This article was downloaded by: [New York University]

On: 16 April 2015, At: 18:22

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:
Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription
information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rapt20

Satisfaction Measurement of Small Tourism

Sector (Museum): Samoa
a a
Yang Huo & Douglas Miller
a
Department of Hospitality Management , Utah Valley State College , USA
Published online: 27 Jun 2007.

To cite this article: Yang Huo & Douglas Miller (2007) Satisfaction Measurement of Small Tourism Sector
(Museum): Samoa, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 12:2, 103-117

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10941660701243331

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”)
contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our
licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or
suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication
are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor &
Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently
verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial
or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use
can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 12, No. 2, June 2007

Satisfaction Measurement of Small Tourism Sector

(Museum): Samoa

Yang Huo
and Douglas Miller

Department of Hospitality Management, Utah Valley State College, USA
Downloaded by [New York University] at 18:22 16 April 2015

The purpose of this study was to determine the relative importance of the Robert Louis
Stevenson (RLS) museum in Samoa in the measurement of tourist satisfaction. A
correlation model was performed to determine the relationship of the satisfaction and
attributes of the museum and visitors’ intention to recommend the museum. In addition,
an analysis of variance was employed to determine any significant differences among
different demographic or trip characteristics groups. The results show that the visitor
who has a high satisfaction intends to recommend the RLS museum to others. The
implications of the study’s findings concerned initiatives to expand its market to
international tourists, especially Americans and Asians.

Key words: museum, satisfaction, attribute, revisit, recommend, demographics

Introduction 1995; Britton, 1987). Naoi determined that

Numerous studies in sustainable tourism have
demonstrated the importance of attractions in
decision processes related to destination selec-
tion and have addressed the importance of a
historical district and museum to an area’s
tourism success (Harrison, 1997; Honkanen,
2002; Jansen-Verbeke & van Rekom, 1996;
Naoi, 2004; Tufts & Milne 1999; Wanhill,
2000). Third World tourist destinations are
particularly in need of attractions other than
their natural beauty, as tourists are looking
for a variety of activities (Belk & Costa,
historical attractions (i.e. museums) are often
transformed into tourism products. Some
scholars even claim that a museum can play
an important role in attracting tourists to a
destination (Browning, 1993; Hu & Ritchie,
1993). Traditionally, museums have placed
the emphasis on the care of their collections,
giving little prominence to serving the needs
of their customers (i.e. tourists or visitors) or
the public (Harrison & Shaw, 2004).
Many museum marketers and destination
management organizers (DMOs) have realized
and modified their view of tourists or visitors,

