Next Article in Journal
Functional Characterization of Abdominal-A in the Pine Caterpillar Moth, Dendrolimus punctatus
Next Article in Special Issue
Importance of Forest Ecosystem within Important Plant Areas (IPAs) for the Development of Nature-Based Tourism—A Case Study of Fruška Gora National Park
Previous Article in Journal
The Application of Percolation Theory in Modeling the Vertical Distribution of Soil Organic Carbon in the Changbai Mountains
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Forests
Volume 15
Issue 7
10.3390/f15071156
forests-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Does Host-Guest Interaction Stimulate Tourists’ Citizenship Behavior? A Combination of Social Exchange Theory and Cognitive Appraisal Theory

by
Juan Bi
1,
Bingnan Wang
2 and
Feifei Lu
2,*
1
School of Tourism and Geography Science, Qingdao University, No. 308 Ningxia Road, Shinan District, Qingdao 266071, China
2
College of Economics and Management, Qingdao Agricultural University, No. 700 Changcheng Road, Chengyang District, Qingdao 266109, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Forests 2024, 15(7), 1156; https://doi.org/10.3390/f15071156
Submission received: 20 May 2024 / Revised: 28 June 2024 / Accepted: 28 June 2024 / Published: 3 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Forest Recreation and Ecotourism)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study delved into the intricate ways in which host-guest interaction influences tourist citizenship behavior (TCB), focusing specifically on two key dimensions: interaction quantity and interaction quality. By drawing on social exchange theory and cognitive appraisal theory, we constructed an integrated model that illustrates the relationship between host-guest interaction and TCB, with experiential value and place attachment serving as mediating factors. Our data were gathered from 499 visitors to Mount Taishan national forest park, and the analysis was conducted using Spss and Amos software. The results revealed that the quality of host-guest interaction has a significant and positive influence on tourists’ overall experiential value, which in turn fosters TCB. Additionally, the evaluation of experiential value triggers a deeper sense of place attachment among tourists towards the destination, further encouraging TCB. The quantity of host-guest interaction did not exert a significant influence on tourist citizenship behavior. These findings offer practical insights for destinations seeking to enhance their competitiveness and sustainability by optimizing host-guest interactions.

1. Introduction

With the increasingly serious environmental problems, a growing number of tourists are seeking out more primitive and natural travel destinations [1,2]. National parks, as natural-based destinations, have emerged as popular choices for ecotourists [3]. Nevertheless, the rise of national park tourism is accompanied by a range of challenges, including potential environmental impacts caused by tourists [4,5], the lack of specialization in tourism management [6], and the intense market competition [7]. Prior research has primarily concentrated on the environmental sustainability of national parks, yet sustainability is a multifaceted concept encompassing not only environmental sustainability but also socio-cultural and economic sustainability [8]. Enhancing the competitive edge of national parks and securing tourist resources and market shares is crucial for achieving sustainable development. This study underscores the significance of fostering tourist citizenship behavior as a vital means to bolster the competitiveness of national parks.
The term tourist citizenship behavior is derived from the construct of customer citizenship behaviors [9]. Customer citizenship behaviours refer to the discretionary and voluntary behaviours of customers that surpass their expected role in a given service scenario [10], such as recommendation, providing feedback, and helping other consumers. These behaviors are not required by service providers but help promote performance of service providers [11]. In tourism, tourists are not only service recipients [12]. Their active participation, like filling out a satisfaction survey questionnaire and recommending the destination to their friends, is vital for destination sustainable development. Therefore, it is critical to explore how to promote tourist citizenship behavior.
Previous studies have investigated the antecedents of tourist citizenship behavior from different aspects. Specifically, tourists’ cognitive or emotional responses have been identified as critical antecedents of tourist citizenship behavior. Those responses include tourists’ perceived value [13], tourists’ perceived restorativeness [14], tourists’ satisfaction and tourists’ delight. Tourist personality, like trait gratitude [15] was also testified as an important predictor of tourist citizenship behavior. Additionally, from destination-level attributes, destination resources uniqueness, service quality [12] and destination social responsibility were proved to be predictors of tourist citizenship behavior [15]. Of these factors, host-guest interaction is less mentioned. However, tourism activities do not take place in a social vacuum. interacting with local residents, as a critical aspect of a trip [16], is likely to exert influences on tourist citizenship behavior. Limited research has investigated the impact pathway from host-guest interaction to tourist citizenship behavior. Some scholars even propose that tourist-resident interaction is short and superficial, which is not enough to exert impacts on tourists’ behavior [17]. However, the experiential nature of host-guest interaction has been identified recently. Wei et al. [18] found that host-guest interaction affected tourists’ participation in destination public service value co-creation activities through experiential value. From emotion elicitation perspective, Tu and Ma [5] indicated that positive host-guest interaction stimulated tourists’ gratitude, thus promoting tourists’ environmentally responsible behavior. It could be inferred that there may be rational and emotional transmission mechanisms from host-guest interaction to tourists’ reciprocal behaviors. Additionally, some study found that interaction quantity itself could induce tourists’ positive attitudes and behaviors [16,19]. Wong and Lin [20] first discussed the influence of social interaction on tourists’ citizenship behavior. However, its focus was tourist-tourist interaction and tourist-companion interaction rather than tourist-resident interaction.
Although many studies have regarded host-guest interaction as a critical factor in promoting positive behaviors, its influence on tourist citizenship behavior remains unexplored. Also, there is no consensus on discussion about whether it is the quality or quantity of host-guest interaction that works in stimulating positive attitudes and behaviors. Therefore, the objective of this study is to investigate the impact of host-guest interaction on tourists’ citizenship behavior. On the one hand, it aims to explore the transmission mechanism of this impact. On the other hand, it strives to dig out which dimension of host-guest interaction is actually playing a role. Specially, starting from the travel experience nature of host-guest interaction, this paper explores its influence on tourists’ rational evaluation and emotion elicitation process. Then, combining cognitive appraisal theory and social exchange theory, a theoretical model is established to depict the relationship between host-guest interaction and tourist citizenship behavior.

