Tourist satisfaction and the souvenir shopping of domestic tourists: extended weekends in Spain

Depósito de investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla https://idus.us.es/ “This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Current Issues In Tourism on 2016, available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2013.877423.” 1 Tourist satisfaction and the souvenir shopping of domestic tourists: Extended weekends in Spain Abstract The satisfaction dimensions of domestic tourists when buying souvenirs are studied in relation to the overall satisfaction of the same tourists, a theme that has received little attention in the prior scientific literature. The research data were gathered from interviews with domestic tourists visiting Seville over an extended weekend. The results show that souvenir shopping satisfaction consists of four factors: internal attraction, service differentiation, service provision and external attraction. The last two, moreover, influence the overall tourist satisfaction rates. A discussion of these results and their implications help contribute to a better understanding among both scholars and practitioners of tourist satisfaction. Keywords: tourist shopping satisfaction; souvenirs; tourist satisfaction; Spain Introduction A ‘puente’ (literally a bridge) is the Spanish term that describes an extended weekend break, which includes a weekday public holiday. Spain enjoys several extended weekends whenever the public holiday falls on a weekday: Labor Day (1st of May), the Assumption of the Virgin (15th of August), Saint Pilar (one of the two Patron Saints of Spain) (12th of October), All Saints’ (1st of November), Constitution Day (6th of December) and the Immaculate Conception (8th of December). These extended weekends can be over a 3 day period and can even stretch to two weekends and be as long as 9 days. When these long-weekends are only 3 or 4 days, many Spanish tourists prefer national destinations to international destinations. 2 While perhaps not travelling for the purpose of shopping, many tourists shop while travelling (Kinley, Forney and Kim, 2012), which makes shopping a very popular tourist activity (Hu and Yu, 2007; Kemperman, Borgers and Timmermans, 2009;Kinley et al., 2012; Murphy, Moscardo, Benckendorff and Pearce, 2011; Tosun, Temizkan, Timothy and Fyall, 2007). Tourist shopping accounts for a large component of travel expenditure (Lloyd, Yip and Luk, 2011). Some studies indicate that travellers spend around one-third of their travel expenditure on retail shopping (Hu and Yu, 2007), and often spend more money on shopping than on other activities such as dining, lodging or entertainment (Wong and Wan, 2013). Tourist shopping also contributes to the prosperity of the touristic sector, generates work opportunities in an economy (Murphy et al., 2011; Wong and Wan, 2013; Yu and Litrell, 2005) and can help to improve the destination image, as tourists will promote the destination by sharing their experiences, showing off their purchases and leaving their gifts with family and friends (Tosun et al., 2007). Buying a souvenir involves the specific sale of a souvenir product to tourists at a touristic destination. Worth billions of dollars each year, producing, selling and buying souvenirs are routine activities at tourist destinations (Swanson and Timothy, 2012). Souvenir purchasing is a relatively recent topic of scholarship (Hu and Yu, 2007; Kemperman et al., 2009; Swanson and Timothy, 2012), despite being an essential part of the leisure experience (Lloyd et al., 2011, Murphy et al., 2011) and it is of demonstrated importance in the prosperity of retail commerce in different markets (Murphy et al., 2011; Swanson and Horridge, 2006; Tosun et al., 2007; Yu and Littrell, 2005). From “an holistic point of view, using every element of the tourism product that contributes to the overall travel experience is essential for establishing a better 3 destination image and achieving differentiation image and achieving differentiation among many commodified destinations around the world” (Tosun et al., 2007, p.88). It is therefore important to delve deeper into the rationale behind tourist souvenir shopping behaviours (Yu and Litrell, 2005). Also, from the retail marketing point of view, it is essential to commoditize the intangible meaning of souvenirs to make them tangible for tourists, i.e., a consumable product for sale by destination merchants (Swanson and Timothy, 2012). The analysis of tourism shopping behavior is highly focused on Asian and mainly Chinese and Japanese cultures (Hsieh and Chang, 2006; Kim, Timothy and Hwang, 2011; Lloyd et al., 2011; Rosenbaum and Spears, 2006; Wong and Wan, 2013; Wu, Li and Song, 2012; Xu and McGehee, 2012). However, some studies compare different nationalities - both Western and Oriental (Barutçu, Doğan and Üngüren, 2011; Murphy et al., 2011; Tosun et al., 2007). Regardless of the country under study, the literature has focused on international rather than on domestic tourist shopping behavior 1 . One prominent study is by Kemperman et al. (2009) on domestic tourist behavior in Holland and another is by de Hu and Yu (2007) on out-of-Midwest state travelers in the United States. With the exception of the study by Tosun et al. (2007), the authors of this current research are unaware of any investigations on tourism shopping satisfaction in the Mediterranean region. The aim of this study is to determine the dimensions of domestic tourist satisfaction with their souvenir purchases at the destination and their relationship with overall tourist satisfaction with short breaks in a Mediterranean country. The results should lead to recommendations for both retailers and local Destination Marketing Organizations 1 This may be due to it being easier to find data on international tourism than on domestic tourism (Turner and Reisenger, 2001). 4 (DMO) on the way in which they can use tourist shopping as an additional tool to improve overall tourist satisfaction rates. Literature review Tourism and shopping In our modern society, the act of buying is not just an inescapable act to cover the daily needs of each individual as it now includes recreational, and at times materialistic and consumeristic dimensions. For these reasons, the analysis of shopping in the 1980s began from a leisure-experience based perspective rather from a utilitarian standpoint (Kim et al., 2011). Along with visiting friends, enjoying oneself and experiencing indigenous culture, shopping is a travel motivator (Bojanic, 2011; Hsu, Cai and Li, 2010; Hu and Yu, 2007; Tosun et al., 2007). At this point, it is necessary to establish a precise terminological difference between tourism shopping and shopping tourism. Tourism shopping refers to going shopping as a side or secondary activity during a trip, while shopping tourism implies that shopping itself is the primary motivation for a trip, such that the principal appeal of the trip relates solely to the goods or services that can be purchased at a destination (their quality, quantity, convenience, etc.) (Rabbiosi, 2011; Timothy, 2005). This distinction is by no means banal, as buying is a further element of the tourist experience in the case of tourism shopping, whereas buying is the aim of the trip in the case of shopping tourism. Indeed, a new research line has recently arisen in the study of tourist shopping, as its importance as a priority motive for undertaking a journey has increased (Rosenbaum and Spears, 2006), especially in Asian cultures. This research is nonetheless centered on tourist shopping, as one of its aims is to establish the relationship between shopping satisfaction and overall tourist satisfaction. 5 Shopping is a part of the tourist experience at the destination that is a source of enjoyment for tourists, in this case, and not the main reason for the journey. Tourist shopping can be defined as a contemporary recreational activity involving looking, touching, browsing and buying that helps people to fulfill their needs for enjoyment and relaxation and that helps tourists to escape from their daily routines (Murphy et al., 2011). During their stay at a destination, tourists acquire, among other things, clothes, souvenirs, artwork and handicrafts, so that shopping becomes an important part of their touristic experience, partly because shopping is a source of enjoyment and satisfaction (Hsieh and Chang, 2006; Murphy et al., 2011; Tosun et al., 2007; Yu and Littrell, 2005). There is, therefore, an undeniable relation between tourism and shopping, at times qualified as the number one activity for tourists (Lloyd et al., 2011) or the most universal of tourist activities (Murphy et al., 2011). For many tourists, the touristic experience would not be complete without an opportunity to go shopping (Hu and Yu, 2007; Lloyd et al., 2011), either for themselves or for their friends and relatives. Although tourists do not necessarily set out with the intention of “going shopping”, during their wider experiences, they are likely to engage in diverse consumption encounters and rituals, involving interactions with vendors and service providers (Murphy et al., 2011, p. 303). Shopping satisfaction Shopping satisfaction is defined in this research as the subjective evaluation of the tourist with a shopping experience at a retail store and with merchandise purchased during the stay at the travel destination (Wong and Wan, 2013). This definition allows us to analyze the construct from a multidimensional perspective, which explicitly considers the tourists, as well as the services provided by the shop. 6 Tourist satisfaction with the shopping experience should be considered in the analysis of tourist shopping. Tourist shopping experiences involve interactions with products, services, and retail store environments (Yu and Littrell, 2005). Shopping experiences are an amalgam of the shoppers’ perceptions of products and services that comprise their total satisfaction level with the individual elements or attributes of all the products and services that constitute the experience. Shopping satisfaction depends on the shopping enjoyment that tourists experience (Wong and Wan, 2013) and on their obtaining the product attributes that they consider important (Swanson, 2004). Consumer satisfaction arises from an assessment of the value the consumer attaches to a shopping experience (Carpenter, 2008). Shopping satisfaction has been researched from the point of view of the expectancy disconformation paradigm, which basically states that customers compare their expectations with their experiences, in such a way that a specific experience that disconfirms their expectations determines their satisfaction (Oliver, 1980; Hill, 1986). After consumers have purchased and/or used the product or service, they then evaluate the purchase experience and the performance of the product or service in relation to their initial expectations. Customers purchase goods and services with pre-purchase expectations regarding their anticipated performance. Once the goods and services have been bought and consumed, customers compare results with the initial expectations: they are dissatisfied if the performance falls short and are satisfied if the performance exceeds their expectations. Satisfaction is confirmed when post-purchase expectations are approximately equal to or exceed pre-purchase expectations. The expectancy disconfirmation paradigm is a valid scheme for analyzing all types of products and services shopping satisfaction, as it focus on internal processing involving actual and 7 expected performance comparison (Choo and Petrick, 2014), regardless of the type of product or service (Lee, Jeon and Kim, 2011) or their prices. The state of satisfaction leads to a positive attitude toward the purchase experience, product and/or service, and can positively influence future purchase intentions (Carpenter, 2008; Esbjerget al., 2012). In the case of dissatisfaction, consumers are likely to look for alternative products for the next purchase (Yoon and Uysal, 2005; Hui, Wan and Ho, 2007), produce negative word of mouth recommendations (Hill, 1986) and generate a decline in consumer loyalty (Song, van der Veen, Li and Chen, 2012). Several factors based on retail shop and merchandise characteristics that affect shopping satisfaction have been identified in previous research: tangible quality, staff service quality, product value, product reliability, price, cleanliness of the shop, the appearance of sales assistants, opening hours, product packaging, and product size (Reisinger and Turner, 2002). However, researchers have normally used a single item to measure tourist satisfaction, without either a comprehensive or a rigorous measure of tourist perceptions of shopping satisfaction (Wong and Wan, 2013). The literature has centered on the analysis of international tourist shopping satisfaction (Lin and Chen, 2013; Reisinger and Turner, 2002; Tosun et al., 2011; Yüksel and Yüksel, 2007), leaving aside the analysis of domestic tourist shopping satisfaction, which is the central theme of this research. Souvenirs Souvenirs can be defined as commercially produced merchandise that is purchased as a tangible representation of a special and ephemeral travel experience (Hu and Yu, 2007; Kim et al., 2011; Swanson and Timothy, 2012) and that reminds the tourist of that experience (Swanson, 2004). 8 The mix of souvenir products sold to tourists is not universal (Swanson and Horridge, 2004) and includes, among others, arts and crafts, jewelry, antiques, collectibles, clothing, and food. Sometimes tourists do not have a specific idea of what they want to buy, instead, shopping arises as an unplanned travel experience, prompted by tangible, intangible and impulsive factors, such as the vendors with whom they interact, the uniqueness of products, and the sites they visit in a travel destination (Wong and Wan, 2013). In fact, as Timothy (2005, p. 102) affirmed, the form of the souvenir itself is not as important as understanding how it is perceived by the people who are involved in its production, sale, and purchase. It is the purchase experience and the later use of the souvenirs that will confirm or disconfirm the tourist’s previous expectations. Gordon (1986) distinguished five major categories of souvenirs: a) pictorial image souvenirs (postcards/booklets) which are tangible reminders that prove the tourist’s presence in the destination; b) piece-of-the-rock (items found in the nature, part of the whole destination environment); c) symbolic shorthand souvenirs (items that evoke a message about the destination, replicas of well-known attractions, miniaturized iconic images, mainly manufactured); d) markers (items inscribed with the location from which they came, such as T-shirts, coffee mugs, magnets); and, e) locally produced souvenirs (items found in the area, for instance food, liquor, wine, handicrafts and clothes). Swanson and Timothy (2012) have recently presented a new taxonomy of souvenirs in four groups. First, tourist commodities, which are those items found in souvenir shops and handicraft markets with an exchange value in the marketplace, which are produced, distributed, and consumed with little emotional attachment. Second, symbolic reminders, such as metonymics of events, places or experiences, imbued with meaning and consequence, often strategically placed at home to be seen by relatives and visitors 15 was used, to check serial correlations between the errors. This ranges from 0 to 4 (Chatterjee and Hadi, 2006). As a rule of thumb, it is assumed that the remainders are independent when D oscillates between 1.5 and 2.5 and has a value of 2 when the remainders are completely independent. Tolerance and variance inflation factor (VIF) were considered to test the multicollinearity of each independent variable. Results and discussion The profile of the sample included slightly more females (59.8%), a majority of men and women under 34 years old (73.2%) and slightly more single people (52.3%). Somewhat more than half the respondents had university degrees and most of them came from Madrid (22.5%), Barcelona (7.1%), Valencia (4.9%), Badajoz (4.5%) and Zaragoza (3.7%). The majority stated that they belonged to households consisting of families of up to three individuals (71.1%) and slightly over half had travelled to Seville in groups (57.3%). Approximately half the respondents came to Seville for leisure reasons (53.0%), but visiting friends and relatives was also an important reason to travel to Seville (37.9%). Most of them (85.9%) bought souvenirs in company with other people (Table 1). INSERT TABLE 1 ABOUT HERE First, an exploratory factorial analysis was performed with the 22 items proposed for the scale of shopping satisfaction to detect hidden structures, for a more parsimonious explanation of the variables, using principal components with Varimax rotation. Both the KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin, 0.898)- a statistic used to measure the appropriateness of the raw dataand Bartlett’s test of sphericity (1852.152 at p=0.000, d.f.=231) indicated that there was sufficient inter-item correlation within the data to perform the factor analysis. 16 The results of the factor analysis produced a clean factor structure with relatively high loadings for the factors, after deleting three items proposed for not fulfilling the criteria described in the data analysis section 4 , which accounted for 55.4% of the variance (Table 2). Cronbach's alpha used for the reliability analysis ranged from 0.74 to 0.84, well above the minimum that is required (0.6). Communalities of the 19 remaining items ranged from 0.450 to 0.707, suggesting that the variance of the original values is fairly explained by the common factors. The four underlying factors of the souvenir tourists’ shopping satisfaction were labeled as follows. Internal attraction (Factor 1, Alpha= 0.822). This factor contains seven items and explains 35.3% of the variance in the data, with an eigenvalue of 7.78. The items associated with this factor deal with the way in which the offer of souvenirs is presented inside the shop, including the decoration and the product displays, the variety of products and brands, the quality of the products and the means of payment accepted. The latter can become a differentiating factor when the tourist chooses a specific shop to buy a souvenir at the expense of those which only accept cash payments. Service differentiation (Factor 2, Alpha= 0.742). Loaded with four items, this factor accounts for 8.3% of the variance, with an eigenvalue of 1.83, and refers to the special services that the shop offers its clients such as home delivery, special conditions for payment and quantity, unique or specialized merchandise and the price of the products in the establishment. Service provision (Factor 3, Alpha= 0.846). Accounting for 7.0% of the variance (eigenvalue 1.54), this factor is loaded with four items that refer to customer service 4 These items were: “Accessibility to the store”, “Authenticity of in-store goods”, and “Style of in-store goods”. 17 provision: the attitude of sales assistants, employee communication capacity and diligence, and their product knowledge. External attraction (Factor 4, Alpha= 0.743).This explains 4.7% of the variance (eigenvalue1.03) and it contains four items relating to the exterior factors of the souvenir shop: location, opening hours, lighting and cleanliness. These factors differ to some extent from those obtained by Wong and Wan (2013) in their analysis of the shopping satisfaction of Chinese tourists in Macao. So, the service provision factor is comparable to staff service quality and Wong and Wan (2013) also have a similar factor to the one in this study referred to as service differentiation. However, the internal and external attraction factors are different. Hence, the shopping satisfaction factors for Spanish tourists differ from those of Chinese tourists. It might even be the case that there were decisive factors related to shopping satisfaction for Western tourists, as both the internal and the external attractions are similar to the domestic tourist satisfaction factors identified by Turner and Reisenger (2001) for domestic tourists in the USA. INSERT TABLE 2 ABOUT HERE A multiple linear regression between the factors relating to souvenir shopping satisfaction of tourists and overall tourist satisfaction achieved a satisfactory goodness of fit. The F ratio (8.744), which explains whether the results of the regression model could have occurred by chance, was significant at 0.000. The model, as a whole, has a significant fit to the data and the determination coefficient (R2 = 0.150) indicates that 15% of the variation in the overall satisfaction of tourists can be explained through the dimensions of tourist souvenir shopping satisfaction that have been identified in this research. 18 In this study, the Durbin-Watson statistic is 1.998, which falls into the no serial correlation zone (dU<D<4-dU, where dU = 1.746, p<0.01). The tolerance and Variance Inflation Factors (VIF) of each of the independent variables was checked to test collinearity between the variables, which might confuse the analysis. If the tolerance statistic for any individual variables is under 0.1, the regression should be repeated once the violating independent variable has been eliminated (Metler and Vannatta, 2002). Normally, a VIF value of 10 is considered to represent severe multicollinearity problems (Neter, Kutner, Wasserman and Nachtsheim, 1996). More strictly, De Vaus (2002) establishes the cut-off point at 5. As all tolerance levels were greater than the cut-off level of 0.10 and VIF are well under 5, multicollinearity is not a problem in this study. The model explains a total of 15% of the variation in overall tourist satisfaction. Although in general terms this may be considered a low R2 value, it should be remembered that the authors are attempting to explain overall tourist satisfaction at the destination through tourist souvenir shopping satisfaction. Logically, other factors may influence the overall tourist satisfaction that are not considered in the regression model, such as lodging, dining, cultural activities and the transport services at the destination. These should be analyzed in future research. However, 15% of the overall tourist satisfaction can be explained through the souvenir shopping satisfaction of tourists. INSERT TABLE 3 ABOUT HERE Of the four factors of souvenir shopping satisfaction, only two are statistically significant: service provision and external attraction. Therefore, the data from sample on internal attraction and service differentiation were unable to explain the overall satisfaction of tourists in any way. However, service provision and external attraction 19 indicated that the greater the tourists’ perception of these two variables, the greater the value of how they perceive the overall satisfaction of their stay at the destination. Beta coefficients in the regression analysis are useful to explain the relative importance of the tourists’ souvenir shopping satisfaction dimension in the tourists’ overall satisfaction. Hence, service provision (factor 3) had the heaviest weight for the tourists’ overall satisfaction. This means that a one-unit increase in satisfaction with the service provision factor would lead to a 27.6% (0.276 units) increase in the overall satisfaction of tourists during their stay in Seville. Similarly, the external attraction of the souvenir shops has a positive effect on the overall satisfaction of the tourists, which was quantified as 17%. Conclusions, limitations and further research Tourism shopping is an important activity for tourists as it is a basic part of their experience at the destination. It is equally important for retailers and for Destination Marketing Organizations (Lloyd et al. 2011; Swanson, 2004; Swanson and Horridge, 2004; Swanson and Timothy, 2012). As Murphy et al. (2011) stated, research into the shopping patterns and behavior of tourists provides useful information for tourism planning and promotion. Tourism in general and tourism shopping in particular can stimulate the economic growth of a destination and is a tool to improve its image (Tosun et al., 2007). “This might suggest that a well-managed tourist shopping experience may function as a tool for building a more favorable image of tourist destinations” (Tosun et al., 2007, p. 88). Nevertheless, the scientific literature has lent little attention to the shopping satisfaction of tourists in general and the particular case of souvenirs and its relation to overall tourist satisfaction. This research addresses this gap, because it extends the souvenir shopping research framework to examine shopping satisfaction and it provides a deeper 20 understanding of tourist shopping satisfaction. This, in turn, will lead to improved planning, marketing and management of souvenir retailers. This research was designed to contribute to the understanding of both scholars and practitioners with regard to tourist shopping satisfaction. From a theoretical point of view, this research is of interest, because it has presented a scale for the measurement of tourist shopping satisfaction adapted to the purchase of souvenirs. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first work which aims to corroborate the multidimensional structure of the tourist shopping satisfaction construct proposed by Wong and Wang (2013). Moreover, this research contributes to an understanding of the relation between tourist souvenir shopping satisfaction and overall tourist satisfaction. This is important because the latter influences desirable tourist behavior, such as revisit intention, loyalty and positive word of mouth recommendations. Two of the factors identified to explain tourist souvenirs shopping satisfaction were not statistically significant in relation to overall tourist satisfaction. This absence of significance may be because the study was not centered on the type of souvenirs identified by Swanson and Timothy (2012) as tourist commodities. Under these circumstances, factors such as internal attraction and service differentiation between establishments blur their importance when explaining overall tourist satisfaction. This is possibly because differences between the establishments (with regard to price, home delivery service, special conditions, decoration, the reputation of the shop and brand variety) that sell souvenirs of the tourist commodity type are usually almost nonexistent, so that their effect on overall tourist satisfaction is diminished. However, for other types of purchases at the destination that are not tourist commodities, not only external attraction and service provision but also internal 21 attraction and differentiation of the service play an important role in tourist shopping satisfaction (Wong and Wan, 2013). Furthermore, it may be assumed that these factors will also influence the overall satisfaction of tourists, as tourist shopping satisfaction is part of the tourist experience at the destination. So, these results appear to show that purchase behavior varies considerably between the normal patterns at their home and at a tourism destination in the case of souvenir purchases (Hu and Yu, 2007; Lloyd et al., 2011; Yu and Litrell, 2005). Moreover, they also suggest that those factors that explain how the purchase at the destination influences overall tourist satisfaction can vary, according to whether souvenirs are seen as tourist commodities alone or as another type of souvenir (symbolic reminders, other commodities and other reminders). This might be due to lack of tourist experiences and/or different levels of expectancy in the destination, what would generate a different level of satisfaction, according to the expectancy disconfirmation paradigm. From the retailers’ point of view, as internal attraction is the factor with the greatest weight in the souvenir shopping satisfaction of the tourist, measures to broaden the accepted means of payment in the shops, to expand the variety of products and brands and to improve the quality and the display of products will all contribute to an increase in tourist shopping satisfaction. Having an impact on service differentiation and service provision will contribute, though to a lesser extent, to improvements in shopping satisfaction. Finally, the retailers can improve the external appearance of their shops through the addition of lighting and a clean environment, which favor shopping satisfaction. This study will also contribute to tourism planning and local policy making, taking into account the relationship, upheld in this study, between the external attraction of souvenir shops and service differentiation with overall tourist satisfaction. DMO could 22 improve the overall satisfaction of tourists by enhancing service provision through employee training and external attraction by facilitating the extension of opening hours. There are several concerns related to this study that warrant further investigation. This study has examined the shopping satisfaction of tourists in Seville (Spain) over the extended weekend of the Constitution-Immaculate Conception. The authors are aware that the findings cannot necessarily be generalized to all tourism destinations, but the study provides valuable information for the city and, no less importantly, for similar cultural cities in other parts of the world. The results of this study are limited to Spanish tourists, but future studies may benefit from the statistical approach and the marketing proposals in other tourism contexts. This research has concentrated on the analysis of the domestic Spanish tourist, although future research should approach this issue in other national contexts given the paucity of studies on the behavior of other nationalities and in the field of tourism shopping. It would even be necessary to establish if, as the results of this investigation appear to indicate, there are differences in the dimensions of the shopping satisfaction of tourists between different cultures. Future research will address an interesting relationship that might exist between type of souvenirs and souvenir shopping satisfaction, as well as overall tourist satisfaction. These relationships might depend on the distinction between tourist commodities and commodities in marketplace which become souvenirs when bought by tourists (Swanson and Timothy, 2012) and their prices (cheap/expensive). A linear regression of tourist souvenir shopping satisfaction, on the other hand, is insufficient in itself to present a complete picture of the overall satisfaction of tourists. In the future, there should be an analysis with a multivariant approximation of the effect 23 of other variables on the overall satisfaction and how these variables interact with each other in forming overall satisfaction. References Baker, S.M., Kleine, S.S., & Bowen, H.E. (2006). On the symbolic meanings of souvenirs for children. Research in Consumer Behaviour, 10, pp. 209-248. Barutçu, S., Doğan, H., & Üngüren, E. (2011). Tourists’ perceptions and satisfaction of shopping in Alanya region: A comparative analysis of different nationalities. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 24, 1049-1059. Bojanic, D.D. (2011). The impact of age and family life experiences on Mexican visitor shopping expenditures. Tourism Management, 32(2), 406-414. Carpenter, J.M. (2008). Consumer shopping value, satisfaction and loyalty in discount retailing. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 15(5), 358-363. Chatterjee, S., & Hadi, A.S. (2006).Regression analysis by example. Hoboken: Willey and Sons. Choo, H. & Petrick, J.F. (2014). Social interactions and intentions to revisit for agritourism service encounters. Tourism Management, 40 (February), 372-381. Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. De Vaus, D. (2002). Analyzing social science data: 50 key problems in data analysis. London: Sage Publications. Esbjerg, L., Jensen, B.B., Bech-Larsen, T., Dutra de Barcellos, M., Boztug, Y., & Grunert, K.G. (2012). An integrative conceptual framework for analyzing customer satisfaction with shopping trip experiences in grocery retailing. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 19(4), 445-456. 24 Gordon, B. (1986). The souvenir: Message of the extraordinary. Journal of Popular Culture, 20(3), 135-146. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R.L. (2006).Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). New York: Prentice-Hall. Hsieh, A-T., & Chang, J. (2006). Shopping and tourist night markets in Taiwan. Tourism Management, 27(1), 138-145. Hu, B., & Yu, H. (2007). Segmentation by craft selection criteria and shopping involvement. Tourism Management, 28(4), 1079-1092. INE (2012). Encuesta de Ocupación Hotelera. Madrid: Instituto Nacional de Estadística. Kemperman, A.D.A.M., Borgers, H.J.P., & Timmermans, H.J.P. (2009). Tourist shopping behavior in an historic downtown area. Tourism Management, 30(2), 208-218. Khan, J. H. (2006). Factor analysis in counselling psychology research, training, and practice: Principles, advances, and applications. The Counselling Psychologist,34(5), 684-718. Kim, S.S., Timothy, D.J., & Hwang, J. (2011). Understanding Japanese tourists’ shopping preferences using the Decision Tree Analysis method. Tourism Management, 32(3), 544-554. Kinley, T.R., Forney, J.A., & Kim, Y-K. (2012). Travel motivation as a determinant of shopping venue. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 6(3), 266-278. Lasusa, D.M. (2007). Eiffel tower key chains and other pieces of reality: The philosophy of souvenirs. The Philosophical Forum, 38(3), 271-287. 31 Table 3.Multiple linear regression results Model Coefficient t-value Collinearity statistics Constant 3.594**** Tolerance VIF Internal attraction 0.054 0.570 † 0.544 1.837 Service differentiation -0.049 -0.595 † 0.729 1.371 Service provision 0.276 2.941*** 0.551 1.815 External attraction 0.170 1.851** 0.376 1.736 Adjusted R2 0.150 F-statistics 8.744**** Source: own elaboration Note: Standardized coefficients are reported ****p<0.001; ***p<0.01; **p<0.05; †non-significant