Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage Show: Exploring the Sustainable Development of Taiwan’s Religious Tourism from the Perspectives of Attraction, Happiness, and Revisit Intention

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors:

The manuscript discussed the relationships among tourism attraction, experience value, happiness, and revisit intention in the religious tourism context during the Covid-19 pandemic. It is a nice try for the authors to develop the study theme and write it out for publication. However, there are several issues that the authors need to consider.

Firstly, it would be better if the authors made some adjustments to the abstract section and keywords. We see the abstract as a paragraph that briefly introduces the value, main content, study method, results, and paper contributions. While in the present manuscript, the first sentence seems useless in this context. And the authors showed too much detail about the study design, which is unnecessary. On the other hand, I recommend the authors reconsider the keywords and use more appropriate ones.

Secondly, the introduction is to let readers be able to tell right away what they are going to be learning and determine if it's of interest to them or not. And I don't think the authors showed an excellent reason why the topic was important enough to warrant investigation. In this way, readers may misidentify the paper. So make sure you explain and spotlight the importance of the topic, why it is relevant, and how you are the authority. The authors can do this by generalizing the topic through statements or including current research that has been done regarding the subject.

Thirdly, same as the introduction section, there exists the same issue in the literature review that the process of hypotheses development is not persuasive in my eyes. A hypothesis is not just a guess; it should be based on existing theories and knowledge. However, the logic of proposing a hypothesis in this manuscript is a little subjective. And we can see this problem, especially in the description of H1 and H2. Citing more studies as you can to ensure objectivity. Besides, it would be better if the authors adjusted the hypotheses' positions to ensure they showed after the relevant variables had been introduced.

Forth, in Figure 1, Why did the authors represent H3 and H6 with dotted arrows?

Fifth, the method section would be more fluent if the authors combined and streamlined 3.1, 3.4, and 3.5 in one paragraph. Besides, on page 6, line 220, what is the standard of invalid questionnaires? On the other hand, the authors mentioned two dimensions of experiential value in the literature review section. However, when designing questionnaires, why did the authors choose five items in one dimension eventually?

Sixth, the sentence "The first part is the content of informed consent... the relevant rights of the respondents" should be deleted on page 6, lines 225-227. Also, table 1 should be deleted. Table 2 should be deleted or shown in the appendix. Table 4 is also not necessary. We can see the authors have strictly carried out the steps of data analysis, but usually, we only present the most important parts with others simply described.

Seventh, the description of the data analysis process can be more brief. Please refer to other papers of the same type and make some improvements.

Eighth, the content of the study's theoretical implications, managerial implications, and limitations should belong to, not parallel with, 6 Theoretical and managerial implications. And I have no idea what the content of "10 conclusions" is for.

 

At last, I think the manuscript's content would be more acceptable if the authors took some time to polish it. And some of the sentences need to be rewritten to ensure readability.

Author Response

Reviewer 1

Dear Reviewer,

 

Thank you very much for forwarding to us the valuable comments from the reviewers. Their time and efforts are very much appreciated. We have revised our manuscript based on their comments, and have summarized the changes in the following:

Dear authors:

The manuscript discussed the relationships among tourism attraction, experience value, happiness, and revisit intention in the religious tourism context during the Covid-19 pandemic. It is a nice try for the authors to develop the study theme and write it out for publication. However, there are several issues that the authors need to consider.

Firstly, it would be better if the authors made some adjustments to the abstract section and keywords. We see the abstract as a paragraph that briefly introduces the value, main content, study method, results, and paper contributions. While in the present manuscript, the first sentence seems useless in this context. And the authors showed too much detail about the study design, which is unnecessary. On the other hand, I recommend the authors reconsider the keywords and use more appropriate ones.

Response and Revised(p.1)

Thank you for your comments. We have been revised the abstract and keywords following your suggestion.

The Dajia Mazu pilgrimage is one of the most well-known events in the world. It not only satisfies tourists' spiritual desires for religious beliefs but also drives the development of destination tourism. In recent years, the tourism industry has been severely impacted by COVID-19. However, tourists participating in the Dajia Mazu pilgrimage continue to do so without fear of the pandemic. Therefore, understanding the relationship between tourists' attraction to religious tourism, perception of happiness, and willingness to revisit can contribute to the sustainable development of religious tourism, especially in the context of COVID-19. Accordingly, this study explored the sustainable development of Taiwan’s religious tourism from the perspective of tourism attraction, experiential value, happiness, and revisit intention. The study conducted quantitative research to address the research issue. Three hundred and fifty valid questionnaires were collected through on-site questionnaire distribution, and the data were analyzed by descriptive statistics and the structural equation partial least square method. According to the results, the tourism attraction of Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage and the experiential value of tourists significantly impact happiness and revisit intention. Happiness is part of the intermediary variables of tourism attraction, experiential value, and revisit intention. Notably, the attraction of the Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage and the experiential value pursued by tourists have not diminished despite the pandemic. Instead, the attraction has become an opportunity for tourists to seek spiritual comfort to support sustainable religious tourism development. Accordingly, spiritual comfort and maintaining their health and safety can be considered as the strategy to promote sustainability of religious tourism in Taiwan.

 

Keywords: Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage; religious tourism; attraction; happiness; pandemic

 

Secondly, the introduction is to let readers be able to tell right away what they are going to be learning and determine if it's of interest to them or not. And I don't think the authors showed an excellent reason why the topic was important enough to warrant investigation. In this way, readers may misidentify the paper. So make sure you explain and spotlight the importance of the topic, why it is relevant, and how you are the authority. The authors can do this by generalizing the topic through statements or including current research that has been done regarding the subject.

Response and Revised (p.2)

Thank you for your comments. We have improved the introduction. Please see the highlight parts.

Attraction and revisit are crucial factors for the success of religious tourism. Religious sites and events often hold great cultural and historical significance, and can draw visitors seeking spiritual fulfillment or a connection to their faith. Positive experiences during the initial visit can lead to repeat visits and increased tourism revenue for the host destination. The Mazu Pilgrimage, one of the world’s three major religious activities, was still held in 2020 and 2021 in Taiwan, attracting more than one million tourists to participate ¹. Due to the uniqueness of religious activities and tourists’ beliefs, thousands and thousands of tourists participate in the Mazu Pilgrimage every year. Even during the COVID-19 pandemic, while all other tourism activities have come to a halt, the Dajia Mazu pilgrimage continues to attract thousands of tourists for their pilgrimage. Therefore, examining the relationship between the attraction of the Dajia Mazu pilgrimage and tourists' willingness to revisit can contribute to the sustainable development of religious tourism.

 

  Tourism attraction is the core element of tourism activities and one of the main reasons for tourists to visit and revisit ². It is also a medium for tourists to seek and meet their experiential values, such as authenticity and learning experience, to achieve their tourism needs ³. Urry ⁴ advocated that tourists look for unforgettable and meaningful experiences in traveling rather than snatching a glance at sceneries. For instance, Son, Xu ³ verified that novelty pursuit, sensory pleasure, supreme tourism experience, authenticity, prestige, and cultural exploration are the main factors that attract them to religious tourism. This addresses people’s daily life is deeply affected by their religious belief, including the arrangement of holidays and tourism destinations to meet their cognitive choice value ⁵. Therefore, the experiential value for religious tourists determines their willingness to continue participating in the event, and it is one of the important predictive variables in this study.

   

  Happiness is a deep emotion that can be further generated when tourists are satisfied with the tourism experience. Not only does it significantly impact tourists' revisit intention, but it also relates to tourism attraction and the tourists’ experiential value ^5-7. Tourists' happiness comes from the attraction characteristics of tourist destinations that meet their needs, which then sublimate satisfaction into happiness⁸. In addition, happiness can make tourists feel that their tourism experience is valuable ⁵, which boosts their revisit intention. For religion, people’s happiness comes from their faith, devotion, and sense of belonging ⁹. The happiness of religious tourists can be considered to come from their participation in religious activities, through which they practice their religious beliefs and regard religious activities as the main body of tourism. Especially during the COVID-19 period, the happiness brought by religious tourism may generate hope and alleviate negative emotions. Therefore, the perception of happiness can be seen as a key factor in promoting the sustainable development of religious tourism. However, there has been little research conducted in this area.

    Religious tourism has been a hot topic in the past two years, with most topics focusing on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic ^{10, 11}, coping strategies ¹², risk management ¹³, and development trend after the pandemic ¹⁴. These topics aimed to understand the problems and potential solutions of religious tourism development during the pandemic. However, few studies on tourists’ behavior in the context of the pandemic attempted to understand the religious tourism sustainable development. Sustainable development is an essential issue for tourists, destinations, and religious activities. The loss of sustainability is equivalent to the loss of faith in religion. Tourists' satisfaction, experiential value, perception of happiness, and revisit intention are the conditions that constitute the sustainable development of religious tourism. Particularly, religious tourism faced the serious impacts on COVID-19 pandemic. It is necessary to explore how to promote the sustainability of religions. Therefore, this study focused on exploring the relationship between tourism attractions, experiential value, happiness, and revisiting intention in the Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage in the context of sustainable development.

Thirdly, same as the introduction section, there exists the same issue in the literature review that the process of hypotheses development is not persuasive in my eyes. A hypothesis is not just a guess; it should be based on existing theories and knowledge. However, the logic of proposing a hypothesis in this manuscript is a little subjective. And we can see this problem, especially in the description of H1 and H2. Citing more studies as you can to ensure objectivity. Besides, it would be better if the authors adjusted the hypotheses' positions to ensure they showed after the relevant variables had been introduced.

