from The United Kingdom (37.37%),
Germany (14.41%), Spain (12.60%), Scandinavia (10.34%), The Netherlands (7.06%), and other countries (18.22%).
With respect to the measurement scales, a Likert scale of 1 item and 7 points was used to measure the time spent looking for
information (no time at all – a long time), the level of uncertainty before the trip to Tenerife (no uncertainty – a lot of uncer-
tainty) and the involvement with the destination (no interest in travelling around Tenerife – a high level of interest in travelling
around Tenerife). To measure the gap in cognitive, affective and global image, we based it on the work of Beerli and Martín
(2004a, 2004b) and used a Likert scale of 7 points and 15 items to measure the cognitive image, 2 items to measure the affective
image, and 1 item to measure the global image. To evaluate the gap in how respondents assessed the extent to which each item
of cognitive, affective and global image had been better, the same, or worse than expected according to the information they
had gathered before their visit, we used a scale ranging from
3 to +3,
3 being much worse than expected, 0 the same as
expected, and +3 much better than expected. To measure the intensity of the visit, and following Gitelson and Crompton
(1983), Fodness and Murray (1997, 1999), Hyde and Lawson (2003), Beerli and Martín (2004a, 2004b) and Hyde (2008), we
evaluated the tourists’ level of interaction with the destination through a dichotomous scale which includes 18 places of inter-
est in Tenerife that are commonly visited by tourists during their stay. The duration holiday was measured by the number of
nights stay in Tenerife. This variable was recoded to a week, two weeks and more than two weeks. Satisfaction was measured
on a scale of 1 item and 7 points, which measure the degree to which the tourist is satisfied with his or her trip to Tenerife.
Finally, loyalty to the destination was measured on a scale of 4 items and 7 points, and based on the work of Rodríguez Del
Bosque and San Martin Gutiérrez (2008) in which not only the intention to return to the destination is measured, but also
the intention to recommend it to friends and family. In Table 1, the scales used in the questionnaire are detailed.

Results

This section was structured in two parts. Firstly, we describe the analysis of the validity of the different measurement
scales used in this research to know its psychometric properties. And secondly, we test the different proposed hypotheses
using structural equation models (SEM).
18 J.D. Martín-Santana et al. / Annals of Tourism Research 62 (2017) 13–25

Table 1
Definitive items of the scale of attributes of the destination.

Dimensions Code Items

Cognitive image
Natural Resources NAT1 Climate
NAT2 Beaches
NAT3 Natural resources (landscape, natural parks, fauna. . .)
Artificial Resources ARTIF1 Cultural heritage (historical monuments, museums, cuisine, concerts, festivals. . .)
ARTIF2 Tourism infrastructure (accommodation, restaurants, shops, golf courses. . .)
ARTIF3 General infrastructure (motorways, airports, public transport, health service, internet. . .)
Tourist Activities TOUR1 Recreation and leisure (theme parks, adventure tourism, golf, wellness. . .)
TOUR2 Nightlife (bars and pubs, discos, casinos. . .)
TOUR3 Sporting Activities (sailing, windsurfing, cycling, water sports. . .)
Environment ENV1 Environment (cleanliness, air quality. . .)
ENV2 Security
ENV3 Quality-price relationship
Affective Image AFF1 Pleasant and friendly place
AFF2 Entertaining, exciting and fun place
LOYALTY LOY1 I will encourage my friends and/or family to visit Tenerife sometime
LOY2 I will discuss positive things about this holiday with my family, friends and/or acquaintances
LOY3 Assuming my current circumstances remain the same, I will choose to come to Tenerife again

Analysis of the validity of the measurement scales

In this sub-title we show the obtained results of the analyses used for test the validation of the scale of the gap in the
cognitive image and of the loyalty scale.

Validation of the scale of the gap in the cognitive image

As a preliminary step to the validation of this scale, and given the importance of this construct for the present investiga-
tion, it was considered appropriate to make a frequency analysis of the items making up this scale in order to analyze their
distribution. All items were rated on a scale from
3 to +3. The results show that the percentage of negative gap (
3 to
1) is
very low in regards to all the attributes of the destination (less than 5%). As a result, we considered it appropriate to recode
the categories of
3,
2,
1 and 0 as a single state, which has been labelled ‘‘The same as or slightly worse than expected”.
The final results of the confirmatory factor analysis of second order applied to the recoded scale of the gap in the cognitive
image of the destination shed light on the existence of four dimensions, which have been labelled as ‘‘Natural Resources”
(NATRES), ‘‘Artificial Resources” (ARTIFRES) ‘‘Tourism Activities” (TOURACT) and ‘‘Environment” (ENVIRONMENT). To ana-
lyze its discriminant validity, a new model in which all items are linked to a single factor was estimated. The results of this
new model [v2(54) = 295.12, p = 0.000, CFI = 0.82, RMSEA = 0.10] demonstrate the suitability of a multidimensional model
[v2(50) = 195.87, p = 0.000, CFI = 0.89, RMSEA = 0.08], since it produces higher levels of significance and better fit indices.
In fact, the chi-square analysis of differences highlights the existence of significant differences (Diff. v2 = 99.25, Dif. g.d.l.
= 4, p = 0.000). Therefore, this scale has ultimately been formed by three items in each of the dimensions outlined above
and shown in Table 2.

Table 2
Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the scale of the gap in cognitive image.

Causal Relationships Standardized estimators t p Internal consistency

NATRES GAPCOGIMAGE 0.995 FC = 0.923
ARTIFRES GAPCOGIMAGE 0.925 7.177 0.000 AVE = 0.752
TOURACT GAPCOGIMAGE 0.791 8.271 0.000 a = 0.788
ENVIRONMENT GAPCOGIMAGE 0.732 7.590 0.000
NAT1 NATRES 0.526 FC = 0.603
NAT2 NATRES 0.521 7.781 0.000 AVE = 0.340
NAT3 NATRES 0.688 9.141 0.000 a = 0.586
ARTIF1 ARTIFRES 0.517 FC = 0.665
ARTIF2 ARTIFRES 0.712 8.988 0.000 AVE = 0.402
ARTIF3 ARTIFRES 0.658 8.674 0.000 a = 0.670
TOUR1 TOURACT 0.753 FC = 0.703
TOUR2 TOURACT 0.603 10.151 0.000 AVE = 0.443
TOUR3 TOURACT 0.631 10.508 0.000 a = 0.709
ENV1 ENVIRONMENT 0.692 FC = 0.656
ENV2 ENVIRONMENT 0.636 9.274 0.000 AVE = 0.391
ENV3 ENVIRONMENT 0.538 8.334 0.000 a = 0.645
 J.D. Martín-Santana et al. / Annals of Tourism Research 62 (2017) 13–25 19

Although the results of this measurement model indicate statistical significance [v2(50) = 195.87, p = 0.000], it should be
noted that these statistics depend on the size of the sample, hence the need to analyze other indicators of fit. In this regard,
the results obtained show that the other indicators of global fit of the model are found to be within the values recommended
by the literature (CFI = 0.89, NFI = 0.86, TLI = 0.85, RMSEA = 0.08), so we can conclude that the specified model adequately
reproduces the observed covariance matrix. This measurement model shows a suitable fit, since the value of CFI is between
0.85 and 0.90 and the value of RMSEA does not exceed the recommended maximum of 0.08. The model demonstrates an
acceptable level of individual reliability, since the relationship between each item and its respective dimension is statistically
significant, with standardized regression weights higher than or very close to 0.7 in most cases, and with t statistic values
also being significant. As for the measurements of internal consistency of the global construct of the cognitive gap, unlike
their dimensions, they have very satisfactory levels. However, the indicator values of composite reliability (CR) reach values
close to 0.70 in their dimensions and most of the extracted variance (AVE) does not exceed 0.50. The Cronbach’s alpha values
corroborate those obtained in the composite reliability. These results indicate that the measurement model can be consid-
ered as valid, although it would be advisable to replicate it in other contexts as well, and even expand or modify the contents
of some dimensions in order to raise their level of reliability.

Validation of the loyalty scale

The measurement model arising from loyalty (LOYALTY) is one-dimensional and composed of three items (see Table 1).
Two key aspects are shown on the scale to assess the degree of loyalty, in accordance with the literature: the level of desire to
return to the destination and the willingness to recommend it to others. In this case, the results show that the model, besides
not being statistically significant [v2(1) = 0.586, p = 0.444], does present very satisfactory values for other indicators of global
fit (CFI = 1.00, NFI = 1.00, TLI = 1.00, RMSEA = 0.00). Therefore, we can conclude that the specified model adequately repro-
duces the observed covariance matrix. This measurement model shows a very satisfactory fit, as the CFI value exceeds
0.95 and RMSEA value does not exceed the recommended maximum of 0.08. The model shows a satisfactory individual reli-
ability, since the relationship between each item and the construct is statistically significant, with standardized regression
weights greater than 0.7 and t statistic values also being significant (see Table 3). As for the measurements of internal con-
sistency, the indicator value of composite reliability (CR) reaches a value exceeding 0.70, and higher than 0.50 for extracted
variance (AVE). The value of Cronbach’s alpha corroborates that obtained in the composite reliability. These results therefore
indicate that this model is reliable.
Appendix 1 presents the means, standard deviations and correlations for the research variables.

Hypothesis testing

To test the different hypotheses, and in order to achieve greater parsimony, we used the four created variables – one
for each of the dimensions of the gap in cognitive image – as indicators of cognitive image. These were calculated as
weighted averages of the scores given by respondents to the items that make up each dimension weighted for the
regression weights for each of those in the CFA. We also proceeded with the scale of loyalty, using the weighted average
regression weights of each item as indicators. At the same time, we developed two partial models – one for the ante-
cedents and one for the consequences of the pre- and post-visit gap in the image – in order to avoid excessive saturation
of the model.
To validate the theoretical model proposed for the antecedents of the pre- and post-visit gap in the image and to test the
hypotheses, structural equation models (SEM) were used, employing the maximum likelihood method. The results indicated
that this model was satisfactory [v2(86) = 308.76, p = 0.000; CFI = 0.92; RMSEA = 0.06], as the CFI value exceeds 0.90 and
RMSEA value does not exceed the recommended maximum of 0.08. As shown in Fig. 1, these results demonstrate that:

 The level of uncertainty existing before the organization of a trip, the level of involvement shown in the destination before
travel and the duration of the trip directly and positively affect the amount of time the tourist dedicates to the search for
information (ß = 0.234, p = 0.000; ß = 0.213, p = 0.000, and ß = 0.202, p = 0.000, respectively). Therefore, hypotheses H1
and H2 are accepted, but H5 is rejected.
 The level of involvement with the destination and the amount of time devoted to the search for information directly and
positively influence the pre- and post-visit gap in the cognitive image (ß = 0.166, p = 0.002 and ß = 0.104, p = 0.042,
respectively). These results give support to hypotheses H3 and H4.

Table 3
Confirmatory factor analysis of the scale of loyalty.

Causal Relationships Standardized Estimators t p Internal consistency

LOY1 LOYALTY 0.842 FC = 0.833
LOY2 LOYALTY 0.860 19.825 0.000 AVE = 0.628
LOY3 LOYALTY 0.659 13.522 0.000 a = 0.824
20 J.D. Martín-Santana et al. / Annals of Tourism Research 62 (2017) 13–25

Fig. 1. Results of the model of antecedents of the gap in the image.

 The greater the number of attractions visited by tourists – as an indicator of the intensity of the visit – the greater the gap
in cognitive image (ß = 0.296, p = 0.000) and the smaller the gap in affective image (ß =
0.126, p = 0.019). The gap in the
global image remains unaffected (ß =
0.073, p = 0.108). Therefore, hypotheses H6a and H6b are accepted and hypothesis
H6c is rejected. Therefore, if prospective tourists consider a destination to be a pleasant, enjoyable and exciting place
before their visit, the more visited places during their stay will not change their judgments on these attributes of affective
image, in which case the gap decreases. However, it should be noted that this relationship is not particularly strong.
 The percentage of variance explained by the model of time spent searching for information and the gap in the cognitive
image stood at 14.4% and 16.0%, respectively.

To test the last hypothesis, in which it was established that the more positive was the pre- and post-visit gap in the global
image, the greater would be the level of satisfaction and, therefore, the greater the level of loyalty to the destination, it has

Fig. 2. Results of the model of consequences of the gap in the image.

 J.D. Martín-Santana et al. / Annals of Tourism Research 62 (2017) 13–25 21

been estimated in the model set out in Fig. 2. The results of the model indicate that it is a very satisfying fit [v2(25) = 101.32,
p = 0.000; CFI = 0.94; RMSEA = 0.08]. As can be seen, the results allow us to accept the hypothesis H7. However, although the
percentage of variance explained for loyalty by the gap in global image stands at 24.2%, the level of satisfaction is very small
(R2 = 0.021), indicating that the effect of the positive gap on the image does not generate a significant increase in satisfaction.
This leads us to think that the positive gap is beneficial for a tourism destination, although we would recommend that the
creation of any such gap be avoided to begin with.
For a better understanding, Table 4 summarizes the hypotheses that have been accepted and rejected.

Conclusions

A major contribution of this research to the scientific literature on how the image of a destination changes has been to
analyze the antecedents of the gap, which is to say, the causes that lead to a change in the perceived image during and after
the visit. The relevance of this work lies in the lack of studies along this line, as the few academic studies that there have been
on the topic of ‘the gap’ have focused on fathoming the consequences that a change in image may have in regards to the level
of satisfaction and loyalty shown by tourists (Kim et al., 2009; Yilmaz et al., 2009). That is why this research has paid special
attention to the causes of the gap in the image, highlighting the antecedents that affect the change in perception of image
which should be considered and managed by the operators of the tourism market so that a tourism destination can hold on
to its success, since the image is one of the most relevant factors in this respect.
A number of hypotheses have arisen from the theoretical review which, together, serve to generate an explanatory the-
oretical model of the gap in the image of a destination in which its antecedents, as well as its consequences, are collected and
tested with information gathered from personal surveys carried out by a significant and representative sample of the first-
time tourists visiting Tenerife. Therefore, the design of this model constitutes the first academic contribution to the field of
research on the gap in the image of a destination from an integrated and holistic perspective.
The testing of the hypotheses regarding the relationship between the antecedents linked to the amount of effort put into
searching for information suggests that the level of uncertainty and the interest in the destination prior to travel jointly and
positively influence the time spent searching for information. These results show that first-time tourists who spend more
time searching for information are the ones for whom the destination generates greater uncertainty, as well as being those
who are more involved with the destination. However, the results of this research show that the longer the duration of the
trip, the longer will be the time dedicated to the search for information – a result that does not match with the study of Hyde
and Lawson (2003). Therefore, it has not been possible to verify the hypothesis in which it was stated that ’the shorter the
duration of the trip, the longer will be the time spent searching‘. This result is probably due to it being a holiday destination
for sunshine and beaches, attracting tourists who stay for a shorter time and whose main motivation for travel is rest and
relaxation. They therefore do not seek to have a greater experience of the destination. Meanwhile, those who stay for longer
have additional reasons that require greater contact with the destination and, therefore, devote more time to the search for
information prior to their trip.
As far as the intensity of the visit is concerned, the results indicate, firstly, that the greater the number of attractions vis-
ited by tourists, the greater the gap in cognitive image. That is, tourists who visit a greater number of attractions during their
stay will have a cognitive image of the destination which is much better than they had initially. This result is probably due to
the fact that many of the attractive places at a tourism destination are not widely known before a place is visited and, thus,
come as a pleasant surprise for the visitor once discovered. Moreover, it is noteworthy that the gap in the cognitive image is
more influenced by the intensity of the visit than by the information that one has before the visit as a result of time spent on
the search. Therefore, and in line with Smith et al. (2015), the experience at the destination is what causes a greater positive
change in the image of the destination.
Regarding the effect of the gap in the image on the level of tourist satisfaction and loyalty, the existence of positive rela-
tionships are confirmed as in previous studies (Kim et al., 2012; Ross, 1993). However, the fact that there is a positive gap
does not cause a large increase in the level of satisfaction. This reflects the fact that the level of satisfaction felt by a tourist

Table 4
A summary table of hypotheses and results.

Hypotheses Results
H1 The greater the level of uncertainty perceived by the prospective tourist, the longer will be the time spent searching for Accepted
information
H2 The greater the level of involvement of the prospective tourist, the longer will be the time spent searching for information Accepted
H3 The time spent searching for information directly influences the pre- and post-visit gap in cognitive image Accepted
H4 The level of involvement of the tourist directly influences the pre- and post-visit gap in cognitive image Accepted
H5 The greater the duration of the holiday, the shorter will be the time spent searching for information Rejected
H6a The intensity of the visit directly affects the pre- and post-visit gap in cognitive image Accepted
H6b The intensity of the visit directly affects the pre- and post-visit gap in affective image Accepted
H6c The intensity of the visit directly affects the pre- and post-visit gap in global image Rejected
H7 The more positive the pre- and post-visit gap in the global image, the greater will be the degree of satisfaction and the higher will Accepted
be the level of loyalty to the destination
22 J.D. Martín-Santana et al. / Annals of Tourism Research 62 (2017) 13–25

during their stay at a destination influences a great number of factors, in addition to the gap between the image that exists
before and after their visit.
This research has sought to contribute towards a better understanding of the area which is concerned with the image of
destinations and, more specifically, the concept of how the image changes after a visit to the destination, both in reference to
the academic and the professional fields.
From an academic standpoint, we have tried to provide a conceptual framework to advance the development of the topic
in order to better understand the process of evolution that takes place during the different phases of the trip. In this sense,
and given the limited empirical evidence available, the goal is to proclaim the need for various authors to study, in greater
depth, the antecedents that influence how the perceived image of a destination changes, thereby bridging the gap in the lit-
erature (Kim et al., 2009; Smith et al., 2015; Yilmaz et al., 2009). In this respect, and as already mentioned above, this model
aims to analyze, in an integrated and holistic manner, the determinants of the gap and its impact on tourist satisfaction and
loyalty. More specifically, first, and based on a conceptual structure of the image with theoretical support, it has been verified
that the image of tourism destinations may be subject to change during and after the visit and that the factors responsible for
this change may be: (1) related to the search process for secondary information; and (2) related to the characteristics of the
trip. Secondly, with reference to the existing fragmented literature, a model has been designed and empirically validated that
is intended to contribute to a better understanding of the antecedents that determine the formation of the gap in the image
of destinations and its consequences in terms of satisfaction and loyalty. And thirdly, we have analyzed the psychometric
properties of the scales used, whose analyses may be useful to further studies, to the extent that the dimensions of the dif-
ferent constructs that should be reinforced in order to improve the validity and reliability are indicated.
From a practical standpoint, the overall understanding of how the gap in the image of destinations is formed, as well as
the factors that influence this change, will help operators in the sector and the public institutions responsible for the com-
mercial management to project an image which is as close as possible to reality, since, as the results of our research show,
the pre- and post-visit gap in the image influences the level of tourist satisfaction and loyalty. It would be advisable that
market operators and the public institutions responsible for image assess the real potential in communicating the attributes
of the destination. In fact, the results of research show that the projected image of Tenerife has a positive gap, as tourists tend
to have a much better experience during their stay than they had expected.
Therefore, marketers should pay special attention to making sure that the information transmitted from different sources
is stimulating enough to invite prospective tourists to spend more time searching for information and increase their desire to
have a more intense experience at the destination, which is what contributes most to a positive change in image. In fact, at
present, the information transmitted about this particular destination from the various sources is not wide, rich or appealing
enough for prospective tourists to be able to form an image which is sufficiently close to reality. Therefore, marketers are not
able to transmit the full potential of the attractiveness of the destination and generate expectations in line with reality,
although it is true that those expectations which are generated are not generally superior to the reality. This may be due
in part to the fact that Tenerife is a destination with very high rates of repeat visitors and, therefore, marketers believe it
is not necessary to follow a particular strategy in this regard. However, a possible alternative that could be followed in order
to meet the information needs of both first-time visitors and the repeat visitors, as described by Li et al. (2008), is that mar-
keters should provide separate websites or links for first-timers (who presumably know less about the destination and are
more interested in attractions) and repeaters (who typically seek more information regarding local life and recreational
opportunities).
Given that the experience of the destination is what causes a greater positive change in image, and in accordance with
Smith et al. (2015), destination managers should work toward the totality of the destination experience beyond
‘‘tourism-specific experience” at hotels, restaurants, or attractions. This implicates more collaboration between different
agents of a destination to guarantee a pleasant and positively surprising experience.
While we have tried to carry out research according to criteria based on scientific rigor we are aware of its limitations,
both conceptually and methodologically. From a conceptual point of view, the research is limited to the context of its
own objectives. We have tried to develop and empirically validate the factors which influence the change in how a destina-
tion is perceived, although we are aware that there are other antecedents – not included in this investigation – that may also
affect the process of the perceptual change in image. It would also be interesting to extend the analysis to repeat tourists in
order to discover what effect prior knowledge and familiarity possibly have on the gap in image.
From a methodological perspective, this work has limitations that affect the evaluation and generalization of results. In
line with the cross-sectional design of the research, the causal relationships that emerge from our study should be inter-
preted with caution, since its design does not permit a strict affirmation of compliance with the conditions of causality,
in as much as we cannot strictly ensure that changes in cause imply changes in effect. In structural models, causality must
be understood in terms of statistical association and not by the conditions of an experimental design. However, we have tried
to establish causal relationships theoretically substantiated on the basis of the theoretical foundation. Another methodolog-
ical limitation refers to double barreled two items of the scale of loyalty due to the need for brevity. However, the scale
shows satisfactory psychometric properties. Moreover, it would be interesting to analyze whether the results of this study
are similar to those obtained using a longitudinal methodology through a panel of tourists, where the change in image is
measured at different moments of the trip (before, during and after). Finally, the generalizability of the results is another
constraint, as the field of research only allows us to generalize the results of the analysis to the population of the sample
 J.D. Martín-Santana et al. / Annals of Tourism Research 62 (2017) 13–25
Appendix 1
Variable descriptive statistics and correlations.

Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
1 NATRES 2.04 0.77 –
2 ARTIFRES 1.70 0.85 0.609*** –
3 TOURACT 1.51 0.93 0.510*** 0.470*** –
4 ENVIRONMENT 1.98 0.75 0.421*** 0.451*** 0.448*** –
5 Time of search 4.67 1.72 0.106* 0.056 0.187*** 0.070 –
6 Uncertainty 3.81 1.84 0.093 0.008 0.032
0.040 0.235*** –
7 Involvement 5.55 1.14 0.246*** 0.224*** 0.086 0.165*** 0.171***
0.211*** –
8 Holiday duration 2.04 0.72 0.089 0.164*** 0.216*** 0.037 0.262*** 0.225*** 0.036 –
9 Number of sources 5.14 0.88 0.097 0.026 0.021 0.013 0.267*** 0.213*** 0.133** 0.157** –
10 Visit intensity 7.60 2.85 0.272*** 0.272*** 0.218*** 0.196*** 0.088
0.205*** 0.253*** 0.227***
0.056 –
11 AFF1 2.26 0.90 0.369*** 0.380*** 0.319*** 0.508*** 0.070 0.008 0.126* 0.001 0.131** 0.115* –
12 AFF2 2.00 1.02 0.372*** 0.375*** 0.466*** 0.465*** 0.100* 0.122* 0.025 0.076 0.102* 0.116* 0.530*** –
13 Gap global image 2.28 0.83 0.413*** 0.426*** 0.429*** 0.485*** 0.161*** 0.110* 0.165***
0.004 0.080 0.081 0.564*** 0.516*** –
14 Satisfaction 6.20 0.96 0.196*** 0.104* 0.115* 0.116* 0.183*** 0.054 0.367*** 0.029 0.233*** 0.030 0.143** 0.198*** 0.146** –
15 Loyalty 6.16 0.90 0.220*** 0.177*** 0.163*** 0.160*** 0.181*** 0.066 0.444*** 0.009 0.241*** 0.027 0.200*** 0.181*** 0.231*** 0.492*** –
***
p60.001.
**
p6 0.01.
*
p6 0.05.

23
24 J.D. Martín-Santana et al. / Annals of Tourism Research 62 (2017) 13–25

and the destination of Tenerife. Therefore, it would be advisable to replicate this research in other contexts and analyze the
factors that influence the perceived image of other tourism destinations.

Appendix A.

(see Appendix 1).

References

Alexandris, K., Kouthouris, C., & Meligdis, A. (2006). Increasing customers’ loyalty in a skiing resort: The contribution of place attachment and service
quality. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 18(5), 414–425.
Anand, P., Holbrook, M. B., & Stephens, D. (1988). The formation of affective judgements: The Cognitive-Affective Model versus the independence
hypothesis. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 386–391.
Baker, D. A., & Crompton, J. L. (2000). Quality, satisfaction and behavioral intentions. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(3), 785–804.
Baloglu, S., & Brinberg, D. (1997). Affective images of tourism destinations. Journal of Travel Research, 35(4), 11–15.
Baloglu, S., & Mangaloglu, M. (2001). Tourism destination images of Turkey, Egypt, Greece, and Italy as perceived by US-based tour operators and travel
agents. Tourism Management, 22(1), 1–9.
Baloglu, S., & Mccleary, K. W. (1999a). A model of destination image formation. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(4), 868–897.
Baloglu, S., & Mccleary, K. W. (1999b). U.S. International Travellers’ images of four mediterranean destinations: A comparison of visitors and no visitors.
Journal of Travel Research, 38(2), 144–152.
Barroso, C., Martín, E., & Martín, D. (2007). The influence of market heterogeneity on relationship between a destination’s image and tourists’ future
behaviour. Tourism Management, 28(1), 175–187.
Beatty, S., & Smith, S. (1987). External search effort: An investigation across several product categories. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(1), 83–95.
Beerli, A., & Martín, J. D. (2004a). Factor influencing destination image. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(3), 657–681.
Beerli, A., & Martín, J. D. (2004b). Tourists’ characteristics and the perceived image of tourist destinations: A quantitative analysis — A case study of
Lanzarote, Spain. Tourism Management, 25(5), 623–636.
Bigné, E., Sánchez, M. I., & Sánchez, J. (2001). Tourism image, evaluation variables and after purchase behaviour: Inter-relationship. Tourism Management, 22
(6), 607–616.
Bigné, E., Sánchez, I., & Sanz, S. (2009). The functional-psychological continuum in the cognitive image of a destination: A confirmatory analysis. Tourism
Management, 30(5), 715–723.
Bonn, M. A., Furr, H. L., & Sussking, A. M. (1998). Using the Internet as a pleasure travel planning tool. An examination of the sociodemographic and
behavioural characteristics amongst internet users and nonusers. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 22(3), 303–317.
Bramwell, B. (1998). User satisfaction and product development in urban tourism. Tourism Management, 19(1), 35–47.
Chen, J., & Uysal, M. (2002). Market positioning analysis: A hybrid approach. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(4), 987–1003.
Chi, C., & Qu, H. (2008). Examining the structural relationships of destination image, tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty: An integrated approach”.
Journal of Tourism Management, 29(4), 624–636.
Chon, K. S. (1991). Tourism destination image modification process. Tourism Management, 12(1), 68–72.
Crotts, J. (1999). Consumer decision making and pre-purchase information search. In A. Pizam & Y. Mansfeld (Eds.), Consumer Behavior in Travel and Tourism
(pp. 149–168).
Decrop, A., & Snelders, D. (2004). Planning the summer vacation: An adaptable and opportunistic process. Annals of Tourism Research, 31, 1008–1030.
Fairweather, J. R., & Swaffield, S. R. (2001). Visitor experiences of Kaikoura, New Zealand: An interpretative study using photographs of landscapes and Q
method. Tourism Management, 22(3), 219–228.
Fakeye, P. C., & Crompton, J. L. (1991). Image differences between prospective, first-time, and repeat visitors to the lower rio grande valley. Journal of Travel
Research, 30(2), 10–16.
Fesenmaier, D. R., & Johnson, B. (1989). Involvement based segmentation: Implications for travel marketing in texas. Tourism Management, 10(4), 293–300.
Fodness, D., & Murray, B. (1997). Tourist information search. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(3), 503–523.
Fodness, D., & Murray, B. (1999). A model of tourist information search behavior. Journal of Travel Research, 37, 220–232.
Gartner, W. C. (1993). Image formation process. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 2(2/3), 191–215.
Gartner, W. C., & Hunt, J. D. (1987). An analysis of state image change over a twelve-year period (1971–1983). Journal of Travel Research, 26(2), 15–19.
Gitelson, R. J., & Crompton, J. L. (1983). The planning horizons and sources of information used by pleasured vacationers. Journal of Travel Research, 21(3),
2–27.
Govers, R., Go, F. M., & Kumar, K. (2007). Promoting tourism destination image. Journal of Travel Research, 46(1), 15–23.
Gursoy, D., & Gavcar, E. (2003). International leisure tourists’ involvement profile. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(4), 906–926.
Gursoy, D., & Mccleary, K. W. (2004). An integrative model of tourists’ information search behavior. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(2), 353–373.
Hosany, S., Ekinci, Y., & Uysal, M. (2006). Destination image and destination personality: An application of branding theories to tourism places. Journal of
Business Research, 59(5), 638–642.
Hyde, K. (2008). Information processing and touring planning theory. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(3), 712–731.
Hyde, K., & Lawson, R. (2003). The nature of independent travel. Journal of Travel Research, 42(1), 13–23.
ISTAC (2015). Instituto Canario de Estadística. FRONTUR-Canarias/Series mensuales de entradas de turistas y excursionistas. Islas de Canarias. 2014-2016
(Metodología 2016). Available in: http://www.gobcan.es/istac/temas_estadisticos/sectorservicios/hosteleriayturismo/demanda/.
Kerstetter, D., & Cho, M. H. (2004). Prior knowledge, credibility and information search. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(4), 961–985.
Kim, K., Hallb, Z., & Kim, J. N. (2012). The moderating effect of travel experience in a destination on the relationship between the destination image and the
intention to revisit. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 21(5), 486–505.
Kim, S., Mckercher, B., & Lee, H. (2009). Tracking tourism destination image perception. Annals of Tourism Research, 36(4), 715–718.
Kim, D., & Perdue, R. R. (2011). The influence of image on destination attractiveness. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 28(3), 225–239.
Lee, S., Jeon, S., & Kim, D. (2011). The impact of tour quality and tourist satisfaction on tourist loyalty: The case of Chinese tourists in Korea. Tourism
Management, 32(5), 1115–1124.
Li, X., Cheng, C., Kim, H., & Petrick, J. (2008). A systematic comparison of first-time and repeat visitors via a two-phase online survey. Tourism Management,
29(2), 278–293.
Martín, D., Cossio, F., & Martín, E. (2008). The moderating effect of customer’s involvement on the relationship between customer perceptions and its future
behavior. Maspalomas (Islas Canarias): Actas del Congreso Nacional de Marketing.
Moutinho, L. (1987). Consumer behavior in tourism. European Journal of Marketing, 21(10), 5–44.
Oppermann, M. (2000). Tourism destination loyalty. Journal of Travel Research, 39(1), 78–84.
_
Ozdemir, B., Aksu, A., Ehtiyar, R., Çizel, B., Çizel, R., & Içigen, T. (2012). Relationships among tourist profile, satisfaction and destination loyalty: Examining
empirical evidences in antalya region of Turkey. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 21(5), 506–540.
Pearce, P. L., & Kang, M. H. (2009). The effects of prior and recent experience on continuing interest in tourist settings. Annals of Tourism Research, 36(2),
172–190.
 J.D. Martín-Santana et al. / Annals of Tourism Research 62 (2017) 13–25 25

Phelps, A. (1986). Holiday destination image – the problem of assessment: an example developed in menorca. Tourism Management, 7(3), 168–180.
Pike, S. (2002). Destination image analysis – A review of 142 papers from 1973 to 2000. Tourism Management, 23(5), 541–549.
Pike, S. (2009). Destination brand positions of a competitive set of near-home destinations. Tourism Management, 30(6), 857–866.
Pike, S., & Ryan, C. (2004). Destination positioning analysis through a comparison of cognitive, affective and conative perceptions. Journal of Travel Research,
42(4), 333–342.
Prayag, G., & Ryan, C. (2012). Antecedents of tourists’ loyalty to mauritius: The role and influence of destination image, place attachment, personal
involvement, and satisfaction. Journal of Travel Research, 51(3), 342–356.
Pritchard, M. P., & Howard, D. R. (1997). The loyal traveller: Examining a typology of service patronage. Journal of Travel Research, 35(4), 2–10.
Quintal, V. A., Lee, J. A., & Soutar, G. N. (2010). Tourists’ information search: The differential impact of risk and uncertainty avoidance. International Journal of
Tourism Research, 12(4), 321–333.
Ratchford, B. T., & Vaughn, R. (1989). On the relationship between motives and purchase decisions: Some empirical approaches. Advances in Consumer
Research, 16, 293–299.
Rodríguez Del Bosque, I., & San Martin Gutiérrez, H. (2008). Tourist satisfaction: A cognitive-affective model. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(2), 551–573.
Ross, G. F. (1993). Ideal and actual images of backpacker visitors to Northern Australia. Journal of Travel Research, 21(3), 54–57.
Ryan, C., & Cave, J. (2005). Structuring destination image: A qualitative approach. Journal of Travel Research, 44(2), 143–150.
Schmidt, J. B., & Spreng, R. A. (1996). A proposed model of external consumer information search. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 24(3),
246–256.
Smith, W. W., Li, X., Pan, B., Witte, M., & Doherty, S. T. (2015). Tracking destination image across the trip experience with smartphone technology. Tourism
Management, 48(June), 113–122.
Stepchenkova, S., & Mills, J. (2010). Destination image: A meta-analysis of 2000–2007 research. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 19(6),
575–609.
Stern, E., & Krakover, S. (1993). The formation of a composite urban image. Geographical Analysis, 25(2), 130–146.
Tasci, A. D. A. (2007). Assessment of factors influencing destination image using a multiple regression model. Tourism Review, 62(2), 23–30.
Tasci, A. D. A., & Gartner, W. C. (2007). Destination image and its functional relationships. Journal of Travel Research, 45(4), 413–425.
Van Raaij, W. F., & Francken, D. A. (1984). Vacation decisions, activities, and satisfactions. Annals of Tourism Research, 11(1), 101–112.
Vogt, C. A., & Andereck, K. L. (2003). Destination perceptions across a vacation. Journal of Travel Research, 41(4), 348–354.
Wang, X., Zhang, J., Gu, C., & Zhen, F. (2009). Examining antecedents and consequences of tourist satisfaction: A structural modeling approach. Tsinghua
Science and Technology, 14(3), 397–406.
Yilmaz, Y., Yilmaz, Y., Içigen, E. T., Ekin, Y., & Utku, B. D. (2009). Destination image: A comparative study on pre and post trip image variations’. Journal of
Hospitality Marketing & Management, 18(5), 461–479.
Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction on destination loyalty: A structural model. Tourism Management, 26
(1), 45–56.

Josefa D. Martín-Santana is a Professor of marketing at Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria (Spain). She is specialized in advertising, tourism, and
applied marketing.

Asunción Beerli-Palacio is a Professor of marketing at Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria (Spain). Her research interests include tourism
marketing, consumer behavior and social marketing.

Patrizio A. Nazzareno has a PhD in Business Administration at Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria.