5.5 pg Tourism and Aging Article..including Title pg...of Southeast Louisiana

articleinfo

Article history:

Received 8 November 2013 Accepted 4 August 2014 Available online

Keywords:

Elderly tourist Involvement Perceived value Satisfaction with trip experience Leisure life satisfaction

Overall quality of life Revisit intention

1. Introduction

Forecasts estimate that the number of people over 65 will more than double, consisting 26% of the world's population by 2050 (Haub, 2011). This means that the percentage of elderly tourists, who already make up a significant segment of the hospitality and tourism market (with their substantial population portion as well as their purchasing power), will increase (Bai, Jang, Cai, & O'Leary, 2001; Lohmann & Danielsson, 2001; Schro€der & Widmann, 2007). The size of the elderly tourists has great market potential and economic significance for the hospitality and tourism industry (Bai et al., 2001). The tourism industry has recognized this market po- tential for a number of years, and tourism policy makers as well as industry practitioners have been focusing on developing competi- tive business and marketing strategies to target elderly tourists (Bai et al., 2001; Sedgley, Pritchard, & Morgan, 2011).

* Corresponding author. 342 Wallace Hall (0429), Blacksburg, Virginia, 24061. Tel.: þ1 540 838 5289; fax: þ1 540 231 8313.

E-mail addresses: [email protected] (H. Kim), [email protected] (E. Woo), samil@vt. edu (M. Uysal).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2014.08.002

0261-5177/© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

abstract

The main purpose of this research is to investigate the relationship between the travel behavior of elderly tourists and overall quality of life. Specifically, the study examines the interrelationships between six main constructs: involvement, perceived value, satisfaction with trip experience, leisure life satisfaction, overall quality of life, and revisit intention. Using a sample drawn from elderly tourists in South Korea, the research model investigates nine hypotheses using a structural equation modeling approach. The results show that all nine of the hypotheses are supported.

© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Accordingly, the scholarly literature has examined elderly tourists and their travel behavior, especially travel-related activ- ities, socio-demographic characteristics, preferences, and tourist motivation (e.g., Anderson & Langmeyer, 1982; Bai et al., 2001; Guinn, 1980; Jang, Bai, Hu, & Wu, 2009; Javalgi, Thomas, & Rao, 1992; Norman, Daniels, McGuire, & Norman, 2001; Shoemaker, 1989). For instance, Hsu, Cai, and Wong (2007) examined elderly tourist motivation from Beijing and Shanghai. Based on a qualita- tive survey and review of motivation theories, the study proposed a conceptual model of tourism motivation for China's elderly tourist. Another example is a study conducted by Shoemaker (1989), who explored the segmentation of the elderly tourist pleasure travel market. The study found that the elderly tourist market is not one large homogenous group but rather that it can be segmented into smaller homogenous groups based on reasons for pleasure travel.

In order to understand the elderly's behavior, major psychoso- cial theories such as disengagement theory, activity theory, and gerotranscendence theory have been developed and applied. Cumming and Henry (1961) proposed disengagement theory. They mentioned that since a reduction in activity is a consequence of the aging process, elderly tourists gradually choose to withdraw from

466 H. Kim et al. / Tourism Management 46 (2015) 465e476

active life and focus on inner fulfillment. That is, ceasing partici- pation in leisure activities and social roles lead to more life satis- faction in older adulthood (e.g., Ananian & Janke, 2010). On the other hand, activity theory was introduced in response to the critique of the disengagement theory, and has played a central role in gerontology (Nimrod, 2007). Activity theory explains that the increased discretionary or free time available to retired individuals provides the opportunity for maintaining high activity levels or roles that are essential for life satisfaction and enrichment (Lefrancois, Leclerc, & Polin, 1997). That is, engagement in mean- ingful activity is linked to life satisfaction. Based on this theory, we hypothesized that “vacation experience” itself can contribute to elderly people's overall quality of life. In this study “vacation experience” is considered a classificatory term used by elderly people to describe their (re)construction of a recent vacation experience, which may include one or several types of activities. In other words, “vacation experience” may be a culmination of a number of activities, types of activities, and strength of those activities.

In the leisure industry, many studies have supported activity theory and demonstrated that elderly people's high level of involvement and activity contributes to their quality of life (Fernandez-Ballesteros, Zamarron, & Ruiz, 2001; Iso-Ahola, Jack- son, & Dunn, 1994; Menec & Chipperfield, 1997; Palmore, 1979; Riddick & Stewart, 1994; Silverstein & Parker, 2002). For instance, Silverstein and Parker (2002) examined whether changes in leisure activities were related to quality of life among elderly in Sweden. The results suggested that those people increasing their partici- pation across different activities tended to perceive an improve- ment in their life satisfaction. Another example conducted by Menec and Chipperfield (1997) examined the potential mediating role of participation in leisure activities between perceived control and well-being in the elderly. They found that an internal locus of control was related to participation in leisure activities, which in turn affected the elderly's increased life satisfaction.

However, the effects may not apply in all contexts to all sub- groups and all activities (Iwasaki & Smale, 1998; Nimrod, 2007). For instance, Nimrod (2007) examined the structure of leisure activ- ities, benefits of leisure, and well-being of old people, revealing that not all types of activities had a positive impact on retirees' well- being. Only a few types of activities, such as cultural activities and enrichment activities, affect retiree's well-being; TV and radio, meanwhile, had a negative impact on their well-being.

In the tourism industry, limited studies have focused on how the elderly's travel experiences or activities affect their overall quality of life or well-being (Lee & Tideswell, 2005; Milman, 1998; Wei & Milman, 2002). Wei and Milman (2002), for example, investigated the interrelationships between elderly tourist partic- ipation in activities, overall satisfaction with travel experiences, and quality of life. The results showed that elderly tourists' activity levels are significantly related to their quality of life. A study con- ducted by Lee and Tideswell (2005) also tried to understand the specific travel behavior of elderly Koreans. They found that vaca- tion experiences improve their quality of life and creates new in- terests in their lives.

Even though several studies have investigated how tourism experiences of elderly affect their quality of life, there is still limited research on the link between tourism experience and the overall quality of life of elderly tourists, especially the relationship be- tween the level of travel involvement and quality of life. Milman (1998) examined how tourism activity affects elderly tourists' quality of life. The study found that travel by itself may not be a change agent for level of happiness, but there might be other intervening variables, such as level of the travel activity, that could contribute to changes in travelers' quality of life.

Therefore, the main purpose of this research is to understand elderly tourists' travel behavior and its relationship to their quality of life. Specifically, the current study investigates the in- terrelationships between six major constructs: level of involve- ment, perceived value, satisfaction with trip experience, leisure life satisfaction, Quality of Life (QOL), and revisit intention. The following sections attempt to establish the theoretical in- terrelationships between the constructs.

Also, the term ‘elderly’ has to be clearly defined. The elderly age group has included a range of different ages, from 50 to 55 to 60e65 years, depending on the specific tourism study (Patterson, 2006). However, literature in gerontology has been reasonably consistent in defining the ‘elderly’ according to their retirement age of 65 and older. Thus, our study defines ‘the elderly’ as individuals aged 65 or over.

2. Literature review and hypothesis development

2.1. Involvement

Researchers and marketers are interested in understanding and predicting the complex behavior of consumers. Involvement is a widely used concept in consumer behavior and one of the impor- tant psychographic constructs because of its potential effect on both people's attitudes towards an activity and their behavior with respect to decision making (Arora, 1985; Josiam, Smeaton, & Clements, 1999).

Many researchers have attempted to define involvement; however, there is lack of consistent definition. One definition of involvement is “a person's perceived relevance of the object based on inherent needs, values, and interests” (Zaichkowsky, 1985, p.342). Also, involvement is defined as an individual's level of in- terest, the importance of an object to an individual, or the centrality of an object to an individuals' ego structure (Zaichkowsky, 1994). Selin and Howard (1988) defined involvement as “the state of identification existing between an individual and a recreational activity, at one point in time, characterized by some level of enjoyment and self-expression being achieved through the activ- ity” (p. 237). In this study, involvement is defined as the degree of interest in an activity and the affective response associated with that interest (Manfredo, 1989).

Clements and Josiam (1995) examined the role of involvement in travel decision-making. They tried to assess respondents' levels of involvement in their decision to travel over spring break not only to assess the ability of the involvement construct to predict the decision to travel, but also to analyze involvement and destination selection. The research findings indicated both that individuals with high levels of involvement are more likely to travel than those with low involvement and those respondents with high levels of involvement are more likely to travel abroad. Moreover, involve- ment is a significant predictor of some aspects of the decision to travel.

The study by Prebensen, Woo, and Uysal (2013) indicated that in tourist experience, involvement is a core antecedent since the tourist has already decided to go on holiday and to participate in certain tourism activities while staying at the destination. That is, the level of involvement affects the level of participation in co- creating experience value positively. Similarly, Chen and Tsai (2008) examined the interrelationship between perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty of TV travel product shopping, while considering the moderator effect of involvement. The results showed that perceived value has positive influences on satisfaction and loyalty. Moreover, the moderating effects of involvement significantly affect the perceived levels of value, satisfaction, and loyalty models. Specifically, the higher the level of involvement, the

larger the likelihood that perceived value will lead to greater customer loyalty. Another study, undertaken by Lee and Beeler (2009), investigated the relationships between motivation, involvement, service quality, demographics, satisfaction, and future intention. The findings showed that motivation, service quality, and involvement are significant predictors of satisfaction and future intention. That is, when tourists were highly involved in the pro- grams and activities in the festival, they were more likely to be satisfied.

A significant number of leisure studies have examined how increased involvement in leisure activities such as traveling might enhance elderly people's life satisfaction while improving their life expectancy and health condition (e.g., Hendricks & Cutler, 2003; Lu, 2011; Teaff, 1985). Van der Meer (2008), for instance, reported that elderly people involved in leisure activities take part in society, which positively influences their life satisfaction. Moreover, a few theories on aging attempt to address the leisure involvement of elderly and how this influences their overall life satisfaction. The activity theory proposes that the way to achieve greater life satis- faction in older adulthood is through one's ability to maintain or increase involvement in leisure activity. Accordingly, the present work puts forward the following hypotheses:

H1. Involvement has a positive influence on perceived value among the elderly.

H2. Involvement has a positive influence on satisfaction with trip experience among the elderly.

2.2. Perceived value

Perceived value has received growing attention in recent years (Prebensen et al., 2013). Marketing practitioners and researchers have identified that the construct of perceived value is one of the most influential measures of customer satisfaction and loyalty (e.g., Cronin, Brady, & Hult, 2000; Sweeney, Soutar, & Johnson, 1999). The reasons are that perceived value not only directly affects future behavior such as repurchase intention and word of mouth referrals (Brady & Cronin, 2001), but it also increases destination competi- tiveness (e.g., Pechlaner, Smeral, & Matzier, 2002; Petrick, 2003).

Although perceived value has been receiving more attention in research, there is no clear definition of the perceived value construct (Woodruff, 1997; Zeithaml, 1988). Cravens, Holland, Lamb, and Moncrieff (1988) argued that consumers' value perception is the ration or trade-off between quality and price. Holbrook (1999) defined value as an “interactive relativistic pref- erence experience” (p. 5). The most commonly accepted definition of perceived value was given by Zeithaml (1988), who defined four types of values (low price; whatever I want in a product; the quality I get for the price I pay; what I get for what I give) and synthesized the four dimensions in one overall concept. Zeithaml defined value as “consumer's overall assessment of the utility of a product based on perception of what is received and what it given” (p. 4).

In this study, perceived value is defined tourists' value percep- tion as “the process by which a tourist receives, selects, organizes, and interprets information based on the various experiences at the destination, to create a meaningful picture of the value of desti- nation experience” (Prebensen et al., 2013, p. 245).

In much of the previous research, perceived value has been operationalized with a single-item scale such as “value for money” (Prebensen et al., 2013); however, Bolton and Drew (1991) pointed out that perceived value should not be considered as the outcome of a trade-off between overall quality and sacrifice because perceived value is complex. Moreover, a single item does not address the whole concept of perceived value (Gallarza & Saura, 2006; Sweeney & Soutar, 2001). Therefore, measuring multiple

components of perceived value has been suggested by many re- searchers (e.g., Gallarza & Saura, 2006; Sweeney & Soutar, 2001). A broader theoretical framework of perceived value was developed by Sheth, Newman, and Gross (1991). Based on the their founda- tion, perceived value items were developed for use in a retail pur- chase situations in order to determine what consumption values drive purchase attitude and behavior (Sweeney & Soutar, 2001). In order to measure the perceived value, the researchers developed four distinct dimensions: emotional, social, quality/performance, and price/value for money. The results revealed that multiple value dimensions performed better than a single value item such as “value for money.”

A significant number of previous studies have suggested that perceived value directly leads to favorable outcomes (Chen & Chen, 2010) such as satisfaction and intentions or loyalty in behavior (e.g., Anderson, Fornell, & Lehmann, 1994; Baker, Parasuraman, Grewal, & Voss, 2002; Chen & Chen, 2010; Lee, Yoon, & Lee, 2007; Williams & Soutar, 2009). Williams and Soutar (2009), for instance, investigated the relationship between value, satisfaction, and behavior intention in an adventure tourism setting. The results indicated that value had strong positive effects on overall satis- faction and future intention. Another study conducted by Prebensen et al. (2013) examined the effects of antecedents and consequences of the perceived value of an on-site trip experience. Based on the previous literature review, they developed a frame- work of perceived value experience and its antecedents (such as motivation, involvement, and knowledge) and consequences (such as satisfaction and future intention). The results showed that perceived value has a positive effect on satisfaction and loyalty.

A review of previous research suggests a strong link between perceived value and satisfaction. Consequently, the following hy- pothesis is provided:

H3. Perceived value of trip experience has a positive influence on satisfaction with trip experience among elderly.

The hypotheses under involvement and perceived value are of confirmatory in nature has been substantiated in different settings with respect to vacation and trip experience. However, there is, if any, very limited empirical evidence that links such constructs to satisfaction with life or subjective well-being which is under the domain of quality of life (QOL) research. The proceeding section is intended to delineate this connection.

2.3. Quality of life (QOL)

Many different disciplines, including psychology, sociology, and gerontology considers quality of life in slightly different terms, such as happiness, psychological well-being, subjective well-being, life satisfaction, quality of life (Gilbert & Abdullah, 2004). Those terms have been used interchangeably. Furthermore, quality of life has been defined in many different ways (Sirgy, 2002); there are, for instance, more than 100 definitions of QOL and models (Andereck & Nyaupane, 2011) because it is clearly difficult to distinguish be- tween such terms as “well-being”, “welfare”, and “happiness” (Puczko & Smith, 2011).

QOL can be defined in either a uni-dimensional or multidi- mensional nature. There are many examples of uni-dimensional definitions for the concept of quality of life, but the uni- dimensional concept has been criticized on a number of grounds. The major reason is that it is impossible to obtain estimates of in- ternal consistency. Further, using one single question has limited utility for smaller group comparisons (Cummins, 1997). Therefore, the majority of QOL definitions stress the multidimensional nature of the concept, which typically manifests itself in the specification of a number of QOL domains. In this study, QOL is examined from a

H. Kim et al. / Tourism Management 46 (2015) 465e476 467

468 H. Kim et al. / Tourism Management 46 (2015) 465e476

multidimensional perspective. It refers to satisfaction within in- dividual's life domains and overall quality of life.

Even though there is a general agreement that overall perceived quality of life is a composite of satisfaction through the spillover effects of a number of life domains, there is little agreement on the key domains that need to be included to cover the construct of overall quality of life. Identifying robust QOL do- mains and indicators remain problematic (Dolnicar, Yanamandram, & Cliff, 2012; Sirgy, 2002). Among the many different life domains, the importance of the leisure life domain to overall quality of life has been extensively researched and shows a positive relationship between leisure life satisfaction and overall quality of life (Gilbert & Abdullah, 2004; London, Crandall, & Seals, 1977; Silverstein & Parker, 2002; Spiers & Walker, 2009). London et al. (1977), for instance, examined the influence of leisure satisfaction (compared to job satisfaction) on overall life satisfac- tion. They found that both leisure and job satisfaction accounted for meaningful variation in life satisfaction. Moreover, they found that job satisfaction and leisure satisfaction contributed relatively little to overall quality of life of minorities and other often “disadvantaged”. Similarly, Spiers and Walker (2009) examined how ethnicity and leisure satisfaction affected people's happiness, peacefulness, and overall quality of life and found that overall leisure satisfaction significantly affected happiness, peacefulness, and quality of life.

The first examination on the significance of vacation experience to overall QOL was conducted by Neal, Sirgy, and Uysal (1999). They investigated the significance of vacation experience on leisure life and overall quality of life. Their study results showed that satis- faction with tourism services contributes to satisfaction in leisure life, which in turn affects overall quality of life. Neal, Uysal, and Sirgy (2007) conducted a follow-up study to examine the moder- ating effect of length of stay. The results revealed that satisfaction with tourism services affects satisfaction in leisure life. Moreover, overall quality of life is more evident for tourists with extended stays compared to tourists with shorter stays. Several other studies also examined the direct effect of tourism experience on overall quality of life (e.g., Dolnicar et al., 2012; Gilbert & Abdullah, 2004; Sirgy, Kruger, Lee, & Grace, 2011). A study by Sirgy et al. (2011) also found that both positive and negative effects on tourists' overall sense of well-being were associated with specific experiences of a trip. The findings of the study demonstrated that positive and negative effects generated from trip experiences do affect overall satisfaction in the 13 different life domains. For instance, positive event experience affects overall satisfaction with leisure and travel life domain, which in turn affects overall life satisfaction. Gilbert and Abdullah (2004) compared the sense of well-being experi- enced by a group taking a holiday with a group not on a holiday. They found that people who have recently taken a vacation expe- rience a higher overall quality of life both before and after the vacation. In other words, vacation experiences affect the level of quality of life.

In order to measure quality of life, several different theories have been used, including telic theories, pleasure and pain, activity theories, associationistic theories, judgment theory, and bottom-up spillover theory. Bottom-up spillover theory is the most popularly used theory among these (e.g., Diener, 1984; Diener, Suh, Lucas, & Smith, 1999; Sirgy, 2002; Sirgy & Lee, 2006). The basic premise of the bottom-up spillover theory is that overall quality of life is affected by satisfaction with all life domains and sub-domains. Overall life satisfaction is considered to be on the top of a satis- faction hierarchy. For instance, overall life satisfaction is influenced by satisfaction with family, social, leisure and recreation, health, work, finances, and travel. Satisfaction with a particular life domain will be influenced by lower levels of life concerns within that

domain (Kruger, 2012). The bottom-up spillover theory is also imbedded in this particular study.

In the elderly market segment, pleasure trip experience and leisure activities are an important issue affecting the overall quality of life (e.g., Javalgi et al., 1992; Lee & Tideswell, 2005; McGuire, Boyd, & Tedrick, 1996). The reason is that travel experience can help elderly people's physical and mental fitness and lead to greater life satisfaction.

With this regard, overall QOL is defined as elderly's global evaluations of their life satisfaction while leisure life satisfaction is regarded as evaluation of specific sub-life domain (leisure life) satisfaction in this study.

A review of previous research and theory suggest strong in- terrelationships among satisfaction with trip experience, leisure life satisfaction, and overall quality of life. Therefore, we hypothesize:

H4. Satisfaction with trip experience has a positive influence on leisure life satisfaction among the elderly.

H5. Leisure life satisfaction has a positive influence on overall quality of life among the elderly.

H6. Satisfaction with trip experience has a positive influence on overall quality of life among the elderly.

2.4. Revisit intention

There are many practical reasons for studying tourists' satis- faction levels. The major reason is that tourists' satisfaction is a significant determinant of behavior intention (e.g., Hutchinson, Lai, & Wang, 2009; Kozak, 2001; Um, Chon, & Ro, 2006). According to the model presented by Zeithaml, Berry, and Parasuraman (1996), behavior intentions can be captured by such measures as repurchase intentions, word of mouth, loyalty, complaining behavior, and price sensitivity. A number of studies have used one or more of these five proposed constructs to examine the outcomes of satisfaction in the retail and tourism fields.

Among these five constructs, revisit intention is viewed as the results of the tourists' evaluation of the travel experience (Burton, Sheather, & Roberts, 2003). When tourists have more enjoyable experience than expected, they are more likely to have plans to return in the future (Hui, Wan, & Ho, 2007; Ross, 1993).

Satisfaction is one of the most preferred evaluation constructs in explaining revisit intention (e.g., Bigne, Sanchez, & Sanchez, 2001; Bowen, 2001; Kozak, 2001; Kozak & Rimmington, 2000; Oh, 1999). Several studies investigated the impact of satisfaction with trip experience on tourists' intention to return in the future (Hutchinson et al., 2009; Kozak & Rimmington, 2000; Ross, 1993). Kozak and Rimmington (2000), for instance, found that the more satisfied the tourists were with their visits, the more likely they were to return and recommend the destination to others. Similarly, Hutchinson et al. (2009) examined the relationships between golf- travelers' perception of quality, value, and satisfaction on their behavior intentions and identified that satisfaction had significant influences on the intention to revisit in the future. Previous research has confirmed that the level of overall satisfaction with holiday experiences has the greatest impact on the intention to revisit the same destination.

Leisure life satisfaction is also a predictor of leisure participation in the future (e.g., Losier, Bourque, & Vallerand, 1993; Walker, Halpenny, Spiers, & Deng, 2011). Leisure life satisfaction results from the gratification of psychological needs (Tinsley & Tinsley, 1986), but the potential for satisfaction of psychological needs motivates individuals to enjoy and reengage in the activity (Losier et al., 1993). In fact, a number of studies have found that enjoy- ment of an activity led to subsequent behavior involvement (Losier

et al., 1993). For instance, Losier et al. (1993) developed a motiva- tional model of leisure participation to examine the factors that may encourage involvement by the elderly in leisure activities. The results indicated that leisure motivation affects leisure satisfaction, which in turn affect leisure participation. That is, higher levels of leisure satisfaction led to greater levels of leisure participation in elderly.

QOL also has an impact on future behavior (Mannell & Kleiber, 1997). The effect of QOL on activity participation has been stud- ied intensively in leisure research (Mannell & Kleiber, 1997). Leisure studies have found that QOL affects leisure participation. Mannell (1993) indicated that, among the elderly, those with a higher level of life satisfaction are more willing to freely choose and continuously engage in recreational activities than those with a lower level of life satisfaction. In tourism research, Lin (2012) found that cuisine experience and QOL influenced hot springs tourists' revisit intentions. Specifically, the study found that QOL is posi- tively related to revisit intention.

Consequently, the following hypotheses are presented:

H7. Satisfaction with trip experience has a positive influence on revisit intention among the elderly.

H8. Leisure life satisfaction has a positive influence on revisit intention among the elderly.

H9. Overall quality of life has a positive influence on revisit intention among the elderly.

A review of literature suggested positive interrelationships be- tween the six constructs: involvement, perceived value, satisfaction with trip experience, leisure life satisfaction, QOL, and revisit intention. Based on the previous literature review, the theoretical model and 9 hypotheses can be depicted as seen Fig. 1.

3. Research design

3.1. Study population and data collection

The questionnaire was distributed to the elderly (aged over 65) residing in Jeju Island, South Korea. The target destination was selected because the population of the elderly there has steadily grown, and it is on the verge of being an aged society (14% of the population is over age 65). The questionnaire was originally

developed in English and then translated into Korean. Several Korean professors with language proficiency in both English and Korean checked the correspondence of meaning between the two versions. After checking the equivalence of the translation, elderly welfare centers, education centers, gathering clubs, and elderly associations in Jeju were contacted from February to April in 2013 and asked to distribute the questionnaire to residents over the age of 65 who had been retired over three months. In order to reduce errors or misunderstanding in reading questions, several well- trained assistants were employed in each place to help the elderly to fill out the questionnaire completely. Despite of the as- sistants' efforts, respondents with aged between 55 and 64 were included. The contextualized target would consist of those that are retirees in the study; most of the ones that did not fall into 65þ categories (55e64) with some missing values were excluded in the subsequent analysis. Thus, of the total 290 surveys, 208 surveys were used for the analysis in this study.

3.2. Questionnaire design and measurement of construct

The study is designed to measure elderly tourists' perceptions toward involvement, perceived value, satisfaction with trip expe- rience, leisure life satisfaction, overall quality of life, and revisit intention in relation to travel behavior. Each construct has multiple questions measured with 5-point Likert scales based on previous literature.

Ten involvement items were used to measure involvement as suggested by Kyle and Chick (2004), and Prebensen, Woo, Chen, and Uysal (2012). Those 10 items were categorized into two different categories based on previous research: Risk probability and Self-Identify. The pre-determined two involvement di- mensions were confirmed with their reliability. Two composite variables were used as observed indicators to test the construct of involvement (Appendix A).

To measure satisfaction with trip experience, four items were used based on existing literature (e.g., Neal, Usyal, & Sirgy, 2007; Yoon & Uysal, 2005), including: (1) “My overall evaluation of my most recent destination experience is positive”; (2) “My overall evaluation of my most recent tourism experience is favorable”; (3) “I am satisfied with my most recent”.

Leisure life satisfaction was measured by three items: satisfac- tion with their “leisure life,” “leisure time,” and “spare time

H. Kim et al. / Tourism Management 46 (2015) 465e476 469

Fig. 1. Theoretical model and hypotheses.

470 H. Kim et al. / Tourism Management 46 (2015) 465e476

activities” (e.g., Grzeskowiak, Sirgy, Lee, & Claiborne, 2006; Neal et al., 2007; Sirgy, Kruger, Lee, & Yu, 2011).

In order to measure elderly tourist quality of life (subjective well-being), six observed indicators were adopted from previous gerontology and tourism literature (e.g., Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985; Diener, Horwitz, & Emmons, 1985; Sirgy, 2002) such as “Overall, I felt happy upon my return from that trip”, “Overall, my experience with this trip was memorable, having enriched my quality of life”, “After the trip, I felt that I led a meaningful and fulfilling life” and so forth.

Revisit intention was measured by four items adopted from previous research (Huang & Hsu, 2009; Um et al., 2006) such as “I would like to recommend others to visit the destination”, “Revisiting the destination would be worthwhile”, “I will revisit the destination”, “I would like to stay more days in the destination”.

It is important to mention that in this present study, taking a vacation trip is linked to outcomes by asking the respondent if, as a result of this particular trip, he/she may think that the trip enhanced or added to his/her well-being. In this regard, the trip was a cause of the outcome variables (sense of well-being and revisit intention) as measured in the study. The line of research in quality of life has support for this type of causality establishment (Gilbert & Abdullah, 2004; Neal et al., 2007). This also assumes that the way in which study questions are anchored would not lead to a level of discourse, meaning respondents are directed to answer the outcome variable(s) in relation to the vacation trip in mind, thus ascertaining implicitly “causality” of the trip taken in relation to perceived importance to well-being and or revisit behavior. How- ever, one can also easily argue that certain lifestyles could also lead to more satisfying life/improved sense of well-being, thus satis- faction with life in general. Naturally, such lifestyles can have positive outcomes and consequences. The study implies a one trip thus basing the study on a one trip phenomenon regardless of its nature or type.

4. Data analysis and results

Since Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is an appropriate statistical tool to measure the relationships among unobserved constructs based on prior empirical research or theory (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 2010), this study employed SEM pro- cedure by using AMOS 20.0 with the Maximum Likelihood esti- mation. One exogenous variabled involvementdand five endogenous variablesdperceived values, satisfaction with trip experience, leisure life satisfaction, quality of life, and revisit intentiondwere tested in the proposed model.

Firstly, data was screened using SPSS version 20.0 to see if there is any violation of assumptions. As a result, no missing values and outliers were detected and the observed variables are normally distributed (less than two of absolute values of univariate skew- ness, less than three of the absolute values of univariate kurtosis). Further, the data do not violate multivariate normality assumption. Therefore, the data were appropriate for further analysis by SEM analysis.

A total 290 respondents were asked to participate in this study. Of these, data from 208 was used in this analysis. The descriptive analysis showed that female respondents (53.0%) marginally out- numbered their male counterparts (47.0%). In terms of age varia- tion, it ranged from 65 to 81 with an average age of 71, In addition, approximately 36.0% of respondents' income comes from their pensions, 30.0% of respondents relied on their own saving, and 12.0% comes from help from their children. The detailed de- mographic information is summarized in Table 1. Moreover, re- spondents' recent vacation trip behaviors have been asked.

Table 1

Respondents profile (N 1⁄4 208). Variables Frequency (%)

Gender Male

Female Age

65e70 71e75 76e80 81e85

Education High school or less Some college/Associate degree College degree (bachelor) Graduate degree (master) Graduate degree (doctoral)

Income source Pension

Own saving Children's donation Relatives or friends' donation Social benefit Salary (if you are working) Others

98 (47.1) 110 (52.9)

96 (46.2) 81 (38.9) 29 (13.9) 2 (1.0)

41 (19.7) 61 (29.3) 59 (28.4) 29 (13.9) 18 (8.7)

75 (36.1) 63 (30.3) 25 (12.0) 4 (1.9) 28 (13.5) 9 (4.3)

4 (2.0)

Regarding the actual length of the trip, the average 4.2 nights away from home. Moreover, 23.1% of the respondents traveled with spouse, 19.6% with social gathering, and 18.3% with relatives and friends respectively.

Respondents were asked to rate items according to the perceived importance of each indicator of construct. The mean scores of the composite indicators of involvement show that the mean of ‘Risk probability’ is 3.59 and ‘Self-Identify’ is 3.33. The mean score and standard deviation of indicators of perceived values, satisfaction with travel experience, leisure life domain, quality of life, and revisit intention are presented in Appendix B.

4.1. Measurement model testing

Each construct was analyzed with Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to confirm the measurement scale property in the model. Jo€reskog (1993) suggested that an item having a coefficient alpha below 0.30 should not be included in the analysis. A series of confirmatory factor analyses were performed. As a result, each construct is confirmed by specifying the relationship between the latent constructs and their indicators, exceeding a coefficient alpha .70, and thereby no indicator in each construct was removed.

Next, the overall measurement model fit was tested. CFA was performed to test whether collected data fit proposed model (Byrne, 1998; Hair et al., 2010). A total of two indicators of exoge- nous variable (involvement) and 23 indicators of endogenous var- iables (six from perceived value, four from satisfaction with travel experience, three from leisure life domain, six from quality of life, and four from revisit intention) were used in the measurement model. The results of the estimation of CFA of the overall model were acceptable in terms of the range of goodness-of-fit indices. The Chi-square value was 416.242 with 255 degrees of freedom (p < .000), which showed that the model was not good enough. However, the sample size is likely to inflate the sensitiveness of Chi- square statistics in structural equation modeling analysis (Bollen & Long, 1993; Byrne, 1998). The RMSEA value was .05, which met the requirement of good fit of less than .08 (Byrne, 1998). Other fit indices also show that the specified model was acceptable (NFI 1⁄4 .89, CFI 1⁄4 .954, RMR 1⁄4 .021). Therefore, the model was not modified.

In order to check construct reliability, discriminant validity, and convergent validity, the study examined the completely standardized loading, the construct reliability, the error variance extracted, and the average variance extracted (AVE) of each construct. Table 2 presents the summary of the results. First, all measurement items were significantly loaded exceeding the critical level of the t value (p < .05; Hatcher, 1994). The average variance extracted (AVE) of five constructs (perceived value, satisfaction with travel experience, leisure life satisfaction, quality of life, and revisit intention) exceeded the minimum criterion of .5 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). However, the AVE for involvement is marginally below the .5 cutoff. Composite reliability of each construct ranged from .59 to .90, confirming the internal consis- tency of each construct. Therefore, all six constructs in this study were considered to be reliable and valid; thus, we proceeded to test the structural model.

4.2. Structural model testing

The main purpose of the study is to examine an integrated model of elderly tourists' quality of life by examining the rela- tionship between their travel involvement, perceived value, satis- faction, leisure life domain satisfaction, quality of life, and revisit intention. Hence, the relationships among six constructs in this model were tested using a structural equation model with the maximum likelihood method. The review of the structural model showed that the Chi-square value was 485.835 with 262 degrees of freedom (p 1⁄4 .00). Reflecting other goodness-of-fit statistics, the structural model had adequate fit [RMSEA 1⁄4 .064, CFI 1⁄4 .936, NFI 1⁄4 .87, RMR 1⁄4 0.04]. The results revealed that the collected data were consistent with the theory-driven model.

Table 2

Results of the overall measurement model (N 1⁄4 208). Constructs and indicators

Involvement

Risk probability Self-Identify Perceived value Compared to the price I paid, I think I have received good value Compared to the effort I spent, I think I have received good value Compared to the time I spent, I think I have received good value Overall my last vacation trip was a good buy

I value my last vacation trip because it met my needs and expectations for a reasonable price Overall, I think my experience was a good value for the money, time and effort I spent Leisure life leisure life in general

Leisure time Spare time activities Satisfaction with trip experience My overall evaluation on the most recent destination experience is positive My overall evaluation on the most recent tourism experience is favorable. I am satisfied with the most recent tourism experience. I am pleased with the most recent tourism experience. Overall quality of life Overall, I felt happy upon my return from that trip My satisfaction with life in general was increase shortly after the trip So far I have gotten the important things I want in life Although I have my ups and downs, in general, I felt good about my life shortly after the trip Overall, my experience with this trip was memorable having enriched my quality of life. After the trip I felt that I lead a meaningful and fulfilling life Revisit intention I would like to recommend others to visit the destination Revisiting the destination would be worthwhile I will revisit the destination I would like to stay more days in the destination

Standardized loading (Li)

.47 .80

.80 .79 .82 .78 .63 .64

.94 .94 .89

.84 .87 .90 .82

.73 .81 .79 .83 .78 .73

.71 .83 .87 .73

Composite AVE/Error reliability/ variance Reliability (Li2)

.59 .43

.22 .78 .64 .36 .88 .56 .64 .36 .62 .38 .67 .33 .61 .39 .40 .60 .41 .59 .94 .85 .88 .12 .88 .12 .80 .20 .92 .74 .71 .29 .76 .24 .81 .19 .67 .33 .90 .73 .53 .47 .66 .34 .62 .38 .69 .31 .61 .39 .53 .47 .87 .62 .50 .40 .69 .31 .76 .24 .53 .47

H. Kim et al. / Tourism Management 46 (2015) 465e476 471

The results of SEM analysis were performed to examine hy- pothesized path. The results are summarized in Table 3, indicating all nine hypotheses were supported. Hypothesis 1 predicted that elderly tourists' involvement has a significant effect on perceived value (t 1⁄4 3.88, p < .001), supporting H1. Hypothesis 2 was also supported by showing the significant relationship between involvement and satisfaction with travel experience (t 1⁄4 2.86, p < .05). Moreover, the results revealed that perceived value has a positive effect on satisfaction with travel experience (t 1⁄4 6.15, p < .001), supporting H3. Further, Hypothesis 4 indicated that tourists' satisfaction with travel experience does affect leisure life satisfaction (t 1⁄4 7.03, p < .001). Hypotheses 5 and 6 were sup- ported by showing that leisure life satisfaction and satisfaction with travel experience are significant predictors of quality of life. In addition, leisure life satisfaction and satisfaction with travel experience did significantly affect revisit intention, supporting H7 and H8. Lastly, and the study supports the conjecture that satis- faction with overall quality of life is a significant antecedent of revisit intention, supporting H8 (t 1⁄4 2.05 p < .05). Fig. 2 repre- sents a model of elderly tourist behavior with hypothesis testing results.

5. Conclusion and discussion

The purpose of this study was to examine elderly tourists' travel behavior, especially their quality of life, and attempt to extend theoretical and empirical evidence about the interrela- tionship between level of involvement, perceived value, satisfac- tion with trip experience, leisure life satisfaction, quality of life, and revisit intention. Thus, the finding of this study enriches our

472 H. Kim et al. / Tourism Management 46 (2015) 465e476

Table 3

Results of the proposed model. Hypothesized path Standardized

coefficients

H1: Involvement / Perceived value .44 H2: Involvement / / Satisfaction .27

with travel experience H3: Perceived value / Satisfaction .53

with travel experience H4: Satisfaction with travel .49

experience / Leisure life satisfaction H5: Leisure life satisfaction / Overall QOL .33 H6: Satisfaction with travel .40

experience / Overall QOL H7: Satisfaction with travel .27

experience / Revisit Intention H8: Leisure life satisfaction / Revisit Intention .27 H9: Overall QOL / Revisit Intention .18

Note: **p < .001, *p < .05.

t-value

3.88** 2.86*

6.15** 7.03**

4.30** 4.97**

3.13*

2.67* 2.05*

revisit intention. So, the uniqueness of this study lies in the manner in which the constructs of both satisfactions with trip experience and leisure life domain would influence one's sense of well-being and or revisit intention.

Specifically, this study contributes to the theoretical ad- vancements in the field of tourism by proving the usefulness of activity theory and bottom-up spillover theory in explaining elderly tourists' behavior. In order to understand the elderly's leisure behavior, activity theory has been applied in the recrea- tion and leisure field; however, activity theory has not been applied much in tourism industry. The study confirmed the ac- tivity theory that the level of involvement in elderly tourists positively affects their overall quality of life. The results provided empirical support for Nimrod (2007) and Lefrancois et al. (1997) on the role of activity. In addition, the study supported the bottom-up spillover theory. That is, overall life satisfaction is determined by satisfaction with leisure life satisfaction, and lei- sure life domain is also affected by subdomains such as tourism experience.

Furthermore, this study provides an integrated approach to understanding the relationship between the travel experience and overall quality of life of elderly tourists. First, the study found that involvement has a positive influence on perceived values and satisfaction with trip experience. The results provide support for Prebensen et al. (2013) and Chen and Tsai (2008)'s study regarding the importance of understanding involvement and perceived values of travel experience. Specifically, we found that the higher the level of involvement, the larger the likelihood that perceived value and satisfaction will be increased. Also, the study tested the relationship between perceived customer values and satisfaction of travel experience (Chen & Chen, 2010; Lee et al., 2007; Williams & Soutar, 2009). The results of the structural analysis confirmed that perceived values is an underlying deter- minant of satisfaction of travel experience among the elderly segment.

Additionally, elderly quality of life was examined in relation to satisfaction with trip experience and leisure life satisfaction. The results showed that travel experience plays an important role affecting leisure life satisfaction and overall quality of life. This

knowledge of the elderly tourist market by looking at elderly tourist behaviors.

A measurement model for six constructs was developed and tested. The results indicated that all of the relationships are posi- tively supported. Most of previous studies used the construct of satisfaction with experience and relate it to possible outcome variables such as loyalty or revisit/purchase intention. And, very limited studies, however, have explored if other possible outcome variables such quality of life or subjective well-being may also be used since there seems to be an increasing interest in more intangible benefits of consumption. In order to accomplish this, our study has brought into the model the concept of one type of life domains, namely leisure life domain since leisure life domain by definition would indicate the degree to which individuals would be happy with their overall life as a result of their involvement in leisure activities as they may also derive overall life satisfaction (as suggested by quality of life researchers). Given this, we hypothesized that satisfaction with trip experience would affect leisure life satisfaction, and leisure life satisfaction would then influence one's sense of well-being (their quality of life) or

Fig. 2. Results of testing hypothetical model.

implies that travel experience improves elderly people's physical and mental health and lead to greater life satisfaction (Gilbert & Abdullah, 2004; Sirgy et al., 2011; Sirgy & Lee, 2006). Lastly, the study examined the relation of revisit intention with satisfaction with trip experience, leisure life satisfaction, and overall quality of life. In previous literatures, travel satisfaction, service quality, and motivation were significant predictors of revisit intention (Um et al., 2006; Yoon & Uysal, 2005). However, this study found that leisure life satisfaction and QOL can be effective predictors of revisit intention.

The significant relationships between the six main constructs also have marketing and managerial implications. When elderly tourists are satisfied with their trip experience, their overall quality of life improves. The makers of tourism development strategies need to consider the strength of these relationships and preserve elderly tourists' quality of life, in part derived from leisure life domain satisfaction and their tourism experience. In order to in- crease elderly tourists' quality of life, tourism developers and in- dustry practitioners need to increase elderly tourists' level of involvement in tourism activity and provide valuable tourism ex- periences. Moreover products and services offered to elderly tour- ists should be priced competitively and appropriately to increase their perceived value. This implies that those elderly tourists who have met their perceived net value for their purchase are more likely to be satisfied with their travel experiences, which in return may affect their leisure and overall life satisfaction positively.

Even though the research provides practical and theoretical implications, there are some limitations. First, since the pro- posed hypothetical SEM model of elderly tourists' quality of life was tested with samples of residents who lived in Jeju, South Korea, results may not be generalized to other populations. Therefore, replications of this study targeting other populations should be made in order to validate a more solid relationship among the constructs. Second, no information was provided on the potential moderating effect of demographics on the re- lationships between the six main constructs. Although the sample is homogeneous, the levels of involvement, perceived value, satisfaction with trip experience, and QOL are different depending on a sample's personality and demographic infor- mation. Therefore, in future research, respondent's characteris- tics should be considered.

In addition, the study simply focuses on general vacation behavior of individuals with respect to the perceived importance of the included constructs. Therefore, we do not know what type vacation/leisure experience respondents may have had in mind as they evaluated the subsequent related questions. Neverthe- less, the vacation/trip questions on the most recent one should reflect general travel behavior. Further research should also consider different types of leisure trips and decision making. Also, the current study asked how one's leisure life satisfaction and overall life satisfaction was changed as a result of the most recent trip. The model is an approximation of reality with one life domain, namely leisure life domain. However, other life do- mains such as social, health, work, material, and family and lifestyles can also be introduced appropriate for the contextu- alization of the study. Future research need to consider other possible life domains and lifestyles that can influence overall quality of life.

Appendix A

Involvement (10 items)

Dimension 1 (Risk probability) e Cronbach's alpha 1⁄4 .77 It is really annoying to purchase a vacation that is not suitable.

Buying a vacation is rather complicated.

Whenever one buys a vacation, he/she never really knows for sure whether it is the one that should have been bought.

When I purchase a vacation, it is not a big deal if I make a mistake.

If, after I buy a vacation, my choice proves to be poor, I would be really upset.

Dimension 2 (Self-Identify) e Cronbach's alpha 1⁄4 .70 I attach great importance to a vacation. The vacation I buy tells something about me. It gives me pleasure to purchase a vacation.

A vacation is somewhat of a pleasure to me. A vacation interests me a great deal.

Appendix B

Mean and Standard deviation of each indicator

Constructs and indicators Mean Standard deviation

Involvement

Risk probability 3.59 .54 Self-Identify 3.33 .56 Perceived value Compared to the price I paid, I think I have 3.50 .74

received good value Compared to the effort I spent, I think I have 3.62 .87

received good value Compared to the time I spent, I think I have 3.57 .71

received good value Overall my last vacation trip was a good buy 3.50 .76 I value my last vacation trip because it met my 3.52 .72

needs and expectations for a reasonable price Overall, I think my experience was a good value 3.56 .71

for the money, time and effort I spent Leisure life satisfaction 3.52 .74 leisure life in general 3.53 .76 Leisure time 3.61 .75 Spare time activities Satisfaction with trip experience My overall evaluation on the most recent 3.75 .62

destination experience is positive My overall evaluation on the most recent 3.82 .57

tourism experience is favorable. I am satisfied with the most recent 3.76 .62

tourism experience. I am pleased with the most recent 3.82 .63

tourism experience.

Overall quality of life

Overall, I felt happy upon my return 3.62 .71 from that trip

My satisfaction with life in general was 3.60 .70 increase shortly after the trip

So far I have gotten the important things 3.60 .64 I want in life

Although I have my ups and downs, in general, 3.54 .66 I felt good about my life shortly after the trip

Overall, my experience with this trip was memorable 3.63 .66 having enriched my quality of life.

After the trip I felt that I lead a meaningful 3.58 .71 and fulfilling life

Revisit intention

I would like to recommend others to 3.65 .70 visit the destination

Revisiting the destination would be 3.72 .60 worthwhile

I will revisit the destination 3.63 .74 I would like to stay more days in 3.50 .81

the destination

H. Kim et al. / Tourism Management 46 (2015) 465e476 473

474

H. Kim et al. / Tourism Management 46 (2015) 465e476

Appendix C

Covariance matrix Inv1 Inv2 PV1 PV2

PV3 PV4

.099 .101 .045 .061 .292 .304 .390 .339 .498 .351 .351 .570 .300 .353 .305 .341 .161 .215 .196 .223 .176 .228 .193 .214 .157 .188 .173 .204 .186 .202 .156 .191 .160 .184 .140 .164 .161 .191 .176 .208 .132 .146 .115 .153 .127 .191

PV5 PV6 LS1

.115 .119 .055 .063 .073 .037 .237 .258 .171 .287 .300 .162 .300 .305 .161 .353 .341 .215 .511 .344 .165 .344 .509 .176 .165 .176 .771 .199 .154 .614 .181 .158 .599 .182 .220 .044 .169 .185 .097 .153 .190 .097 .183 .194 .136 .197 .186 .137 .157 .156 .062 .187 .154 .038 .164 .152 .108 .191 .172 .199 .180 .158 .159 .176 .176 .163 .193 .210 .171

LS2 LS3 ST1

.055 .062 .105 .069 .075 .074 .173 .173 .139 .182 .174 .191 .196 .176 .193 .223 .228 .214 .199 .181 .182 .154 .158 .220 .614 .599 .044 .704 .627 .076 .627 .769 .062 .076 .062 .389 .133 .113 .269 .128 .119 .290 .172 .147 .250 .162 .159 .193 .118 .090 .158 .070 .087 .168 .138 .150 .135 .174 .145 .134 .134 .176 .141 .189 .168 .120 .200 .179 .139

ST2 ST3 ST4

.102 .102 .118 .049 .068 .059 .122 .168 .194 .157 .166 .201 .157 .173 .186 .188 .204 .202 .169 .153 .183 .185 .190 .194 .097 .097 .136 .133 .128 .172 .113 .119 .147 .269 .290 .250 .324 .271 .247 .271 .384 .295 .247 .295 .392 .168 .167 .197 .139 .142 .125 .143 .143 .119 .134 .109 .134 .126 .138 .170 .129 .125 .143 .128 .137 .128 .124 .162 .129

Q1 Q2 Q3

.161 .114 .130 .064 .105 .106 .156 .125 .096 .181 .176 .149 .156 .160 .140 .191 .184 .164 .197 .157 .187 .186 .156 .154 .137 .062 .038 .162 .118 .070 .159 .090 .087 .193 .158 .168 .168 .139 .143 .167 .142 .143 .197 .125 .119 .506 .275 .268 .275 .405 .276 .268 .276 .433 .274 .255 .296 .268 .248 .291 .158 .130 .138 .136 .110 .094 .115 .135 .118

Q4 Q5 RV1

.144 .160 .124 .084 .096 .087 .142 .169 .159 .200 .193 .214 .161 .176 .132 .191 .208 .146 .164 .191 .180 .152 .172 .158 .108 .199 .159 .138 .174 .134 .150 .145 .176 .135 .134 .141 .134 .126 .129 .109 .138 .125 .134 .170 .143 .274 .268 .158 .255 .248 .130 .296 .291 .138 .429 .321 .148 .321 .505 .195 .148 .195 .480 .132 .134 .254 .158 .137 .211

RV2 RV3

.115 .096 .098 .108 .141 .142 .164 .185 .115 .127 .153 .191 .176 .193 .176 .210 .163 .171 .189 .200 .168 .179 .120 .139 .128 .124 .137 .162 .128 .129 .136 .115 .110 .135 .094 .118 .132 .158 .134 .137 .254 .211 .357 .310 .310 .545

Inv1 Inv 2 PV1 PV2 PV3 PV4 PV5 PV6 LS1 LS2 LS3 ST1 ST2 ST3 ST4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 RV1 RV2 RV3

.296 .114 .085 .163 .114 .319 .098 .127 .085 .098 .551 .410 .163 .127 .410 .749 .099 .045 .292 .390 .101 .061 .304 .339 .115 .063 .237 .287 .119 .073 .258 .300 .055 .037 .171 .162 .055 .069 .173 .182 .062 .075 .173 .174 .105 .074 .139 .191 .102 .049 .122 .157 .102 .068 .168 .166 .118 .059 .194 .201 .161 .064 .156 .181 .114 .105 .125 .176 .130 .106 .096 .149 .144 .084 .142 .200 .160 .096 .169 .193 .124 .087 .159 .214 .115 .098 .141 .164 .096 .108 .142 .185

Inv: Involvement, PV: Perceived value, LS: Leisure life satisfaction, ST: Satisfaction with travel experience,

Q: Quality of life RV:

Revisit Intention.

References

Ananian, C. D., & Janke, M. (2010). Leisure life later life. In L. Payne, B. Ainsworth, & G. Godbey (Eds.), Leisure, health, and wellness (pp. 249e261). State College, PA: Venture Publishing, Inc.

Andereck, K. L., & Nyaupane, G. P. (2011). Exploring the nature of tourism and quality of life perceptions among residents. Journal of Travel Research, 50(3), 248e260.

Anderson, E. W., Fornell, C., & Lehmann, D. R. (1994). Customer satisfaction, market share, and profitability: findings from Sweden. Journal of Marketing, 58(July), 53e66.

Anderson, B., & Langmeyer, L. (1982). The under 50 and over 50 travelers: A profile of similarities and differences. Journal of Travel Research, 20, 20e24.

Arora, R. (1985). Consumer involvement: what it offers to advertising strategies. International Journal of Advertising, 4(2), 119e130.

Bai, B., Jang, S. S., Cai, L. A., & O'Leary, J. T. (2001). Determinants of travel mode choice of senior travelers to the United States. Journal of Hospitality and Leisure Marketing, 8(3/4), 147e168.

Baker, J., Parasuraman, A., Grewal, D., & Voss, G. B. (2002). The influence of multiple store environment cues on perceived merchandise value and patronage in- tentions. Journal of Marketing, 66(2), 120e141.

Bigne, J., Sanchez, M., & Sanchez, J. (2001). Tourism image, evaluation variables and after purchase behaviour: inter-relationship. Tourism Management, 22(6), 607e616.

Bolton, R. N., & Drew, J. H. (1991). A multistage model of customers' assessments of service quality and value. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(4), 375e384.

Bollen, K. A., & Long, J. S. (1993). Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Bowen, D. (2001). Antecedents of consumer satisfaction and dis-satisfaction (CS/D) on long-haul inclusive tours: a reality check on theoretical considerations. Tourism Management, 22, 49e61.

Brady, M., & Cronin, J. (2001). Some new thoughts on conceptualizing perceived service quality: a hierarchical approach. Journal of Marketing, 65(3), 34e49. Burton, S., Sheather, S., & Roberts, J. (2003). The effect of actual and perceived

performance on satisfaction and behavioral intentions. Journal of Service

Research, 5(4), 292e302. Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS:

Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates. Chen, C., & Chen, F. (2010). Experience quality, perceived value, satisfaction and

behavioral intentions for heritage tourists. Tourism Management, 31(1), 29e35. Chen, C., & Tsai, M. (2008). Perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty of TV travel product shopping: involvement as a moderator. Tourism Management, 29,

1166e1171. Clements, C. J., & Josiam, B. M. (1995). Role of involvement in the travel decision.

Journal of Vacation Marketing, 1(4), 337e348. Cravens, D. W., Holland, C. W., Lamb, C. W., Jr., & Moncrieff, W. C., III (1988). Mar-

keting's role in product and service quality. Industrial Marketing Management, 17(4), 285e304.

Cronin, J. J., Brady, M. K., & Hult, G. T. M. (2000). Assessing the effects of quality, value and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environments. Journal of Retailing, 76(2), 193e218.

Cummins, R. A. (1997). The domains of life satisfaction: An attempt to order chaos. In Citation classics from social indicators research (pp. 559e584).

Cumming, E., & Henry, W. E. (1961). Growing old: The process of disengagement. New York: Basic Books.

Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 542e575. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life

scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71e75. Diener, D., Horwitz, J., & Emmons, R. A. (1985). Happiness of the very wealthy. Social

Indicators Research, 16(3), 263e274. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: three

decades of progress. Psychological bulletin, 125(2), 276. Dolnicar, S., Yanamandram, V., & Cliff, K. (2012). The contribution of vacations to

quality of life. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1), 59e83. Fernandez-Ballesteros, R., Zamarron, M., & Ruiz, M. (2001). The contribution of socio-

demographic and psychosocial factors to life satisfaction. Ageing and Society,

21(1), 25e43. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable

variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39e50. Gallarza, M. G., & Saura, I. G. (2006). Value dimensions, perceived value, satisfaction and loyalty: an investigation of university students' travel behavior. Tourism

Management, 27(3), 437e452. Gilbert, D., & Abdullah, J. (2004). Holidaytaking and the sense of well-being. Annals

of Tourism Research, 31(1), 103e121. Grzeskowiak, S., Sirgy, M. J., Lee, D.-J., & Claiborne, C. B. (2006). Housing well-being:

developing and validating a measure. Social Indicators Research, 79(3), 503e541. Guinn, R. (1980). Elderly recreational vehicle tourists: motivation for leisure. Journal

of Travel Research, 19, 9e12. Hair, J., Jr., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2010). Multivariate data

analysis. New Jersey: Pearson Education. Hatcher, L. (1994). A step-by-step approach to using the SAS(R) system for factor

analysis and structural equation modeling. Cary, NC: SAS Institute. Haub, C. (2011). World population aging: Clocks illustrate growth in population under age 5 and over age 65. Population Reference Bureau. Retrieved November 1,

2013, from http://www.prb.org. Hendricks, J., & Cutler, S. J. (2003). Leisure in life-course perspective. In

R. A. Settersten (Ed.), Invitation to the life course: Toward new understandings of

later life (pp. 107e134). New York: Baywood. Holbrook, M. B. (1999). Consumer value. A framework for analysis and research.

London: Routledge. Hsu, C. H. C., Cai, L. A., & Wong, K. K. F. (2007). A model of senior tourism moti-

vations - anecdotes from Beijing and Shanghai. Tourism Management, 28(5),

1262e1273. Huang, S., & Hsu, C. H. C. (2009). Travel motivation: linking theory to practice. In-

ternational Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 3(4), 287e295. Hui, T., Wan, D., & Ho, A. (2007). Tourists' satisfaction, recommendation and

revisiting Singapore. Tourism Management, 28(4), 965e975.

Hutchinson, J., Lai, F., & Wang, Y. (2009). Understanding the relationships of quality, value, equity, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions among golf travelers. Tourism Management, 30(2), 298e308.

Iso-Ahola, S. E., Jackson, E., & Dunn, E. (1994). Starting, ceasing and replacing leisure activities over the life-span. Journal of Leisure Research, 26(3), 227e249.

Iwasaki, Y., & Smale, B. J. A. (1998). Longitudinal analyses of the relationships among life transitions, chronic health problems, leisure, and psychological well-being. Leisure Sciences, 201(1), 25e52.

Jang, S., Bai, B., Hu, C., & Wu, C. M. (2009). Affect, travel motivation, and travel intention: a senior market. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 33(1), 51e73.

Javalgi, R. G., Thomas, E. G., & Rao, S. R. (1992). Consumer behavior in the U.S. pleasure travel marketplace: an analysis of senior and non-senior travelers. Journal of Travel Research, 31(2), 14e19.

Josiam, B. M., Smeaton, G., & Clements, C. J. (1999). Involvement: travel motivation and destination selection. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 5(2), 167e175.

Jo€reskog, K. G. (1993). Testing structural equation models. In K. A. Bollen, & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publishing.

Kozak, M. (2001). Repeaters' behavior at two distinct destinations. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(3), 784e807.

Kozak, M., & Rimmington, M. (2000). Tourist satisfaction with Mallorca, Spain, as an off-season holiday destination. Journal of travel research, 38(3).

Kruger, P. S. (2012). Perceptions of tourism impacts and satisfaction with particular life domains. In Handbook of tourism and quality-of-life research (pp. 279e292). Kyle, G., & Chick, G. E. (2004). Enduring leisure involvement: The importance of

relationships. Leisure Studies, 23, 243e266. Lee, J., & Beeler, C. (2009). An investigation of predictors of satisfaction and future

intention: links to motivation, involvement, and service quality in a local

festival. Event Management, 13(1), 17e29. Lee, S. H., & Tideswell, C. (2005). Understanding attitudes towards leisure

travel and the constraints faced by senior Koreans. Journal of Vacation

Marketing, 11(3). Lee, C. K., Yoon, Y. S., & Lee, S. K. (2007). Investigating the relationships among

perceived value, satisfaction, and recommendations: the case of the Korean

DMZ. Tourism Management, 28(1), 204e214. Lefrancois, R., Leclerc, G., & Polin, N. (1997). Predictors of activity involvement

among older adults, activities. Adaptation & Aging, 22(4), 15e29. Lin, C. (2012). Effects of cuisine experience, psychological well-being, and self- health perception on the revisit intention of hot springs tourists. Journal of

Hospitality & Tourism Research. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1096348012451460. Lohmann, M., & Danielsson, J. (2001). Predicting travel patterns of senior citizens. How the past may hold the key to the future. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 7,

357e366. London, M., Crandall, R., & Seals, G. (1977). The contribution of job and leisure

satisfaction to quality of life. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(3), 328e334. Losier, G. F., Bourque, P. E., & Vallerand, R. J. (1993). A motivational model of leisure participation in the elderly. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and

applied, 127(2), 153e170. Lu, L. (2011). Leisure experiences and depressive symptoms among Chinese older

people: a national survey in Taiwan. Educational Gerontology, 37(9), 753e771. Manfredo, M. J. (1989). An investigation of the basis for external information search

in recreation and tourism. Leisure Sciences, 11(1), 29e45. Mannell, R. C. (1993). High-investment activity and life satisfaction among older

adults: committed, serious leisure, and flow activities. In I. R. Kelly (Ed.), Activity

and aging: Staying involved in later life (pp. 125e145). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE. Mannell, R. C., & Kleiber, D. A. (1997). A social psychology of leisure. State College, PA:

Venture. McGuire, F., Boyd, R., & Tedrick, R. (1996). Leisure and aging: Ulyssean living in later

life. Champaign,IL: Sagamore Pub. Menec, V. H., & Chipperfield, G. C. (1997). Remaining active in later life, the role of

locus of control in seniors' leisure activity participation, health, and life satis-

faction. Journal of Aging and Health, 9, 105e125. Milman, A. (1998). The impact of tourism and travel experience on senior travelers'

psychological well-being. Journal of Travel Research, 37, 166e170. Neal, J., Sirgy, M., & Uysal, M. (1999). The role of satisfaction with leisure travel/ tourism services and experience in satisfaction with leisure life and overall life.

Journal of Business Research, 44(3), 153e163. Neal, J., Uysal, M., & Sirgy, M. J. (2007). The effect of tourism services on travelers'

quality of life. Journal of Travel Research, 46(2), 154e163. Nimrod, G. (2007). Expanding, reducing, concentrating and diffusing: post retire-

ment leisure behavior and life satisfaction. Leisure Sciences, 29, 91e111. Norman, W. C., Daniels, M. J., McGuire, F., & Norman, C. A. (2001). Whither the mature market: an empirical examination of the travel motivations of neo- mature and veteran mature markets. Journal of Hospitality and Leisure Market-

ing, 8(3), 113e130. Oh, H. (1999). Service quality, customer satisfaction, and customer value: a holistic

perspective. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 18(1), 67e82. Palmore, E. (1979). Predictors of successful aging. The Gerontologist, 19, 427e431. Patterson, I. R. (2006). Growing older: Tourism and leisure behaviour of older adults.

MA, USA: CABI International. Pechlaner, H., Smeral, E., & Matzier, K. (2002). Customer value management as a

determinant of the competitive position of tourism destinations. Tourism Re-

view, 57(4), 15e22. Petrick, J. F. (2003). Measuring cruise passengers' perceived value. Tourism Analysis,

Prebensen, N., Woo, E., Chen, J., & Uysal, M. (2012). Motivation and involvement as antecedents of the perceived value of the destination experience. Journal of Travel Research, 52(2), 253e264.

Prebensen, N., Woo, E., & Uysal, M. (2013). Experience value: antecedents and consequences. Current Issues in Tourism. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 1368350 0.2013.770451.

Puczko, L., & Smith, M. (2011). Tourism-Specific Quality-of-Life Index: The Budapest Model. Quality-of-Life Community Indicators for Parks (pp. 163e183). Recreation and Tourism Management.

Riddick, C. C., & Stewart, D. G. (1994). An examination of the life satisfaction and importance of leisure in the lives of older female retirees: a comparison of blacks to whites. Journal of Leisure Research, 26(1), 75e87.

Ross, G. F. (1993). Destination evaluation and vacation preferences. Annals of Tourism Research, 20(3), 477e489.

Schro€der, A., & Widmann, T. (2007). Demographic change and its impact on the travel industry: oldies d nothing but goldies? In R. Conrady, & M. Buck (Eds.), Trends and issues in global tourism 2007 (pp. 3e17) Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.

Sedgley, D., Pritchard, A., & Morgan, N. (2011). Tourism and aging: a transformative research agenda. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(2), 422e436.

Selin, S. W., & Howard, D. R. (1988). Ego involvement and leisure behavior: a con- ceptual specification. Journal of Leisure Research, 20(3), 237e244.

Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., & Gross, B. L. (1991). Consumption values and market choice: Theory and Applications. Cincinnati, OH: South Western Publishing. Shoemaker, S. (1989). Segmentation of the senior pleasure travel market. Journal of

Travel Research, 27(3), 14e21. Silverstein, M., & Parker, M. G. (2002). Leisure activities and quality of life among

the oldest old in Sweden. Research on Aging, 24(5), 528e547. Sirgy, M. J. (2002). The psychology of quality of life. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer

Academic. Sirgy, M. J., Kruger, P. S., Lee, D. J., & Grace, B. Y. (2011). How does a travel trip affect

tourists' life satisfaction? Journal of Travel Research, 50(3), 261e275. Sirgy, M. J., & Lee, D. J. (2006). Macro measures of consumer well-being (CWB): a critical analysis and a research agenda. Journal of Macromarketing, 26(1), 27e44. Spiers, A., & Walker, G. J. (2009). The effects of ethnicity and leisure satisfaction on

happiness, peacefulness, and quality of life. Leisure Science, 31, 84e99. Sweeney, J., & Soutar, G. (2001). Consumer perceived value: the development of a

multiple item scale. Journal of Retailing, 77(2), 203e207. Sweeney, J. C., Soutar, G. N., & Johnson, L. W. (1999). The role of perceived risk in the

quality value relationship: a study in a retail environment. Journal of Retailing,

75(1), 77e105. Teaff, J. D. (1985). Leisure services with the elderly. xvi±360pp. Tinsley, H. E., & Tinsley, D. J. (1986). A theory of the attributes, benefits and causes of

leisure experience. Leisure Sciences, 8, 1e45. Um, S., Chon, K., & Ro, Y. (2006). Antecedents of revisit intention. Annals of Tourism

Research, 33(4), 1141e1158. Van der Meer, M. J. (2008). The sociospatial diversity in the leisure activities of older

people in the Netherlands. Journal of Aging Studies, 22(1), 1e12. Walker, G. J., Halpenny, E., Spiers, A., & Deng, J. (2011). A prospective panel study of Chinese-Canadian immigrant's leisure participation and leisure satisfaction.

Leisure Sciences, 33, 349e365. Wei, S., & Milman, A. (2002). The impact of participation in activities while on

vacation on seniors' psychological well-being: a path model application. Journal

of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 26(2), 175e185. Williams, P., & Soutar, G. N. (2009). Value, satisfaction and behavioural intentions in

an adventure tourism context. Annals of Tourism Research, 36(3), 413e438. Woodruff, B. R. (1997). Customer value: the next source for competitive advantage.

Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25(2), 139e153. Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction

on destination loyalty: a structural model. Tourism Management, 26(1), 45e56. Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer

Research, 12(December), 341e352. Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1994). Research note: the personal involvement inventory: reduc-

tion, revision, and application to advertising. Journal of Advertising, 23(4), 59e70. Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality and value: a means-

end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2e22. Zeithaml, V., Berry, L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The behavioral consequences of

service quality. The Journal of Marketing, 60(2), 31e46.

Dr. Eunju Woo is a post-doctoral research fellow in the Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vir- ginia Tech. She completed her Ph.D. degree at Virginia Tech in 2013. Her research interests include destination market- ing, tourist behavior, and Quality-of-Life (QOL).

H. Kim et al. / Tourism Management 46 (2015) 465e476 475

7(3), 251e258.

476

H. Kim et al. / Tourism Management 46 (2015) 465e476

Hyelin Kim is a research associate in the Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Virginia Tech. She received her M.S. in Convention Management from Kyung Hee University, South Korea. Her research mainly focused on elderly tourist behavior, Quality-of-Life (QOL) research in tourism, and convention marketing

Dr. Muzaffer Uysal is a professor of tourism in the Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Virginia Tech. He is a member of International Academy for the Study of Tourism, the Academy of Leisure Sciences, and serves as co-editor of Tourism Analysis: An Interdisci- plinary Journal. In addition, he sits on the editorial boards of several journals. He also received a number of awards for Research, Excellence in International Education, and Teaching Excellence. His current research interests center on tourism demand/supply interaction, Tourism develop- ment and QOL research in tourism.