E-mail: huoya@uvsc.edu

ISSN 1094-1665 print/ISSN 1741-6507 online/00/020103 –15 # 2007 Asia Pacific Tourism Association
DOI: 10.1080/10941660701243331
 104 Yang Huo and Douglas Miller
concluding that tourists are a principal factor
in the success of their operations and organiz-
ations (McLean, 1994). These claims have
increased the attention given to the important
role of visitor satisfaction in the tourism
sector.
Some researchers (Kawashima, 1999;
McLean, 1994) studied the museum experi-
ence and claimed the importance of customer
view (i.e. satisfaction) as a component of
incorporated marketing strategy, and realized
that it is an essential element in their success.
Harrison & Shaw (2001, p. 32) determined,
Downloaded by [New York University] at 18:22 16 April 2015
“museum marketers are interested in how
factors such as satisfaction influences repeat
visiting and recommending the experience to
others”. For example, Young (1981) and
Harrison & Shaw (2004) insisted that the
importance of satisfaction in the tourism
sector is illustrated by the emphasis on word-
of-mouth communication, as opposed to
more traditional means of promotion such as
advertising, as an efficient means of attracting
consumers to cultural facilities such as
museums and art galleries.
Despite the relative importance of a
museum as an attraction in the destination,
research in the field of sustainable tourism
has still tended to lag in the importance of
value-driven research. Specifically, although
the theoretical literature on customer satisfac-
tion in general is well developed, empirical
research on the museum visitors is lacking. In
this paper, tourist satisfaction in their visit to
a museum in Samoa is examined.
Tourism in Samoa, a small island state in the
South Pacific, has seen steady growth over the
past 20 years, but struggles to meet desired
revenues from this industry. Worldwide
visitor arrivals into Samoa for 2003 reached
a record high of 92,313, up 3.8% (an
additional 3,353 visitors) compared with the
previous year. These visitors also generated
ST$158.3 million (US$52.7 million) in
foreign exchange, up ST$5.2 million from
the previous year (Samoa Visitors Bureau
Newsletter). However, of this number over
half are Samoans living abroad who travel
“home” to visit friends and relatives (VFR).
It is estimated, therefore, that approxi-
mately 46,000 tourists (holiday, business,
and sport travelers) visited Samoa in 2003.
Samoa has very few fee-based attractions.
Other than sporting events and several
national festivals, Samoa’s greatest attraction
is its natural beauty. Samoa’s natural
wonders of waterfalls, rainforests, mountains,
volcanoes and miles of white sand beaches
beckon the adventurer seeking peace and
quiet away from the hustle and bustle of
modern society (Samoa Tourism Authority,
2004; Theuns, 1994). However, a well-
known resident from Samoa’s past presented
an interesting opportunity. Robert Louis
Stevenson (RLS) is considered by many to be
the most gifted and important literary figure
of the 19th century (McLynn, 1994). During
the late 1800s, Stevenson’s health required
him to relocate to a tropical climate. He
settled in Samoa and died there in 1894.
Shortly after the death of Stevenson, his
Samoan estate, Vailima, became home to the
highest-ranking chief of Samoa, who also
holds the title of Head of State. This was the
arrangement for over 80 years. In 1993 two
American businessmen who had been mission-
aries in Samoa in their youth arranged with the
government to take a lease on the Robert
Louis Stevenson property and the home at
Vailima (Winegar, 2000). Later that year
they opened the RLS museum.
O’Leary & Deegan (2003) stated that one of
the most significant challenges arising from the
increasingly competitive global tourism
environment is the need for an effective desti-
nation positioning and marketing strategy in
 Satisfaction Measurement of Small Tourism Sector
conjunction with the attraction and tourists’
satisfaction. In a small country with limited
resources to build tourism infrastructure,
important questions are: “What can a man-
made attraction such as a museum contribute
to a successful tourism marketing strategy?”
and “How can a museum marker induce
more tourism to the museum?” Both the cul-
tural and economic values of a museum as
one of the attractions to a tourism destination
are largely dependent on enhancement of
visitor satisfaction in conjunction with post-
purchase intentions. Therefore, the purpose
Downloaded by [New York University] at 18:22 16 April 2015
of this study was to determine the relative
importance of the RLS museum in Samoa in
the measurement of tourist satisfaction.
In the following section, definition of satis-
faction and its measurement and previous
research on customer satisfaction are reviewed
to provide a conceptual background for this
paper. In addition, a research model of this
study and hypotheses are developed based on
the previous research. The next section
presents the method used in data collection
and the techniques used in the analysis. The
study findings and their managerial impli-
cations are discussed and recommendations
for future research are provided.
Literature Review
Definition of Satisfaction and its
Measurement
The most widely accepted definition of
consumer satisfaction characterizes it as the
state of a consumer who has purchased a
product after weighing the costs and benefits
(Harrison & Shaw, 2001, 2004). Satisfaction
is a way to determine a gap between prior
expectations and actual experience on the
products and goods. Oliver (1981, p. 42)
105
defined a consumer satisfaction as a gap
between the consumption experience and
prior expectations, describing satisfaction as
“the emotional reaction following a disconfir-
mation experience . . . consumer’s prior feel-
ings about the consumption experience”.
Parasuraman et al. (1985, 1988) claimed that
satisfaction is thought to be the result from
the comparison between predicted service
and perceived service (i.e. experience). In
other words, the consumer will be satisfied
when his/her needs are fulfilled by the pro-
ducts and goods rendered by the facility.
Harrison & Shaw (2001, 2004) further
explained that satisfaction is an evaluative
state. When the product is predominantly tan-
gible (as in goods marketing), it is said to occur
subsequent to the purchase and use of the
product. In services such as museums,
however, Gabbott & Hogg (1998) claimed
that satisfaction might be evaluated continu-
ally throughout the service delivery or con-
sumption process, rather than exclusively or
mainly post-purchase and post-consumption.
Satisfaction is recognized as one of the key
judgments that consumers make regarding a
tourism service, and, as such, is a well-estab-
lished, long-standing focal point for marketer
attention (Yuksel & Yuksel, 2002). This
focus seems appropriate since customer
satisfaction is an integral factor in marketing
theory, research and practice (Yi, 1991).
Satisfied customers are believed to affect the
long-term viability of organizations through
repeat purchase, brand loyalty and word-
of-mouth communication (Churchill &
Surprenant, 1982; Cina, 1989; Walker,
1995). Satisfying customers is integral to this
marketing process. MacInnis & Price (1987)
also suggested that satisfaction with the
tourism product should be composed of
perceptions of individual attributes (such as
climate, accommodation facilities, friendliness
 106 Yang Huo and Douglas Miller
of the people) as well as more holistic
impressions (mental pictures or imagery) of
the place.
Harrison & Shaw (2004) claimed that with
regard to relationship development and
loyalty, satisfaction with a particular aspect
of a service experience is unlikely to lead to
long-term loyalty, whereas an overall judg-
ment based on several aspects of the service
experience may leave the consumer with the
intention to return or the intention to rec-
ommend it to others. Therefore, customer sat-
isfaction is an important topic for both
Downloaded by [New York University] at 18:22 16 April 2015
researchers and managers because a high
level of customer satisfaction leads to an
increase in repeat patronage among current
customers and aids customer recruitment by
enhancing an organization’s market repu-
tation. Successfully being able to judge custo-
mers’ satisfaction levels and to apply that
knowledge are critical starting points to estab-
lishing and maintaining long-term customer
retention and long-term competitiveness
(Bowen & Clarke, 2002).
Basic tourist literature and theory related to
consumer behavior suggests that consumers or
tourists make destination choice decisions
based on the experience. The experiences
then influence travel behavior as a satisfaction.
This satisfaction is varied based on the tour-
ists’ demographics. In addition, an image
from the museum may be influenced or
varied among the demographics of the inter-
national tourists.
The measurement of satisfaction on the des-
tination products or attractions is illustrated
as one extreme of the continuum, and a desti-
nation’s attractions can include ratings on
certain common functional characteristics,
such as price levels, transportation infrastruc-
ture, types of accommodation, climate, etc.
The destination attractions can also be rated
on very commonly considered psychological
characteristics: level of friendliness, safety,
quality of service expected, fame, etc.
(Echtner & Ritchie, 1991). Hu & Ritchie
(1993) measured the destination attractiveness
in the context of ability of destinations to
provide satisfaction on choice attributes.
They claimed that one factor of attractiveness
generated the multiplier effect on the rest of
the attractiveness of the destination. Bowen
& Clarke (2002) pointed out that satisfaction
is recognized as one of the key judgments that
consumers make regarding a tourism service
and an attraction and, as such, is a well-estab-
lished, long-standing focal point for marketer
attention to induce more tourists to the
destination.
It has been stated that differences between
tourism products and other consumer pro-
ducts make it difficult to measure customer
satisfaction (CS) in the tourism industry. It is
important to identify and measure CS with
each component of the destination because
consumer satisfaction or dissatisfaction (CS/
D) with one of the components leads to CS/
D with the overall destination (Pizam et al.,
1978). Overall satisfaction or dissatisfaction
is the result of evaluating various positive
and negative experiences. Therefore, the rela-
tive importance of each component to the
overall impression should be investigated
(Rust et al., 1996). The evaluations of both
attractions and levels of service quality
(supply side) are regarded as crucial in deter-
mining overall tourist satisfaction (demand
side) (Whipple & Thach, 1988).
Previous Research
Satisfaction with a museum has been
addressed in several studies, including one
exploring consumer satisfaction and post-pur-
chase intentions (Harrison & Shaw, 2004) and
 Satisfaction Measurement of Small Tourism Sector
one studying level of involvement (Caughey
et al., 1995); but visitor satisfaction with
tours of museums is an area not well studied.
A search of the literature about museums
yields published work about maintenance,
publicity, docent training and preparation of
buildings for public use (Wiederhold, 2000),
but little has been reported about visitor satis-
faction with the tour experience and with the
facilities themselves. Previous research find-
ings demonstrate that there is a significant
relationship among tourist satisfaction, inten-
tion to return and positive word-of-mouth
Downloaded by [New York University] at 18:22 16 April 2015
communication (Beeho & Prentice, 1997;
Hallowell, 1996; Pizam, 1994; Ross, 1993).
A similar relationship exists among tourist
dissatisfaction, willingness to look for other
destinations for further trips, and negative
word-of-mouth communication (Almanza
et al., 1994; Peter & Olson, 1987; Pizam,
1994). Satisfaction or dissatisfaction with pre-
vious experience also is crucial because it
might affect expectations for the next
purchase (Westbrook & Newman, 1978;
Woodruff et al., 1983). This fact means that
favorable tourist perceptions and attitudes
are potentially an important source of com-
petitive advantage. However, it also is import-
ant to note that the impact of CS on repeat
business and customer loyalty is not the same
for all industries (Fornell, 1992), nor the
same for all destinations worldwide (Kozak
& Rimmington, 1997).
Heskett et al. (1997) found that respondents
who reported high levels of satisfaction were
more likely to translate their intentions into
actual behaviors, such as loyalty, than those
who reported mere satisfaction. Harrison &
Shaw (2004, p. 24) claimed, “loyalty is tra-
ditionally measured through behaviors such
as repeat purchase, intention to repurchase
or advocacy of the organization’s products.
Those customers who were highly satisfied
107
were also more likely to intend to repurchase
the firm’s products than those who were
merely satisfied”. They further applied this
claim into a museum marketing as, “knowl-
edge about how users evaluate their museum
experience, particularly in relation to high
and low levels of satisfaction, can help market-
ers to manage intention to return and intention
to recommend the visit to others” (Harrison &
Shaw, 2004, p. 25).
An initial conceptual model (Figure 1) was
developed based on hypothesized relation-
ships among the constructs discussed above
and modified as presented by Harrison &
Shaw (2004).
Christopher et al. (1991) and Harrison &
Shaw (2001, 2004) claimed that increased
levels of satisfaction are likely to lead to
higher levels of loyalty behaviors, frequently
measured through intention to return and
intention to recommend. Based on the results
of previous research (Boulding et al., 1993;
Fornell, 1992; Harrison & Shaw, 2001,
2004), it is hypothesized that satisfaction is
related to consumer loyalty, expressed as
intention to return and intention to
recommend. In order to explore the relation
Figure 1 Conceptual Model of the
Relationship among Service Elements,
Satisfaction and Future Behavior Intentions.
 108 Yang Huo and Douglas Miller
between the effect of expectations and experi-
ence, several hypotheses were developed:
Hypothesis 1: The greater the visitor
satisfaction with the experi-
ence in the museum, the
more likely the visitor inten-
tion to recommend.
Researchers claimed that satisfaction in the
service environment should be evaluated
using a range of elements encountered during
the service experience (Bitner et al., 1990;
Downloaded by [New York University] at 18:22 16 April 2015
Gabbott & Hendry, 1999; Parasuraman
et al., 1985; Wilton & Nicosia, 1986; Yi,
1991; Youngdahl & Kellogg, 1994), and
more specifically the museum environment
(Burton & Scott, 2003; Kozak & Rimming-
ton, 2000), and in the tourism industry
(Chadee & Mattsson, 1996; Ostrowski et al.,
1993), it is hypothesized that satisfaction
with museum “elements”, such as facilities,
staff services and the experience, influences
overall satisfaction, intention to return and
intention to recommend.
Hypothesis 2: Visitor satisfaction is influ-
enced by elements of the
museum experience, namely
the venue attributes (facili-
ties), staff services, and
exhibition experience.
As tourism destinations attract tourists from
different cultures and countries, tourists
might be more or less satisfied depending on
the countries from which they originate.
While demographic data such as ethnic
group, occupation, gender, age and education
are relatively “blunt” measures of segmenta-
tion, a large number of organizations continue
to use these easily collectible segmentation
bases to build their strategy (McDonald &
Harrison, 2002). A museum marketer
focuses on visitor profile, including demo-
graphics such as age, education, place of resi-
dence and nationality, to help determine who
is visiting a museum and provide valuable
information for a marketing strategy. Kawa-
shima (1999, p. 25) emphasized, “the socio-
economic class of a visitor, and the level of
educational attainment in particular, strongly
correlates with the habit of museum visiting”.
We therefore include additional hypotheses to
clarify the relationship between demographic
moderators such as age, gender and education
and satisfaction and intentions.
Hypothesis 3: Satisfaction will be varied
based upon the demographic
segments measured such as
ethnic group, age, education,
and gender.
Demographics and cultural differences in atti-
tudes, behavior and social class also can influ-
ence expectations and perceptions (Lewis,
1991; Mayo & Jarvis, 1981). These data
were included in this study because they
could contribute to a general understanding
of the responses of particular segments to the
museum’s offerings.
The intentions of museum visitors are one
indicator that managers can use when consid-
ering future trends. In addition, intentions can
be related to attitudes: a positive attitude
about museum attendance may lead to other
loyalty behaviors such as positive word-
of-mouth and other forms of advocacy
(Christopher et al., 1991).
Methodology
The objective was to examine the effect of
expectations and experience on the satisfaction
 Satisfaction Measurement of Small Tourism Sector
of visitors to a museum. The preliminary prop-
osition explored was that the visitors’ expec-
tations and level of service would be related
to their overall satisfaction with their visit.
The general goal of the study was to apply sat-
isfaction theory to the RLS museum in Samoa.
Subjects
The preliminary research for this paper
included data collection on the ways in
which satisfaction is actually measured. The
Downloaded by [New York University] at 18:22 16 April 2015
units of analysis of this study were visitors
who had visited the RLS museum as a part
of the attractions of a travel destination (i.e.
Samoa).
Instrument
Chadee & Mattsson (1996), Harrison & Shaw
(2001, 2004), Hu & Ritchie (1993) and Naoi
(2004) provided the framework adapted in
this study for measuring tourists’ satisfaction
of historical attractions (i.e. museum). The
survey was taken to a group of experts (indus-
try professionals and academics) for review in
order to ensure the content validity of the
measurement used in this study. Changes
were made to the instruments based on the
results of this focus group. Satisfaction levels
were reported as condensed measures rather
than as frequency distributions of all scaled
responses. For example, satisfaction was
reported as a combined or aggregated response,
such as the sum of the positive satisfaction
responses, via high satisfaction and satisfaction.
In other words, seven-point Likert scales were
used, with “1” indicating that the visitor was
highly dissatisfied with the experience and
“7” indicating that the visitor was highly satis-
fied with the experience. More specially, a
seven-point scale was condensed into a three-
109
tiered scale presented as dissatisfaction,
neutral and satisfaction: 1 and 2 became dissa-
tisfaction, 3 became somewhat dissatisfaction,
4 became neutral, 5 became somewhat satisfac-
tion, and 6 and 7 were reported as satisfaction.
The questionnaire consisted of two sections.
The first section had 10 statements on the satis-
faction measured in the context of elements of
the venue attributes on museum experience:
facilities, exhibition experience and staff
services. The second section had questions
touching on segments (i.e. demographics:
types of tours, ethnic background, age,
gender, occupation).
Procedure
An exploratory questionnaire was adminis-
tered to international visitors of the RLS
museum during March 2003 – October 2003.
This study measured tourist satisfaction by
distributing questionnaires while tourists
were still at the museum. At this point, tourists
still have the benefit of the visit and, more
importantly, the experience is still fresh in
their minds regarding the facilities, attractions
and customer services. A total of 200 survey
forms were passed out to the visitors at the
gate. One hundred and twelve completed
forms were returned for a 56% response
rate. Responses were examined for differences
in the complex image and the relative import-
ance of the museum’s attributes.
Data Analysis
The first hypothesis was tested using the
following model:
H1: Intention to Recommend ¼ a þ b
(Level of Satisfaction) þ e.
 110 Yang Huo and Douglas Miller
To test significance for the correlation between
two variables, the null and alternative hypoth-
eses were made as follows:
Ho: r ¼ 0 (no correlation)
Ha: r = 0 (correlation exists)
H2: Satisfaction ¼ a þ (b1) Venue Attri-
butes (Facilities) þ (b2) Experience þ
(b3) Staff Services þ e
H3: Satisfaction (metric) ¼ X1 þ X2 þ
X3 þ X4 (non-metric).
To test hypotheses 1 and 2, the correlation was
Downloaded by [New York University] at 18:22 16 April 2015
examined to estimate the extent to which
different elements of experience affect the sat-
isfaction of museum visitors in each of the
settings presented to them. Hypothesis 3 was
stated as a way to test the degree of satisfac-
tion in the context of demographics. Its null
hypothesis of several dependent population
means (i.e. satisfaction level; metric) in the
context of the experience at the museum
with its expectation as related to visitor s-
egmentation (i.e. demographics; non-metric
or categorical variables) was tested using an
analysis of variance (ANOVA). ANOVA was
used to determine any significant differences
among different demographics, tourists’
origin, and characteristics of tourists. More
specifically, a General Linear Model (GLM)
univariate procedure was done since there is
one dependent variable (satisfaction) and
many variables (categorical variables). It was
also used to test the null hypothesis on the
effects of other variables on the means of
various groupings of a single dependent
variable. Further, interactions between
factors as well as the effects of individual
factors were investigated. Levene’s test of
homogeneity of variance was computed to
test the ANOVA assumption that each group
(category) of the independent variables has
the same variance.
Results and Discussion
The descriptive statistics for the visitors to the
RLS museum and Samoa are shown in
Table 1. Approximately one-third (33.7%) of
the visitors were under the age of 30, while
15.9% of visitors were over 60 years old.
Those who had never visited Samoa accounted
for 83.6%, while only 16.4% had visited
Samoa previously. Visitors to the museum
were classified as either frequent independent
tourist (FIT) or group tourists. The FIT
portion shows 87.5%, compared with 12.5%
referring to the group tourists. In addition,
there were more than 40 occupations reported
by respondents. Visitors listing “retired” rep-
resent 27.4%, while “professionals” were
49.2%. Six ethic groups are also shown in
Table 1. European shows 27.7%, while local
(Samoan) shows 3.6%. Almost 58% of
respondents were female. In addition, in the
context of demographics of visitors, more
than half of respondents (56.25%) (i.e. 26
male and 37 female, 23.21% and 33.03% of
112, respectively) expressed that they were
satisfied with the RLS museum, while only
seven (6.25%) males and females expressed
that the RLS was not as good as expected
(see Table 2).
Descriptive statistics for key variables in the
model are summarized in Table 3. It shows
that the mean for satisfaction is 6.2530 and
for intention to recommend is 6.4364. They
are relatively high since the highest score is
7.0. The table further shows that “service”,
which was measured by kindness and knowl-
edge, contributes the highest mean (6.5000)
among three attributes. It indicates that
visitors were most satisfied with the services
rendered by the museum staff, followed by
the “facilities” (mean ¼ 6.3409), which
were measured by cleanliness and accessi-
bility, and “experiences” (mean ¼ 5.9182),
 Satisfaction Measurement of Small Tourism Sector 111

Table 1 Demographics of Respondents which were measured by stimulation and

authenticity.
Study Sample The results of the correlation analysis for
the first two hypotheses are shown in
Variables N (%) Table 4. It shows that the sample person
product moment correlation is r ¼ 0.898. An
Gender alpha level of p ¼ 0.05 was used for these
Male 47 42.4 tests. Hypothesis 1 is supported. In other
Female 65 57.6 words, visitors who reported a greater level
Total 112 100 of satisfaction would intend to recommend
Age the RLS museum to others. Based on these
Under 20 9 7.7 sample data, it indicates that there is a signifi-
20 –29 29 26.0 cant, positive linear relationship in the popu-
Downloaded by [New York University] at 18:22 16 April 2015

30 –39 25 22.8 lation between satisfaction and intention to

40 –49 17 15.4 recommend. The implication is that the more
50 –59 14 12.2 a visitor is satisfied with the RLS museum,
60 or older 18 15.9 the more he/she intends to recommend the
Total 112 100 museum to others. Museum management
Number of times visited Samoa will want to look further into the attributes
Never 94 83.6 to see which attribute might contribute more
1 11 9.4 satisfaction to a visitor. Pearson correlations
2 3 2.9 between satisfaction and elements of experi-
3 1 1.2 ence also show that visitor satisfaction is influ-
More than 4 3 2.0 enced by elements of the museum experience,
Total 112 100 namely the venue attributes: facilities
Visiting museum (r ¼ 0.692); exhibition experience
FIT 98 87.5 (r ¼ 0.795); and staff services (r ¼ 0.542)
Group 14 12.5 (see Table 5). Therefore, hypothesis 2 is
Total 112 100 supported.
Occupation Levene’s test of homogeneity of variance is
Retired 31 27.4 computed to test the ANOVA assumption
Professional 55 49.2 that each group (category) of the indepen-
No job 26 23.4 dent variables has the same variance. As
Total 112 100 the Levene statistic is significant at the 0.05
level in this case (Table 6), the conclusion
Ethnic group
is made that the four groups formed by
Local (Samoan) 4 3.6
New Zealand 13 11.6
demographics are not homogenous in
American 27 24.1 variances, violating an assumption of
Asian 16 14.3 ANOVA. However, that failure to meet the
European 31 27.7 assumption of homogeneity of variances is
Australian 21 18.7 not fatal to ANOVA, which is relatively
robust, particularly as groups are of equal
Total 112 100
sample size.
 112 Yang Huo and Douglas Miller

Table 2 Crosstab Analysis for Satisfaction and Gender of Respondents

Satisfaction Male Female Total

Dissatisfied 7 (6.25%) 7 (6.25%) 14 (12.50%)

Neutral (as expected) 14 (12.50%) 21 (18.75%) 35 (31.25%)
Satisfied 26 (23.21%) 37 (33.03%) 63 (56.25%)
Total 47 (41.96%) 65 (58.04%) 112 (100%)

Table 3 Descriptive Statistics for Key Variables

Downloaded by [New York University] at 18:22 16 April 2015

Model R R2 Adjusted R2 SEa of the Estimate

1 0.898 0.806 0.804 0.5542

Mean SDb
Facilities 6.3409 1.1834
Services 6.5000 1.1071
Experience 5.9182 1.5273
Overall satisfaction 6.2530 1.2726
Intention to recommend 6.4364 1.2527

a
SE, standard error.
b
SD, standard deviation.

Table 4 Correlation Between Satisfaction and Intention to Recommend

Correlations Satisfaction Recommend

Pearson Satisfaction 1.000 0.898

correlation Recommend 0.898

1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) Satisfaction 0.000
Recommend 000

Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The “corrected model” row shown in the
“Sig.” column in the ANOVA table (Table 7)
indicates that the main effect for “age, ethnic
group, gender, and occupation to satisfaction”
is significant (F ¼ 1.767, Sig. ¼ 0.019). In
addition, “gender” contributes to satisfaction
most significantly. The two-way interactions
of age
ethnic, ethnic
gender, and “gen-
der
occupation” are significant. The
researcher concludes that the demographics
 Satisfaction Measurement of Small Tourism Sector 113

Table 5 Correlations Between Satisfaction and Elements of Experience

Satisfaction Facilities Experience Services

Pearson Satisfaction 1.000 0.692

0.795

0.542

correlation Facilities 0.692

1.000 0.544

0.708


Experience 0.795

0.544

1.000 0.486


Services 0.542

0.708

0.486

1.000

Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

of the visitor are related to satisfaction, but equal difference for every category of demo-
Downloaded by [New York University] at 18:22 16 April 2015

this relationship is not a simple one and must
be interpreted in terms of the interaction of
age and ethnic, ethnic and gender, and
gender and occupation.
A post hoc Bonferroni comparison is
displayed in Table 8. Note in the “mean
difference” column that some of the differ-
ences have asterisks, to indicate which are
significant at the 0.05 level or better. The coef-
ficient is 1.4578, indicating that mean satisfac-
tion is significantly different between the “US
(American)” and the “Asian” ethnic group.
Further down the list, there is another signifi-
cant difference in “satisfaction” of those who
are “professional” and “none (no jobs)”
(coefficient ¼ 0.6847). Though the ANOVA
F-test (F ¼ 1.767, Sig. ¼ 0.019) concluded
that satisfaction is related to demographics,
this fact does not mean satisfaction makes an
Table 6 Levene’s Test of Equality of Error
Variances
F df1 df2 Sig.
Satisfaction 8.299 54 53 0.000
Tests the null hypothesis that the error var-
iance of the dependent variable is equal
across groups.
graphics. The connection is concentrated in
the relation of higher satisfaction in relation
to the “US (American)” and “Asian” ethnic
groups. That is, these two groups differ from
all the others. Therefore, hypothesis 3 is
supported.
Conclusion, Implications and Future
Research
The purpose of this study was to clarify the
relationship between satisfaction and inten-
tion to recommend to others as well as
measuring the correlation between attributes
of the museum and the demographics of the
visitors to the RLS museum. The study indi-
cates that services rendered by museum staff
plays a major role in enhancing the level of
satisfaction and a visitor’s willingness to rec-
ommend a museum to others. The satisfaction
level varies by ethic group, especially between
Americans and Asians. Therefore, the value of
this study goes beyond analyzing the success of
a particular museum.
The implications of the study’s findings
support initiatives to market and develop one
specific attraction to improve the physical
and perceptual attractiveness of the entire des-
tination. The information gained should be
 114 Yang Huo and Douglas Miller

Table 7 ANOVA Tests of Between-subjects Effects

Dependent Variable:
Satisfaction
Type III Sum
Source of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Corrected model 117.911a 49 2.406 1.767 0.019

Intercept 912.196 1 912.196 669.663 0.000
Age 9.008 4 2.252 1.653 0.173
Ethnic 13.409 6 2.235 1.641 0.152
Gender 8.896 2 4.448 3.266 0.045
Occupation 1.889 2 0.944 0.693 0.504
Downloaded by [New York University] at 18:22 16 April 2015

Age
ethnic 14.498 4 3.625 2.661 0.042

Age
gender 3.118 5 0.624 0.458 0.806
Ethnic
gender 8.718 2 4.359 3.200 0.048
Age
ethnic
gender 0.000 0 . . .
Age
occupation 3.185 6 0.531 0.390 0.883
Ethnic
occupation 1.299 3 0.433 0.318 0.812
Age
ethnic
occupation 0.000 0 . . .
Gender
occupation 18.729 3 6.243 4.583 0.006
Age
gender
occupation 1.521 6 0.254 0.186 0.980
Ethnic
gender
occupation 0.000 0 . . .
Age
ethnic
gender
occupation 0.000 0 . . .
Error 79.006 58 1.362
Total 4567.000 108
Corrected total 196.917 107

a
R 2 ¼ 0.599 (adjusted R 2 ¼ 0.260).

used to evaluate the justification for establish-
ing greater satisfaction of attractions as a part
of a museum and tourism marketing strategy.
By placing great emphasis upon promotional
activities in the context of attractiveness of
the RLS museum, the overall image of
Samoa would be enhanced as well.
Future research addressing the interaction
of the variables obtained from the respon-
dents, such as measurement of source of infor-
mation on the museum, length of stay, reason
for visit, intention to visit other attractions,
and types of accommodation is warranted.
Furthermore, research on the government’s
responsibility in conjunction with destination
image segmentation is worth studying further.
Today’s competitive environment has forced
a non-profit organization (i.e. museum) to join
corporations in aggressively pursuing market
share and revenue. Unfortunately, most non-
profit organizations misunderstand “market-
ing strategy” and assume that they begin by
creating image-enhancement campaigns,
conducting expensive marketing research
 Satisfaction Measurement of Small Tourism Sector 115

Table 8 ANOVA Multiple Comparisons

Dependent Variable: Satisfaction

Bonferroni
95% Confidence Interval
Mean Difference
(I) Ethnic (J) Ethnic (I – J) SE Sig. Lower Bound Upper Bound

US(American) Samoan 0.5543 0.597 1.000 21.5587 1.9744

Pacific Islander 20.5422 0.635 1.000 22.5702 1.4859
Asian 1.4578
0.400 0.013 0.1803 2.7354
Canadian 1.1245 0.635 1.000 20.9036 3.1526
European 20.5422 0.498 1.000 22.1313 1.0469
Downloaded by [New York University] at 18:22 16 April 2015

Australian 20.5422 0.774 1.000 23.0116 1.9272

Asian Samoan 21.2500 0.662 1.000 23.3632 0.8632
Pacific Islander 22.0000 0.732 0.179 24.3363 0.3363
US(American) 21.4578
0.400 0.013 22.7354 20.1803
Canadian 20.3333 0.732 1.000 22.6696 2.0029
European 22.0000 0.616 0.082 23.9673 23.2682E-02
Australian 22.0000 0.855 0.485 24.7282 0.7282
Dependent Variable: Satisfaction
Bonferroni
95% Confidence Interval
Mean Difference
(I) Occup (J) Occup (I 2 J) SE Sig. Lower Bound Upper Bound

Retired professional 0.4656 0.299 0.375 20.2716 1.2029

none 20.2191 0.292 1.000 20.9398 0.5016
professional retired 20.4656 0.299 0.375 21.2029 0.2716
none 20.6847 0.257 0.030 21.3176 20.0519
none retired 0.2191 0.292 1.000 20.5016 0.9398
professional 0.6847 0.257 0.030 0.0519 1.3176

Based on observed means. The error term is Error. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05
level.

studies, and developing new products and ser- References

vices. A marketing strategy should be built by
focusing attention on the organization’s custo-
mers, and management must recognize that
increased market share and revenue primarily
are functions of customer satisfaction.
Almanza, B. A., Jaffe, W. & Lin, L. C. (1994). Use of the
service attribute matrix to measure consumer satisfac-
tion. Hospitality Research Journal, 17(2), 63–75.
Beeho, A. J. & Prentice, R. C. (1997). Conceptualizing the
experiences of heritage tourists: a case study of New
 116 Yang Huo and Douglas Miller
Lanark World Heritage Village. Tourism Management,
18(2), 75–87.
Belk, R. W. & Costa, J. A. (1995). International tourism:
an assessment and overview. Journal of Macromarket-
ing, 15(2), 33–49.
Bitner, M. J., Booms, B. H. & Tetreault, M. S. (1990). The
service encounter: diagnosing favorable and unfavor-
able incidents. Journal of Marketing, 54(1), 71–84.
Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staelin, R. & Zeithaml, V. A.
(1993). A dynamic process model of service quality:
from expectations to behavioral intentions. Journal of
Marketing Research, 30(1), 7 –27.
Bowen, D. & Clarke, J. (2002). Reflections on tourist
satisfaction research: past, present and future. Journal
of Vacation Marketing, 8(4), 297 –308.
Downloaded by [New York University] at 18:22 16 April 2015
Britton, S. (1987). Tourism in Pacific-Island states:
constraints and opportunities. In S. Britton & W. C.
Clarke (eds), Ambiguous Alternatives: Tourism in Small
Developing Countries, 113–139 Suva, Fiji: Institute of
Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific.
Browning, E. L. (1993). A personality museum as a
tourist attraction. Economic Development Review,
11(4), 78–80.
Burton, C. & Scott, C. (2003). Museums: challenges for
the 21st century. International Journal of Arts
Management, 5(2), 56–68.
Caughey, C. C., Nafis, D. A. & Francis, S. K. (1995). Level
of involvement in relation to satisfaction with a student-
owned dining facility. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction,
Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 8, 234–238.
Chadee, D. D. & Mattsson, J. (1996). An empirical
assessment of customer satisfaction in tourism. Service
Industries Journal, 16(3), 305–320.
Christopher, M., Payne, A. & Ballantyne, D. (1991).
Relationship Marketing: Bringing Quality, Customer
Service, and Marketing Together. Oxford: Butter-
worth-Heinemann.
Churchill, G. A., Jr & Surprenant, C. (1982). An investi-
gation into the determinants of customer satisfaction.
Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4), 491–504.
Cina, C. (1989). Creating an effective customer satisfaction
program. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 6(4), 31–40.
Echtner, C. M. & Ritchie, B. J. R. (1991). The meaning
and measurement of destination image. Journal of
Tourism Studies, 2(2), 2– 12.
Fornell, C. (1992). A national customer satisfaction
barometer: the Swedish experience. Journal of Market-
ing, 56(1), 6–21.
Gabbott, M. & Hendry, J. (1999). A cross cultural study
of service quality using critical incidents. In J.
Cadeaux (ed.), Proceedings of Australia and New
Zealand Marketing Academy Conference [CD-ROM].
Sydney: University of New South Wales.
Gabbott, M. & Hogg, G. (1998). Consumers and Services.
Chichester: John Wiley.
Hallowell, R. (1996). The relationships of customer
satisfaction, customer loyalty, and profitability: an
empirical study. International Journal of Service
Industry Management, 7(4), 27–42.
Harrison, J. (1997). Museums and touristic expectations.
Annals of Tourism Research, 24(1), 23–40.
Harrison, P. & Shaw, R. (2001). An empirical
investigation of the relationship between satisfaction,
intention to repurchase, and intention to recommend
infrequently used services. In R. Ferguson (ed.),
Proceedings of the 9th International Colloquium in
Relationship Marketing, 31–45 Montreal: John
Molson School of Business, Concordia University.
Harrison, P. & Shaw, R. (2004). Consumer satisfaction
and post-purchase intentions: an exploratory study of
museum visitors. International Journal of Arts Manage-
ment, 6(2), 23–32.
Heskett, J. L., Sasser, W. E., Jr & Schlesinger, L. A.
(1997). The Service Profit Chain: How Leading
Companies Link Profit and Growth to Loyalty,
Satisfaction, and Value. New York: Free Press.
Honkanen, A. (2002). Churches and statues: cultural
tourism in Finland. Tourism and Hospitality Research,
3(4), 371–379.
Hu, Y. & Ritchie, J. R. B. (1993). Measuring destination
attractiveness: a contextual approach. Journal of
Travel Research, 32(2), 25–39.
Jansen-Verbeke, M. & van Rekom, J. (1996). Scanning
museum visitors: urban tourism marketing. Annals of
Tourism Research, 23(2), 364–375.
Kawashima, N. (1999). Knowing the public: a review of
museum marketing literature and research. Museum
Management and Curatorship, 17(1), 21–39.
Kozak, M. & Rimmington, M. (1997). Developing a
benchmarking model for tourist destinations. In K.
S. K. Chon & C. C. B. Mok (eds), Proceedings of
the 3rd Annual Graduate Education and Graduate
Students Research Conference in Hospitality and
Tourism (Vol. III): Advances in Hospitality and
Tourism Research, 40– 52 Houston, TX: University
of Houston..
Kozak, M. & Rimmington, M. (2000). Tourist
satisfaction with Mallorca, Spain, as an off-season
holiday destination. Journal of Travel Research,
38(3), 260–269.
 Satisfaction Measurement of Small Tourism Sector
Lewis, B. R. (1991). Service quality: an international com-
parison of bank customers’ expectations and percep-
tions. Journal of Marketing Management, 7(1), 47–62.
MacInnis, D. J. & Price, L. L. (1987). The role of imagery
in information processing: review and extensions.
Journal of Consumer Research, 13(4), 473 –491.
Mayo, E. J. & Jarvis, L. P. (1981). The Psychology of
Leisure Travel: Effective Marketing and Selling of
Travel Services. Boston: CBI Publication.
McDonald, H. & Harrison, P. (2002). The marketing and
public relations practices of Australian performing arts
presenters. International Journal of Nonprofit &
Voluntary Sector Marketing, 7(2), 105–117.
McLean, F. (1994). Services marketing: the case of
museums. Service Industries Journal, 14(2), 190–203.
Downloaded by [New York University] at 18:22 16 April 2015
McLynn, F. (1994). Robert Louis Stevenson: A Biography.
New York: Random House.
Naoi, T. (2004). Visitors’ evaluation of a historical
district: the roles of authenticity and manipulation.
Tourism and Hospitality Research, 5(1), 45– 63.
O’Leary, S. & Deegan, J. (2003). People, pace, place:
qualitative and quantitative images of Ireland as a
tourism destination in France. Journal of Vacation
Marketing, 9(3), 213– 226.
Oliver, R. L. (1981). Measurement and evaluation of sat-
isfaction processes in retail settings. Journal of
Retailing, 57(3), 25–48.
Ostrowski, P. L., O’Brien, T. V. & Gordon, G. L. (1993).
Service quality and customer loyalty in the commercial
airline industry. Journal of Travel Research, 32(2), 16–24.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. & Berry, L. L. (1985). A
conceptual model of service quality and its implications
for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49(4), 41–50.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. & Berry, L. L. (1988).
SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale for measuring
consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of
Retailing, 64(1), 12–40.
Peter, J. P. & Olson, J. C. (1987). Consumer Behavior:
Marketing Strategy Perspectives. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Pizam, A. (1994). Monitoring customer satisfaction. In B.
David & A. Lockwood (eds), Food and Beverage
Management: A Selection of Readings, 231– 247
London: Butterworth-Heinemann..
Pizam, A., Neumann, Y. & Reichel, A. (1978).
Dimensions of tourist satisfaction with a destination
area. Annals of Tourism Research, 5(3), 314–322.
Ross, G. F. (1993). Destination evaluation and vacation pre-
ferences. Annals of Tourism Research, 20(3), 477–489.
Rust, R. T., Zahorik, A. J. & Keiningham, T. L. (1996).
Service Marketing. New York: HarperCollins College.
117
Samoa Tourism Authority (2004). Samoa Visitors Bureau
Electronic Newsletter, 17. Retrieved 25 May 2005 from
http://www.spto.org/spto/export/sites/spto/news/in
dustry/samoa/samoa2002_06_05.shtml.
Theuns, H. L. (1994). Tourism in Western Samoa:
situation, policies, impacts and constraints. Tourism
Recreation Research, 19(1), 49– 58.
Tufts, S. & Milne, S. (1999). Museums: a supply-side
perspective. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(3), 613–631.
Walker, J. L. (1995). Service encounter satisfaction: con-
ceptualized. Journal of Services Marketing, 9(1), 5–14.
Wanhill, S. (2000). Mines – a tourist attraction: coal
mining in industrial South Wales. Journal of Travel
Research, 39(1), 60–69.
Westbrook, R. A. & Newman, J. W. (1978). An analysis
of shopper dissatisfaction for major household appli-
ances. Journal of Marketing Research, 15(3), 456–466.
Whipple, T. W. & Thach, S. V. (1988). Group tour
management: Does good service produce satisfied
customers? Journal of Travel Research, 27(2), 16–21.
Wiederhold, K. M. (2000). Exploring Oregon’s Historic
House Museum. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University
Press.
Wilton, P. & Nicosia, F. M. (1986). Emerging paradigms
for the study of consumer satisfaction. European
Research, 14(1), 4 –11.
Winegar, J. (2000). RLS in Samoa in the year 2000. In K.
Steele (ed.), The Robert Louis Stevenson Club: 150th
Birthday Anniversary Book, 54–46 Edinburgh:
AlphaGraphics.
Woodruff, R. B., Cadotte, E. R. & Jenkins, R. L. (1983).
Modeling consumer satisfaction processes using experi-
ence-based norms. Journal of Marketing Research,
20(3), 296–304.
Yi, Y. (1991). A critical review of consumer satisfaction.
In V. A. Zeithaml (ed.), Review of Marketing 1990,
68–123 Chicago: American Marketing Association.
Young, R. F. (1981). The advertising of consumer services
and the hierarchy of effects. In J. H. Donnelly & W. R.
George (eds), Marketing of Services, 196–199 Chicago:
American Marketing Association.
Youngdahl, W. E. & Kellogg, D. L. (1994). Customer
costs of service quality: a critical incident study. In T.
A. Swartz, D. E. Bowen & S. W. Brown (eds), Advances
in Services Marketing and Management: Research and
Practice (Vol. 3), 149 –173 Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Yuksel, A. & Yuksel, F. (2002). Measurement of tourist
satisfaction with restaurant services: a segment-
based approach. Journal of Vacation Marketing,
9(1), 52– 68.