2. Literature Review and Hypothesis Development

2.1. Tourist Citizenship Behavior (TCB)

Adapted from customer citizenship behavior, tourist citizenship behavior is specially used to depict positive, discretionary and voluntary actions by tourists [13]. As explained earlier, these extra-role behaviors are not necessary for the functioning of a tourist offering but benefit the destination directly or indirectly [5]. Specifically, tourist citizenship behavior comprises behaviors like recommending, providing feedback to DMOs and helping other tourists. Recommending, known as word-of mouth, refers to behaviors of suggesting a destination to friends, relatives or others through online or face-to-face communications. Feedback is another kind of destination-oriented positive behavior. It refers to providing suggestions to a destination to improve its product or service. From tourist-oriented aspect, helping other tourists describes the act of assisting others when traveling in a destination. Tourist citizenship behavior therefore helps the destination development.
Tourists who engage in citizenship behaviors care for the destination they visit, as if they were citizens of the place. Previous studies have investigated how to encourage tourist citizenship behavior. However, literature mainly focuses on tourist-level or destination-level factors and ignores the impacts of on-site host-guest interaction. The following part is going to discuss the influence pathway from host-guest interaction to tourist citizenship behavior.

2.2. Host Guest Interaction and TCB

In tourism, host-guest interaction refers to the face-to-face contact and communication between residents and tourists [21]. Tourists inevitably encounter with local residents in tourism destinations, such as interacting with local service personnel when shopping, asking directions, or communicating with local residents at tourist attractions. Prior literature has mostly discussed the effect of host-guest interaction from two dimensions, that is the quantity and quality of host-guest interactions (such as Fan, Zhang, Jenkins, etc.; luo, Brown & Huang) [16,22]. Some scholars have testified the significant impacts of positive host-guest interaction on residents’ or tourists’ behaviors (such as Tu & Ma; Xiong, Wang, Yang & He) [5,23], while some other scholars supposed that frequent host-guest interactions itself can improve their relationship [19]. Therefore, this paper will discuss the relationship between the host-guest interaction and TCB from the quality and quantity dimensions.
According to symbolic interaction theory, tourists would constantly adjust their attitudes and behaviors during the interaction with local residents [24]. Actually, such interaction is not only a transaction of money and resources, but also an emotional connection to a destination [18]. Therefore, the following part will investigate the impact of host-guest interaction on TCB from two paths, that is rational evaluation and emotional stimulation.

2.2.1. Social Exchange Theory: Role of Perceived Experiential Value

For tourists, interacting with local residents forms an integral and enriching aspect of travelers’ overall experiential journey [16,18]. Tourists derive utility and value from these interactions [25], whereas experiential value exerts influences on tourists’ behaviors. Specifically, host-guest interaction can enrich tourists’ travel experience from many aspects. For example, simple encounters with local residents may help tourists experience local culture through local residents’ clothes or native languages. By asking directions from local people, tourists may find the scenic spots they want to go, which can help save their time [18]. Moreover, positive host-guest interaction can bring tourists unique emotional experiences such as respect and self-efficacy [5]. Previous studies have verified the positive relationship between positive host-guest interaction and tourists’ experiential value [18]. Although no studies have proved that more host-guest interactions result in high experiential value, the mere exposure theory suggests that mere repeated exposure to stimulus can lead people to evaluate it more positively [26]. And the mere exposure theory has been applied in many fields [27]. For example, Iordanova and Stylidis [28] observed that visiting times exerted a positive effect on destination image of tourists. From this, we propose the following hypothesis:
H1: 
The quantity of host-guest interaction has a positive influence on tourists’ perception of experiential value.
H2: 
The quality of host-guest interaction has a positive influence on tourists’ perception of experiential value.
According to social exchange theory, individual behavior is primarily determined by a reciprocal rule [29,30]. Reciprocity governs interactions, such that when one participant exhibits benevolent behavior, it prompts a reciprocal and corresponding behavior from the other participant [31,32,33]. Since travel experience is highly related to tourists’ travel motive, experiential value is expected to stimulate tourists’ reciprocal behaviors to the destination. Previous studies have verified that experiential value was positively associated with tourists’ satisfaction [34] and tourists’ participation in destination value co-creation [18]. Therefore, it could be inferred that experiential value of tourists will promote their citizenship behavior, that is,
H3: 
Tourists’ perception of experiential value has a positive impact on TCB.

2.2.2. Cognitive Appraisal Theory: Role of Place Attachment

Cognitive appraisal theory (CAT) helps to understand how individuals respond to stimuli in external environment. It emphasizes the role of cognitive appraisal in emotion, and proposes that emotion arises from the evaluation of an event and stimuli in relation to personal motives and goals. Moreover, CAT further explains how positive and negative emotions emerge by focusing on evaluation of motive consistency and inconsistency [35]. When the stimuli or event aligns with their personal motives and goals, people experience positive emotions. Conversely, negative emotions arise when the stimuli is incompatible with their goals. CAT has been applied in tourism studies to understand tourists’ emotions. For instance, researchers discovered that when tourists evaluated the destination as offering a memorable tourism experience, they found it to be a catalyst for enhancing family cohesion [36]. Residents who evaluated their experience at dark tourism sites as a loss reported more negative emotions like sadness [35].
Generally, one of the most important motive for tourists is to obtain satisfactory travel experience [37]. For destination development, it is critical to ensure tourists having positive experiences during their visit [38]. This paper adopts cognitive appraisal theory, and presumes that host-guest interaction can satisfy the motives of experiential value and help tourists generate place attachment to the destination. As illustrated earlier, host-guest interaction may be positively related to tourists’ experiential value evaluation about a destination. Such positive evaluation may further stimulate tourists’ positive emotions towards the destination. Since place attachment refers to a positive emotional bond between people and a particular place [39,40], this paper utilized it to represent tourists’ positive emotions elicited by perceived experiential value. Previous studies have observed that when tourists are satisfied with their experience at a destination, they become emotional attached to the destination [13,41]. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis.
H4: 
Experiential value has a positive impact on tourists’ place attachment.
CAT also utilizes the evaluative nature of emotions to explain their influence on consumer behavior [42]. Specifically, emotions can either facilitate or hinder actions, as individuals tend to behave in ways that promote positive emotions and avoid negative ones [43]. For instance, it was found that authenticity and employee helpfulness evaluation produced customer delight, which in turn, significantly stimulated positive word-of-mouth [44]. Accordingly, place attachment may promote tourists to participate in behaviors that can benefit the destination. Previous studies proved the positive impact of place attachment on tourists’ environmentally responsible behavior [45,46], tourist loyalty [47], and increased consumption of local products [48]. Therefore, it could be inferred that place attachment can contribute to TCB. The following hypothesis is proposed.
H5: 
Place attachment has a positive impact on TCB.
In line with CAT, place attachment (emotion) arises from the evaluation of host-guest interaction (stimuli) in relation to experiential value (personal motive). Positive emotions (place attachment) further induce tourists’ positive behaviors towards the destination (TCB). As discussed earlier, host-guest interaction quality and quantity contributes to tourists’ experiential value, which further help generate tourists’ place attachment and TCB to the destination. Therefore, experiential value and place attachment mediate the relationship between host-guest interaction and TCB. The following hypotheses are proposed. Meanwhile, the theoretical model is shown in Figure 1.
H6: 
Experiential value and place attachment mediates the relationship between host-guest interaction quality and TCB.
H7: 
Experiential value and place attachment mediates the relationship between host-guest interaction quantity and TCB.

3. Methods

3.1. Constructs and Measures

The constructs in this paper were measured on a 5-point likert scale. The measurement items for each variable were based on previous literature. Specifically, the evaluation encompassed both the quantity and quality of host-guest interaction, utilizing seven items derived from the research of Luo et al. [16]. Experiential value was evaluated using three items from He, Hu, Swanson et al. [49] and Torres-Moraga et al. [13]. Four items from Vada et al. [40] were used to measure place attachment. The scale of tourist citizenship behavior referred to the study of Shafiee et al. [50], including six items. To guarantee the validity of the content, a panel of three experts, who are academics well-versed in survey design, was consulted to refine the wording of each item.
Since this study specifically targeted Chinese visitors to a Chinese city, the questionnaire was meticulously designed and presented entirely in the Chinese language. We utilized Brislin’s [51] back-translation approach to ensure the accurate translation of all questionnaire items from English to Chinese. Two authors translated the original questionnaires into Chinese. To guarantee precision, we invited two English-speaking tourism experts to perform a back-translation of the items into English. By comparing the discrepancies between the translations, we refined the questionnaires to enhance the overall accuracy.

3.2. Questionnaire Distribution and Sample Profile

The questionnaire of this study was distributed to tourists visiting Mout Tai in Tai’an City, Shandong Province, China. Mount Tai is a natural and cultural World Heritage Site. It attracts more than 8 million tourists annually. The decision to select Mount Tai natural forest park as the research site was based on two reasons. Firstly, Mount Tai, renowned both domestically and internationally as a tourist destination, attracts a diverse array of tourists. Secondly, tourists generally spend at least two days when visiting Mount Tai, affording them opportunities to engage and interact with local residents. At the tourist exit of Mount Tai, the research team administered questionnaires to tourists who had completed their ascent of the mountain. Totally, we distributed 600 questionnaires. And 499 were deemed valid, giving an effective questionnaire return rate of 84%.
Table 1 presented the respondent profile. Men (60.3%) outnumbered women (39.7%). The sample was dominated by younger visitors (64.9% aged under 30 years old). Approximately two-thirds of the respondents possessed either a junior college or undergraduate education level. Occupationally, students and corporate workers constituted approximately half of the participants. Additionally, 28.9% of the respondents indicated an income of 2000 yuan or less, while 25.6% reported an income ranging from 5001 to 8000 yuan. 65.7 percent were from outside Shandong province. 64.9 percent were unmarried. Most respondents came to Mount Tai for the first time.

4. Results

4.1. Common Method Variance Test

To address concerns about common method variance (CMV), Harman’s single factor test was conducted through exploratory factor analysis (EFA) [52]. The Harman single-factor test results revealed a multi-factorial configuration, with the factor possessing the highest eigenvalue accounting for merely 38.232% of the total variance. The explained variance did not surpass half of the total variance. Consequently, this study does not exhibit a significant issue of common method bias.

4.2. Measurement Model Test

Prior to testing the proposed hypotheses via structural equation modeling, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was employed to evaluate the model fit of the measurement model and assess the construct validity. Model fit indices (X2/df = 2.850, RMSEA = 0.061, GFI = 0.919, IFI = 0.958, TLI = 0.949, CFI = 0.958) suggested that the measurement model was a good fit to the data. Reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of main constructs were examined through the procedure proposed by Fornell and Larcker [53]. As shown in Table 2, for each construct, the composite reliability exceeded the suggested threshold of 0.70 [54]. This result demonstrated satisfactory reliability and internal consistency of all measures. The average variance extracted (AVE) of all latent variables was greater than 0.5, suggesting sufficient convergent validity. As shown in Table 3, the correlation estimate between any pair of latent variables was smaller than the square root of for AVE each latent variable, providing evidence for good discriminant validity.

4.3. Structural Model and Hypothetical Test

Structural equation modeling (SEM) was utilized to test the hypothetical relationships. Table 4 and Figure 2 display the SEM results. The results show that the structural model fits the data well (X2/df =2.841, RMSEA = 0.061, CFI = 0.957, IFI = 0.957, TLI = 0.950). On this basis, the structural model was then used to verify the research hypotheses.
The hypothetical test result was presented in Table 4. The influence of quantity of host-guest interactions on perceived experiential value was not significant (β = 0.06, p > 0.05). That is, H1 was not supported. Quality of host-guest interaction had a significantly positive impact on perceived experiential value (β = 0.398, p < 0.001). H2 was supported. Meanwhile, H5 was supported, with perceived experiential value being significantly and positively associated with TCB (β = 0.275, p < 0.001). From cognitive appraisal perspective, perceived experiential value was positively associated with place attachment (β = 0.749, p < 0.001). That is, H3 was supported. Place attachment further exerted significant and positive effects on TCB (β = 0.397, p < 0.001). H4 was supported.
Forests 15 01156 g002
Forests 15 01156 g002
As for the mediating effect of perceived experiential value and place attachment, this study followed the procedure proposed by MacKinnon and Davidson [55], and utilized the bootstrap method. The number of bootstrap samples was set to 5000. With a 95% confidence interval as for the mediating effect of perceived experiential value and place attachment, this study followed the procedure proposed by MacKinnon and Davidson [55], and utilized the bootstrap method, the structural model was tested to obtain the confidence interval and t-value for the indirect effect between variables. If the confidence interval does not contain 0, and the t value is more than 1.96, then the mediating effect is significant. As shown in Table 5, the mediating effect of perceived experiential value and place attachment between quantity of host-guest interaction and TCB was not significant, with a 95% confidence interval of (−0.012, 0.057). However, the mediating effect of that between the quality of host-guest interaction and TCB was significant at 0.01 level. The indirect effect coefficient was 0.119, and the 95% confidence interval was (0.062, 0.192). The overall hypothesis test results were presented in Figure 2.

5. Conclusions and Discussions

5.1. Conclusions

To explore whether host-guest interaction can stimulate TCB, this study proposed a model based on social exchange theory and cognitive appraisal theory. Host-guest interaction, as a crucial aspect of any trip, is anticipated to improve tourists’ experiential value, thus promoting tourists’ citizenship behavior out of reciprocal principle. Meanwhile, a rational assessment of experiential value can further enhance tourists’ place attachment to a destination, ultimately fostering their citizenship behavior. This results confirmed the rational and emotional transmission mechanisms from host-guest interaction to tourist citizenship behavior.
Furthermore, host-guest interaction was examined from two perspectives in this paper, that is quantity and quality. The findings indicated that the quality of host-guest interaction had a notable positive influence on tourists’ experiential value. This experiential value, in turn, had a significantly positive impact on tourists’ citizenship behavior, both directly and indirectly through their emotional attachment to the place. On the other hand, the results indicated that quantity of host-guest interaction has no significant effects on perceived experiential value of tourists. That is, from the experience nature of host-guest interaction, it was the quality of host-guest interaction that could improve tourists’ overall experiential value rather than the quantity of host-guest interaction.
From these findings, one can surmise that positive host-guest interaction serves as a pivotal predictor of tourist citizenship behavior. Both TCB and host-guest interaction have consistently garnered significant attention in the tourism industry [5,56]. However, the connection between host-guest interaction and TCB has generally been ignored [15]. Especially, previous studies on TCB mainly investigated its antecedents from individual level and destination level [57,58,59,60], neglecting the effect of on-site host-guest interaction [61]. Thus, this study extended the research on both host-guest interaction and TCB.

5.2. Theoretical Contributions

This study offered several theoretical contributions. First, this study clarified the impact path of host-guest interaction on tourists’ citizenship behavior. While previous studies have delved into the influence of such interactions on tourists’ attitudes and behaviors [62], they have overlooked its potential impact on tourists’ citizenship behavior. Additionally, the majority of prior research has primarily emphasized the experiential facet of host-guest interaction, discussing its consequences on tourists’ behavior through the lens of social exchange theory [5,18]. However, these studies have neglected the emotional attachment to a place that is evoked by experiential value evaluation [15]. Therefore, this study, drawing upon cognitive appraisal theory, investigated the impact of value evaluation on place attachment and further delved into the mechanisms by which place attachment influenced tourists’ citizenship behavior. Secondly, this study probed into the effect of host-guest interaction on tourist citizenship behavior, examining it from two distinct dimensions: the quantity and quality of interaction. Prior research has often conflated these two aspects, focusing primarily on the combined effect of frequent and positive host-guest encounters [5,62,63]. However, this study makes a crucial distinction between quantity and quality, revealing that it is the quality of interaction, rather than its frequency, that plays a pivotal role in fostering tourist citizenship behavior.

5.3. Practical Implications

Drawing from the aforementioned research conclusions, the quality of host-guest interaction emerges as a crucial antecedent of tourist citizenship behavior (TCB). This finding holds several practical implications. Firstly, destination management organizations should prioritize measures aimed at elevating the quality of host-guest interactions. This can be achieved through various avenues, including public advertising campaigns and training programs designed to enhance the hospitality and welcoming attitude of local residents. Furthermore, this study validates the positive influence of experiential value and place attachment in fostering TCB. Consequently, destinations should consider implementing strategies that effectively promote tourists’ experiential value and foster a deeper sense of place attachment, as these factors can serve as powerful catalysts in stimulating TCB. For instance, Mount Tai could offer complimentary interpretation services to tourists, leveraging the expertise of local residents who are well-versed and passionate about the mountain. These residents could volunteer as tour guides, and in return, they would be granted complimentary access to Mount Tai or other travel perks. Such an arrangement not only enhances the experiential value for tourists but also fosters a deeper sense of place attachment among them towards the destination.

5.4. Limitations

There are certain limitations to be acknowledged in this study. Firstly, the data was solely collected from a natural forest park, which restricts the generalization of the research findings to other types of destinations. It is, therefore, imperative to conduct further studies in diverse types of destinations to validate and extend the current results. Secondly, while this paper has examined the impact of host-guest interaction on TCB from the perspectives of quantity and quality, there is potential to enrich the theoretical model by incorporating additional dimensions of interaction, such as content, intensity, and context. Furthermore, interaction is not confined to tourists and local residents alone; tourist-tourist interaction is also a significant factor that shapes tourists’ behaviors. Future research endeavors should aim to unpack the underlying mechanisms of tourist-tourist interaction and its impact on TCB.

Author Contributions

J.B.: research design, conceptualization, data analysis and manuscript writing. B.W.: research design, data preparation and data analysis. F.L.: conceptualization, manuscript preparation and supervised this project. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province (Grant No. ZR2021QG023), Forestry Science and Technology Development Project of China (Grant No. KJZXRZ202306), the University Innovation and Technology Project of Shandong Province in China (Grant No. 2020RWG004), the High-level Research Foundation of QAU (Grant No. 1119710), and the Project Supported by Enterprises and Institutions (Grant No. 6602424706).

Data Availability Statement

The data of this research are publicly available.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Shasha, Z.T.; Geng, Y.; Sun, H.P.; Musakwa, W.; Sun, L. Past, current, and future perspectives on eco-tourism: A bibliometric review between 2001 and 2018. Environ. Sci. Pollut. R 2020, 27, 23514–23528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Dinç, A.; Bahar, M.; Topsakal, Y. Ecotourism research: Bibliometric overview. Tour. Manag. Stud. 2023, 19, 29–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Galloway, G.; Lopez, K. Sensation seeking and attitudes to aspects of national parks: A preliminary empirical investigation. Tour. Manag. 1999, 20, 665–671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Kavallinis, I.; Pizam, A. The environmental impacts of tourism—Whose responsibility is it anyway? The case study of Mykonos. J. Travel Res. 1994, 33, 26–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Tu, H.; Ma, J. Does positive contact between residents and tourists stimulate tourists’ environmentally responsible behavior? The role of gratitude and boundary conditions. J. Travel Res. 2022, 61, 1774–1790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Frey, N.; George, R. Responsible tourism management: The missing link between business owners’ attitudes and behaviour in the Cape Town tourism industry. Tour. Manag. 2010, 31, 621–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Croes, R.; Kubickova, M. From potential to ability to compete: Towards a performance-based tourism competitiveness index. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2013, 2, 146–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Cottrell, S.P.; Vaske, J.J.; Roemer, J.M. Resident satisfaction with sustainable tourism: The case of Frankenwald Nature Park, Germany. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2013, 8, 42–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Liu, J.S.; Tsaur, S.H. We are in the same boat: Tourist citizenship behaviors. Tour. Manag. 2014, 42, 88–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Groth, M. Customers as good soldiers: Examining citizenship behaviors in internet service deliveries. J. Manag. 2005, 31, 7–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Mandl, L.; Hogreve, J. Buffering effects of brand community identification in service failures: The role of customer citizenship behaviors. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 107, 130–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Liu, L.; Cui, T.; Wu, J.; Cao, R.; Ye, Y. Encouraging tourist citizenship behavior through resource uniqueness and service quality: The mediating role of emotions. J. Vacat. Mark. 2021, 27, 45–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Torres-Moraga, E.; Rodriguez-Sanchez, C.; Sancho-Esper, F. Understanding tourist citizenship behavior at the destination level. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2021, 49, 592–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Yao, Y.; Wang, G.; Ren, L.; Qiu, H. Exploring tourist citizenship behavior in wellness tourism destinations: The role of recovery perception and psychological ownership. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2023, 55, 209–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Tu, H.; Zhang, Z.; Jiang, Z. When and How tourists engage in citizenship behavior: The interactive effect of trait gratitude and positive resident–tourist contact. J. Travel Res. 2023, 62, 1832–1847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Luo, X.; Brown, G.; Huang, S.S. Host perceptions of backpackers: Examining the influence of intergroup contact. Tour. Manag. 2015, 50, 292–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Tomljenovic, R. Tourism and intercultural understanding or contact hypothesis revisited. In Tourism, Progress and Peace; Wallingford UK: Cabi. 2010; pp. 17–34.
  18. Wei, M.; Bai, C.; Li, C.; Wang, H. The effect of host–guest interaction in tourist co-creation in public services: Evidence from Hangzhou. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res. 2020, 25, 457–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Pettigrew, T.F.; Tropp, L.R. A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2006, 90, 751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Wong, I.A.; Lin, Z. Understanding tourist citizenship behavioral intentions: The role of social interactions and brand perceptions. J. China Tour. Res. 2022, 18, 592–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Reisinger, Y.; Turner, L. Cross-Cultural Behaviour in Tourism: Concepts and Analysis; Elsevier: Oxford, UK, 2003; Volume 35. [Google Scholar]
  22. Fan, D.X.; Zhang, H.Q.; Jenkins, C.L.; Lin, P.M. Does tourist–host social contact reduce perceived cultural distance? J. Travel Res. 2017, 56, 998–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Xiong, L.; Wang, H.; Yang, Y.; He, W. Promoting resident-tourist interaction quality when residents are expected to be hospitable hosts at destinations. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2021, 46, 183–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Colton, C.W. Leisure, recreation, tourism: A symbolic interactionism view. Ann. Tour. Res. 1987, 14, 345–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Prebensen, N.K.; Woo, E.; Chen, J.S.; Uysal, M. Motivation and involvement as antecedents of the perceived value of the destination experience. J. Travel Res. 2013, 52, 253–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zajonc, R.B. Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1968, 9, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Stylidis, D.; Woosnam, K.M.; Kim, S. Perceptions of attractions, residents as “more knowledgeable others” and destination image: Evidence from two destinations. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2022, 24, 472–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Iordanova, E.; Stylidis, D. The impact of visitors’ experience intensity on in-situ destination image formation. Tour. Rev. 2019, 74, 841–860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Homans, G.C. Social behavior as exchange. Am. J. Sociol. 1958, 63, 597–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Erul, E.; Uslu, A.; Woosnam, K.M.; Santos, J.A.C.; Aleshinloye, K.D.; Ribeiro, M.A. Navigating the New Normal: The Role of Residents’ Involvement and Support in Sustainable Tourism Recovery. Sustainability 2024, 16, 4333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Cropanzano, R.; Mitchell, M.S. Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. J. Manag. 2005, 31, 874–900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Lai, P.H.; Chuang, S.T.; Zhang, M.C.; Nepal, S.K. The non-profit sharing economy from a social exchange theory perspective: A case from World Wide Opportunities on Organic Farms in Taiwan. J. Sustain. Tour. 2020, 28, 1970–1987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Molm, L.D. Theoretical comparisons of forms of exchange. Sociol. Theor. 2003, 21, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Prebensen, N.K.; Kim, H.; Uysal, M. Cocreation as moderator between the experience value and satisfaction relationship. J. Travel Res. 2016, 55, 934–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Jordan, E.J.; Prayag, G. Residents’ cognitive appraisals, emotions, and coping strategies at local dark tourism sites. J. Travel Res. 2022, 61, 887–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Lee, K.J.; Lee, S.Y. Cognitive appraisal theory, memorable tourism experiences, and family cohesion in rural travel. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2021, 38, 399–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Helkkula, A.; Kelleher, C.; Pihlström, M. Characterizing value as an experience: Implications for service researchers and managers. J. Serv. Res. 2012, 15, 59–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Choi, H.; Choi, H.C. Investigating tourists’ fun-eliciting process toward tourism destination sites: An application of cognitive appraisal theory. J. Travel Res. 2019, 58, 732–744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Dwyer, L.; Chen, N.; Lee, J. The role of place attachment in tourism research. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2019, 36, 645–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Vada, S.; Prentice, C.; Hsiao, A. The influence of tourism experience and well-being on place attachment. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2019, 47, 322–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Yuksel, A.; Yuksel, F.; Bilim, Y. Destination attachment: Effects on customer satisfaction and cognitive, affective and conative loyalty. Tour. Manag. 2010, 31, 274–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Watson, L.; Spence, M.T. Causes and consequences of emotions on consumer behaviour: A review and integrative cognitive appraisal theory. Eur. J. Mark. 2007, 41, 487–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Bagozzi, R.P.; Gopinath, M.; Nyer, P.U. The role of emotions in marketing. J. Acad. Market. Sci. 1999, 27, 184–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Jiang, Y. A cognitive appraisal process of customer delight: The moderating effect of place identity. J. Travel Res. 2020, 59, 1029–1043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Cheng, T.M.; Wu, H.C.; Huang, L.M. The influence of place attachment on the relationship between destination attractiveness and environmentally responsible behavior for island tourism in Penghu, Taiwan. J. Sustain. Tour. 2013, 21, 1166–1187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ramkissoon, H.; Smith, L.D.G.; Weiler, B. Testing the dimensionality of place attachment and its relationships with place satisfaction and pro-environmental behaviours: A structural equation modelling approach. Tour. Manag. 2013, 36, 552–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Patwardhan, V.; Ribeiro, M.A.; Payini, V.; Woosnam, K.M.; Mallya, J.; Gopalakrishnan, P. Visitors’ place attachment and destination loyalty: Examining the roles of emotional solidarity and perceived safety. J. Travel Res. 2020, 59, 3–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Kastenholz, E.; Eusébio, C.; Carneiro, M.J. Purchase of local products within the rural tourist experience context. Tour. Econ. 2016, 22, 729–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. He, X.; Hu, D.; Swanson, S.R.; Su, L.; Chen, X. Destination perceptions, relationship quality, and tourist environmentally responsible behavior. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2018, 28, 93–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Shafiee, M.M.; Tabaeeian, R.A.; Khoshfetrat, A. Tourist engagement and citizenship behavior: The mediating role of relationship quality in the hotel industry. Tour. Hosp. Res. 2020, 20, 481–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Brislin, R.W. Back-translation for cross-cultural research. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 1970, 1, 185–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Gerbing, D.W.; Anderson, J.C. An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. J. Mark. Res. 1988, 25, 186–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Davidson, R.; MacKinnon, J.G. Econometric Theory and Methods; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2004; pp. 189–196. [Google Scholar]
  56. Wang, X.; Cave, J.; Simpson, M. Interdependencies in Visiting Relatives Travel: Uncovering the Nature, Meanings, and Dynamics of Host–Guest Interactions. J. Hosp. Tour. Res. 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Rather, R.A.; Raisinghani, M.; Gligor, D.; Parrey, S.H.; Russo, I.; Bozkurt, S. Examining tourist citizenship behaviors through affective, cognitive, behavioral engagement and reputation: Symmetrical and asymmetrical approaches. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2023, 75, 103451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Li, J.; Liu, C.; Yuan, J.J.; Zhang, Z. Understanding Destination Immersion in Rural Tourism: The Effects of Destination Fascination and Resident–Tourist Interaction. J. Travel Res. 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Su, L.; Li, M.; Swanson, S.R. The influence of organizational interpersonal climate on the belonging, well-being, and citizenship behaviors of tourism practitioners. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2024, 58, 419–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Martínez García de Leaniz, P.; Herrero, Á.; García de los Salmones, M.D.M. Communicating Destination Social Responsibility Through Social Media: The Roles of Tourists’ Social Engagement, Citizenship Behaviors, and Emotions. J. Travel Res. 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Lu, F.; Wang, B.; Bi, J.; Guo, W. Study on the Influence of Host–Guest Interaction on Tourists’ Pro-Environment Behavior: Evidence from Taishan National Forest Park in China. Forests 2024, 15, 813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Qu, Y.; Zhou, Q.; Cao, L. How do positive host-guest interactions in tourism alter the indicators of tourists’ general attachment styles? A moderated mediation model. Tour. Manag. 2024, 105, 104937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Eusébio, C.; Vieira, A.L.; Lima, S. Place attachment, host–tourist interactions, and residents’ attitudes towards tourism development: The case of Boa Vista Island in Cape Verde. J. Sustain. Tour. 2018, 26, 890–909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Forests 15 01156 g001
Figure 1. Theoretical model. Note: EV = experiential value; PA = place attachment; TCB = tourist citizenship behavior.
Figure 1. Theoretical model. Note: EV = experiential value; PA = place attachment; TCB = tourist citizenship behavior.
Forests 15 01156 g001
Forests 15 01156 g001
Figure 2. Results of the hypothetical model. Note: ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. QUAN = quantity of host-guest interaction; QUAL = quality of host-guest interaction; EV = experiential value; PA = place attach-ment; TCB = tourist citizenship behavior.
Figure 2. Results of the hypothetical model. Note: ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. QUAN = quantity of host-guest interaction; QUAL = quality of host-guest interaction; EV = experiential value; PA = place attach-ment; TCB = tourist citizenship behavior.
Forests 15 01156 g001
Table 1. Demographic description of samples (n = 499).
Table 1. Demographic description of samples (n = 499).
Demographics%Demographics%
Gender Income (RMB/Month)
Male60.32000 and below28.9
Female39.72001~5000a17.4
Age 5001~800025.6
20 and below238001~10,00012.6
21~3041.9More than 10,00115.5
31~4020Residential region
41~508.2Other cities of Shandong province34.1
51 and over6.8Cities not belonging to Shandong province65.9
Education level Marital Status
Junior high school or below6.4Married32.9
Senior high school/technical13.2Unmarried64.9
Junior college/Undergraduate72.3Other2.2
Master degree6.2Visiting frequency
Master degree above1.8One 74.9
Occupation Two 13.6
Agricultural laborers1.6Three 4.2
Enterprise Staff26.6Four3.2
Government9.7More than four times4.0
Student32.3
Self-employed11.7
Other18.1
Table 2. Confirmatory factor analysis results.
Table 2. Confirmatory factor analysis results.
Measurement ItemsEstimateAVECRα
QUAN1How often have you communicated with local residents?0.8560.5940.8140.812
QUAN2How often have you communicated with local service personnel in tourism service scenario?0.714
QUAN3How often have you communicated with local residents out of tourism service scenario?0.735
QUAL1My interaction with local residents is harmonious.0.9140.7330.9160.911
QUAL2My interaction with local residents is friendly.0.954
QUAL3My interaction with local residents is equal.0.847
QUAL4My interaction with local residents is cooperative.0.686
PA1I feel that this place is a part of me.0.5290.5040.7940.822
PA2This place is the best place for what I like to do. 0.519
PA3This place is very special to me.0.842
PA4No other place can compare to this place.0.871
EV1Considering the money I spent, this destination is worth a visit.0.8970.8170.9300.928
EV2Considering the time I spent, this destination is worth a visit.0.959
EV3Considering the effort I made, this destination is worth a visit.0.852
TCB1Recommend Mount Tai to my friends and family.0.7900.5740.8900.895
TCB2Say good things about Mount Tai to others.0.788
TCB3Fill out a tourist satisfaction survey. 0.781
TCB4Inform the management organization of Mount Tai about the great service I received by an individual employee.0.716
TCB5Provide advice to help improve Mount Tai. 0.733
TCB6When I have experienced a problem in Mount Tai, I let its management organization know about it.0.736
Note: QUAN = quantity of host-guest interaction; QUAL = quality of host-guest interaction.
Table 3. Discriminant validity for the measurement model.
Table 3. Discriminant validity for the measurement model.
VariablesQUANQUALEVPATCB
QUAN0.771
QUAL0.376 **0.856
PV0.209 **0.409 **0.904
PA0.304 **0.487 **0.656 **0.710
TCB0.131 **0.243 **0.508 **0.487 **0.758
Note: ** p < 0.01. The numbers in bold font represent the square root of the average variance extracted, off-diagonal elements are the correlation estimates.
Table 4. Model testing results.
Table 4. Model testing results.
HypothesisPath RelationshipStandardized CoefficientSECRpTest Result
H1PV<---QUAN0.060.0511.1340.257Not supported
H2PV<---QUAL0.3980.0677.376***Supported
H3PA<---PV0.7490.04410.614***Supported
H4TCB<---PA0.3970.1035.029***Supported
H5TCB<---PV0.2750.0573.949***Supported
Note: *** p < 0.001.
Table 5. The mediating effect test results.
Table 5. The mediating effect test results.
HypothesisIndirect Effect CoefficientSEPercentile 95% Confidence Interval
LowerUpperp
stdInd10.0180.018−0.0120.0570.262
stdInd20.1190.0340.0620.1920.001
Note: Ind1 = QUAN-EV-PA-TCB; Ind2 = QUAL-EV-PA-TCB.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bi, J.; Wang, B.; Lu, F. Does Host-Guest Interaction Stimulate Tourists’ Citizenship Behavior? A Combination of Social Exchange Theory and Cognitive Appraisal Theory. Forests 2024, 15, 1156. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15071156

AMA Style

Bi J, Wang B, Lu F. Does Host-Guest Interaction Stimulate Tourists’ Citizenship Behavior? A Combination of Social Exchange Theory and Cognitive Appraisal Theory. Forests. 2024; 15(7):1156. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15071156

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bi, Juan, Bingnan Wang, and Feifei Lu. 2024. "Does Host-Guest Interaction Stimulate Tourists’ Citizenship Behavior? A Combination of Social Exchange Theory and Cognitive Appraisal Theory" Forests 15, no. 7: 1156. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15071156

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop