Next Article in Journal
Assessment of Mycological Possibility Using Machine Learning Models for Effective Inclusion in Sustainable Forest Management
Previous Article in Journal
Algorithm for Evaluating the Difficulty of Land Consolidation Using Cadastral Data
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 16
Issue 13
10.3390/su16135655
sustainability-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 Critical Thinking Mediate the Relationship between Sustainability Knowledge and Tourism Students’ Ability to Make Sustainable Decisions?

by
Masoud Shafieieh
*,
Ali Ozturen
,
Hamed Rezapouraghdam
and
Osman M. Karatepe
Faculty of Tourism, Eastern Mediterranean University, Gazimagusa 99628, Turkey
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(13), 5655; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135655
Submission received: 21 November 2023 / Revised: 24 December 2023 / Accepted: 11 January 2024 / Published: 2 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Sustainable Education and Approaches)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The complex and critical global issues of the 21st century resulting from the unsustainable growth of tourism and hospitality, like air, land, and water pollution, have exacerbated concerns over whether educational institutions equip future managers and employees with adequate skills to meet the new demands of the current era. These ever-growing global sustainability issues stemming from the sophisticated interactions between people and the planet have no simple answers. They require well-skilled critical thinkers disposed of analyticity and systematicity to consider them and make positive contributions through their sustainable decisions. Despite this recognition, there are limited studies of the tourism and hospitality industry focusing on this crucial topic, and it is unclear how sustainability knowledge may result in more sustainable decision-making abilities. Accordingly, the current study proposed a model that links tourism and hospitality students’ sustainability knowledge to their sustainable tourism decision-making, testing the mediating role of critical thinking. Applying a quantitative research design, the researchers used a self-administered online survey to collect data from 146 full-time tourism students in Northern Cyprus. The PROCESS plug-in for the statistical package for social sciences was used to test the hypotheses of this study. The result of this study revealed that sustainability knowledge and critical thinking play significant roles in students’ sense of sustainable tourism competency and their sustainable tourism decision-making power. This study discusses how critical thinking serves as a mediating factor between knowledge of environmental sustainability, perceived competency in sustainable tourism, and sustainable decision-making ability. This study offers a more nuanced view of critical thinking’s function in terms of converting knowledge into sustainable tourism practices.

