International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism

Administration

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjht20

Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior to

Predict Tourism Destination Revisit Intention

Mohammad Soliman

To cite this article: Mohammad Soliman (2021) Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior to
Predict Tourism Destination Revisit Intention, International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Administration, 22:5, 524-549, DOI: 10.1080/15256480.2019.1692755

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15256480.2019.1692755

Published online: 25 Nov 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 3276

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 53 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wjht20
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM ADMINISTRATION
2021, VOL. 22, NO. 5, 524–549
https://doi.org/10.1080/15256480.2019.1692755

Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior to Predict

Tourism Destination Revisit Intention
Mohammad Soliman
Business Administration Department, College of Applied Sciences, Salalah, Oman; Faculty of Tourism
and Hotels, Fayoum University, Al Fayyum, Egypt

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

This study sought to propose an extended model of the theory Received 23 November 2018
of planned behavior (TPB), incorporating further major con- Revised 23 September 2019
structs in tourism marketing (i.e. travel motivation, eWOM, Accepted 27 September
destination image, and destination familiarity) to predict tour- 2019
ists’ intention to revisit Egypt. Data were collected using KEYWORDS
a survey. Responses of 302 visitors to the preferable destina- Theory of planned behavior;
tions in Egypt have been analyzed and hypotheses were travel motivation; eWOM;
assessed by employing structural equation modeling (PLS- destination image;
SEM). The findings demonstrate that the extended model has destination familiarity
a sturdy illustrative power to well understand travelers’ revisit
intention. Besides the core TPB constructs, the added variables
indeed exert a significant influence on tourists’ revisit inten-
tion. Further, a mediating role of attitude, subjective norms
and perceived behavioral control has existed. Academic con-
tributions, practical implications and directions of future
research are argued.

Introduction
Tourism is viewed as an area of great economic and social significance to
most countries (Yang, Yuan, & Hu, 2009). The industry has contributed
10.4% of the global GDP and created 313 million jobs in 2017 (WTTC, 2018).
Its revenues climbed 5% to reach US$ 1,332 billion. Figures are compatible
with the sturdy trend in international tourism, which increased by 7%
(1,323 million) in 2017 (UNWTO, 2018). Egypt, one of the leading destina-
tions among the Middle East nations, is highly considered as a discriminatory
case that cannot be matched, due to its unrivaled natural and cultural
attractions (El-Gohary, 2012). The Egyptian tourism industry is a major
force for socio-economic development. The sector helps in raising foreign
exchange earnings, creating jobs, reducing poverty, fostering development,
improving the standards of living, etc. (Hassan, Hamid, & Bohairy, 2010;
Soliman, 2015). According to WTTC (2018), in 2017, the total contribution
of tourism was 11.0% of the Egyptian GDP. Tourism also supports

CONTACT Mohammad Soliman msoliman.sal@cas.edu.om Business Administration Department, College

of Applied Sciences, Salalah, Oman
© 2019 Taylor & Francis, LLC
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM ADMINISTRATION 525

2,425 million jobs (8.5% of the total employment). Additionally, visitor

exports generated 31.6% of the total exports and tourism investment was
11.4% of the total investment in Egypt. However, international tourist arri-
vals in Egypt have considerably declined during recent years. Decreasing
from 9.8 million in 2014 to 9.3 million in 2015, Egypt’s tourists' number
then plunged to a low of 5.4 million in 2016. In spite of the slight leap in
2017 (8.3 million), the figures still remain under the 2010 peak value, when
14.7 tourists visited Egypt (Central Agency for Public Mobilization and
Statistics [CAPMAS], 2018). Given the importance of tourism and consider-
ing the drop of figures in such a developing country, Egypt, it is crucial to
study the decision-making process of choosing or revisiting a destination to
develop effective marketing strategies that encourage positive travel decisions
(Han, Hsu, & Sheu, 2010; Lam & Hsu, 2004).
Travel decision-making, which is a highly intricate process, is affected by
psychological (attitudes), social (subjective norm) factors and perceived
behavioral control (Bianchi, Milberg, & Cúneo, 2017; Han & Kim, 2010;
Lam & Hsu, 2004, 2006). Other antecedents were also found to have
a significant influence on tourists’ intention to select/revisit a destination.
Tourist motivation has been a salient topic of tourism research because it is
the primary step of travel behavior process. It is considered one of the most
important factors affecting the intention of revisiting a destination (i.e. Hsu
& Huang, 2012; Huang & Hsu, 2009; Lee, 2009). Electronic word of mouth
(eWOM) is an effective marketing tool in tourism industry. It has
a considerable influence on behavioral intention and choosing travel destina-
tions (i.e. Jalilvand & Samiei, 2012; Jalilvand, Samiei, Dini, & Manzari, 2012).
Previous research (i.e. Chen & Tsai, 2007; Jalilvand et al., 2012; Wang & Hsu,
2010; Yang et al., 2009; Zhang, Wu, & Buhalis, 2018) pointed out that
destination image is a crucial factor which impacts traveler’s decision-
making, destination selection and behaviors in the future. Furthermore,
there is no doubt that tourist destination selection is a complicated, risky,
and vague process. Travelers then need to find valuable ways to reduce the
perceived risks of their destination choices (Lepp & Gibson, 2003). As
a result, destination familiarity has a significant effect on travelers’ intention
to visit a destination (i.e. Bianchi et al., 2017; Tan & Wu, 2016; Yang et al.,
2009). However, how these factors help predict international travelers’ revisit
intentions have rarely been studied. To fill this gap, the theory of planned
behavior (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991) will be extended. This extension could rein-
force our understanding of the framework theoretical mechanism and raise
the prediction power for human intention/behavior in a specific field (Ajzen,
1991; Han & Kim, 2010) such as tourism.
It is evident that the TPB model has been widely applied in several
contexts. However, the model scarcely applied in studies related to interna-
tional travelers’ attitudes and intentions (Lam & Hsu, 2004). According to
526 M. SOLIMAN

Bianchi et al. (2017) limited research has employed this model to predict
visitors’ intention in selecting a travel destination. Furthermore, no study has
yet employed an extended TPB model, consisting of the studied constructs
(i.e. tourist motivation, eWOM, destination image, and destination familiar-
ity) in tourism, specifically in Egypt.
Consequently, the current study aims to (a) examine the influence of
attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, travel motivation,
eWOM, destination image, and destination familiarity on international tra-
velers’ revisit intention; (b) explore the interrelationships between the studied
constructs and (c) investigate the mediating role of attitude, subjective
norms, perceived behavioral control and destination image.

Conceptual Development and Hypotheses

Theory of Planned Behavior
The theory of planned behavior (TPB) is one of the most widely researched
frameworks for predicting behavioral intentions (Fielding, McDonald, &
Louis, 2008). According to this theory, intention elucidates the people willing
to conduct a specific behavior (Ajzen, 1985, p. 2009). The basic premise of
TPB is that individuals’ behavior is governed by their intention, which is in
turn affected by attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioral control
(Ajzen, 1985, 1991; Lam & Hsu, 2004). Attitude indicates individuals’ feelings
associated with performing a behavior. It results from the salient beliefs and
consequence evaluations (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Han & Kim, 2010).
Individuals, hence, form positive or negative attitudes toward acting this
behavior (Bianchi et al., 2017). In the tourism context, traveler attitude
includes three components: cognitive, affective, and behavioral. The first is
the evaluation made in an attitude formation, while the affective component
is a psychological reaction expressing the predilection of visitors for
a destination and the behavioral element that is a verbal indication of
intention to visit that destination (Lee, 2009). The following determinant of
behavioral intention is subjective norms which are viewed to be a social
element in nature (Ajzen & Driver, 1992). Subjective norms refer to the
perceived social pressure of individuals to engage or not in a behavior and
the tendency to adapt to this pressure (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1980; Moutinho,
Ballantyne, & Rate, 2011). Subjective norms are believed to be a function of
a person’s perception of how referent others, view the behavior and the
motivation to comply with these referents’ beliefs and expectations
(Fishbein & Ajzen, 1980). The third predictor of intentions is perceived
behavioral control, which points to human perceptions of their capability
to act a behavior (Ajzen, 1991). The belief reflected from this factor is about
the resources and chances required when performing a behavior. There are
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM ADMINISTRATION 527

two parts of this belief. The first illustrates the availability of resources
required for a behavior, which involves money, time, and other resources.
The second part showing one’s confidence in being capable to enforce this
behavior (Ajzen, 1991; Ajzen & Madden, 1986). When individuals have
considerable resources and opportunities, perceived behavioral control
should be the utmost (Madden, Ellen, & Ajzen, 1992).
Previous studies in tourism field revealed that attitude can be a major factor
which predicts, describes and influences tourists’ behavioral intentions
(Bianchi et al., 2017; Han et al., 2010) to act a certain behavior such as
revisiting a destination (Huang & Hsu, 2009). Subjective norms and perceived
behavioral control also have a positive impact on individuals’ actual visit
behavior (i.e. Chen & Tung, 2014; Han et al., 2010; Hsu & Huang, 2012).
Lam and Hsu (2004, 2006) revealed that a growing in preferable attitude,
subjective norm and perceived behavioral control will lead to a rise in the
endurance of revisiting a destination. Moreover, the study of Han and Kim
(2010) demonstrated that revisit intention is positively and significantly related
to the core constructs of the TPB model (attitude, subjective norm, and
perceived behavioral control). The first three hypotheses, therefore, would be:

H1. Attitude toward a destination has a significant influence on tourists’

revisit intention.

H2. Subjective norms have a significant influence on tourists’ revisit

intention.

H3. Perceived behavioral control has a significant influence on tourists’

revisit intention.

Travel Motivation
According to Pearce (2011), travel motivation is a particular subset of
individuals’ motivation which includes the overall network of biological
and cultural forces that provide value and trend to travel choice, behavior,
and experience. Guiding the empirical study, some travel motivation theories
have been developed including the push-pull (Dann, 1977), escape-seeking
(Ross & Iso-Ahola, 1991), allocentric–psychocentric (Plog, 2001) and travel
career patterns (Pearce & Lee, 2005). Despite these achievements, travel
motivation is still a very complicated and mostly multifaceted issue (Lee,
2009). Additionally, the variety of individuals’ needs, methodological diffi-
culties, and cultural diversity result in the absence of agreed-on theoretical or
conceptual model of motivation (Hsu, Cai, & Li, 2010).
528 M. SOLIMAN

It is believed that tourist motivation is derived from tourist’s personality

impact (Madrigal, 1995), psychographic features (Pearce, 1993) and external
social/cultural forces (Huang & Hsu, 2005). Thus, different classifications of
travel motivation are found.
Although there has been growing interest in studying travel motivation,
limited research has investigated the correlation between tourist motivation
and attitude (Hsu & Huang, 2012; Lam & Hsu, 2004, 2006). Baloglu (1999)
revealed that travel motivation is one of the interlinked determinants of
intention to visit a destination. (Lam and Hsu (2004, 2006)) suggested that
travelers’ behavior belief of motivational factors is a predictor of their
attitude. Hsu et al. (2010), stated that travelers’ motivation directly affects
the attitude toward visiting the destination. According to Baloglu (1999),
travel motivation was shown as an antecedent of revisit intention. The study
of Hsu and Huang (2012) investigated the impact of travel motivation on
visitors’ behavior in selecting a destination by developing the TPB model.
Travel motivation is measured by four major factors, namely knowledge,
relaxation, novelty, and shopping including 19 measurement items. Hsu and
Huang (2012) revealed that motivation has a direct influence on both attitude
and intention to visit the destination. Additionally, Mohaidin, Wei, and Ali
Murshid (2017) demonstrated that travel motivation is a driving force which
encourages individuals to make a decision to travel or revisit a destination.
Based on these findings, we propose the following hypotheses:

H4. Attitude toward revisiting a destination will be affected by travel

motivation.

H5: Travel motivation has a significant impact on tourists’ revisit intention.

eWOM
eWOM refers to a relatively quick, informal method of sharing experiences
about products or services with others (Cheung & Lee, 2012; East,
Hammond, & Wright, 2007). Many tourists are keen before traveling to
search for information posted by prior visitors to make themselves comfor-
table. They often use the provided applications and communication plat-
forms for eWOM (Cheung & Thadani, 2012). Online user-generated reviews
related to tourism destinations have become essential sources of information
(Pan, MacLaurin, & Crotts, 2007). Vermeulen and Seegers (2009) stated that
visitors’ attitude and behavior can be reinforced by online positive reviews. In
addition, there is a confusion between eReferral and eWOM. According to
Abubakar, Ilkan, and Sahin (2016), the two notions are different. eReferral
occurs among people with strong social relations. In terms of a technical
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM ADMINISTRATION 529

aspect, there are two dimensions of eReferral which are reciprocal and
customer referrals. However, this study focuses on eWOM as a predictor of
consumer behavior.
The relationship between eWOM and the TPB core constructs has been
debated. Jalilvand and Samiei (2012) found that eWOM is a basic informa-
tion source of travelers and substantially influences their attitude. According
to Ying and Chung (2007), a positive WOM will result in an increase in
favorable attitude toward a particular product. Jalilvand et al. (2012) revealed
that the traveler’s attitude is significantly and positively impacted by eWOM.
As a result, the following hypothesis is:

H6. eWOM has a significant effect on travelers’ attitudes toward

a destination.

Hung, Ku, and Chang (2003) concluded peer influence (WOM from
colleagues, friends, and relatives) and external social (media reports, expert
opinions, and non-personal information) influence as predictors of the sub-
jective norm (Teo & Pok, 2003). The study of Guoqing, Kai, and Xiaofan
(2009) illustrated that the objective norms of clients were positively impacted
by eWOM. Furthermore, Jalilvand and Samiei (2012) revealed that there is
a significant relation between eWOM and subjective norms. Thus, the next
hypotheses would be:

H7. eWOM has a significant influence on subjective norms.

According to Jalilvand and Samiei (2012), eWOM has positive influences

on perceived behavioral control. Cheng, Lam, and Hsu (2006) indicated that
customer’s negative WOM is positively associated with perceived behavioral
control. In addition, it is shown that perceived behavioral control could be
affected by resource-based conditions in mobile WOM (Palka, Pousttchi, &
Wiedemann, 2009). The following hypothesis, therefore, is:

H8. eWOM has a significant impact on perceived behavioral control.

Further, it is confirmed that eWOM has a substantial impact on the

destination image. Hanlan and Kelly (2005) showed that the destination
image is mostly formed through WOM and various information sources.
Some empirical studies illustrated that WOM can influence a destination
image. Baloglu and McCleary (1999) stated that WOM recommendations
were the most essential source in forming destination image. Additionally, it
is agreed that WOM outstandingly influenced the destination image (Beerli
& Martin, 2004; Jalilvand et al., 2012). Thus, we propose the following
hypotheses:
530 M. SOLIMAN

H9. eWOM has a significant effect on destination image.

Past studies have also found that eWOM has a significant impact on
behavioral travel intention and selection of destination (Jalilvand et al.,
2012; Söderlund & Rosengren, 2007). According to Abubakar (2016), there
is a positive relation between eWOM and travel intention. In addition,
Abubakar, Ilkan, Al-Tal, and Eluwole (2017) revealed that the customers’
intention to revisit the medical tourism context is significantly influenced by
eWOM. As a result of the above discussion, the following hypothesis is
presented:

H10. eWOM has a significant influence on tourists’ revisit intention.

Destination Image
One of the most important predictors influencing travelers’ behavior is the
destination image (Beerli & Martin, 2004), which points to individuals’
overall perceptions about destinations (Chen & Tsai, 2007) and their promi-
nent features, shaped via information from distinct sources (Han, Hsu, &
Lee, 2009; Tasci & Gartner, 2007). Destination image includes two interre-
lated dimensions (cognitive and affective) (Baloglu & Brinberg, 1997; Beerli
& Martin, 2004). The cognitive image refers to the perception of destination’s
characteristics (Govers, Go, & Kumar, 2007), whereas the affective image
points to the mental picture toward this destination (Baloglu & McCleary,
1999). According to (Stylidis & Cherifi, 2018), there are four features of
destination image that vary between visitors and non-visitors, involving
accuracy, specificity, completeness, and complexity.
Many destination image studies revealed that destination image plays
a substantial role in travel decision-making process, intention to revisit and
willingness to recommend the destination to others (Beerli & Martin, 2004;
Chen & Tsai, 2007). In addition, the positive correlation between the desti-
nation image and visit intention has been proven frequently. For instance,
Court and Lupton () demonstrated that the potential travelers’ perceptions of
a destination image played a significant role in destination choice process.
Baloglu and McCleary (1999) found out that cognitive image has
a substantial influence on behavioral intention to select a tourism destina-
tion. Lin et al. (2007) indicated that a favorable image of a particular destina-
tion reinforces travelers’ preferences for that destination. The study of Ryu,
Han, and Kim (2008) confirmed the correlation between destination image
and intentions. Moreover, the destination image is the essential predictor of
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM ADMINISTRATION 531

destination selection intention (Lee, 2009). It is generally confirmed that the

overall destination image (cognitive and affective elements) has a significant
influence on tourists’ intention to recommend the same destination (Stylidis,
Shani, & Belhassen, 2017). Similarly, Sharma and Nayak (2018) found that
a positive overall image has a significant impact on the intention of tourists
to revisit and recommend the visited destination to others. Based on the
previous studies, the next hypothesis is as follows:

H11. Destination image has a significant effect on tourists’ revisit

intention.

Destination Familiarity
Familiarity is a critical factor that influences tourists’ risk perceptions as well
as their destination choices (Bianchi et al., 2017). Destination familiarity is
a wide concept that varies depending upon the field applied and appears in
integration with other concepts, such as awareness, knowledge, and experi-
ence (Tan & Wu, 2016; Yang et al., 2009). According to Baloglu (2001) and
Prentice (2004), there are three forms of familiarity, namely informational,
self-rated and empirical familiarity. Informational familiarity refers to the
scope of information sources utilized, operationalized as singular or varied
sources. Self-rated represents how familiar individuals thought themselves to
be with a place. Experiential familiarity points out to the extent of previous
experiences, operationalized as first-timer or repeater (Tan & Wu, 2016). The
current study depends on informational familiarity. It is revealed by some
researchers (Baloglu, 2001; Bianchi et al., 2017; Prentice, 2004; Yang et al.,
2009) that the high level of destination familiarity has a positive consequence
on the intention to choose a destination. With familiar environments, visitors
feel secure (Chen & Lin, 2012). Consequently, familiarity reliefs to diminish
risk perceptions and can provide tourists with more confidence in their
destination selection (Lepp & Gibson, 2003). Other studies have illustrated
that destination familiarity positively affected visit intention (i.e. Chen & Lin,
2012; Tsai, 2012). With regard to the relationship between familiarity and
destination image, previous empirical studies suggested that increased famil-
iarity presents a more favorable destination mage (Beerli & Martin, 2004).
Destination image can be affected by one’s subjective familiarity with
a destination (Sun, Chi, & Xu, 2013). From the previous literature, it is
evident that tourism destination familiarity is a primary factor in forming
destination image and influencing travelers’ revisit intention. Therefore, we
propose the following hypotheses:

H12. Destination familiarity has a significant influence on destination image.

532 M. SOLIMAN

Tourist H4
Motivation (MOT)
Attitude (ATT)
H1 H5
H6

Subjective Norms
H7 (SBN) H2

Electronic Word of H10 Revisit Intention

Mouth (eWOM) (RI)
H8
H3
Perceived Behavioral
Control (PBC)
H9 H11

Destination Image
Destination H12 H13
(IMG)
Familiarity (FAM)

Figure 1. The conceptual model and hypotheses.

H13. Destination familiarity has a significant impact on tourists’ revisit

intention.

Based on the theoretical background and hypothesis development, the

proposed research model is presented in Figure 1.

Methodology
Questionnaire Development and Measurements
To collect the data, a survey questionnaire was designed and validated. The
final form involves two basic sections. The first section consisted of the
measurement scales (items) for the studied constructs, selected depending
on existing validated scales or adapted from the previous literature
(Appendix 1). The indicators were slightly modified to be appropriate for
the present study. While attitude was measured by five items and a 7-point
semantic differential scale, other constructs were all assessed using a 7-point
Likert-type scale (1 strongly disagree, 7 strongly agree): subjective norms (3
items), perceived behavioral control (5 items), travel motivation (17 items),
eWOM (5 items), destination image (14 items), destination familiarity (5
items), and revisit intention (3 items).
The last part of the questionnaire involves the demographic features of
surveyors, namely gender, age, education level, occupation, past experience
and country of origin.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM ADMINISTRATION 533

Prior to pre-testing, the form was first reviewed by a panel of three

academic staff specializing in tourism to check content and face validity.
The panel then recommended piloting the initial form on a small sample of
tourists. Based on the information existed that there are many Arab tourists
visiting Egypt during the empirical study period, the mixed-method for
translation validity was, therefore, utilized (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill,
2009). The questionnaire was written in English firstly; then double-
translated to Arabic. A bilingual expert translated it into Arabic. The
Arabic version was translated back into English by another bilingual expert.
The new English copy was compared to the preliminary one; then, the
questionnaire was further checked and polished by an Arabic language
expert. Later, the survey was piloted on a convenience sample of 55 visitors.
Corrected item-total correlations and reliability tests were used to assure the
construct validity (Netemeyer, Bearden, & Sharma, 2003). As their corrected-
item-total correlation loadings between 0.35 and 0.80, all items were chosen
(Netemeyer et al., 2003). Additionally, the Cronbach’s for the latent variable
extends from 0.76 to 0.90, which is above the recommended threshold value
of 0.70 (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).

Sampling and Data Gathering

The target population of this study includes international inbound tourists
who visited the most favored destinations in Egypt (CAPMS, 2018) including
Greater Cairo, Alexandria, Sharm El-Sheikh, Hurghada and Luxor during
a four-month period from December 2017 to March 2018. This period is
often considered the peak tourism season in Egypt (CAPMAS, 2018).
Probabilistic sampling techniques could not be conducted since accurate
data as to the size and location of this population were not available.
Therefore, a convenience sampling is used in this study. The participants
were surveyed in different sites (i.e. the Egyptian Museum, the Citadel and
the Great Pyramids in Greater Cairo, Qaitbay Citadel in Alexandria, Na’ama
Bay in Sharm El-Sheikh, Giftun Island in Hurghada and Valley of the Kings
in Luxor), chosen based on their popularity as tourist attractions. Once the
individual concurred to participate in the survey, the questionnaire was
distributed by the tour guides. Between December 24th and February 25th
of 2018, a total of 450 visitors were interviewed, 386 completed surveys were
retained. After discarding the invalid forms, 302 responses were considered
valid for further analyses. The valid percentage is approximately 78%. Forms
were removed when they had missing values and/or when 10 or more
sequential same scores happened (Zhang et al., 2018).
Table 1 illustrates the respondents’ demographic characteristics. One hun-
dred and ninety-two were men and 110 were women and more than 80%
were aged between 25 and 45. Most of survey participants had high education
534 M. SOLIMAN

Table 1. Respondents’ Demographic Profile.

Variable Classification Frequency Percentage (%)
Gender Male 192 63.6
Female 110 36.4
Age
Less than 20 19 6.3
20–30 126 41.7
31–40 118 39.1
More than 41 39 12.9
Highest education level
High school 60 19.9
University/college 161 53.3
Post graduate 54 17.9
Technical 27 8.9
Occupation
Student 46 15.2
Employee 205 76.9
Unemployed 51 16.9
Past experience
Never 175 58.0
1 Time 49 16.2
2–3 Times 44 14.6
4 or more 34 11.2
Country of origin
Germany 43 14.2
Ukraine 41 13.6
Saudia 35 11.6
UK 33 10.9
China 31 10.3
USA 22 8.9
Libya 20 6.6
Jordan 19 6.3
Italia 16 5.3
Others 42 12.3
Total 302 100

levels, where 71.2% had a university degree or higher qualification. The

majority of respondents were employees (slightly under 77.0%). Fifty-eight
percent of them had no previous experience of international travel to Egypt,
while 42% visited Egypt before. Moreover, the research was carried out
among various nationalities with the most dominant nationalities being
from European and Arab countries (44% and 24.5%, respectively).

Data Analysis and Findings

For analysis purposes, the current study employed the partial least squares
structural equation modeling (SEM-PLS) which helps enable simultaneous
assessment of the measurement model and the structural model
(Marcoulides & Saunders, 2006). Moreover, PLS is suitable for analyzing
small sample size (Chin, 1998). To conduct SEM and to evaluate whether the
proposed research framework has a better fit with the data by using WarpPLS
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM ADMINISTRATION 535

6.0 and SPSS 23.0, the two-step approach recommended by Anderson and
Gerbing (1988) was adopted. In the first stage, the measurement (outer)
model results are presented to test the reliability and validity of the construct
measures. The second stage includes evaluating the structural (inner) model
and the assessment of the causal correlation between the latent variables
presented in the conceptual model.

Measurement Model Assessment

To assess the internal consistency of measures, computing the constructs’
coefficient alpha is the most well-known method. Table 2, which involves 57
indicators presenting eight constructs, shows that all Cronbach’s alpha values
exceed 0.70. Hence, all measures are solid in terms of their internal consis-
tency reliability (Nunnally, 1978). Moreover, the composite reliability, which
is more adequate for PLS-SEM than Cronbach’s alpha (Hair, Ringle, &
Sarstedt, 2011), is greater than the proposed satisfactory level of 0.70
(Bagozzi & Yi, 1988). Additionally, standardized loadings of all indicators
are above the value recommended by Fornell and Larcker (1981).
Convergent and discriminant validity was assessed to test construct valid-
ity which points to the measurement scale level that can well reflect the
studied constructs. Convergent validity refers to the correlation between two
or more items, designed to assess the same variable. To evaluate convergent
validity, the average variance extracted (AVE) is used. As shown in Table 2,
the AVEs are greater than 0.50. This verifies the convergent validity (Fornell
& Larcker, 1981). Discriminant validity points to the degree to which factors
differentiate between latent variables. Based on the guidelines of Fornell and
Larcker (1981), the discriminant validity was evaluated to test if a latent
variable is more strongly correlated to its own items than with other con-
structs through investigating the overlap in variance by comparing each
construct’s AVE with the squared multiple correlations between constructs.
The discriminant validity is achieved when the AVE exceeds correlations in
all cases. According to Table 3, the square root of each construct’s AVE
(SQRT AVEs) was greater than the squared value of each correlation between
latent variables, supporting evidence of discriminant validity (Kock, 2015).
To conclude, based on the testing of the outer model, the validity and
reliability of the studied constructs have been met.

The Structural Model and Hypotheses Testing

The overall goodness-of-fit indices of the model are as follows: average path
coefficient (APC) 0.27, P < .001; average R-squared (ARS) = 0.41, P < .001;
average adjusted R-squared (AARS) = 0.40, P < .001; average block VIF
(AVIF) = 2.71; average full collinearity VIF (AFVIF) = 2.92; large
536 M. SOLIMAN

Table 2. Validity of the Outer Model.

Constructs/Indicators Cronbach’s Alpha Composite Standardized Average Variance
(Reflective) Values Reliability Loading Extracted
Attitudes (ATT) 0.85 0.89 0.64
ATT1 0. 82
ATT2 0.83
ATT3 0.80
ATT4 0.80
ATT5 0.77
Subjective norms (SN) 0.79 0.88 0.71
SN1 0.86
SN1 0.83
SN1 0.81
Perceived behavioral 0.91 0.93 0.73
control (PBC)
PBC1 0.86
PBC2 0.85
PBC3 0.87
PBC4 0.85
PBC5 0.83
Travel motivation (MOT) 0.96 0.97 0.65
MOT1 0.84
MOT2 0.83
MOT3 0.76
MOT4 0.73
MOT5 0.79
MOT6 0.87
MOT7 0.83
MOT8 0.82
MOT9 0.78
MOT10 0.83
MOT11 0.81
MOT12 0.88
MOT13 0.85
MOT14 0.83
MOT15 0.74
MOT16 0.74
MOT17 0.73
Electronic word of mouth 0.94 0.96 0.82
(eWOM)
eWOM1 0.91
eWOM2 0.88
eWOM3 0.90
eWOM4 0.93
eWOM5 0.88
Destination image (IMG) 0.95 0.95 0.61
IMG1 0.74
IMG2 0.74
IMG3 0.77
IMG4 0.84
IMG5 0.69
IMG6 0.83
IMG7 0.82
IMG8 0.77
IMG9 0.76
IMG10 0.81
IMG11 0.81
IMG12 0.79
IMG13 0.79
IMG14 0.73
(Continued )
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM ADMINISTRATION 537

Table 2. (Continued).
Constructs/Indicators Cronbach’s Alpha Composite Standardized Average Variance
(Reflective) Values Reliability Loading Extracted
Destination familiarity 0.90 0.93 0.73
(FAM)
FAM1 0.84
FAM2 0.83
FAM3 0.89
FAM4 0.85
FAM5 0.84
Revisit intention (IN) 0.87 0.92 0.79
RI1 0.91
RI2 0.92
RI3 0.84

Table 3. Discriminant Validity – Correlations between Latent Variables.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. Attitude (0.81)
2. Subjective norms 0.70 (0.84)
3. Perceived behavioral control 0.81 0.77 (0.85)
4. Travel motivation 0.58 0.63 0.66 (0.80)
5. Electronic word of mouth 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.16 (0.90)
6. Destination image 0.34 0.41 0.38 0.55 0.38 (0.78)
7. Destination familiarity 0.39 0.45 0.49 0.75 0.34 0.70 (0.85)
8. Revisit intention 0.61 0.58 0.66 0.64 −0.01 0.39 0.55 (0.89)
Numbers between brackets represent SQRT AVEs.

Tenenhaus GoF (GoF) = 0.54; Sympson’s paradox ratio = 0.92; R-squared

contribution ratio = 0.98; statistical suppression ratio = 1.000; and non-linear
bivariate causality direction ratio = 1.000. Given these results, the analysis
concluded the proposed model has a satisfactory fit to the data (Kock, 2015).
To assess the proposed model predictive power, a basic emphasis in SEM-
PLS analysis is to test the explained variance (R2) of the endogenous latent
variables which demonstrates the amount of variance in the variables.
Figure 2 shows that R2 of the seven exogenous variables toward the endo-
genous construct was 69%, indicating that the final model had a strong
statistical ability and a sufficient explanation (Cohen, 1988) of international
tourists’ revisit intention.
The next step of the analysis is to measure the hypothesized correlations
among the latent variables through path coefficients (β) and significance
levels (P) (Hair et al., 2011). The results (Fig. 2) indicated that attitude (β
= 0.19, P < .01), subjective norms (β = 0.16, P < .01), and perceived
behavioral control (β = 0.13, P < .01) were significantly and positively related
to visitors’ revisit intention, supporting hypotheses 1, 2, and 3. Findings
indicate that travel motivation had a significant and positive impact on
both attitude (β = 0.57, P < .01) and revisit intention (β = 0.23, P < .01).
538 M. SOLIMAN

Tourist 0.57**
Motivation (MOT) Attitude
R2=0.31
0.23**
0.19**
-0.09*

Subjective Norms
0.40** R2=0.16 0.16**

Electronic Word of -0.18** Revisit Intention

Mouth (eWOM) R2=0.69
0.45** 0.13**

Perceived Behavioral
Control R2=021
0.60** 0.15**

Destination Image
Destination 0.28** R2=0.69
Familiarity (FAM) 0.15**

Figure 2. The findings of path analysis of travelers’ revisit intention.

Therefore, hypotheses 4 and 5 were accepted. The path analysis revealed that
eWOM has a significant and negative influence on attitude (β = −0.09, P <
.05) and revisit intention (β = −0.18, P < .01), while eWOM has a significant
and positive impact on subjective norms (β = 0.40, P < .01), perceived
behavioral control (β = 0.45, P < .01), and destination image (β = 0.60, P <
.01). Thus, hypotheses 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 were supported. As predicted,
destination image was found to be significant antecedents of revisit intention
(β = 0.15, P < .01), thus, the 11 hypothesis was supported. For hypotheses 12
and 13, destination familiarity positively affected destination image (β = 0.28,
P < .01) and revisit intention (β = 0.15, P < .01). Consequently, hypotheses 12
and 13 were confirmed. The above findings illustrate that all hypotheses in
the research model were supported.
To have a better understanding of a sequence of impacts that leads to
something, mediation impact analysis is crucial (Kenny, 2008). As a result,
the mediating roles of attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioral con-
trol, and destination image were tested by examining the indirect impact of
travel motivation, eWOM and destination familiarity on revisit intention.
Based on WarpPLS software, findings (Table 4) indicated that travel motiva-
tion has a significant indirect impact on tourists’ revisit intention via their
attitudes. This result demonstrates that travelers’ attitude exerts its partial
mediating influence between travel motivation and international tourists’
intentions to visit Egypt. In addition, eWOM has a significant indirect effect
on travelers’ revisit intention through four constructs, namely attitude, sub-
jective norms, perceived behavioral control and destination image. These
findings prove that the mentioned factors have a significant mediating role
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM ADMINISTRATION 539

Table 4. Indirect Impact Results.

Direct Effect Indirect effect
Paths Significance Mediator Significance Outcome
MOT-RI P < .01 ATT P < .001 Partial mediation
eWOM- RI P < .01 ATT P < .001 Partial mediation
SN P < .001 Partial mediation
PBC P < .001 Partial mediation
IMG P < .016 Partial mediation
FAM-RI P < .01 IMG P = .383 No mediation

in the relationship between eWOM and revisit intention. Finally, the results
revealed that there is no significant mediating role in the correlation between
destination familiarity and revisit intention through destination image.

Discussion and Conclusions

Results' Discussion
This paper aimed to extend the TPB model to present a deeper understand-
ing of visitors’ revisit intention to Egypt as a travel destination. In particular,
the modified model involves the TPB original constructs (attitude, subjective
norms, and perceived behavioral control) and incorporates some critical
factors in tourism marketing and behavior literature (i.e. travel motivation,
destination familiarity, eWOM, and destination image). The studied con-
structs were proven to be unidimensional and the measurement scales
adapted from previous studies were reliable items of their latent variable.
The empirical results indicate that the TPB core variables have positive
and significant effects on tourists’ intention to revisit Egypt. These findings
are consistent with past studies (e.g. Han et al., 2010; Han & Kim, 2010; Hsu
& Huang, 2012; Lam & Hsu, 2004, 2006), indicating that a growth in
favorable individuals’ attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral
control will generate an increase in their intention. Furthermore, the highest
direct impact on revisit intention through the three variables is recorded
amongst attitude. That is, the international tourists’ revisit intention was
positively and significantly related to their positive attitude toward Egypt.
The findings also illustrated that travel motivation has a significant and
positive impact on tourists’ attitudes and revisit intention. In fact, it has the
greatest direct effect on revisit intention across all the studied constructs.
This refers to the importance of its dimensions on tourists’ decision-making
process to revisit Egypt. As there are limited numbers of previous research on
travel motivation, therefore, these findings could not be compared to and
validated by other studies' findings. However, it can be argued that visitors’
attitude toward revisiting a destination is determined by the travel motiva-
tion. This finding aligned with the study of Hsu and Huang (2012) who
540 M. SOLIMAN

indicated that travel motivation has a significant and direct influence on both
attitude and intention to select a destination. The participants assured that
revisiting Egypt would aid them to have specific experiences, to increase their
knowledge and to provide social and cultural advantages.
Moreover, the results demonstrated that eWOM negatively affected visi-
tors’ attitudes. The previous result indicates the impact of the current eWOM
on Egypt as a tourist destination. The information that is being disseminated
focuses on the negative aspects and issues that would discredit Egypt as
a tourist destination. This leads to create a negative eWOM that in turn
negatively influences the tourists’ attitude. That is, a positive WOM will
result in an increase in favorable attitudes toward a particular product
(Jalilvand et al., 2012; Ying & Chung, 2007). Subjective norms are also
influenced by eWOM. This finding is in agreement with past studies (i.e.
Guoqing et al., 2009; Jalilvand & Samiei, 2012) who found eWOM is related
to subjective norms. The finding also revealed that eWOM positively
impacted perceived behavioral control. It supports the studies by Jalilvand
and Samiei (2012), as they also revealed a similar result. This demonstrates
that eWOM has a positive influence on perceived behavioral control.
Additionally, the findings revealed that revisit intention is negatively affected
by eWOM. Again, this reflects the fact that there are negative impacts of
eWOM on Egypt as a destination, particularly on social media sites. The
finding is in line with previous studies (e.g. Jalilvand et al., 2012; Söderlund &
Rosengren, 2007) which found that eWOM has a significant effect on travel
intention and destination choice. In addition, the findings indicate that
eWOM has a significant impact on the destination image. This result is in
line with the study of Hanlan and Kelly (2005) who found that destination
image is formed through WOM and varied information sources. It also
confirms some previous research (i.e. Beerli & Martin, 2004; Jalilvand et al.,
2012), as they found that WOM substantially affected the destination image.
Further, the destination image is evaluated by the features of its resources
and attractions which make travelers keen to come back to that destination
(Beerli & Martin, 2004). It is apparent that the positive destination image
related to Egypt leads to increasing tourists’ revisit intention. This result
contradicts the findings by Court and Lupton (1997), Lin et al. (2007) and
Ryu et al. (2008). They stated that a favorable destination image reinforces
tourists’ preferences for that destination. Lee (2009) found that destination
image is the essential determinant of destination choice intention.
The results also elucidate that destination familiarity significantly and
positively affects the destination image. Increased familiarity related to
Egypt presents a more favorable destination image. Egypt’s destination
image can be influenced by international tourists’ subjective familiarity.
This finding is consistent with past studies (e.g. Baloglu, 2001; Beerli &
Martin, 2004; Prentice & Andersen, 2000), who stated that a high level of
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM ADMINISTRATION 541

destination familiarity positively affects its image and visit intention. The
study findings also showed that destination familiarity has a significant direct
effect on international tourists’ intention to revisit Egypt. When international
tourists become more familiar with the Egyptian destination, they then feel
secure. This familiarity can help in diminishing their risk perceptions and
making them more confidence in their decision to revisit Egypt. This finding
is in line with previous studies (e.g. Baloglu, 2001; Bianchi et al., 2017; Chen
& Lin, 2012; Prentice, 2004; Tsai, 2012; Yang et al., 2009), who revealed that
destination familiarity has a positive impact on the behavioral intention to
visit a travel destination.

Theoretical and Practical Contributions

Both scholarly and practical implications have been achieved in this study.
To begin, the findings illustrated the utility of an extended TPB model for
predicting the intention of revisiting a travel destination among international
visitors. The criteria for revising the TPB have been met by the new model:
similar to situated antecedents of the theory, the proposed constructs are
behavior-specific in compliance with the compatibility principle; the latent
variables are conceptually independent of the theory present constructs.
Moreover, the constructs are viewed as causal factors that affect decisions;
and lastly, the constructs are potentially viable to a wide range of behaviors in
various settings (Ajzen, 1991). Specifically, the added latent variables in the
present study (travel motivation, eWOM, destination image, and destination
familiarity) evidently present adequate impetus for the travel decision-
making process, and a concurrent analysis of these variables and core con-
structs of the TPB considerably enhanced our understanding of the process
of destination revisit intention formation. Another theoretical contribution
of the current paper lies in its special study context. Unlike most of the
notable travel behavior models presented in the developed countries, this
research reported the applicability of the extended TPB framework in
a developing country, Egypt.
With regard to empirical contributions, the present study provides
substantial visions for the planning and development of the performance
of destination management organizations (DMOs) in Egypt. It suggests
that understanding the essential factors affecting the visitors’ intention to
revisit or recommend a destination will help in developing effective mar-
keting strategies that motive positive travel decisions. Besides the TPB
constructs, the current study found that travel motivation, destination
image, and destination familiarity have positive correlations with revisit
intention. Consequently, both tourism marketers and tourism companies
in Egypt have to focus on these variables in their marketing plans. The
prediction of travel behavior and knowledge of travel motivation plays an
542 M. SOLIMAN

essential role in creating demand and help travelers in their decision-

making. Therefore, having suitable knowledge and understanding of travel
behavior will assist DMOs in developing and implementing effective stra-
tegies and policies to increase tourism demand to Egypt. Destination
marketers and managers should engage in tourism marketing strategies
to raise travelers’ perceived motivation levels. They also can convey to
international visitors a clear message that the destination can meet their
needs. Furthermore, it is revealed that destination image, when integrated
into the TPB model, can play a substantial role in predicting a travelers’
intention to revisit the destination. The present study suggested that
effective strategies should be developed by marketers for enhancing the
image by dissemination of the positive aspects of destination to actual and
potential tourists using multiple information sources. Moreover, destina-
tion familiarity is shown as a significant determinant of visitors’ intention
to revisit destinations. That is, revisit intention becomes stronger with the
information available through different sources (e.g. destination’s bro-
chures, the destinations’ website, friends and relatives, newspaper and
magazines, travel guidebook) from several parties such as Ministry of
Tourism, hotels, resorts, airports, tour operators, travel agents, etc.
Lastly, the study revealed that eWOM has a negative impact on both
attitudes and revisit intention. In this context, it is crucial to understand
much importance tourists give eWOM and why they search for recom-
mendations from virtual opinion platforms when making travel decisions.
This requires from the mass media in Egypt to focus on conveying and
disseminating a positive image of Egypt as a tourist destination. Awareness
campaigns should also be planned through social media sites (i.e.
Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc.) to provide a good image of Egypt as
a safe and distinctive tourist destination. Attention should also be given to
the role of familiar trips in improving the e-WOM and the destination
image and reputation.

Limitation and Future Research

The current research has specific limitations that need to be taken into
consideration. The data collection in certain cities in Egypt may present
bias in the sample because only visitors in these cities were included.
Future studies should apply the model in different locations to examine
the influence of the studied constructs on tourist destination revisiting.
Similar studies' efforts are warranted to verify and compare the conceptual
model validity with other destinations and other traveler markets in the
Middle East region. Moreover, this study extended the TPB model includ-
ing particular variables; then, a broader variety of constructs (e.g. past
behavior, customer satisfaction, destination trust, personal features, and
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM ADMINISTRATION 543

value) should be incorporated in this framework. Another limitation of the

current study is that it used a self-administrated questionnaire survey to
gather data from respondents. Future studies should apply an internet-
based survey method to reach and sample a broader range of international
tourists.

References
Abubakar. (2016). Does eWOM influence destination trust and travel intention: A medical
tourism perspective. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 29(1), 598–611.
doi:10.1080/1331677X.2016.1189841
Abubakar, A. M., Ilkan, M., Al-Tal, R. M., & Eluwole, K. K. (2017). eWOM, revisit intention,
destination trust and gender. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 31,
220–227. doi:10.1016/j.jhtm.2016.12.005
Abubakar, A. M., Ilkan, M., & Sahin, P. (2016). eWOM, eReferral and gender in the virtual
community. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 34(5), 692–710. doi:10.1108/MIP-05-2015-0090
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. Heidelberg, Berlin:
Springer-Verlag.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Ajzen, I., & Driver, B. L. (1992). Application of the theory of planned behavior to leisure
choice. Journal of Leisure Research, 24(3), 207–224. doi:10.1080/00222216.1992.11969889
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Ajzen, I., & Madden, T. J. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed behavior-attitudes, intentions,
and perceived behavioral-control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22(5),
453–474. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(86)90045-4
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. doi:10.1037/
0033-2909.103.3.411
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–94. doi:10.1007/BF02723327
Baloglu, S. (1999). A path analytic model of visitation intention involving information
sources, socio-psychological motivations, and destination image. Journal of Travel &
Tourism Marketing, 8(3), 81–90. doi:10.1300/J073v08n03_05
Baloglu, S. (2001). Image variations of Turkey by familiarity index: Informational and
experiential dimensions. Tourism Management, 22(2), 127–133. doi:10.1016/S0261-
5177(00)00049-2
Baloglu, S., & Brinberg, D. (1997). Affective images of tourism destinations. Journal of Travel
Research, 35(4), 11–15. doi:10.1177/004728759703500402
Baloglu, S., & McCleary, K. W. (1999). A model of destination image formation. Annals of
Tourism Research, 26(4), 868–897. doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00030-4
Beerli, A., & Martin, J. D. (2004). Factors influencing destination image. Annals of Tourism
Research, 31(3), 657–681. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2004.01.010
Bianchi, C., Milberg, S., & Cúneo, A. (2017). Understanding travelers’ intentions to visit
a short versus long-haul emerging vacation destination: The case of Chile. Tourism
Management, 59, 312–324. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2016.08.013
544 M. SOLIMAN

CAPAMS (Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics). (2018). Statistical year
book issued for Egypt. Cairo, Egypt: Author.
CAPMAS. (2018). Egypt in figures. Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics.
Retrieved from Egypt:
Chen, C., & Tsai, D. (2007). How destination image and evaluative factors affect behavioral
intentions? Tourism Management, 28(4), 1115–1122. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2006.07.007
Chen, C. C., & Lin, Y. H. (2012). Segmenting mainland Chinese tourists to Taiwan by
destination familiarity: A factor-cluster approach. International Journal of Tourism
Research, 14(4), 339–352. doi:10.1002/jtr.864
Chen, M.-F., & Tung, P.-J. (2014). Developing an extended theory of planned behavior model
to predict consumers’ intention to visit green hotels. International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 36, 221–230. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.09.006
Cheng, S., Lam, T., & Hsu, C. H. (2006). Negative word-of-mouth communication intention:
An application of the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Research, 30(1), 95–116. doi:10.1177/1096348005284269
Cheung, C. M., & Lee, M. K. (2012). What drives consumers to spread electronic word of
mouth in online consumer-opinion platforms. Decision Support Systems, 53(1), 218–225.
doi:10.1016/j.dss.2012.01.015
Cheung, C. M., & Thadani, D. R. (2012). The impact of electronic word-of-mouth commu-
nication: A literature analysis and integrative model. Decision Support Systems, 54(1),
461–470. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2012.06.008
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Mod.
Methods Bus. Res, 295(2), 295–336.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2 ed.). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Court, B., & Lupton, R. A. (1997). Customer portfolio development: modeling destination
adopters, inactives, and rejecters. Journal Of Travel Research, 36(1), 35–43. doi:10.1177/
004728759703600106
Dann, G. M. (1977). Anomie, ego-enhancement and tourism. Annals Of Tourism Research, 4
(4), 184–194. doi:10.1016/0160-7383(77)90037-8
East, R., Hammond, K., & Wright, M. (2007). The relative incidence of positive and negative
word of mouth: A multi-category study. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 24
(2), 175–184. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2006.12.004
El-Gohary, H. (2012). Factors affecting E-Marketing adoption and implementation in tourism
firms: An empirical investigation of Egyptian small tourism organisations. Tourism
Management, 33(5), 1256–1269. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.10.013
Fielding, K. S., McDonald, R., & Louis, W. R. (2008). Theory of planned behaviour, identity
and intentions to engage in environmental activism. Journal of Environmental Psychology,
28(4), 318–326. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.03.003
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50. doi:10.1177/
002224378101800104
Govers, R., Go, F. M., & Kumar, K. (2007). Promoting tourism destination image. Journal of
Travel Research, 46(1), 15–23. doi:10.1177/0047287507302374
Guoqing, G. Z., Kai, C., & Xiaofan, W. (2009, December 26–29). The influence of WOM on
consumers’ intention of brand switching: The mediate role of subjective norms. Paper
presented at the Summit International Marketing Science And Management Technology
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM ADMINISTRATION 545

Conference, Beijing. Retrieved from http://www.seidatacollection.com/upload/product/

200911/2009scyxhy01a8.pdf
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of
Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152. doi:10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202
Han, H., Hsu, L.-T. J., & Lee, J.-S. (2009). Empirical investigation of the roles of attitudes
toward green behaviors, overall image, gender, and age in hotel customers’ eco-friendly
decision-making process. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28(4), 519–528.
doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.02.004
Han, H., Hsu, L.-T. J., & Sheu, C. (2010). Application of the theory of planned behavior to
green hotel choice: Testing the effect of environmental friendly activities. Tourism
Management, 31(3), 325–334. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2009.03.013
Han, H., & Kim, Y. (2010). An investigation of green hotel customers’ decision formation:
Developing an extended model of the theory of planned behavior. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 29(4), 659–668. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.01.001
Hanlan, J., & Kelly, S. (2005). Image formation, information sources and an iconic Australian
tourist destination. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 11(2), 163–177. doi:10.1177/
1356766705052573
Hassan, S. B., Hamid, M. S. A., & Bohairy, H. A. (2010). Perception of destination branding
measures: A case study of Alexandria destination marketing organizations. International
Journal of Euro-Mediterranean Studies, 3(2), 271–288.
Hsu, C., & Huang, S. (2012). An extension of the theory of planned behavior model for
tourists. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 36(3), 390–417. doi:10.1177/
1096348010390817
Hsu, C. H., Cai, L. A., & Li, M. (2010). Expectation, motivation, and attitude: A tourist
behavioral model. Journal of Travel Research, 49(3), 282–296. doi:10.1177/
0047287509349266
Huang, S., & Hsu, C. H. (2005). Mainland Chinese residents’ perceptions and motivations of
visiting Hong Kong: Evidence from focus group interviews. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism
Research, 10(2), 191–205. doi:10.1080/10941660500135977
Huang, S., & Hsu, C. H. (2009). Effects of travel motivation, past experience, perceived
constraint, and attitude on revisit intention. Journal of Travel Research, 48(1), 29–44.
doi:10.1177/0047287508328793
Hung, S.-Y., Ku, C.-Y., & Chang, C.-M. (2003). Critical factors of wap services adoption: an
empirical study. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 2(1), 42–60. doi:10.1016/
S1567-4223(03)00008-5
Jalilvand, M. R., & Samiei, N. (2012). The impact of electronic word of mouth on a tourism
destination choice: Testing the theory of planned behavior (TPB). Internet Research, 22(5),
591–612. doi:10.1108/10662241211271563
Jalilvand, M. R., Samiei, N., Dini, B., & Manzari, P. Y. (2012). Examining the structural
relationships of electronic word of mouth, destination image, tourist attitude toward
destination and travel intention: An integrated approach. Journal of Destination
Marketing & Management, 1(1–2), 134–143. doi:10.1016/j.jdmm.2012.10.001
Kenny, D. (2008). Reflections on mediation. Organizational Research Methods, 11(2), 353–358.
doi:10.1177/1094428107308978
Kock, N. (2015). WarpPLS 5.0 user manual, scriptwarp systems. Laredo, TX: ScriptWarp Systems.
Lam, T., & Hsu, C. H. (2004). Theory of planned behavior: Potential travelers from China.
Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 28(4), 463–482. doi:10.1177/1096348004267515
Lam, T., & Hsu, C. H. (2006). Predicting behavioral intention of choosing a travel destination.
Tourism Management, 27(4), 589–599. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2005.02.003
546 M. SOLIMAN

Lee, T. H. (2009). A structural model to examine how destination image, attitude, and
motivation affect the future behavior of tourists. Leisure Sciences, 31(3), 215–236.
doi:10.1080/01490400902837787
Lepp, A., & Gibson, H. (2003). Tourist roles, perceived risk and international tourism. Annals
of Tourism Research, 30(3), 606–624. doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(03)00024-0
Lin, C.-H., Morais, D. B., Kerstetter, D. L., & Hou, J.-S. (2007). Examining the role of
cognitive and affective image in predicting choice across natural, developed, and theme-
park destinations. Journal Of Travel Research, 46(2), 183–194. doi:10.1177/
0047287507304049
Madden, T. J., Ellen, P. S., & Ajzen, I. (1992). A comparison of the theory of planned behavior
and the theory of reasoned action. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(1), 3–9.
doi:10.1177/0146167292181001
Madrigal, R. (1995). Personal values, traveler personality type, and leisure travel style. Journal
of Leisure Research, 27(2), 125–142. doi:10.1080/00222216.1995.11949738
Marcoulides, G. A., & Saunders, C. (2006). Editor’s comments: PLS: A silver bullet? MIS Q, 30
(2), iii–iix. doi:10.2307/25148727
Mohaidin, Z., Wei, K. T., & Ali Murshid, M. (2017). Factors influencing the tourists’
intention to select sustainable tourism destination: A case study of Penang, Malaysia.
International Journal of Tourism Cities, 3(4), 442–465. doi:10.1108/IJTC-11-2016-0049
Moutinho, L., Ballantyne, R., & Rate, S. (2011). Consumer behaviour in tourism. Strategic
Management in Tourism, 2(2), 83–126.
Netemeyer, R. G., Bearden, W. O., & Sharma, S. (2003). Scaling procedures: Issues and
applications. London, UK: Sage Publications.
Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, USA: McGraw-Hill.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3 ed.). New York, USA: McGraw-Hill.
Palka, W., Pousttchi, K., & Wiedemann, D. G. (2009). Mobile word-of-mouth – A grounded
theory of mobile viral marketing. Journal of Information Technology, 24(2), 72–85.
doi:10.1057/jit.2008.37
Pan, B., MacLaurin, T., & Crotts, J. C. (2007). Travel blogs and the implications for destina-
tion marketing. Journal of Travel Research, 46(1), 35–45. doi:10.1177/0047287507302378
Pearce, P. L. (1993). Fundamentals of tourist motivation. In D. Pearce & R. Butler (Eds.),
Tourism research: Critiques and challenges (pp. 113–134). London, England: Routledge.
Pearce, P. L. (2011). Travel motivation, benefits and constraints to destinations. In Y. Wang
& A. Pizam (Eds.), Destination marketing and management: Theories and applications (pp.
39–52). Cambridge, UK: CAB International.
Pearce, P. L., & Lee, U.-I. (2005). Developing the travel career approach to tourist motivation.
Journal of Travel Research, 43(3), 226–237. doi:10.1177/0047287504272020
Plog, S. (2001). Why destination areas rise and fall in popularity: An update of a cornell
quarterly classic. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 42(3), 13–24.
doi:10.1016/S0010-8804(01)81020-X
Prentice, R. (2004). Tourist familiarity and imagery. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(4),
923–945. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2004.02.008
Prentice, R., & Andersen, V. (2000). Evoking Ireland: Modeling tourism propensity. Annals of
Tourism Research, 27(2), 490–516. doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00085-7
Ross, E. L. D., & Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1991). Sightseeing tourists’ motivation and satisfaction.
Annals of Tourism Research, 18(2), 226–237. doi:10.1016/0160-7383(91)90006-W
Ryu, K., Han, H., & Kim, T.-H. (2008). The relationships among overall quick-casual
restaurant image, perceived value, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentions.
International Journal of Hospitality Management, 27(3), 459–469. doi:10.1016/j.
ijhm.2007.11.001
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM ADMINISTRATION 547

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students (5 ed.).
London, UK: Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Sharma, P., & Nayak, J. K. (2018). Testing the role of tourists’ emotional experiences in
predicting destination image, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions: A case of wellness
tourism. Tourism Management Perspectives, 28, 41–52. doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2018.07.004
Söderlund, M., & Rosengren, S. (2007). Receiving word-of-mouth from the service customer:
An emotion-based effectiveness assessment. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 14
(2), 123–136. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2006.10.001
Soliman, M. S. (2015). Pro-poor tourism in protected areas–Opportunities and
challenges:“The case of Fayoum, Egypt”. Anatolia, 26(1), 61–72. doi:10.1080/
13032917.2014.906353
Stylidis, D., & Cherifi, B. (2018). Characteristics of destination image: Visitors and non-
visitors’ images of London. Tourism Review, 73(1), 55–67. doi:10.1108/TR-05-2017-0090
Stylidis, D., Shani, A., & Belhassen, Y. (2017). Testing an integrated destination image model
across residents and tourists. Tourism Management, 58, 184–195. doi:10.1016/j.
tourman.2016.10.014
Sun, X., Chi, C. G.-Q., & Xu, H. (2013). Developing destination loyalty: The case of Hainan
Island. Annals of Tourism Research, 43, 547–577. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2013.04.006
Tan, W.-K., & Wu, C.-E. (2016). An investigation of the relationships among destination
familiarity, destination image and future visit intention. Journal of Destination Marketing
& Management, 5(3), 214–226. doi:10.1016/j.jdmm.2015.12.008
Tasci, A. D., & Gartner, W. C. (2007). Destination image and its functional relationships.
Journal of Travel Research, 45(4), 413–425. doi:10.1177/0047287507299569
Teo, T. S., & Pok, S. H. (2003). Adoption of WAP-enabled mobile phones among Internet
users. Omega, 31(6), 483–498. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2003.08.005
Tsai, S. P. (2012). Place attachment and tourism marketing: Investigating international
tourists in Singapore. International Journal of Tourism Research, 14(2), 139–152.
doi:10.1002/jtr.842
UNWTO. (2018). UNWTO world tourism barometer. Retrieved from http://cf.cdn.unwto.
org/sites/all/files/pdf/unwto_barom18_03_june_excerpt.pdf
Vermeulen, I. E., & Seegers, D. (2009). Tried and tested: The impact of online hotel reviews
on consumer consideration. Tourism Management, 30(1), 123–127. doi:10.1016/j.
tourman.2008.04.008
Wang, C.-Y., & Hsu, M. K. (2010). The relationships of destination image, satisfaction, and
behavioral intentions: An integrated model. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 27(8),
829–843. doi:10.1080/10548408.2010.527249
WTTC. (2018). Travel & tourism economic impact 2018: Egypt. Retrieved from https://www.
wttc.org/-/media/files/reports/economic-impact...2018/egypt2018.pdf
Yang, J., Yuan, B., & Hu, P. (2009). Tourism destination image and visit intention: Examining
the role of familiarity. Journal of China Tourism Research, 5(2), 174–187. doi:10.1080/
19388160902910557
Ying, H. L., & Chung, C. M. Y. (2007). The effects of single-message single-source mixed
word-of mouth on product attitude and purchase intention. Asia Pacific Journal of
Marketing, 19(1), 75–86. doi:10.1108/13555850710720911
Zhang, H., Wu, Y., & Buhalis, D. (2018). A model of perceived image, memorable tourism
experiences and revisit intention. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 8,
326–336. doi:10.1016/j.jdmm.2017.06.004
548 M. SOLIMAN

Appendix 1.
Constructs and sources for measurement scales

Construct Measure Source

Attitude toward revisiting Egypt (Han et al., 2010; C. Hsu & Huang, 2012;
For me, revisiting Egypt for travel is: Huang & Hsu, 2009; Lam & Hsu, 2004, Lam &
Hsu, 2006)
ATT1 Extremely unenjoyable (1)/Extremely
enjoyable (7).
ATT2 Extremely unpleasant (1)/Extremely pleasant
(7).
ATT3 Extremely unsatisfactory (1)/Extremely
satisfactory (7).
ATT4 Extremely unfavorable (1)/Extremely favorable
(7).
ATT5 Extremely boring (1)/Extremely fun (7).
Subjective norms (Han et al., 2010; Han & Kim, 2010; Huang &
In the near future, Hsu, 2009; Lam & Hsu, 2006)
SN1 Most people important to me think that
I should revisit Egypt
SN2 Most people who are important to me would
want me to revisit Egypt
SN3 People whose opinions are valued to me
would prefer that I should revisit Egypt
Perceived behavioral control (Han & Kim, 2010; Huang & Hsu, 2009; Lam &
In the near future, Hsu, 2006)
PBC1 Whether or not I revisit Egypt is completely
up to me
PBC2 I am confident that I can revisit Egypt
PBC3 I have money to revisit Egypt
PBC4 I have time to revisit Egypt
PBC5 I have opportunities to visit Egypt
Travel Motivation (Hsu & Huang, 2012; Huang & Hsu, 2009)
MOT1 Visit some cultural and historical attractions
MOT2 Increase knowledge about other places
MOT3 Experience different cultures and traditions
MOT4 Know more about Egypt as a cradle of
civilization
MOT5 Interact with Egyptians
MOT6 Release work pressure
MOT7 Enjoy happy time with family
MOT8 Relax and rest
MOT9 Enjoy happy time with family/friends who
travel together with you
MOT10 Have some time for a break from routine life
MOT11 Feel the magnificence of modern Egypt
MOT12 Visit a destination that most people think
deserves to visit
MOT13 Experience the famous cities (Sharm el-Shaikh,
Hurgada, etc.)
MOT14 Fulfil curiosity about Egypt

(Continued )
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM ADMINISTRATION 549

(Continued).
Construct Measure Source
MOT15 Go shopping
MOT16 Buy hand-made handicrafts
MOT17 Buy souvenirs
Electronic word of mouth (Jalilvand & Samiei, 2012; Jalilvand et al.,
2012)
eWOM1 I often read tourists’ online travel reviews to be
aware of destinations make good feelings on
others.
eWOM2 To make sure I select the correct destination,
I read other tourists’ online travel reviews
eWOM3 I consult other travelers’ online travel reviews
to aid select an attractive destination.
eWOM4 I frequently gather information from tourists’
online travel reviews before I travel to Egypt.
eWOM5 Tourists’ online travel reviews make me
confident in traveling to Egypt
Destination image (Cognitive destination image) (Beerli & Martin, 2004; Chen & Tsai, 2007; Tan
& Wu, 2016; Zhang et al., 2018)
IMG1 Egypt offers personal safety
IMGI2 Egypt has a good quality of life
IMG3 Egypt is a clean destination
IMG4 Egypt has a good name and reputation
IMG5 Egyptian are hospitable and friendly
IMG6 Egypt has a good nightlife
IMG7 Egypt is a good place for shopping
IMG8 Egypt has a rich diversity of local food
IMG9 Egypt has convenient local transport system
IMG10 Egypt has a great variety of fauna and flora
IMG11 Egypt has a spectacular landscape
IMG12 Egypt has its unique ways of life and customs
IMG13 Egypt has a good weather and beaches
IMG14 Egypt has a good value for money
Destination Familiarity (informational familiarity) (Tan & Wu, 2016; Yang et al., 2009)
I obtain information about Egypt from:
FAM1 Brochures/pamphlets about Egypt
FAM2 Destination official website
FAM3 Friends and relatives/WOM
FAM4 Newspaper and magazines
FAM5 Travel guidebook/Travel agency
Revisit intention (Huang & Hsu, 2009; Zhang et al., 2018)
In the near future,
RI1 I tend to visit Egypt again
RI2 I’d love to revisit Egypt
RI3 I plan to revisit Egypt