Response and Revised (pp.3-4)

Thank you for your comments. We have improved the LR. Please see the highlight parts. Furthermore, each variable in this study was introduced prior to the presentation of the hypotheses, as described in the research literature. Please refer to the relevant section in the manuscript for further details.

 

Tourism attraction is an essential factor that determines whether tourists will revisit their tourist destinations and continue to participate in activities ¹⁹. Attraction has a significant relationship with tourists' intrinsic motivation; when perceiving tourism attraction, tourists are encouraged to participate in tourism ²². There is substantial research evidence confirming that tourist attraction significantly influences tourists' revisit intention^23-25. For example, Sinambela ²³ verified that touristic attraction significantly effects on revisit intention. From the viewpoint of attraction, tourists will be more involved in tourism and leisure activities when they feel happiness in such activities ²¹. In other words, happiness serves as an important mediator in inducing tourists' sustained participation in activities. Numerous studies have also confirmed that happiness can serve as an effective mediating variable on revisit intention ^{26, 27}. Hence, this study put forward the following assumptions:

 

Experiential value refers to consumers' perception of the value of products and services through direct use and indirect observation ²⁸. Tourists' experiential value is the value perception generated by their direct and indirect experience of tourism products and services ²⁹. It can be divided into emotional value and functional value. Emotional value is the experience generated by tourists' feelings and emotional interaction during or after traveling, while functional value is the value generated by comparing the perceived utility benefits and tourism cost investment ³⁰. In other words, emotional value comes from perceived experience, while functional value comes from rational experience. Experiential value has a significant impact on tourists' psychology and behavior. Many studies have confirmed that experiential value has an impact on tourists' satisfaction ^{29, 31}, happiness ³², experiential quality ²⁹, trust ²⁹, corporate reputation ²⁹, and revisit intention ^{31, 32}. Fu and Wang ³² found in their study on tourists' behavioral intention at the Taipei International Travel Fair that tourists' experiential value significantly impacts happiness and behavioral intention and significantly indirectly impacts behavioral intention through happiness. Therefore, based on the literature reviewed above, there are significant direct and indirect effects between tourists' experiential value, happiness, and revisit intention ^{31, 32}. Accordingly, this study put forward the following hypotheses:

 

Happiness is a psychological feeling of quality of life and hedonic happiness ³³. According to positive psychology, the sources of happiness can be divided into subjective and psychological well-being. Subjective well-being refers to various phenomena of human happiness, including emotional expression and judgment of satisfaction. Its main components include satisfaction, and positive and negative emotions, which usually relate to personal characteristics ^{34, 35}. On the contrary, psychological well-being relates to personal potential, in which happiness is generated by pursuing personal goals. This kind of happiness usually includes two critical aspects: self-realization and self-growth ^{34, 36}. The source of happiness in the tourism context usually refers to the subjective well-being generated by tourists’ emotional display (i.e., satisfaction and experiential value) of tourism products and services in pursuing pleasurable experiences. Happiness varies according to tourists’ characteristics and the types of tourist destinations and activities ³⁷. The happiness of religious tourists comes from the interaction between ritual activities and their own beliefs and values ³⁸. Kim et al. ³⁹ argued that the pilgrimage and ritual participation of religious tourism is conducive to satisfying the happiness pursued by tourists. Many studies have confirmed that tourists’ happiness relates to their revisit intention ^{27, 33, 40}, but only a few empirical studies focused on the relationship between the happiness of religious tourists and their revisit intention based on sustainability. Therefore, based on the review of the above literature, this study put forward the following assumption:

 

 

 

Forth, in Figure 1, Why did the authors represent H3 and H6 with dotted arrows?

Response and Revised (p.5)

Thank you for your question. In order to distinguish between direct and indirect relationships in the model, solid lines (representing direct effects) and dashed lines (representing indirect effects) were used.

 

Fifth, the method section would be more fluent if the authors combined and streamlined 3.1, 3.4, and 3.5 in one paragraph. Besides, on page 6, line 220, what is the standard of invalid questionnaires? On the other hand, the authors mentioned two dimensions of experiential value in the literature review section. However, when designing questionnaires, why did the authors choose five items in one dimension eventually?

Response and Revised (pp. 6-7)

Thank you for your question and comments. Regarding streamlined 3.1, 3.4, and 3.5, each of these sections contains content that needs to be explained clearly. In order to make the reading more coherent for the readers, we have decided to present the sections as streamlined 3.1, 3.4, and 3.5. The standard of invalid questionnaires has been explored in the 3.2. Please see the highlight part.

Regarding experiential value, the literature review mentioned two dimensions as a means of explaining the theoretical foundation underlying the construct of experiential value. However, given the large number of variables measured in this study, a single-dimensional measure was used to assess experiential value.

 

Sixth, the sentence "The first part is the content of informed consent... the relevant rights of the respondents" should be deleted on page 6, lines 225-227. Also, table 1 should be deleted. Table 2 should be deleted or shown in the appendix. Table 4 is also not necessary. We can see the authors have strictly carried out the steps of data analysis, but usually, we only present the most important parts with others simply described.

Response and Revised (pp. 6-8)

Thank you for your comments. We have improved the content that you mentioned. However,
Table 2 is an important component of the study, as future readers may need to refer to the items in order to develop their own scales. Therefore, we have decided to retain Table 2 for reference. Given that the journal format does not include an appendix, the table can only be presented within the body of the text.

 

Seventh, the description of the data analysis process can be more brief. Please refer to other papers of the same type and make some improvements.

Response and Revised (p. 7)

Thank you for your comments. We have improved the data analysis.

This study used the descriptive statistics to analyze the demographic background data of the sample, as well as the average, standard deviation, skewness, and kurtosis of the items of tourism attraction, experiential value, happiness, and revisit intention. In addition, Smart-PLS 3.0 was employed to test the research scale’s reliability and validity and verify the relationship between tourism attraction, experiential value, happiness, and revisit intention.

Eighth, the content of the study's theoretical implications, managerial implications, and limitations should belong to, not parallel with, 6 Theoretical and managerial implications. And I have no idea what the content of "10 conclusions" is for.

Thank you for your comments. We have improved the content that you mentioned. The conclusion is a summary of the key findings of this study and is a standard component of research articles in sustainability or other social science journals.

Response and Revised (pp. 11-12)

Theoretical and managerial implications    

This study verified a significant causal relationship between Dajia A-Ma tourists' tourism attractiveness, experiential value, happiness, and revisit intention in sustainable development. Happiness is the mediating variable in the model. Several academic and managerial implications are mentioned following the findings.

The case of Dajia A-Ma confirms the relationship between tourism attractiveness, experiential value, happiness, and revisit intention. These variables are essential to understanding tourists' behaviors when religious tourism is restarted after the pandemic. In particular, for sustainability of religious tourism, happiness generated by religious activities can attract tourists to revisit destinations, which is worth further study in the context of different countries and religious activities.

Happiness is the mediating variable that motivates visitors to revisit religious tourism activities. In other words, the tourist attraction and experience must make visitors feel happy. Therefore, marketing and event can be designed based on happiness to increase visitors' revisit intention and promote sustainable development.

Although this study carried out a rigorous design, there are still several limitations that could be improved in future research. First, this study only covered the Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage in Taiwan. This study did not cover other countries that also held religious tourism activities; thus, whether other countries that also held religious activities had similar findings to this study still needs to be verified by future research. Furthermore, the questionnaire survey was only done on tourists from Taiwan in this study. Because international tourists have been unable to enter Taiwan due to the government's pandemic prevention measures, their views were unknown. A survey can be further conducted for future research after the restrictions are lifted. Second, the explanatory variance of tourists' revisit intention in the Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage in the overall model of this study was 55%, denoting that there is still room for improvement in the explanatory power of religious tourists’ revisit intention. It is suggested that different variables, such as authenticity and perceived risk, can be added to future research to comprehensively understand the revisit intention in the Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage. Third, this study was done quantitatively. Qualitative research can be integrated into the research design in the future to strengthen the understanding of tourists' revisit intention in the Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage.

Reviewer 2 Report

the paper is adequately placed in tourism studies that cross psychology and the sustainability. The text has a very clear form, the research hypotheses and methods are well detailed and the results clearly explained. The bibliography is adequate but could be upgraded. Pictures and maps would aid reading.The methodology also seemed clear to me.  In any case, the article is appreciable.

Finally, I recommended a greater use of bibliography on tourism sciences.

 

Author Response

Reviewer 2

 

Dear Reviewer,

 

Thank you very much for forwarding to us the valuable comments from the reviewers. Their time and efforts are very much appreciated. We have revised our manuscript based on their comments, and have summarized the changes in the following:

 

 

the paper is adequately placed in tourism studies that cross psychology and the sustainability. The text has a very clear form, the research hypotheses and methods are well detailed and the results clearly explained. The bibliography is adequate but could be upgraded. Pictures and maps would aid reading. In any case, the article is appreciable.

 

Response and Revised

Thank you for your kind feedback and assistance. I hope that this manuscript will be successfully published.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Thank you for allowing me to review this paper. However, I have several suggestions for the improvement of manuscripts, such as the following:

Introduction

1.     One of the biggest issues in this paper was forgetting cite of the previous studies. Starting from the first sentences and continuing until the end of the manuscript, several sentences need in-text references or citations (e.g., for example, Page 1. Lines 38; 39; 43; p. 2 line 62; etc.). We should be more careful with in-text citations or references, especially when we are emphasizing or showing the importance of something, such as p.2, "crucial, significance or essential." Hence, find those sentences and similar sentences and add a citation at the end of the sentence.

2.     I suggest the authors write a captivating introduction, including the research problem. I would like to see 'What is the problem or the gap, why you are doing this study, how this study contributes to the literature, or/and how does this study fill the gap?' The authors mentioned briefly but they should emphasize those more.

L.R

3.     What is the theory that supports the model and/or the author's claim or idea? Please, write a section about the theory with a few paragraphs examines or supports the relations.

4.     p. 3 line 101 second paragraph first sentence, authors should add citation(s).

5.     The authors wrote so general such as many studies (p.3 line 136), previous studies (p.4 178), related literature (p.5 line 184), above literature (p.5 line 186), please mention exactly what or who are those studies or related studies. Please be specific.

6.     P.5 lines 156,157, 164 not only need cite but also need page numbers.

Methods

7.     How did you collect the data? Why did you prefer to use convenient sampling technique?

8.     Can you mention more the study area? Where is located, population, geography, etc.

9.     Why did you exclude some surveys please more specific.

10.  Did you translate the survey, if yes please mention it.

11.  I would like to see a table that covers fit indicies (IFI, CFI, TLI scores) for both CFA and SEM.

12.  I would like to see a table that hypothsese (p and t value Beta scores, etc)

Discussion and Conclusion

13.  The study's contribution to theory needs to be clarified, noticeable, or evident. Please, consider rewriting or improving the sections' implications of the research because it was too short, authors wrote just a few sentences (i.e., improve the practical implication and theoretical implication).

14.  The author(s) only wrote the result of the study and didn't compare them with previous studies in detail. In other words, they just wrote similar to previous studies or consistent with previous studies. I would like to know what those studies found, where they did in their study, and what they explored.

 

I wish the author(s) the best of luck with the revision.             

Author Response

Reviewer 3

Dear Reviewer,

 

Thank you very much for forwarding to us the valuable comments from the reviewers. Their time and efforts are very much appreciated. We have revised our manuscript based on their comments, and have summarized the changes in the following:

Thank you for allowing me to review this paper. However, I have several suggestions for the improvement of manuscripts, such as the following:

Introduction

1. One of the biggest issues in this paper was forgetting cite of the previous studies. Starting from the first sentences and continuing until the end of the manuscript, several sentences need in-text references or citations (e.g., for example, Page 1. Lines 38; 39; 43;  2 line 62; etc.). We should be more careful with in-text citations or references, especially when we are emphasizing or showing the importance of something, such as p.2, "crucial, significance or essential." Hence, find those sentences and similar sentences and add a citation at the end of the sentence.

Response and Revised (pp. 1-2)

 

Thank you for your comments. We have revised the citation issue.

 

2. I suggest the authors write a captivating introduction, including the research problem. I would like to see 'What is the problem or the gap, why you are doing this study, how this study contributes to the literature, or/and how does this study fill the gap?' The authors mentioned briefly but they should emphasize those more.

Response and Revised (p. 2)

Thank you for your comments. We have enhanced research gaps in the introduction. Please see the highlight parts in the introduction.

 

L.R

3. What is the theory that supports the model and/or the author's claim or idea? Please, write a section about the theory with a few paragraphs examines or supports the relations.

Response and Revised (pp. 3-5)

Thank you for your comments. This study did not use any specific theory or model to support the relationships between variables. However, significant relationships between these variables have been found in previous studies. In many studies, there is no theory to support the research framework. Nevertheless, if there is abundant literature to support the findings, the research results can still be validated even without a theory or model.

 

3. 3 line 101 second paragraph first sentence, authors should add citation(s).

Response and Revised (pp. 3)

Thank you for your comments. The first sentence of each paragraph serves as both a title and a key point, which is written based on the references cited in the entire paragraph. Therefore, the first citation in each paragraph may not be particularly significant as it encompasses all the citations in that paragraph. If you have further comments please let us know.

 

4. The authors wrote so general such as many studies (p.3 line 136), previous studies (p.4 178), related literature (p.5 line 184), above literature (p.5 line 186), please mention exactly what or who are those studies or related studies. Please be specific.

Response and Revised (pp. 3)

Thank you for your comments. The portion you mentioned is used to highlight the research gap in religious tourism and variables in past related studies. If there are related studies, we have provided examples to illustrate (the content limitations of the article do not allow us to provide specific details for all examples). For instance, Many studies have confirmed that experiential value has an impact on tourists' satisfaction ^{1, 30}, happiness ³², experiential quality ³⁰, trust ³⁰, corporate reputation ³⁰, and revisit intention ^{1, 32}. Fu and Wang ³² found in their study on tourists' behavioral intention at the Taipei International Travel Fair that tourists' experiential value significantly impacts happiness and behavioral intention and significantly indirectly impacts behavioral intention through happiness.

 

5. 5 lines 156,157, 164 not only need cite but also need page numbers.

Response and Revised(p.5)

Thank you for your comments. We have added the citation. But we didn’t cite directly, so the page number is not necessary.

 

 

 

 

Methods

6. How did you collect the data? Why did you prefer to use convenient sampling technique?

Response and Revised (p.6)

Thank you for your comments. The detail of data collection has explained in Data Collection. Due to the large number of religious tourists during the Dajia Mazu pilgrimage, it was not feasible to use random sampling. Instead, convenience sampling was employed with specific criteria for selecting participants.

7. Can you mention more the study area? Where is located, population, geography, etc.

Response and Revised (p.6)

Thank you for your comments. The reason why the study area cannot be introduced in this research is that the pilgrimage of the Dajia Matsu procession spans over dozens of regions. The 9-day event is not held in any specific area. Therefore, it is impossible to provide information on the located, population, geography, etc.

8. Why did you exclude some surveys please more specific.

Response and Revised (p.6)

Thank you for your comments. We have explained the reason. Please see data collection.

9. Did you translate the survey, if yes please mention it.

Response and Revised (p.6)

Thank you for your comments. We didn’t translate the survey.

10. I would like to see a table that covers fit indices (IFI, CFI, TLI scores) for both CFA and SEM.

Response and Revised (p.10)

Thank you for your comments. This study adopts PLS-SEM, and therefore the model fit indices used are not those based on maximum likelihood estimation (such as IFI, CFI, and TLI), but are instead calculated using the Goodness-of-fit (GoF) measure (p.10). Moreover, the advantage of PLS-SEM is that it enables the analysis of both the measurement and structural models simultaneously, without the need to separate them.

 

 

 

11. I would like to see a table that hypothsese (p and t value Beta scores, etc)

Response and Revised (p.10)

Thank you for your comments. In view of the fact that the other two reviewers have suggested that our content is not concise enough and have even requested the removal of some unnecessary tables, we would like to point out that the results of the structural model, including P and Beta values, have already been presented in the section of "Structural model analysis."

 

 

Discussion and Conclusion

12. The study's contribution to theory needs to be clarified, noticeable, or evident. Please, consider rewriting or improving the sections' implications of the research because it was too short, authors wrote just a few sentences (i.e., improve the practical implication and theoretical implication).

Response and Revised (pp.11-12)

Thank you for your comments. We have improved the content that you mentioned.

13. The author(s) only wrote the result of the study and didn't compare them with previous studies in detail. In other words, they just wrote similar to previous studies or consistent with previous studies. I would like to know what those studies found, where they did in their study, and what they explored.

Response and Revised (pp.11-12)

Thank you for your comments. The significance of the research discussion is to resonate with relevant previous studies and explain the findings of the research, and then write about the theoretical and practical contributions. We believe that the specific content of the previous relevant literature should not be the focus of the discussion, but rather compare and explain the research findings. If you have further suggestions, please let us know. Thank you.

I wish the author(s) the best of luck with the revision.      

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

As a reviewer, I have given my time and effort to improve the paper. 

However, the author(s) have yet to respond or not take action on several of my suggestions. I only saw the author's comments to other reviewers. In other words, the authors decline most of my comments or find excuses not to do it. I am sorry I didn't see any improvement. Hence, I had to reject it. 

 

Here are some of their response based on my comment:

'there is no theory to support the research framework'

'If there are related studies, we have provided examples to illustrate'

 'we didn’t cite directly, so the page number is not necessary'

'The reason why the study area cannot be introduced in this research is that the pilgrimage of the Dajia Matsu procession spans over dozens of regions. The 9-day event is not held in any specific area. Therefore, it is impossible to provide information on the located, population, geography, etc.'

'We have explained the reason. Please see data collection' (which I didnt find it)

'This study adopts PLS-SEM, and therefore the model fit indices used are not those based on maximum likelihood estimation (such as IFI, CFI, and TLI), but are instead calculated using the Goodness-of-fit (GoF) measure (p.10)'

'Thank you for your comments. In view of the fact that the other two reviewers have suggested that our content is not concise enough and have even requested the removal of some unnecessary tables, we would like to point out that the results of the structural model, including P and Beta values, have already been presented in the section of "Structural model analysis.'

'We have improved the content that you mentioned (they didnt).

'We believe that the specific content of the previous relevant literature should not be the focus of the discussion, but rather compare and explain the research findings.'

 

 

Author Response

As a reviewer, I have given my time and effort to improve the paper. 

However, the author(s) have yet to respond or not take action on several of my suggestions. I only saw the author's comments to other reviewers. In other words, the authors decline most of my comments or find excuses not to do it. I am sorry I didn't see any improvement. Hence, I had to reject it. 

Dear editor and reviewer,

We sincerely apologize for causing discomfort to the reviewer. We rather appreciate the reviewer’s efforts and time for our manuscript. We thought that academic research is an open platform that provides opportunities for communication. We value the opinions of the reviewer, but we also possess the right to defend our research. At the end of the response, we welcome further comments from the reviewer if he/she has different opinions. 

Some responses are not complete, the full response are shown as follow red words:

Here are some of their response based on my comment:

'there is no theory to support the research framework'

Response and Revised (pp. 3-5)

Thank you for your comments. This study did not use any specific theory or model to support the relationships between variables. However, significant relationships between these variables have been found in previous studies. In many studies, there is no theory to support the research framework. Nevertheless, if there is abundant literature to support the findings, the research results can still be validated even without a theory or model.

'If there are related studies, we have provided examples to illustrate'

Response and Revised (pp. 3)

Thank you for your comments. The portion you mentioned is used to highlight the research gap in religious tourism and variables in past related studies. If there are related studies, we have provided examples to illustrate (the content limitations of the article do not allow us to provide specific details for all examples). For instance, Many studies have confirmed that experiential value has an impact on tourists' satisfaction ^{1, 30}, happiness ³², experiential quality ³⁰, trust ³⁰, corporate reputation ³⁰, and revisit intention ^{1, 32}. Fu and Wang ³² found in their study on tourists' behavioral intention at the Taipei International Travel Fair that tourists' experiential value significantly impacts happiness and behavioral intention and significantly indirectly impacts behavioral intention through happiness.

 

 'we didn’t cite directly, so the page number is not necessary'

Response and Revised(p.5)

Thank you for your comments. We have added the citation. But we didn’t cite directly, so the page number is not necessary.

This part, according to London's Global University suggestion of academic writing: With any in-text citations, you must include a page number/s when you cite a source and are either: Directly quoting and Paraphrasing. That is why the page number of the citation is unnecessary

 

Can you mention more the study area? Where is located, population, geography, etc.

Response and Revised (p.6)

'The reason why the study area cannot be introduced in this research is that the pilgrimage of the Dajia Matsu procession spans over dozens of regions. The 9-day event is not held in any specific area. Therefore, it is impossible to provide information on the located, population, geography, etc.'

We have already provided an explanation for the difficulties in providing specific details. If the reviewer has any other suggestions or alternative approaches, we would appreciate that.

 

Why did you exclude some surveys please more specific

'We have explained the reason. Please see data collection' (which I didnt find it)

The original content data collection, please see the highlight part. 

This study selected tourists who were at least 20 years old and participated in the Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage as the respondents through convenient sampling. In addition, tourists must have left their residential places and partially or entirely participated in the Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage activities. Therefore, people under the age of 20 were not within the scope of this study. In this study, a physical paper questionnaire was used for data collection. The places where the questionnaire was distributed were based on the driving and starting places of the Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage announced by the Dajia Jenn Lann Temple ⁴⁶, including the Changhua City Nanyao Temple, Siluo Township Fuhsing Temple, Hsingang Township Fengtien Temple, Hsingang Township Fuhsing Temple, Beidou Township Dien-an Temple, Changhua City Tienhou Temple, Chingshui Chaohsing Temple, and the Dajia Jenn Lann Temple. The distribution date of the questionnaire was June 12–20, 2020. Before the questionnaire was distributed, the age and residential places were confirmed with the respondents, and the questionnaire respondents had to divulge whether they were residents or tourists, so this study could filter out those who were not included. During this period, four hundred questionnaires were distributed, and three hundred and nighty were returned. After excluding invalid questionnaires, response is extremely incomplete, there were three hundred and fifty valid questionnaires with the effective recovery rate of 94.5%.

 

'This study adopts PLS-SEM, and therefore the model fit indices used are not those based on maximum likelihood estimation (such as IFI, CFI, and TLI), but are instead calculated using the Goodness-of-fit (GoF) measure (p.10)'

Due to the fact that PLS does not use maximum likelihood estimation for measurement, and its provided model fit indices include SRMR, exact fit criteria d_ULS and d_G, NFI, and Chi², Akter et al. (2011) have pointed out that Goodness-of-fit (GoF) is a preferable method for measuring model fit in PLS. This is mentioned on page 10 of the original manuscript.

 

'Thank you for your comments. In view of the fact that the other two reviewers have suggested that our content is not concise enough and have even requested the removal of some unnecessary tables, we would like to point out that the results of the structural model, including P and Beta values, have already been presented in the section of "Structural model analysis.'

Apparently, there is a conflict with the suggestions provided by other reviewers. We have decided to incorporate the recommendations from another reviewer in order to make the manuscript appear more concise.

 

'We have improved the content that you mentioned (they didnt).

We did improve:

Theoretical and managerial implications    

This study verified a significant causal relationship between Dajia A-Ma tourists' tourism attractiveness, experiential value, happiness, and revisit intention in sustainable development. Happiness is the mediating variable in the model. Several academic and managerial implications are mentioned following the findings.

The case of Dajia A-Ma confirms the relationship between tourism attractiveness, experiential value, happiness, and revisit intention. These variables are essential to understanding tourists' behaviors when religious tourism is restarted after the pandemic. In particular, for sustainability of religious tourism, happiness generated by religious activities can attract tourists to revisit destinations, which is worth further study in the context of different countries and religious activities. Further exploring the mechanisms and processes underlying the generation of happiness among religious tourists can contribute to encouraging their continued participation in activities and further enhancing the sustainability of religious tourism.

Happiness is the mediating variable that motivates visitors to revisit religious tourism activities. In other words, the tourist attraction and experience must make visitors feel happy. Marketing and event can be designed based on happiness to increase visitors' revisit intention and promote sustainable development. Therefore, the organizers can incorporate the theme of happiness into the promotion of religious tourism, and highlight the importance of happiness as an image and value of religious tourism. This can further stimulate the inner desire of tourists for religious activities.

Although this study carried out a rigorous design, there are still several limitations that could be improved in future research. First, this study only covered the Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage in Taiwan. This study did not cover other countries that also held religious tourism activities; thus, whether other countries that also held religious activities had similar findings to this study still needs to be verified by future research. Furthermore, the questionnaire survey was only done on tourists from Taiwan in this study. Because international tourists have been unable to enter Taiwan due to the government's pandemic prevention measures, their views were unknown. A survey can be further conducted for future research after the restrictions are lifted. Second, the explanatory variance of tourists' revisit intention in the Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage in the overall model of this study was 55%, denoting that there is still room for improvement in the explanatory power of religious tourists’ revisit intention. It is suggested that different variables, such as authenticity and perceived risk, can be added to future research to comprehensively understand the revisit intention in the Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage. Third, this study was done quantitatively. Qualitative research can be integrated into the research design in the future to strengthen the understanding of tourists' revisit intention in the Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage.

 

'We believe that the specific content of the previous relevant literature should not be the focus of the discussion, but rather compare and explain the research findings.'

We did indeed discuss not only past related studies but also provided explanations for our choices. For example (highlight):

 

According to this study, the tourists’ experiential value in the Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage also had a noticeable positive impact on their happiness and revisit intention. When tourists' experience in the landscape more conformed with their values, their happiness and revisit intention were higher. This research finding is similar to the results of previous studies on the relationship between experiential tourism value, happiness, and revisit intention [^{1, 32}]. Tourists' experiential value in tourism comes from unforgettable and meaningful experiences, especially for religious tourists, whose religious beliefs affect their daily life and tourism decisions [⁵], thereby obtaining self-considered valuable experience, and producing positive emotion and continuous participation. Therefore, the decisions of tourists who participated in the Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage could also be regarded as a result of religious beliefs, which led to happiness in pursuit of experiential value. They continued to throw themselves into the environment and support the religious sustainable development.

 

 

Once again, we sincerely apologize for any discomfort caused to the reviewer.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors should explain the model in the conclusion and strengthen the theoretical contribution of the study.

Author Response

Reviewer 3

Dear Reviewer,

 

Thank you very much for forwarding to us the valuable comments from the reviewers. Their time and efforts are very much appreciated. We have revised our manuscript based on their comments, and have summarized the changes in the following:

1. The authors should explain the model in the conclusion and strengthen the theoretical contribution of the study.

Thank you for your comments. We have explained the model in the conclusion and strengthened the theoretical contribution of the study. Please have a look the highlight parts.

In the theoretical contributions, the case of Dajia A-Ma confirms the relationship between tourism attractiveness, experiential value, happiness, and revisit intention. These variables are essential to understanding tourists' behaviors when religious tourism is restarted after the pandemic. This study makes significant contributions by providing empirical evidence to substantiate the substantial impact of this model on the sustained behavior and sustainable development of religious tourism visitors within the context of COVID-19. In particular, for sustainability of religious tourism, happiness generated by religious activities can attract tourists to revisit destinations. This finding represents a pivotal contribution of this study, particularly in the post-pandemic period where individuals aspire to return to a state of normalcy in their lives. The study highlights the significant benefits that religious tourism engenders in terms of generating a sense of happiness and well-being among tourists. Which is worth further study in the context of different countries and religious activities. Moreover, further exploring the mechanisms and processes underlying the generation of happiness among religious tourists can contribute to encouraging their continued participation in activities and further enhancing the sustainability of religious tourism.

Tourism attraction and tourists' experiential value of the Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage significantly affected tourists’ happiness and revisit intention. The present model reveals that both tourism attraction and Dajia A-Ma tourists' experiential value significantly influence revisit intention in the context of post-pandemic era. Moreover, happiness mediates the relationship within this research model. In sustainable development context, happiness was found to be the intermediary variable of tourism attraction, happiness, and revisit intention. Based on the religious belief of tourists, their participation in religious tourism activities would not diminish the risk of the pandemic to support the activity. The spiritual comfort they feel in participating in religious tourism activities might lead to their continuous participation in religious tourism activities. In other words, participating in religious activities is a spiritual food for people. Therefore, religious tourism activities should not be stopped due to the pandemic, as tourists are unwilling to suspend their participation. That is the tourists’ performances for sustainable development of religious tourism.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx