Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism 42 (2023) 100617

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism

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

Research Article

The role of brand associations on the development of place attachment into

outdoor adventure tourism destinations
Thomas Karagiorgos a, *, Yannis Lianopoulos b, Konstantinos Alexandris a, Charilaos Kouthouris c
a
Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
b
Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences (Serres), Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Serres, Greece
c
Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Thessaly, Trikala, Greece

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Brand associations considered as a dominant concept to develop brand performance. Such associations might
Brand associations impact brand structure and consumers’ decision making process. Thus, tourism destinations offer opportunities
Place identity within outdoor recreational activities to develop brand associations, to differentiate their brand from similar
Place dependence
products and to enhance emotional bond with the destination. The aim this study was to establish a brand as­
Adventure destination
sociation scale into recreational context and to explore the influence of brand associations on the formation of
Outdoor recreation activities
Mount Olympus participants’ place attachment in an adventure destination setting. The sample was 373 hikers of Mount Olympus
in Greece. Two research instruments were used to capture the brand association and place attachment concepts.
The research data confirmed the two goals of the study. The results indicated that the brand association scale is a
reliable and valid research tool for future studies in adventure destinations. Furthermore, several associations
could act as antecedents of place identity and place dependence. More specific, tradition, escape, product de­
livery and importance association could significantly develop both dimensions of place attachment. However,
few brand associations had not significant impact on the formation of place attachment. This study provides
several managerial and theoretical implications for destination managers and academic literature.
Managerial implications: Brand associations are a crucial framework to develop destination attachment. Desti­
nation managers and policy makers might consider the three categories (attributes, benefits, attitudes) of brand
association concept as the basis of their future promotional actions. Hence, we proposed.

• They could develop the tangible (e.g. easy or challenging hiking routes) and the intangible (e.g.
popularity and history) attributes of the destination, while at the same time, they could focus on the
non-product-related attributes such as tradition and product delivery associations.
• They might promote the perceived benefits of engagement in outdoor activities within destination
based on motivation research. The sense of escape from daily routine, the opportunity for social­
ization, taking risks in adventure activities and experienced local culture could be serve as drivers
to attract adventure tourists.
• They may develop cognitive and affective advertisement’s messages which deliver added value and
affect participants’ decision-making process of destination choice.

1. Introduction
Recent branding research has shown the utility of brand equity
concept in brand management (Bianchi et al., 2014; Tanveer & Lodhi,
2016; Çifci et al., 2016). Aaker’s (1991) and Keller’s (1993) research
conceptualize the brand equity framework and set the foundational
structure of its dimensions. Both models argued that brand associations
are a dominant aspect to develop brand performance. Organizations
have realized the benefits of associations that consumers link with their
brand. These links operate as a network within nodes that create
meaningful information and added value in consumer’s mind (Aaker,
1991). Keller (1993) interpreted how brand associations serve into

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: thomaskg@phed.auth.gr (T. Karagiorgos).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2023.100617
Received 12 July 2022; Received in revised form 29 January 2023; Accepted 10 February 2023
Available online 3 April 2023
2213-0780/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
T. Karagiorgos et al.
brand and consumers by assisting in the recall of information and by
differentiating the brand from similar products. The brand literature
revealed the positive influence of brand associations on attitudinal and
behavioral outcomes (Bianchi et al., 2014; Filo et al., 2008; Kunkel et al.,
2013). Also, Hosany and Martin (2012) proposed that brand associations
reflect the personal cognitive and affective evaluation process for a
brand within the congruence of self-image concept. This is in agreement
with Funk et al.’s (2016) recommendations who proposed that brand
managers might develop brand-related attributes and perceived benefits
associations to provide a sense of fit between the brand and the con­
sumer. Therefore, brand association management is a critical process for
managers.
The majority of brand associations measurements remain within the
body of brand equity model which treats them as a one-dimensional
construct (Cifci et al., 2016; Dedeoglu et al., 2019). This is inconsis­
tent with the researchers’ suggestions (Gladden & Funk, 2001; Kaynak
et al., 2008; Kunkel et al., 2014; Ross et al., 2007), who outlined the
utility and the insightful information that brand associations may pro­
vide as a separate multi-dimensional structure. Thus, a distinct scale to
measure brand associations is necessary. In contrast, brand associations
had been examined as a separate component only in the professional
sport industry (Gladden & Funk, 2002; Ross et al., 2006). Several studies
support the application of brand associations scales in sports spectators
(Wear & Heere, 2020), professional sports teams and leagues (Kunkel
et al., 2013, 2014), and fitness context (Alexandris et al., 2008; Filo
et al., 2008). Despite that, little evidence of research has been docu­
mented on sports tourism and outdoor recreational activities related to
tourism destinations (Huang et al., 2015; Wagner & Peters, 2009).
Today, several tourism destinations provide outdoor recreation ser­
vices to reach a larger market share (Chilembwe & Mweiwa, 2019).
Therefore, destination marketers implement strategies to present the
physical attributes of the area (Cheng et al., 2022), to promote the
benefits of participation in outdoor activities (Kil et al., 2012), and to
create associations for developing favorable attitudes toward their
location (Mlozi & Pesämaa, 2013). There are two major reasons that
individuals are motivated to travel in outdoor adventure destinations;
first, to be involved with an outdoor activity (Alexandris et al., 2006;
Chang & Gibson, 2011) and, second, to bond themselves emotionally
with the destination (Beery & Jönsson, 2017). As a consequence, rec­
reation experiences have been identified as a key factor to develop
positive intentions and place attachment to the destination (Alexandris
et al., 2006; Kainzinger et al., 2018). Mueller and Graefe (2018), and
Kaplanidou et al. (2012) addressed the importance of place attachment
as an attitudinal outcome for branded destinations. Recent studies
support this finding (Beery & Jönsson, 2017; Budruk & Stanis, 2013;
Kainzinger et al., 2018). To an extent of branded destinations, brand
associations are outlined as a determinant component to influence the
branding structure and the consumer’s decision-making process (Huang
et al., 2015; Keller, 1993). Still, the link between the type of brand as­
sociation and the place attachment to outdoor recreation and adventure
destination context has not been tested yet.
The exploration of place attachment notion and its antecedents has
been highlighted in research literature of adventure and leisure desti­
nations (Beery & Jönsson, 2017; Budruk & Stanis, 2013; Ramkissoon,
2020). Ramkissoon and Mavondo (2015) noted the value of exploring
place attachment’s antecedents into national park context. Specifically,
they revealed that visitor’s satisfaction and pro-environmental behavior
acted as significant contributors on the development of place depen­
dence, place identity, and place affect. Another study indicated that
residents’ perceiving social impacts through tourism might contribute to
place attachment, which in turn, could positively influence the resi­
dents’ quality of life (Ramkinssoon, 2020). Despite the importance that
has been placed in studying the factors predicting place attachment, the
link between brand associations and place attachment in adventure
destination context has not been examined yet. The aim of the study is
twofold and grounded on both theoretical and practical contributions.
2
Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism 42 (2023) 100617
First, the study establishes a new measurement instrument of brand
associations into adventure destination setting, based on Keller’s (1993)
framework and Gladden and Funk’s (2002) distinct brand association
scale. Second, it explores the influence of brand associations on the
formation of participants’ place attachment with the adventure desti­
nation. Regarding the theoretical contribution, the research will add to
literature a new tool to measure brand associations and it shows a new
antecedent of place attachment. With respect to practical contribution,
given that place attachment has been considered as a key variable for
traveling to an outdoor adventure destination, brand associations’ in­
fluences may reveal the key factors which policy makers and destination
marketers will base their promotional actions to develop links and as­
sociations with their destination.
2. Literature review
2.1. Brand associations
Authors agree that brand associations are a core element of brand
equity development (Aaker, 1991; Berry, 2000; Keller, 1993). Brand
associations represent anything associated with a brand (e.g., opinions,
thoughts, feelings for the brand’s tangible and intangible attributes) that
is stored in consumers’ memory (Aaker, 1991). As a consequence, a
network of several associations, concerning a specific brand, is shaped in
the minds of consumers. This cluster of associations can be generated
from the companies’ promotional activities, noncommercial informa­
tion channels, and from the customers themselves (e.g., word-of-mouth
or brand experience) (Mirzaei et al., 2016; Stepchenkova & Li, 2014).
According to Keller (1993), the image of a brand is formed through the
evaluation of how strong, favorable, and unique these associations are
perceived and how they can be remained in consumers’ minds.
Aaker (1991) outlined that brand associations can be a source of
brand differentiation through brand positioning. For Keller (2003), it is
critical for practitioners to comprehend which brand associations are
perceived as positive and important by customers, as not all associations
are considered in this way. By gathering such information, marketers
can be able to determine which associations should be put forth and
which should be de-emphasized, since individuals’ consumption de­
cisions are usually affected by the associations customers attach to a
brand (Keller, 2008).
With respect to the sport setting, building brand associations be­
comes an essential task because of the highly experiential nature of sport
services, where customers are mainly creating memories (Gladden et al.,
2001). A series of investigations in this field has indicated that brand
associations contribute to customer loyalty, purchase intentions, and
team identification (Kunkel et al., 2013; Wear & Heere, 2020). The clear
majority of such research endeavors has been focused on spectator
sports (i.e., sport teams and sport leagues) (e.g., Anagnostou & Tzetzis,
2021; Daniels et al., 2019; Gladden & Funk, 2002; Kunkel et al., 2013;
Ross et al., 2007; Wear et al., 2018), while less investigations have been
devoted in participatory sports (i.e., health and fitness clubs and sport
events) (e.g., Alexandris et al., 2008; Filo et al., 2008; Williams et al.,
2012). One area that has received limited attention pertain the brand
associations afforded by destinations hosting recreational activities
(Huang et al., 2015).
Tourism literature has highlighted that destinations can generate
various associations to individuals’ minds, and therefore, they can be
branded as if they were corporate brands (Boo et al., 2009). In the words
of Konecnik and Gartner (2007), “the name of a destination has collat­
eral like the name of a company selling consumer goods” (p. 403).
Several studies have supported that countries (Kim et al., 2017), cities
(Huerta-Álvarez et al., 2020), or regions (Liu & Chou, 2016) can be
regarded as brands to be managed. Cai (2002) argued that destination
brand associations (which can be created from various sources of in­
formation) can constitute an important motivation for tourists because
of their inability to “try” a destination before visiting it. Elsewhere,
T. Karagiorgos et al.
Huerta-Álvarez et al. (2020) revealed that place brand associations force
travelers to revisit or recommend the destination.
Regarding the destination brand associations of active leisure tour­
ists, research has been concentrated on individuals who wish to travel to
destinations in order to attend or participate in sporting events (Chalip
& Costa, 2005). Cai (2002) contended that “unlike typical goods or
services, the name of a destination brand is relatively fixed by the actual
geographical name of the place” (p.722). However, despite the growing
body of literature on destination brand associations, as far as the authors
of the present study are concerned, no study to date has investigated
brand associations in the field of adventure tourism destinations.
Today, outdoor adventure tourism considered as one of the fastest
growing sectors in leisure industry (Cheng et al., 2018). Its economic
impact was estimated in US$ 263 billion in 2016 (Adventure Tourism
Development Index, 2020). Millions of people seek for outdoor experi­
ences in unique destinations. Buckley (2006) noted the impact of
adventure tourists on tourism destinations, as well as their determinant
role for the future of tourism industry. As such, the knowledge of how
individuals perceive the associations attached to destinations hosting
outdoor activities can assist destination policy makers to develop more
effective marketing strategies for communicating the key associations of
their brand. Pike (2007) stressed the necessity of incorporating desti­
nation branding activities as some destinations suffer from lack of dif­
ferentiation. Thus, one of purposes of the present study is to establish a
measurement of brand association in the context of outdoor adventure
tourism destinations.
Undoubtably, Keller’s (1993) conceptualization of brand associa­
tions constitutes one of the most influential works for approaching this
concept. This author classified brand associations into three major cat­
egories: attributes, benefits, and attitudes. Attributes pertain the fea­
tures that describe the product or service which are divided into
product-related (e.g., the quality of a hiking trail) and non-product
related (e.g., the link between a hiking trail with a famous destina­
tion). Benefits are related to the customers’ expectations concerning the
value and meaning afforded by consuming a brand and are separated
into functional, which are related to problem solving (e.g., feeling less
lonely when participating in adventure activities), experiential, which
are related with the feelings that can be revealed during consumption (e.
g., excitement, pleasure), and symbolic, which are associated with
intrinsic needs, such as ego-enhancement and social approval (e.g.,
participating in recreational activities for social status). Lastly, attitudes
are referred to “consumers’ overall evaluation about the brand” (Keller,
1993, p. 4).
Building on Keller’s (1993) theoretical framework, Gladden and
Funk (2002) developed the Team Association Model (TAM) to estimate
the brand associations individuals can hold for a sport team. TAM rec­
ognizes sixteen dimensions believed they correspond to sport team
brand associations: success, head coach, star player, management,
tradition, stadium, logo design, and product delivery (under the cate­
gory of attributes), fan identification, escape, pride in place, peer group
acceptance, and nostalgia (under the category of benefits), knowledge,
importance, and affect (under the category of attitudes). To establish a
model of brand associations in the context of destinations in which
adventure tourism activities are taking place, based on Gladden and
Funk’s (2002) structure, this study will investigate a set of eight asso­
ciations within the categories of attributes (i.e., tradition and product
delivery), benefits (i.e., escape, peer acceptance, nostalgia, and pride in
place), and attitudes (i.e., importance and knowledge). Alike to prior
efforts in the field of participatory sporting activities (e.g., Alexandris
et al., 2008; Filo et al., 2008), we excluded factors that do not fit with the
chosen context, such as head coach, star player, stadium, and fan
identification. The final scale with the retained and withdrawn factors
will be discussed in the methodology section.
3
Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism 42 (2023) 100617
2.2. Place attachment
Place attachment concerns the way in which particular places create
positive value and meaning for people which can lead to an emotional
bond between individuals and such places (Su et al., 2018). For Low and
Altman (1992), “place attachment involves an interplay of affect and
emotions, knowledge and beliefs, and behaviors and actions in reference
to a place” (p. 5). Such human-place bond can emerge from the in­
dividuals’ cumulative and complex experiences with a place (Low &
Altman, 1992). Going a step further, Gunderson and Watson (2007)
contended that place attachment can occur even in the absence of direct
experience, as the meanings, associated with a place can be also derived
from society and culture. In the context of leisure and outdoor recrea­
tion, several studies have highlighted the tendency of individuals to feel
emotionally connected with places that offer them opportunities for
outdoor activities (Budruk & Stanis, 2013; Kyle et al., 2004).
Place attachment has been approached by using the two dimensions
conceptualization (i.e., place identity and place dependence) proposed
by Schreyer et al. (1981) and Willliams and Roggebbuck (1989).
Although other dimensions have been suggested by researchers, such as
social bonding (Kyle et al., 2005), familiarity, rootedness, and belong­
ingness (Hammitt et al., 2004), the two-dimensional measurement has
been preferred by the clear majority of adventure tourism research,
where the reliability and validity of the two distinct components of place
attachment have been verified across different settings (Cheng et al.,
2022; Kil et al., 2021; Williams & Vaske, 2003).
Authors refer to place identity as the peoples’ inclination to identify
with places that are perceived to be in congruence with their self-
concept and are believed to be unique and distinct from other places
(Proshansky et al., 1983; Twigger-Ross & Uzzell, 1996). Thus, recrea­
tionists can use specific places as means to affirm or to express their own
identity to others (Twigger-Ross & Uzzell, 1996). For Moore and Graefe
(1994), this facet of place attachment can be developed when natural
environments are viewed as places conveying emotional and symbolic
meanings. Place identity is considered to include a set of the “norms,
behaviors, rules, and regulations that are inherent in the use of these
places and spaces” (Proshanski et al., 1983, pp. 63–64) and, according to
Moore and Graefe (1994), it is difficult to be built over a short period of
time.
Place dependence, in turn, represents the functional element of place
attachment (Williams & Vaske, 2003). That is, natural environments’
features (e.g., location, activities availability, proximity, landscapes)
can be able to facilitate visitors’ goal achievement, enjoyment, satis­
faction, and needs fulfillment (Kainzinger et al., 2018; Kastenholz et al.,
2020). Through the quality assessment of a wide range of recreational
settings, individuals may choose to be attached to a place that can
deliver desired outcomes (Williams et al., 1992; Yuksel et al., 2010). For
example, a hiker may feel attached to a specific destination due to its
rugged trails because, by completing tough trails, she or he can satisfy
their need for self-actualization.
Studies on place attachment have revealed that the development of
this concept can benefit destination marketing organizations. Place
attachment can be considered as an asset for outdoor recreation mar­
keters since research has indicated its positive association with tourists’
willingness to participate in more recreation activities when traveling
(Wilkins & de Urioste-Stone, 2018), revisit intentions (Isa et al., 2020),
place recommendation (Silva et al., 2013), place satisfaction (Ramkis­
soon et al., 2013), and attitude and pro-tourism behavioral intention
(Shen et al., 2019).
Since place attachment is regarded as a significant exploratory var­
iable in the recreation and tourism literature, research has also focused
on the factors that can predict this construct. Authors pointed that the
examination of place attachment’s antecedents will assist agencies to
create more effective strategies when their aim is to create or to increase
the emotional bond between customers and recreational settings (Price
et al., 2018). Research endeavors in this domain showed that factors
T. Karagiorgos et al.
such as activity involvement, place image, service quality, atmosphere
environment, sensorial experiences, and perception of recreation safety
climate can contribute to the prediction of place attachment (Cheng
et al., 2022; Isa et al., 2020; Kastenholz et al., 2020; Kyle et al., 2003;
Shen et al., 2019). These arguments are in agreement with van Riper and
colleagues (2019) findings who nominated the critical role of anteced­
ents of place attachment into recreational tourism destinations.
Based on recreation literature (Beery & Jönsson, 2017; Budruk &
Stanis, 2013; Cheng et al., 2022; Kainzinger et al., 2018; Kaplanidou
et al., 2012; Mueller & Graefe, 2018; van Riper et al., 2019), place
attachment act as an important concept in the formation of positive
attitudinal and behavioral intentions toward a destination. Thus, the
exploration of different antecedents of place attachment is considered as
a crucial process. According to the latter and alongside with the previous
discussion, brand association concept could develop the brand structure
and impact the consumers’ decision making process and his/her attitude
compositions (Gladden & Funk, 2002; Kaynak et al., 2008; Keller, 1993,
2008), the research hypotheses were developed as follows.
H1. Brand Associations (Tradition, Escape, Product delivery, Knowl­
edge, Importance, Peer acceptance, Nostalgia, Pride) have a positive
impact on the development of Place Identity.
H2. Brand Associations (Tradition, Escape, Product delivery, Knowl­
edge, Importance, Peer acceptance, Nostalgia, Pride) have a positive
impact on the development of Place Dependence.
3. Methodology
3.1. Sample and procedure
The study was conducted in the National Park of Mount Olympus
which is considered as a protected area and provides several hiking trails
for the summit and the surroundings. Mount Olympus is the most pop­
ular hiking destination in Greece with more than 100.000 visitors
annually. Five well-organized mountain huts operate between June to
October and facilitate bed and food services for visitors. Therefore, this
study employed a field survey in August 2020 which remains the busiest
tourist period. The researchers distributed an on-site questionnaire into
the two mountain huts and in the exit point of the national park during
the weekends of August for data collection. The research team informed
participants about the goal of the study and urged their favor to com­
plete the questionnaire.
The research recruited hikers who completed the questionnaire after
their hike. A total of 500 questionnaires were distributed among in­
dividuals. After a careful inspection and screening data process, few
questionnaires were withdrawn due to the low response rate and missing
values. The valid sample for further analysis consisted of 373 (N = 373)
participants (74,6% response rate). The respondents’ characteristics
indicated that most of the hikers were men (69,2%) than women
(30,8%) and singles (69,7%) than married (30,3%). Also, the majority
hold a university degree (51,2%), followed by vocational school (18%),
secondary school (27,1%), and current students (3,7%). The average
mean age was 34 years old. Regarding the occupation status, the largest
group was consisting of employees in the private sector (45,7%), free­
lancers (36,5%), and state employees (17,8%). Furthermore, most of the
participants reported that prefer to hike with a friend/s (55,0%), fol­
lowed by hike with an alpine club (29,2%), and hike alone (15,8%). It
should be mentioned that participants had an average hiking experience
of 10 years, hey spend 11 weekends for hiking, annually; and they visit
Mount Olympus three times per year.
3.2. Measures
A combination of research questionnaires was utilized to test the
hypothesized model. The measures comprised by two scales which have
been used in previous studies (Alexandris et al., 2008; Cheng et al.,
4
Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism 42 (2023) 100617
2022; Filo et al., 2008; Kaplanidou et al., 2012).
The first section measured the Brand Associations concept based on
Gladden and Funk’s (2002) work. The prime questionnaire included
sixteen factors.: Initially, two academics and two managers of outdoor
activity companies who operate in Mount Olympus carefully screened
the questionnaire. After finishing this process, a research tool with eight
components was employed. Each variable contained three items. The
chosen factors were adopted and modified due to the high relevancy
context within an outdoor adventure destination setting (Mount
Olympus). The final scale consisted of tradition (i.e. considered as a
classic and popular hiking destination), escape (i.e. offers opportunities
to escape from daily routine), product delivery (i.e. holds some
outstanding routes to explore), knowledge (i.e. refers to participant’s
breadth and depth of knowledge for the mountain), importance (i.e.
refers to the affective element and the importance that a hiker assigns to
the area), peer acceptance (i.e. gives the sense of acceptance by peers in
an alpine club or team), nostalgia (i.e. reminds past memories and ex­
periences) and pride in place (i.e. provides a sense of pride to its citi­
zens). On the other hand, the factors of success, star player, head coach,
management, logo design, affect, fan identification, and stadium were
omitted due to the lack of relatedness with the research concept.
The second section tested the Place Attachment framework based on
Williams and Roggenbuck (1989) approach. This model contains the
place identity and the place dependence sub-scales which capture the
individuals’ feelings toward a place. The scale’s items were measured in
a 5-point Likert scale with anchors 1-disagree, 2-somewhat disagree,
3-either agree or disagree, 4-somewhat agree, and 5-agree.
3.3. Data analysis
The raw data were screened for outliers, normality and missing
values prior to the formal data analyses. The SPSS 26.0 and AMOS 21.0
software were used. First, a descriptive analysis examined the de­
mographic characteristics of the sample. Then, a confirmatory factor
analysis was carried out to test goodness of fit indicators and reliability
and validity of the measurement model. In the next step, a structural
equation model with maximum likelihood estimation method was
conducted to test the direct effects of brand association’s dimensions on
place attachment.
4. Results
4.1. Model validation
Before the formal analysis, the screening of the data was explored
with the use of two methods. Both calculations were established to
validate the data for further analysis. First, a data normality assessment
was employed. The normality test showed that skewness and kurtosis
ranged within the appropriate thresholds (Kline, 2015). Specifically,
skewness ranged between − 1,90 and 0,32; and kurtosis ranged between
− 1,20 and 1,75. Thus, we assumed that the data had a normal distri­
bution (see Table 1). Second, a common method bias (CMB) estimation
was utilized. CMB is the inflation of the true correlation among observed
variables (Jordan & Troth, 2020). The Harman’s single-factor test
(Podsakoff & Organ, 1986) test, for all latent constructs in the model as
computed. The results revealed that the one-factor explained 31% of the
variance, which was less than the 50% cut of point (Jordan & Troth,
2020). Hence, we concluded that CMB is not a threat for the present
study. Overall, both estimations indicated that the data could be further
analyzed.
According to Anderson and Gerbing (1988), a two step approach is
recommended to test the direct effects in a causal relationship. Before
the structural equation model step, a measurement model should be
tested. Hence, confirmatory factor analysis was conducted. The pro­
cessed results are presented in Table 1. The assessment of the overall
model fit indicated acceptable fit indices: χ2(887,27)/df(386) = 2,2, CFI
T. Karagiorgos et al. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism 42 (2023) 100617

Table 1
Measurement model.
Variables λ t-value SMC skeweness kurtosis μ α CR AVE

Tradition 4,4 .79 .79 .56

Olympus has a history of achievements .71 1 .59 − 1,87 1,31
Olympus has a rich history .82 12,28** .68 − 1,05 ,39
Olympus has no history (R) .70 11,51** .54 − 1,90 1,06
Escape 4,1 .87 .87 .70
Hiking, reading and talking about Olympus provides me a temporary escape from life’s problems .87 1 .70 − 1,00 0,61
Hiking, reading and talking about Olympus helps me forget my day-to-day problems .87 20,30** .75 − 1,32 1,75
Hiking, reading and talking about Olympus takes me away from life’s hassles .76 17,01** .77 − 1,21 1,04
Product Delivery 4,2 .87 .89 .73
Hiking trails on Olympus are exciting .84 1 .79 − 1,06 0,75
Hiking on Olympus are entertaining .84 19,23** .70 − 1,18 0,92
Hiking on Olympus are enjoyable .89 19,51** .71 − 0,96 0,62
Knowledge 4,2 .89 .88 .77
I posses a great deal of knowledge about Olympus .86 1 .71 − 0,94 0,08
If I were to list everything I knew about Olympus, the list would be quite long .90 23,88** .89 − 1,06 0,57
Compared to other hiking destinations, I consider myself an expert about Olympus .72 16,50** .75 − 1,04 0,52
Importance 4,2 .87 .90 .79
I consider Olympus to be personally important .87 1 .79 0,05 − 1,12
Being a hiker of Olympus is important for me .91 23,52** .82 0,02 − 1,09
Compared to how I feel about other hiking destinations, still Olympus is my favorite .89 24,17** .75 0,12 − 1,20
Peer acceptance 2,8 .81 .75 .53
I began hiking on Olympus because of my friends .64 1 .62 − 0,32 − 0,77
It is important to hike on Olympus as my friends .74 18,11** .81 − 0,05 − 0,44
I like to hike on Olympus because my friends like to hike on it .90 18,58** .73 − 1,77 1,68
Nostalgia 3,3 .85 .79 .56
Thinking Olympus brings back good memories .70 1 .53 − 0,97 − 0,09
I have fond memories of Olympus .82 12,09** .68 − 0,32 − 1,10
I have fond memories of Olympus with friends .71 11,87** .54 0,21 − 1,12
Pride in place 3,9 .90 .89 .77
Olympus helps its citizens be proud of where they live .89 1 .71 − 0,74 − 0,73
Olympus elevate the image of its community .89 23,99** .79 − 1,32 1,30
Olympus brings prestige to the community .84 22,01** .80 − 1,08 0,29
Place identity 3,9 .87 .88 .72
Olympus means a lot to me .71 1 .57 − 0,77 1,23
I am very attached to Olympus .93 16,34** .88 − 0,12 − 0,99
I identify myself strongly with Olympus .84 12,79** .80 − 0,11 − 0,86
I feel no commitment to Olympus (R) .69 9,09** .54 − 0,15 − 0,78
Place dependence 3,3 .90 .90 .70
I like hiking here than in any other place .78 1 .61 − 0,11 0,86
I am more satisfied out of hiking in this place than from hiking any other mountain .83 22,40** .69 − 0,16 0,98
Hiking here is more important than hiking in any other place .92 15,49** .84 − 0,63 − 0,49
I wouldn’t substitute any place for the type of recreation I do here .81 13,16** .65 0,31 − 0,99

Notes: λ = path loadings; ** = p < .01; SMC = square multiple correlation; μ = average mean; α = Cronbach’s alpha; CR = composite reliability; AVE = average
variance extracted.

= 0.94, TLI = 0.92, RMSEA = 0.05 and SRMR = 0.04 (Schumacker &
Lomax, 2016). More in-depth, tradition (M = 4,4) had the highest mean
among brand association constructs, followed by product delivery,
knowledge, importance, escape and pride in place with a nearly close
score (see Table 1). The factors nostalgia (M = 3,3) and peer acceptance
(M = 2,8) had the lowest values among the sub-scales. Concerning place
attachment, the place identity factor scored with the highest mean (M =
3,9) and the place dependence with the lowest (M = 3,3).
In regard to reliability estimates, the first indicator, named Cron­
bach’s alpha, revealed an acceptable range from 0.79 to 0.90. Also, the
composite reliability estimator scored in an adequate range between
0.75 and 0.90 (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988). These results showed a high internal
consistency level of the measurement instrument. Thus, reliability was
established. To further validate the measurement model, the process of
convergence and discriminant validity were employed. Regarding
convergent validity two tests were conducted. According to Kline
(2015), all correlations among latent factors should be less than 0.85. As
seen in Table 2, the results satisfied the appropriate threshold. The
second test was to review the average variance extracted (AVE) indi­
cator for the latent variables, which were greater than the 0.50 cut-off

Table 2
Descriptive statistics and inter-correlation matrix.
Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1.Tradition .748
2.Escape .572 .838
3.Product delivery .347 .519 .859
4.Knowledge .321 .572 .504 .851
5.Importance .316 .352 .298 .472 .891
6.Peer acceptance .189 .390 .373 .569 .647 .724
7.Nostalgia .352 .327 .291 .343 .440 .427 .752
8.Pride .437 .426 .346 .366 .433 .417 .642 .879
9.Place identity .332 .349 .273 .279 .348 .243 .284 .371 .838
10.Place dependence .356 .367 .344 .249 .376 .238 .286 .304 .641 .853

Footnote: numbers on the first horizontal row represent the constructs of the first column according to the same number.

5
T. Karagiorgos et al.
criterion (Schumacker & Lomax, 2016). In total, convergence validity
was established. Concerning the discriminant validity, Fornell and
Larcker’s (1981) approach was adopted. This method recommends that
all squared roots of AVE for each latent variable must be greater than the
inter-correlations among constructs in the matrix. Table 2 provides
positive evidence for the discriminant validity process.
Overall, the validation of the model met all the recommended
criteria. Thus, the first research objective was achieved.
4.2. Testing the hypothesized model
To test the causal relationships among factors simultaneously, a
structural equation model was utilized with maximum likelihood esti­
mation. The hypothesized model showed acceptable fit indices to the
data: χ2(978,61)/df(387) = 2,5, CFI = 0.92, TLI = 0.91, RMSEA = 0.06,
and SRMR = 0.05. With respect to the hypothesis testing process, the
results did not provide support for all paths of brand associations,
neither to place identity, nor to place dependence. The significant esti­
mators were tradition (β = 0.22, p < .01), escape (β = 0.25, p < .01),
product delivery (β = 0.12, p < .05), and importance (β = 0.28, p < .01)
for place identity; the independent variables accounted for 29% of the
dependent variable (R2 = 0.29, p < .001). In the second test, tradition (β
= 0.20, p < .01), escape (β = 0.24, p < .01), product delivery (β = 0.13,
p < .05), and importance (β = 0.20, p < .01) contributed to the devel­
opment of place dependence; the independent variables accounted for
26% of the dependent variable (R2 = 0.26, p < .001). The dimension of
knowledge, peer acceptance, nostalgia, and pride in place did not pro­
vide evidence of significance (p > .05) on both dependent variables.
Table 3 shows the significant factors of brand associations toward the
development of place attachment. Therefore, the second research
objective was partially established.
5. Discussion
This study aimed to provide a better understanding of the effects of
brand associations on the development of place attachment with Mount
Olympus. Moreover, it tests a modified brand association scale for its
validity in adventure destination settings. The research concept has its
groundwork on Keller’s (1993) conceptualization for brand associations
and the TAM scale from Gladden and Funk (2001, 2002) studies. Both
research objectives of the study were achieved. The findings demon­
strated a reliable and valid research instrument that could be applicable
to adventure destinations and outdoor recreational activities. Also, the
results uncovered the direct impact of brand associations on the
empowerment of place identity and place dependence. The first
important inference is that the factors tradition, escape, and importance
contribute significantly to the development of place attachment. Other
interesting deductions are: a) product delivery holds a central role for
adventure destinations as it operates as the main bait to attract cus­
tomers, and b) knowledge, peer acceptance, nostalgia, and pride in place
had no influence on place attachment with the mountain. These results
can be used as a reference for marketers and managers of outdoor
Table 3
Path coefficients on the dependent variables.
Exogenous variables Endogenous variables
Place identity R2 = .29 Place dependence R2 = .26
Tradition .22** .20**
Escape .25** .24**
Product delivery .12* .13*
Knowledge − .14 .03
Importance .28** .20**
Peer acceptance − .08 − .04
Nostalgia .05 − .01
Pride .02 .11
Note: *p < .05; **p < .01.
6
Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism 42 (2023) 100617
adventure destinations to advance their campaigns and build appro­
priate associations for adventure tourists. Several managerial and
theoretical implications are discussed in the following sections.
The results confirmed a significant relationship between tradition
and place identity and place dependence. This factor is considered as an
attribute in the brand association framework. The finding is consistent
with previous studies (e.g. Gladden & Funk, 2001, 2002) which high­
lighted the positive impact of tradition dimension on consumers’ brand
perception. Tradition association acts as a notable element in the
development of place attachment since adventure destinations, such as
Olympus, are considered as classic and “must to do” for adventure
tourists. The reason for this outcome is because Olympus is a
well-known brand, very popular for its history and ancient mythology,
and it counts as a unique mountain in Greece. Adventure destination
management literature (Buckley, 2006; Mlozi & Pesämaa, 2013) sug­
gests that the destination which perceived as traditional or “classic
adventure” operates as an attractive element to destination choice. In
this line, destination managers might develop promotional actions
which highlight the classic hiking routes and the scenery to empower
place dependence. In addition, they can promote the sense of uniqueness
of the brand and build a myth of “classic hiking destination”, like the
Appalachian Trail in US or the Tanzania adventure destination (Mlozi &
Pesämaa, 2013), to enhance place identity. Moreover, it could be argued
that tradition association develops feelings and preferences based on
functional operations of the product. Hence, destination managers could
raise brand awareness and build the mountain’s image with
product-related characteristics (e.g. trail distance, side activities ser­
vices, mountain huts, rescue services, etc.) and non-product-related
characteristics, such as popularity.
Equally important for the development of place attachment is also
the escape association. Escape factor is considered a benefit that an in­
dividual expects to gain by using a product or service (Keller, 2008).
This result confirmed previous scholars who stretched the important
role of escape association in the development of positive behavioral and
attitudinal outcomes (Filo et al., 2008; Kunkel et al., 2014). This is in
agreement with motivation research in participatory sports (Funk et al.,
2007) and recreation activities (Manfredo et al., 1996), in which escape
is considered as a major driver to participant’s decision-making process.
The sense of escape from daily hassles and do something meaningful in a
natural environment could be a strong argument to promote onto
adventure tourists. Thus, brand adventure managers might include more
perceived benefits which will operate as drivers for participants’ desti­
nation preference, and have their basis on the motivation literature
(Sato et al., 2018). Examples of such drivers related to adventure rec­
reation activities could be exploration, risk-taking, learning new things,
and relaxation (Manfredo et al., 1996; Sato et al., 2018). Therefore,
managers must have a deep understanding of hikers’ motivations and
constraints to draw appropriate brand associations. Likewise, in the new
era after the pandemic of covid-19, the escape construct will be a
powerful incentive for participants to be involved with outdoor leisure
activities.
Another interesting finding of the model was the significant contri­
bution of importance dimension to the development of place attach­
ment. Importance holds the highest path coefficient in predicting place
identity and had the second largest score in predicting place depen­
dence. This factor refers to the attitude category and expresses an in­
dividual’s perception of subjective beliefs and values linked with an
object (e.g. adventure destination), based on its perceived significance
(Kaynak et al., 2008). This result confirms previous studies (Gladden &
Funk, 2001, 2002; Kaynak et al., 2008) which showed the key role of
importance as an antecedent of positive behaviors and loyalty. More­
over, this finding showed a clear perception that Mount Olympus holds a
significant meaning for hikers who develop their attitude mainly due to
affective elements. This finding is also consistent with recreation liter­
ature which highlighted the positive link between leisure centrality,
participant’s delight and place identity (Kyle et al., 2003; Shoukat &
T. Karagiorgos et al.
Ramkissoon, 2022). Despite the strong contribution of importance
attitude element on place attachment, a substantial question has been
raised; how can we provide managerial actions? In the words of Gladden
and Funk (2001) and Kaynak et al. (2008), attitudes associations are
abstract and represent a broad term. Therefore, it is difficult to apply
managerial implications. Nevertheless, the same authors suggested a
combination of attribute and benefit associations promotional activities
to positively influence the attitude formations. Such actions could be
facilitating side activities as an extension of the core product, building
communities in social media, bidding recreational events and festivals,
and developing cognitive and affective messages through
advertisement.
The last striking finding of the study is the significant contribution of
product delivery to the development of both place attachment sub-
scales. The product delivery dimension stands as a non-related prod­
uct attribute of brand association concept (Kaynak et l., 2008) and re­
flects on adventure destination capability to satisfy participants’
internal needs for recreation and entertainment. This finding was not a
surprise because recreational activities in adventure destinations are the
core product. The unique characteristics of the destination, such as
marked hiking trails, well-organized mountain huts, information and
signs, summit height, mountain geology, and natural environment form
the main product in which destination marketers rely their major pol­
icies and promotional strategies. The result is following Kyle’s et al.’s
(2003, 2004) findings which pointed that the entertaining and attractive
dimensions lead to place attachment of an adventure destination. It
could be argued that brand destination marketers should pay attention
to the development of core product and pivot their strategies on the
empowerment of awareness of brand unique characteristics. For
instance, they might claim the enjoyment of hiking, the safety process,
and the feeling of satisfaction to better positing their brand.
Unlike what has been proposed in previous studies from the sport
services sector and the critical role of knowledge, peer acceptance,
nostalgia, and pride in place (Alexandris et al., 2008; Filo et al., 2008;
Gladden & Funk, 2002; Kunkel et al., 2013), our findings failed to
confirm their positive influence on place attachment. First, the knowl­
edge dimension had not significant impact on place attachment. In this
study, the knowledge factor refers to the amount of hiker’s knowledge
about Mount Olympus. Such knowledge has its basis mainly in tangible
elements like best hiking routes, pros and cons for every trail or the
knowledge of the "hidden treasures" of the area. However, this kind of
association demand a high level of expertise and dedication related to
the destination. As suggested in literature, developing attitudinal asso­
ciations is difficult due to the lack of participants’ experience or the low
level of engagement with the product (Gladden & Funk, 2002).
Regarding the peer acceptance dimension, the results may suggest that
hikers do not seek social approval. This could be attributed to the par­
ticipants’ tendency to hike with friends rather than with an alpine club
or a formal social group. This finding did not support previous studies
which claimed the value of peer acceptance as a social interaction
element (Gladden & Funk, 2001, 2002). With respect to nostalgia factor,
the result indicated that past memories and experiences did not play a
role in the development of place attachment. This finding could be due
to the participants’ low experience in hiking on Mount Olympus. In
contrast, the result is inconsistent with Alexandris et al. (2008) and
Kaynak et al. (2008) who noted the important role of nostalgia in the
development of positive behaviors. However, nostalgia dimension may
act as a key association only in highly committed hikers of Olympus.
Regard to pride in place, this finding is in contrast with past studies
(Alexandris et al., 2008; Gladden & Funk, 2002; Kunkel et al., 2013)
which revealed its significant role in brand association concept. Pride in
place refers to the community’s pride about hometown, since this is a
common case in sports teams. Yet, in our study, no impact on place
attachment was identified. This was rather anticipated because of the
nature of the sample, which was comprised by tourists and not by local
people.
7
Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism 42 (2023) 100617
Overall, the results revealed significant implications for adventure
destination policy makers. Still, destination managers have to be
conscious about the target group of their choice, because different pat­
terns of brand associations may be needed. The present study indicated
clear patterns of brand associations in the development of place
attachment.
5.1. Theoretical implications
The study contributes to the outdoor recreation and adventure
tourism literature with two theoretical implications. The primary
contribution is that it explored an empirical model between brand as­
sociations and place attachment. By testing this proposition, the hy­
pothesized model revealed empirical evidence that brand associations
act as antecedents of place attachment. Given this argument, we extend
the literature by adding new perspectives into consumers’ decision-
making process. Also, we charted the dominant brand associations
which may impact the consumer’s recall information process. Further­
more, the researchers treated the place attachment as an outcome. This
is consistent with previous studies in outdoor recreation settings
(Kaplanidou et al., 2012; Kyle et al., 2003, 2004), and further supports
the important role of place attachment as a behavioral and attitudinal
outcome.
The second contribution is that the study applied for the first time the
brand association conceptual framework in outdoor adventure destina­
tion sector. Specifically, it employed the TAM model (Gladden & Funk,
2002) and modified it into the destination of Mount Olympus. The re­
sults showed that the adaptive scale is a reliable and valid research in­
strument which could be used in future research projects. Furthermore,
drawing on Keller’s (1993) and Gladden and Funk’s (2002) recom­
mendations who explored the utility of brand associations in the con­
texts of business and sports teams, our results represent a step forward
by applying the same concept to adventure tourism. Therefore, we
enrich the destination marketing literature by adding the fundamental
lines of a comprehensive and integrated brand association model.
5.2. Limitations and future research
Despite the severity of our effort to conduct this study, a few limi­
tations should be acknowledged. First, this was a pilot attempt to mea­
sure brand associations in adventure destination context. Thus, a
modified scale was used to capture the relevant concept. Further
investigation is needed to develop an integrated brand association scale,
since there were few dimensions in the measurement model. A second
limitation concerns that the data were collected from only one specific
area. Thus, the findings are not representative for every adventure
tourism destination and the generalizations should be made with
caution. A third limitation pertains that this study was focused only on
hikers of a specific area. A different sample (e.g. backcountry skiers or
climbers) in another destination may lead to different results. A last
limitation was the moderate variance score in each dependent variable.
As such, a multi-dimensional brand association framework with more
factors should be developed to improve the initial model.
On the other hand, the results revealed some interesting suggestions
for future studies. Future researchers are encouraged to include more
behavioral (e.g. brand involvement) and attitudinal (e.g. brand trust)
outcomes as dependent variable of brand associations. Also, they could
apply the same model or an expanded one with multiple mediators and
moderators in other or same recreational and sport tourism contexts.
The last suggestion concerns a call for a new brand association scale for
outdoor activities and adventure destinations through qualitative
methods, such as focus groups. There is a need for building a distinct
brand association conceptual framework since adventure tourism is on a
rise and, therefore, the development of competitive advantage of such
destinations becomes more challenging.
T. Karagiorgos et al.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Thomas Karagiorgos: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal
analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Project
administration, Visualization. Yannis Lianopoulos: Writing – original
draft, Formal analysis, Investigation. Konstantinos Alexandris: Project
administration, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing,
Supervision. Charilaos Kouthouris: Project administration, Writing –
review & editing, Supervision.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
References
Aaker, D. A. (1991). Managing brand equity. New York: Free Press.
Adventure Tourism Development Index. (2020). Adventure tourism market study 2016.
Retrieved from http://www.adventureindex.travel/docs/ATDI16-web.pdf.
Alexandris, K., Douka, S., Papadopoulos, P., & Kaltsatou, A. (2008). Testing the role of
service quality on the development of brand associations and brand loyalty.
Managing Service Quality, 18, 239–255.
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, 414–425.
Anagnostou, M., & Tzetzis, G. (2021). Greek sport fans’ evaluation of football leagues’
brand associations and their influence on brand loyalty. The case of UEFA champions
league. Sport, Business and Management: International Journal, 11(4), 430–450.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A
review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3),
411–423.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal
of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–94.
Beery, T., & Jönsson, K. I. (2017). Outdoor recreation and place attachment: Exploring
the potential of outdoor recreation within a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve. Journal of
Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 17, 54–63.
Berry, L. L. (2000). Cultivating service brand equity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 28(1), 128–137.
Bianchi, C., Pike, S., & Lings, I. (2014). Investigating attitudes towards three South
American destinations in an emerging long haul market using a model of consumer-
based brand equity (CBBE). Tourism Management, 42, 215–223.
Boo, S., Busser, J., & Baloglu, S. (2009). A model of customer-based brand equity and its
application to multiple destinations. Tourism Management, 30(2), 219–231.
Buckley, R. (2006). Adventure tourism. Cabi.
Budruk, M., & Stanis, S. A. W. (2013). Place attachment and recreation experience
preference: A further exploration of the relationship. Journal of Outdoor Recreation
and Tourism, 1–2, 51–61.
Cai, L. A. (2002). Cooperative branding for rural destinations. Annals of Tourism Research,
29(3), 720–742.
Chalip, L., & Costa, C. A. (2005). Sport event tourism and the destination brand: Towards
a general theory. Sport in Society, 8(2), 218–237.
Chang, S., & Gibson, H. J. (2011). Physically active leisure and tourism connection:
Leisure involvement and choice of tourism activities among paddlers. Leisure
Sciences, 33(2), 162–181.
Cheng, T. M., Chen, M. T., Hong, C. Y., & Chen, T. Y. (2022). Safety first: The
consequence of tourists’ recreation safety climate. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and
Tourism, 37, Article 100471.
Cheng, M., Edwards, D., Darcy, S., & Redfern, K. (2018). A tri-method approach to a
review of adventure tourism literature: Bibliometric analysis, content analysis, and a
quantitative systematic literature review. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research,
42(6), 997–1020.
Chilembwe, J. M., & Mweiwa, V. R. (2019). Responsible travel and tourism adventure:
Evidence from Malawi as a tourist destination. In Chilembwe, & Mweiwa (Eds.),
Sustainable tourism development (pp. 31–54). Apple Academic Press.
Çifci, S., Ekinci, Y., Whyatt, G., Japutra, A., Molinillo, S., & Siala, H. (2016). A cross
validation of Consumer-Based Brand Equity models: Driving customer equity in
retail brands. Journal of Business Research, 69(9), 3740–3747.
Daniels, J., Kunkel, T., & Karg, A. (2019). New brands: Contextual differences and
development of brand associations over time. Journal of Sport Management, 33(2),
133–147.
Dedeoğlu, B. B., Van Niekerk, M., Weinland, J., & Celuch, K. (2019). Re-conceptualizing
customer-based destination brand equity. Journal of Destination Marketing &
Management, 11, 211–230.
Filo, K., Funk, D. C., & Alexandris, K. (2008). Exploring the role of brand trust in the
relationship between brand associations and brand loyalty in sport and fitness.
International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, 3(1–2), 39–57.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with
unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18,
39–50.
Funk, D., Alexandris, K., & McDonald, H. (2016). Sport consumer behavior: Marketing
strategies. NewYork: Routledge.
8
Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism 42 (2023) 100617
Funk, D. C., Toohey, K., & Bruun, T. (2007). International sport event participation: Prior
sport involvement; destination image; and travel motives. European Sport
Management Quarterly, 7(3), 227–248.
Gladden, J. M., & Funk, D. C. (2001). Understanding brand loyalty in professional sport:
Examining the link between brand associations and brand loyalty. International
Journal of Sports Marketing & Sponsorship, 3(1), 67–95.
Gladden, J. M., & Funk, D. C. (2002). Developing an understanding of brand associations
in team sport: Empirical evidence from consumers of professional sport. Journal of
Sport Management, 16(1), 54–81.
Gladden, J. M., Irwin, R. L., & Sutton, W. A. (2001). Managing North American major
professional sport teams in the new millennium: A focus on building brand equity.
Journal of Sport Management, 15(4), 297–317.
Gunderson, K., & Watson, A. (2007). Understanding place meanings on the bitterroot
national forest, Montana. Society & Natural Resources, 20(8), 705–721.
Hammitt, W. E., Backlund, E. A., & Bixler, R. D. (2004). Experience use history, place
bonding and resource substitution of trout anglers during recreation engagements.
Journal of Leisure Research, 36, 356–378.
Hosany, S., & Martin, D. (2012). Self-image congruence in consumer behavior. Journal of
Business Research, 65(5), 685–691.
Huang, Z., Li, M., & Li, Q. (2015). An examination of Taiwan destination brand
associations: From the perspective of mainland Chinese tourists. Journal of Travel &
Tourism Marketing, 32(1–2), 50–64.
Huerta-Álvarez, R., Cambra-Fierro, J. J., & Fuentes-Blasco, M. (2020). The interplay
between social media communication, brand equity and brand engagement in tourist
destinations: An analysis in an emerging economy. Journal of Destination Marketing &
Management, 16, 1–12.
Isa, S. M., Ariyanto, H. H., & Kiumarsi, S. (2020). The effect of place attachment on
visitors’ revisit intentions: Evidence from batam. Tourism Geographies, 22(1), 51–82.
Jordan, P. J., & Troth, A. C. (2020). Common method bias in applied settings: The
dilemma of researching in organizations. Australian Journal of Management, 45(1),
3–14.
Kainzinger, S., Arnberger, A., & Burns, R. C. (2018). An examination of whitewater
boaters’ place attachment and specialization in four different river settings.
Environmental Management, 62(5), 832–844.
Kaplanidou, K., Jordan, J., Funk, D., & Rindinger, L. (2012). Recurring sport events and
destination image perceptions: Impact on active sport tourist behavioral intention
and place attachment. Journal of Sport Management, 26, 237–248.
Kastenholz, E., Marques, C. P., & Carneiro, M. J. (2020). Place attachment through
sensory-rich, emotion-generating place experiences in rural tourism. Journal of
Destination Marketing & Management, 17, 1–11.
Kaynak, E., Salman, G. G., & Tatoglu, E. (2008). An integrative framework linking brand
associations and brand loyalty in professional sports. Journal of Brand Management,
15(5), 336–357.
Keller, K. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand
equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1–22.
Keller, K. (2003). Brand synthesis: The multidimensionality of brand knowledge. Journal
of Consumer Research, 29(1), 1–22.
Keller, K. (2008). Strategic brand management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kil, N., Holland, S. M., Stein, T. V., & Ko, Y. J. (2012). Place attachment as a mediator of
the relationship between nature-based recreation benefits and future visit intentions.
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(4), 603–626.
Kil, N., Stein, T. V., Holland, S. M., Kim, J. J., Kim, J., & Petitte, S. (2021). The role of
place attachment in recreation experience and outcome preferences among forest
bathers. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 35, 1–10.
Kim, S., Sam), Schuckert, M., Im, H. H., & Elliot, S. (2017). An interregional extension of
destination brand equity: From Hong Kong to Europe. Journal of Vacation Marketing,
23(4), 277–294.
Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford
Publications.
Konecnik, M., & Gartner, W. C. (2007). Customer-based brand equity for a destination.
Annals of Tourism Research, 34(2), 400–421.
Kunkel, T., Funk, D., & Hill, B. (2013). Brand architecture, drivers of consumer
involvement, and brand loyalty with professional sport leagues and teams. Journal of
Sport Management, 27(3), 177–192.
Kunkel, T., Funk, D., & King, H. (2014). Developing a conceptual understanding of
consumer-based league brand associations. Journal of Sport Management, 28(1),
49–67.
Kyle, G., Graefe, A., & Manning, R. (2005). Testing the dimensionality of place
attachment in recreational settings. Environment and Behavior, 37(2), 153–177.
Kyle, G. T., Graefe, A. R., Manning, R. E., & Bacon, J. (2003). An examination of the
relationship between leisure activity involvement and place attachment among
hikers along in Appalachian trail. Journal of Leisure Research, 35(3), 249–273.
Kyle, G. T., Graefe, A. R., Manning, R. E., & Bacon, J. (2004). Effect of activity
involvement and place attachment on recreationists’ perceptions of setting density.
Journal of Leisure Research, 36, 209–231.
Liu, C. H. S., & Chou, S. F. (2016). Tourism strategy development and facilitation of
integrative processes among brand equity, marketing and motivation. Tourism
Management, 54, 298–308.
Low, S. M., & Altman, I. (1992). Place attachment: A conceptual inquiry. In I. Altman, &
S. M. Low (Eds.), Place attachment: Human behavior and environment, 12 pp. 1–12).
NewYork: Plenium Press.
Manfredo, M. J., Driver, B. L., & Tarrant, M. A. (1996). Measuring leisure motivation: A
meta-analysis of the recreation experience preference scales. Journal of Leisure
Research, 28(3), 188–213.
T. Karagiorgos et al.
Mirzaei, A., Siuki, E., Gray, D., & Johnson, L. W. (2016). Brand associations in the higher
education sector: The difference between shared and owned associations. Journal of
Brand Management, 23(4), 419–438.
Mlozi, S., & Pesämaa, O. (2013). Adventure tourist destination choice in Tanzania.
Current Issues in Tourism, 16(1), 63–95.
Moore, R. L., & Graefe, A. R. (1994). Attachment to recreation settings: The case of trail
users. Leisure Sciences, 16, 17–31.
Mueller, J. T., & Graefe, A. R. (2018). Testing the relationships between conflict,
specialization, and place attachment among members of the American Alpine Club.
Journal of outdoor recreation and tourism, 24, 26–34.
Pike, S. (2007). Consumer-based brand equity for destinations – practical dmo
performance measures. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 22(1), 51–61.
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research:
Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531–544.
Price, S., Blacketer, M., & Brownlee, M. (2018). The influence of place attachment on
campers’ evaluations of ecological impacts due to recreation use. Journal of Outdoor
Recreation and Tourism, 21, 30–38.
Proshansky, H. M., Fabian, A. K., & Kaminoff, R. (1983). Place-identity: Physical social
world socialization of the self. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 3, 57–83.
Ramkissoon, H. (2020). Perceived social impacts of tourism and quality-of-life: A new
conceptual model. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1–17.
Ramkissoon, H., Graham Smith, L. D., & Weiler, B. (2013). Testing the dimensionality of
place attachment and its relationships with place satisfaction and pro-environmental
behaviours: A structural equation modelling approach. Tourism Management, 36,
552–566.
Ramkissoon, H., & Mavondo, F. T. (2015). The satisfaction-place attachment
relationship: Potential mediators and moderators. Journal of Business Research, 68
(12), 2593–2602.
van Riper, C. J., Yoon, J. I., Kyle, G. T., Wallen, K. E., Landon, A. C., & Raymond, C.
(2019). The antecedents of place attachment in the context of an Australian national
park. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 61, 1–9.
Ross, S. D., Bang, H., & Lee, S. (2007). Assessing brand associations for intercollegiate ice
hockey. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 16(2), 106–114.
Ross, S. D., James, J. D., & Vargas, P. (2006). Development of a scale to measure team
brand associations in professional sport. Journal of Sport Management, 20(2),
260–280.
Sato, S., Kim, H., Buning, R. J., & Harada, M. (2018). Adventure tourism motivation and
destination loyalty: A comparison of decision and non-decision makers. Journal of
Destination Marketing & Management, 8, 74–81.
Schreyer, R., Jacob, G., & White, R. (1981). Environmental meaning as a determinant of
spatial behavior in recreation. In Papers and proceedings of the applied geography
conferences, IV pp. 294–300). Kent State University.
Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2016). A beginner’s guide to structural equation
modeling. Psychology Press.
Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism 42 (2023) 100617
Shen, K., Geng, C., & Su, X. (2019). Antecedents of residents’ pro-tourism behavioral
intention: Place image, place attachment, and attitude. Frontiers in Psychology, 10,
1–12.
Shoukat, M. H., & Ramkissoon, H. (2022). Customer delight, engagement, experience,
value co-creation, place identity, and revisit intention: A new conceptual framework.
Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 1–19.
Silva, C., Kastenholz, E., & Abrantes, J. L. (2013). Place-attachment, destination image
and impacts of tourism in mountain destinations. Anatolia, 24(1), 17–29.
Stepchenkova, S., & Li, X. (2014). Destination image: Do top-of-mind associations say it
all? Annals of Tourism Research, 45, 46–62.
Su, W. S., Hsu, C. C., Huang, C. H., & Chang, L. F. (2018). Setting attributes and revisit
intention as mediated by place attachment. Social Behavior and Personality, 46(12),
1967–1981.
Tanveer, Z., & Lodhi, R. N. (2016). The effect of brand equity on customer satisfaction:
An empirical study based on David Aaker’s Brand Equity Model. IUP Journal of Brand
Management, 13(3), 43.
Twigger-Ross, C. L., & Uzzell, D. L. (1996). Place and identity processes. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 16, 205–220.
Wagner, O., & Peters, M. (2009). Can association methods reveal the effects of internal
branding on tourism destination stakeholders? Journal of Place Management and
Development, 2(1), 52–69.
Wear, H., & Heere, B. (2020). Brand new: A longitudinal investigation of brand
associations as drivers of team identity among fans of a new sport team. Journal of
Sport Management, 34(1), 1–13.
Wear, H., Hills, S., Heere, B., & Walker, M. (2018). Communal brand associations as
drivers of team identity and consumer behavior. Journal of Global Sport Management,
3(3), 302–320.
Wilkins, E. J., & de Urioste-Stone, S. (2018). Place attachment, recreational activities,
and travel intent under changing climate conditions. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,
26(5), 798–811.
Williams, D. R., Patterson, M. E., Roggenbuck, J. W., & Watson, A. E. (1992). Beyond the
commodity metaphor: Examining emotional and symbolic attachment to place.
Leisure Sciences, 14, 29–46.
Williams, A. S., Pedersen, P. M., & Walsh, P. (2012). Brand associations in the fitness
segment of the sports industry in the United States: Extending spectator sports
branding conceptualisations and dimensions to participatory sports. International
Journal of Sports Marketing & Sponsorship, 14(1), 34–50.
Williams, D. R., & Roggenbuck, J. W. (1989). Measuring place attachment: Some
preliminary results. In L. H. McAvoy, & D. Howard (Eds.), Abstracts: 1989 leisure
research symposium (p. 32). Arlington, VA: National Recreation and Park Association.
Williams, D., & Vaske, J. J. (2003). The measurement of place attachment: Validity and
generalizability of a psychometric approach. Forest Science, 49(6), 830–840.
Yuksel, A., Yuksel, F., & Bilim, Y. (2010). Destination attachment: Effects on customer
satisfaction and cognitive, affective and conative loyalty. Tourism Management, 31,
274–284.