1. Introduction

There is a growing demand for tourism education institutions to more actively respond to the globalizing impacts of tourism on destinations [1,2]. As one of the largest industries in the world, besides its positive contribution to the development of communities, tourism’s social, cultural, and environmental impacts are also considerable [3]. Also, the magnitude of the sector’s reliance on the attractiveness of nature, tourism, and hospitality are leading to increased pressure to use natural resources more sustainably and help to deal with the global threats of climate change and the deterioration of biodiversity [4]. For these reasons, excessive attention in the tourism and hospitality industry has been paid in recent years to the topics of organizational sustainability, employees’ contributions to achieving sustainability goals, and staff’s environmentally friendly behavior at workplaces [5,6,7]. The tourism industry is experiencing a transition compelling it to not only react to global sustainability concerns but also satisfy the customers’ request for more environmentally friendly services and operations [3]. In this vein, the role of tourism-related higher education institutions is becoming more prominent since they are the ones who should prepare future tourism employees, managers, and stakeholders with adequate knowledge about sustainability and the ability to make sustainable tourism decisions and develop a sense of competency in sustainable tourism. However, it should be noted that the current complex challenges of sustainability in the context of a globalized world and the anthropogenic pressures on the earth system require new thinking [8].
Tourism is a complex phenomenon that operates in a highly complex world [1,9]. Therefore, to tackle this industry’s complex social, economic, and environmental issues, students need something beyond mere sustainability knowledge, which refers to the familiarity with and understanding and comprehension of concepts and issues about sustainability. In the Tbilisi Declaration, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization stated the importance of teaching about critical thinking [10] and the powerful equipment needed for tourism students to overcome complicated challenges in the industry. Cultivating students’ critical thinking skills is one of the most urgent objectives of pedagogy in modern education [11]. Critical thinking is “reasonable, reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do” [12] (p. 10). Nurturing critical thinking in graduates is in line with the targets of higher education, which aim to prepare individuals as responsible citizens in a complex world [13] to ensure that they are capable of resolving conflicts and proposing solutions for complex and critical problems [14].
Despite the pivotal role of CT in sustainable development debates, few studies of tourism and hospitality education have studied the sustainability knowledge of students [15]. Despite the recommendation of regarding critical thinking as one of the required skills for the 21st century [16], few studies assess how it is transmitted to graduates via tourism and hospitality programs [17]. Additionally, the assessment of the development of knowledge and practices of sustainability and complex thinking about sustainability issues in tourism education is warranted, as shown in previous studies [18]. Moreover, there are concerns that tourism students are graduating with a narrow understanding of sustainability [19], which is highly significant for sustainable tourism development in destinations. In particular, in small island developing states that are so dependent on the economic benefits of tourism but, at the same time, are so vulnerable to the environmental and socio-cultural impacts of tourism, sustainable development and management of tourism seem to be crucial [20]. Therefore, if tourism is a source of economic development, island destinations should examine several factors and develop tourist economies that can sustain external shocks [21]. One of these strategies is education, as today’s tourism students, the future decision-makers in the industry, can play an outstanding role in achieving sustainable tourism development [1]. Besides feeling empowered to make sustainable decisions, tourism students need to develop a sense of competency in sustainable tourism. Sustainable decision-making power refers to students’ confidence to contribute to improving sustainability, make informed decisions, and improve access to resources for sustainable choices. A sense of competency in sustainable tourism refers to recognizing impacts, identifying stakeholders, implementing plans, and being aware of the related strategies and tools [15]. While the issues related to human resource development in islands are known as prime concerns for the successful operation of tourism in such destinations [21], a recent study in Northern Cyprus, the setting of this paper, found that tourism and hospitality students face some challenges when dealing with sustainability [1].
Thus, further investigations to realize mechanisms that may lead to tourism graduates positively contributing to the sustainable development of this developing island state are necessary. The current study aims to (1) examine the effect of sustainability knowledge on tourism and hospitality students’ critical thinking, (2) evaluate the effect of sustainability knowledge on students’ sustainable decision-making abilities and sense of competency in sustainable tourism, and (3) test the mediating role of critical thinking (CT) in the aforementioned relationships (Figure 1).

2. Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses

The most significant ability that schools may pass on to their graduates is critical thinking [22]. However, the more knowledge that students acquire about the world, the better they may understand its complexities and think critically [23]. In fact, as Garside [24] (p. 215) states, “Since it is impossible to think critically about something of which one knows nothing, critical thinking is dependent on a sufficient base of knowledge”. Subsequently, hospitality and tourism students must first acquire adequate knowledge about sustainable tourism [1,2]. McPeck [25] alleged that critical thinking skills such as identifying relevant information or evaluating and analyzing the claims is not feasible; otherwise, students have adequate knowledge of the issue. Due to the constant pace of change and transformation in every aspect of the world, to underpin their professional expertise, tourism and hospitality institutions should facilitate lifelong learning in their graduates [26]. The graduates should be equipped to act in highly complex situations and be prepared for lifelong knowledge acquisition and learning [27].
Sufficient subject knowledge has been a vital prerequisite for forming critical thinking skills [28]. Considering knowledge as the simple facts that students possesses and thinking as the application of such knowledge, critical thinking can be outlined as the application of knowledge in more complicated ways [29]. Students need a frame of reference and a context in which they have knowledge and information [30,31]. Therefore, the depth of understanding and knowledge of individuals in a specific area of study determines the extent to which they can critically think in that field [32]. Thus, according to the previous literature and research, the following claim can be hypothesized:
Hypothesis 1.
There is a positive link between tourism students’ sustainability knowledge and critical thinking.
Knowledge gives the understanding, awareness, and insights required for making informed choices. People may use it to navigate challenging situations, make accurate decisions, and predict likely consequences. If tourism students are well-informed and knowledgeable about sustainability, they can become enduring advocates for sustainability [2]. Previous studies conducted among student nurses revealed that when faced with low-complexity problems, educational background influences decision-making; however, as the complexity of the case grows, domain-specific knowledge and expertise become more important for making better decisions [33]. Another study’s findings indicated a positive link between consumers’ subjective knowledge about products and their decision-making abilities [34]. Moreover, previous research reported that the environmental knowledge of customers influenced their purchase decision-making [35]. Accordingly, the following claim can be hypothesized:
Hypothesis 2.
Tourism students’ sustainability knowledge is positively related to their sustainable decision-making power.
To better understand how people interact with knowledge, the use of cognitive information processing theory (IPT) can be helpful [36]. This theory perceives the processes that constitute mental events as reflecting the flow of information [37]. In other words, the knowledge that is stored in memory is used to interpret the information that is received from a person’s senses. To produce a particular response, interpretations are merged with a goal, which is achieved by taking the necessary actions, producing the desired results, and using the feedback provided by those actions to guide future performance [38]. The more knowledge students acquire affects their level of competencies. Knowledge concerns how facts, concepts, principles, and techniques in a certain area are represented [39]. Competence refers to the sum of a person’s knowledge and abilities to effectively and efficiently accomplish particular goals in various contexts or circumstances [39]. The previous literature demonstrated that knowledge of a certain domain, such as the technical understanding of ethics, responsibility, and sustainability, plays a pivotal role in responsible management competencies [40]. People become more skilled and capable of applying their information efficiently when they gain knowledge and competence in a particular field. Due to this mastery, they feel more prepared to take on issues and find solutions within that area, which inspires a sense of competence and confidence. Accordingly, we can develop the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 3.
Tourism students’ sustainability knowledge is positively related to their sense of competence in sustainable tourism.
CT is “the ability to see beyond simple facts, to think at a more comprehensive level” [29] (p. 213). This higher-order thinking refers to the process through which students think about and detect problems while searching for information to make decisions that find solutions to the problems [41,42].
CT is crucial in social and interpersonal contexts, where there is a need for good decision-making and problem-solving abilities [43]. It is highly relevant in the sustainable tourism development decision-making process, where managers face many challenges when balancing the economic advantages of tourism activities and environmental protection and society’s well-being [44]. Past studies support the idea that CT provides good judgments and decisions in complex situations [45]. Central to any informed decision-making and policy-making process is the application of knowledge [46]. To make well-informed decisions, students must have CT abilities relevant in the contemporary age of information [13]. The effect of CT skills and disposition on the students’ problem-solving abilities and decision-making skills is significant [47].
Conversely, CT is strongly associated with complex problem-solving situations [48]. Walker [49] declared that CT enables students to move beyond simple perception and intuition to take a reflexive and proactive approach that leads to the proposition of alternative solutions, innovative recommendations, and various decision-making patterns. Facione and Facione [50] believe that CT is a cyclical process that allows individuals to decide what actions to take and ideas to believe in a given context. Since sustainability issues in tourism and hospitality are complex and critical, students must acquire higher-order thinking capabilities to understand and solve problems when required [1]. Therefore, as CT is one of the paradigms of higher-order thinking [51], according to the discussion above and the evidence, the following hypothesis can be developed;
Hypothesis 4.
Tourism students’ CT is positively linked to their sustainable decision-making power.
Regarding competencies, numerous academics have concurred that the core of sustainable tourism education should focus on creativity, reflective practice, and critical analysis [15]. The previous literature in many disciplines provided evidence of the link between critical thinking and various types of competencies. For example, Chen et al. [52] stated that the disposition of clinical nurses to think critically was positively correlated with their research competence. Jensen and Schnack [53] emphasized that there is a close link between critical thinking and action competence, and building action competency requires a strong focus on critical thinking, as a healthy, equitable, and sustainable future cannot be built by mindlessly and naively following the same paths as the past. Therefore, critical thinking is a key educational idea that enables future citizens to actively participate in solving environmental and public health issues [53]. Accordingly, we devised the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 5.
Tourism students’ CT is positively linked to their sense of competencies in sustainable tourism.
In order to cognitively comprehend sustainability knowledge, CT seems essential. The previous literature revealed that critical thinking was a mediator between students’ academic interests and their performance at school [54]. Referring to the definition of thinking as a mental process that is “asking reasonable questions to oneself to solve an encountered problem utilizing existing experiences and background” [55] (p. 376), the role of students’ knowledge and background information about sustainability is highlighted. Knowledge is the foundation of CT because students cannot use higher-order thinking if they do not know or cannot recall the information about the issue that they need [56]. In Bloom’s [57] taxonomy of educational objectives, knowledge has been considered the first stage and the core stone of the framework that describes mental acts, or thinking, as the educational outcome.
The successful application of CT requires knowledge and comprehension [58]. Garside [24] mentioned that CT depends on a sufficient knowledge base within the context of the particular subject, without which such thinking is impossible. In other words, knowing the facts is the just first stage; thus, the students need to know how to apply and relate them to other topics and how to question them [24]. CT usage is vital to perform daily responsibilities in complex circumstances, particularly to capture the true knowledge and identify what that knowledge conveys [59]. Specifically, in the complex context of sustainability in tourism, which requires critical analysis of the students’ past knowledge to find solutions, critical thinking can empower students to critically use their background knowledge and feel both empowered and able to contribute to the sustainability of tourism. Additionally, according to IPT, how people process sustainability knowledge through CT affects their ability to make sustainable decisions and their perception of their level of sustainability competence. Their following acts with regard to competent and long-term decision-making are impacted by this processing step. Thus, based on this theory and the previous literature that indicates the role of knowledge as a base for CT, as well as the studies that indicate that CT is an important factor that allows individuals to make decisions [43,45,50], we can develop the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 6.
Critical thinking works as a mediator between tourism students’ sustainability knowledge and their sustainable decision-making power.
Hypothesis 7.
Critical thinking works as a mediator between tourism students’ sustainability knowledge and their sense of competence in sustainable tourism.

Sustainability and Northern Cyprus

Tourism is inevitable in many SIDS through economic diversification, career opportunity creation, and foreign exchange absorption multiplier effects [60]. Northern Cyprus is not an exception. However, several factors make tourism development and management in Northern Cyprus more challenging and the issue of sustainability more critical. The chief obstacle that this destination suffers from is the unremitting political uncertainty resulting from the inability to solve the Cyprus problem [61]. Moreover, along with limited natural resources, restricted marketing opportunities for inward investment, an embargo on direct air communication from the EU, and international sanctions, this uncertainty has created many obstacles to the economic growth and the tourism industry in this destination.
Although tourism is the main provider of foreign exchange for the Turkish part of Cyprus, it was primarily developed as mass tourism. The complexity of casino gambling tourism, with its negative sociocultural impacts, the ongoing uncertainty due to Northern Cyprus’ international status [62], and, most importantly, the domination of short-term thinking, makes the sustainable development issue even more complex in this destination. The findings of previous studies reported that people in Northern Cyprus generally think that tourism investments and environmental conservation exist in contrast to each other [63]. In other words, “they do not clearly understand that planning, environmental conservation, economic growth, and social development can concurrently be achieved”. Moreover, previous studies asserted that tourism in this small island state lacks a sustainable perspective [64].
In this case, the other major problem with sustainability is the lack of institutional reorganization or adaptation to the new global environment [65]. Unfortunately, sustainable tourism development in Northern Cyprus cannot been taken into consideration without the establishment of a rational, balanced, and functional relationship between historic and newly developing areas. In particular, the short-term mentality of people contradicts the sustainability principles that require long-term planning [64].

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Data Collection and Sample

The researchers used a self-administered online survey [66] to measure the effects of tourism students’ sustainability knowledge and critical thinking on their sustainable decision-making power and sense of competency in sustainable tourism. A pilot study with 20 students revealed that the questionnaires needed no change. Full-time university students from tourism faculties/schools located at two universities in Northern Cyprus were targeted using the convenience sampling technique. After obtaining consent from tourism department leaders, a link consisting of information about the project and questionnaires was shared with the students. Consistent with the works of Bogan et al. [67] and Karatepe and Eslamlou [68], as well as the guidelines given by Podsakoff et al. [69], the initial page of the questionnaire included the following information to minimize common method variance: “There are no right or wrong answers in this questionnaire. Any information collected during our research will be kept confidential. Participation is voluntary but encouraged”.
The statistics obtained from the Registrar’s Office of the universities indicate that 224 bachelor’s students were enrolled in tourism programs within the targeted faculty/school during the data collection period. Of this total, 146 students participated in the research, reflecting a participation rate of 65%. The sample consisted of 98 (67%) students aged between 18 and 27 years old, while 35 (24%) were aged between 28 and 37 years old. The rest were older than 37 years old. The sample was balanced in terms of gender (73 males and 73 females). The mean score of the cumulative grade point average was 3.04 (standard deviation = 0.83). After the submission of each survey, responses were automatically and anonymously sent to the center for further analysis.

3.2. Measurement

To test students’ environmental sustainability knowledge, this study used 5 items derived from the study of Camargo and Gretzel [15], utilizing a 5-point Likert scale (1 = Not familiar at all to 5 = Very familiar). These questions measured participants’ familiarity with environmental sustainability principles and mechanisms such as “Climate change”, “Ecosystems and biodiversity conservation”, and “Environmental certification programs”.
The next part of the questionnaire evaluated the students’ critical thinking skills. Pintrich et al.’s [70] critical thinking subscale derived from the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ) was used for this step, and it comprised five items in a 5-point Likert format (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). Sample items were “I treat the course material as a starting point and try to develop my ideas about it” and “I try to play around with ideas of my own related to what I am learning in courses”.
The third section of the questionnaire tested tourism students’ sustainable tourism decision-making power using 11 items and their feelings of competency in sustainable tourism upon graduation using 9 questions [15]. A 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) was also used for this section. A sample item used for the former scale was “I have a range of options from which to make sustainable tourism choices”. A sample item for the latter scale was “I am able to identify and classify major impacts of tourism”. Age and gender were the covariates in this study and studied to understand whether they functioned as confounds.

3.3. Data Analysis

The measurement model was tested by utilizing confirmatory factory analysis in LISREL 8.30 for the assessment of the validity and reliability of the measures. Confirmatory factor analysis was employed to assess how accurately the measured variables described the number of constructs. Model fit was assessed via “χ2/df, a comparative fit index (CFI), a parsimony normed fit index (PNFI), a standardized root mean square residual (SRMR), and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)” [68,71]. Before the test of the measurement model, in accordance with other studies [72,73], Harman’s single-factor test was used [74]. We ran an unrotated exploratory factor analysis. The first factor accounted for 39.3% of the total variance. Since it was below 50–60% of the variance among the study constructs [75], it seemed that common method variance was not an issue in this study.
This study’s hypotheses were gauged via the “PROCESS plug-in for the statistical package for social sciences”, and we ran model 4 with a “bootstrapped 5000 sample size via the 95 percent confidence interval” [76]. PROCESS plug-in was utilized for path analysis, enabling individuals to evaluate the direct and indirect impacts of the models. The directed dependencies among a collection of variables described using path analysis.

4. Results

4.1. The Measurement Model

Table 1 presents the findings of the confirmatory factor analysis. Though the value for CFI was slightly below 0.90, the values for RMSEA and SRMR were <0.08, and the value for PNFI was >0.50 [77,78]. Accordingly, the four-factor measurement model fit the data acceptably (χ2 = 666.09, df = 386; χ2/df = 1.73; CFI = 0.89; PNFI = 0.69; RMSEA = 0.071; SRMR = 0.075). The preponderance of the standardized loadings was >0.70, and all loadings were significant (>1.96, two-tailed test). The average variance extracted (AVE) values for environmental sustainability knowledge, critical thinking, sustainable tourism decision-making power, and sense of competency in sustainable tourism were 0.44, 0.58, 0.47, and 0.52, respectively. The AVE for environmental sustainability knowledge and sustainable tourism decision-making power was <0.50. The literature for hospitality and tourism is abundant with similar findings, which are associated with values < 0.50 [79,80]. More importantly, it is a conservative test of convergent validity, and the AVE for a variable may be <0.50, even though its composite reliability is >0.70 [81]. The findings regarding the composite reliability for environmental sustainability knowledge and sustainable tourism decision-making power were >0.70. Overall, the convergent validity was verified.
As depicted in Table 1, the composite reliability (coefficient alpha) values for environmental sustainability knowledge, critical thinking, sustainable tourism decision-making power, and a sense of competency in sustainable tourism were 0.80 (0.78), 0.87 (0.88), 0.91 (0.91), and 0.91 (0.91). These findings (>0.70) delineated evidence of internal consistency reliability. Discriminant validity was checked by utilizing the Fornell and Larcker [81] criterion [82,83].
The correlations among the latent constructs and the square root of the AVE for each latent variable are given in Table 2. The findings denoted that all the square roots of the AVE values were greater than their corresponding inter-correlations, excluding the one between sustainable tourism decision-making power and a sense of competency in sustainable tourism. Therefore, we performed an additional analysis. Specifically, the chi-square difference test was significant when a two-factor model (χ2 = 546.32, df = 169) was compared to a single-factor model (χ2 = 715.70, df = 170). Consequently, the discriminant validity was verified [84].
The means, standard deviations, and correlations of the observed constructs are presented in Table 3. Analyzing the means provides information about the central tendency of the data.
Standard deviations reveal details about the variability in the data. Understanding the relationship between two variables is made possible by using correlations.

4.2. Model Test Results

Prior to the test of the research hypotheses, we checked the risk of multicollinearity using the variance inflation factor [85]. All the variance inflation factors were <3.0, demonstrating no multicollinearity problem [86].
The unstandardized beta (B) values (two-tailed test) were reported. Hypothesis 1 suggested that environmental sustainability knowledge was positively related to critical thinking. This hypothesis was corroborated since an increase in environmental sustainability knowledge positively influenced critical thinking (B = 0.355, standard error = 0.065, t = 5.486). Hypothesis 2 predicted that environmental sustainability knowledge was positively related to sustainable tourism decision-making power. Hypothesis 2 was supported because environmental sustainability knowledge significantly amplified sustainable tourism decision-making power (B = 0.221, standard error = 0.060, t = 3.669). The findings stated that environmental sustainability knowledge was also positively related to a sense of competency in sustainable tourism (B = 0.379, standard error = 0.058, t = 6.492). Hypothesis 3 was confirmed. As depicted in Figure 2, critical thinking was positively linked to sustainable tourism decision-making power (B = 0.354, standard error = 0.071, t = 4.994, hypothesis 4) and sense of competency in sustainable tourism (B = 0.249, standard error = 0.069, t = 3.632, hypothesis 5). Hence, hypotheses 4 and 5 were supported.
Hypotheses 6 and 7 were also verified because critical thinking mediated the effect of environmental sustainability knowledge on sustainable tourism decision-making power (B = 0.126, standard error = 0.041, lower-level confidence interval = 0.053, upper-level confidence interval = 0.213) and sense of competency in sustainable tourism (B = 0.089, standard error = 0.046, lower-level confidence interval = 0.017, upper-level confidence interval = 0.188).
Only age was significantly associated with a sense of competency in sustainable tourism (B = −0.175, standard error = 0.069, t = −2.551). Older students showed low levels of a sense of competency in sustainable tourism. The rest of the covariates were not significantly linked to this study’s constructs.
The findings explained 18.3% of the variance in environmental sustainability knowledge, 32.7% of the variance in sustainable tourism decision-making power, and 39.9% of the variance in the sense of competency in sustainable tourism. The findings regarding the significance of the impacts led to no changes without the covariates.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

The topic of sustainability has become increasingly important and well known in the tourism and hospitality sectors. Tourism organizations and destination administrations need to involve a wide range of stakeholders, such as workers, visitors, and local communities, in pro-environmental activities and adopt policies that aim to conserve the environment in order to successfully achieve sustainability goals. Today’s tourism and hospitality students are tomorrow’s supervisors, workers, and essential contributors to the wider sector. As such, it is crucial that we understand the factors that can enhance their ability to make informed sustainability decisions and be proficient in sustainable tourism issues.
This study developed and tested a research model that explored the inter-relationships between sustainability knowledge, CT, sustainable tourism decision-making power, and students’ sense of competency in sustainable tourism to overcome the lack of empirical research into the potential role of CT in hospitality and tourism students’ education for sustainable development. The sample includes full-time university students from two Northern Cyprus institutions’ tourism faculties/schools. In the context of tourism education, this study highlights the integration of CT with environmental sustainability knowledge. This integration moves beyond simply evaluating sustainability knowledge, emphasizing the significance of cultivating CT abilities alongside subject-specific knowledge. This study identifies CT as a mediating factor between knowledge of environmental sustainability, perceived competency in sustainable tourism, and sustainable decision-making abilities. This study offers a more nuanced view of CT’s function in converting knowledge into effective decision-making and developing competence in sustainable tourism practices. This study also emphasizes how critical it is to comprehend the elements that improve the capacity of today’s tourism and hospitality students—the future workforce—to make the industry sustainable. Moreover, this study underscores the value of educating students about sustainable tourism, especially in places like small island states, where sociocultural and environmental factors are more sensitive. Insightful conclusions are drawn from this paper.
Firstly, the findings indicate that there is a positive association between students’ environmental sustainability knowledge and their critical thinking. This finding means that people who have greater knowledge of environmental sustainability have better critical thinking capabilities. This finding asserts the previous argument in the literature that in order to build critical thinking skills, it is widely believed that students must have sufficient knowledge of a certain subject, in this case, environmental sustainability. This shows that having a strong background in a topic area gives people the basis they need to analyze, assess, and critically think about related problems and ideas [28,30,31].
Secondly, the results show a positive relationship between environmental sustainability knowledge and the capacity for sustainable tourism decision-making. This shows that people who have a stronger understanding of environmental sustainability are more likely to make decisions that are compatible with sustainable tourism policies. Students studying tourism who are knowledgeable and informed about sustainability can become fierce advocates of sustainability [2]. The literature, in other contexts, asserted that there is a positive link between individuals’ subject knowledge and their decision-making power [33,34].
Furthermore, this study demonstrates a positive connection between environmental sustainability knowledge and a feeling of competency in sustainable tourism. This implies that students who have higher CT abilities are more likely to adhere to the principles of sustainable tourism. Previous studies have shown that a particular domain’s knowledge, such as the technical comprehension of ethics, responsibility, and sustainability, is crucial to the development of responsible management competencies [40].
Additionally, this study shows an association between CT and sustainable tourism decision-making. This suggests that students are more likely to follow sustainable tourism practices if they possess greater CT abilities. CT is especially important in circumstances when sound decision-making and problem-solving skills are required [43]. According to past studies, CT helps people to make wise decisions in challenging circumstances [45]. Students must develop higher-order thinking skills in order to comprehend and solve sustainability problems because they are complex challenges [1].
Fifthly, this study depicts a link between CT and a feeling of competency in the context of sustainable tourism. This indicates that educational tourists who are more capable of thinking critically also tend to feel more capable of pursuing sustainable tourism practices. The relationship between CT and other forms of competencies has been demonstrated in previous studies across several fields. Scholars believe that CT and action competence are closely related, and developing action competency necessitates a strong emphasis on CT [53].
Finally, the results imply that CT serves as a mediator between environmental sustainability knowledge and both decision-making capacity and perception of competency in sustainable tourism. This proves that CT skills play a role in determining how environmental sustainability knowledge affects decision-making and competency. Knowledge and understanding are necessary for effective CT implementation [58]. Garside [24] stated that without an adequate foundation of knowledge within the context of the specific issue, thinking is virtually impossible. In particular, CT can enable students to use their background knowledge critically and feel both empowered and competent to contribute to the sustainability of tourism, which requires a critical analysis of a student’s prior knowledge in order to find solutions.

5.1. Theoretical Implications

The literature on sustainability education in tourism institutions is still in its infancy, and this work makes an essential contribution to the field [2,15]. The growing requirement for these institutions to proactively address the effects of tourism on the world highlights the importance of providing future industry professionals with a strong foundation in sustainability. This study extends the debate about how academia can play a crucial role in promoting ethical tourism practices by highlighting the significance of incorporating sustainability ideas into education.
Secondly, by highlighting the need to encourage students’ CT abilities in the context of tourism education, this study significantly contributes to the theory. Few studies have examined how critical thinking is transferred to graduates of tourism and hospitality programs [17], even though critical thinking is highlighted as one of the abilities necessary for the twenty-first century [16]. Besides highlighting the significance of sustainability knowledge, this study expands our understanding of the cognitive and analytical abilities required for students to interact with the complex challenges that frequently arise in the tourism industry.
Thirdly, by developing and testing a model that can help to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations, our study adds to the literature. Additionally, this study supports the request for critical consideration of the role of CT in the growth of sustainable tourism systems. This study also makes an important contribution to the discussion of sustainable tourism education, especially in areas with a higher sensitivity to sociocultural and environmental elements, such as small island states.
This study extends the use of IPT theory in hospitality and tourism education. As it deals with how people turn information into knowledge that has value and determines their subsequent actions, IPT is particularly pertinent in this scenario. Complex cognitive activities such as CT require an ability to recall facts and information [22]. It places a strong emphasis on cognitive abilities, including problem-solving, attention, and perception, all of which are essential parts of the information–cognition–action process. As a result, if hospitality and tourism educational institutions want to train sustainable leaders and employees to work in the industry, they must improve both sustainability knowledge and CT among students.

5.2. Practical Implications

This paper outlines suggestions for various stakeholders based on practical considerations. For instance, taking into account the exceptional positive impacts of sustainability knowledge and critical thinking on students’ ability to make sustainable decisions and their sense of sustainability competency, the following steps can be taken by the government and policymakers (such as the Ministry of Education):
Encouraging the inclusion of rigorous environmental sustainability knowledge in the core curricula of educational institutions’ hospitality and tourism programs can be a good starting point. Thus, the Ministry of Education and Policymakers could also encourage the creation of uniform frameworks that guarantee students receiving a comprehensive education in sustainable practices.
Provide funding for educational programs that emphasize the development of environmental sustainability knowledge and analytical abilities can be another practical step to be taken. Policymakers could also establish incentives such as grants to motivate educational institutions to improve their curricula in these areas. On the other hand, tourism and hospitality organizations should implement creative teaching strategies that encourage CT among students. For instance, real-life case studies can all be used to improve students’ analytical skills and motivate them to use CT in a variety of situations.
Moreover, universities where tourism and hospitality programs are being delivered should foster collaboration with host communities to develop opportunities for experiential learning for educational tourists. These institutions should create community-based initiatives that let students take on actual sustainability problems so they may have a better understanding of how their knowledge is put to use in the real world. Finally, practitioners in the tourism sector should encourage professionals to pursue continuous possibilities for development connected to environmental sustainability and CT. For instance, offering specific training programs and workshops can enhance employees’ comprehension of sustainable practices and provide them with the analytical power of CT. This may aid them in making more environmentally responsible decisions at work.

5.3. Limitations and Future Research

This study has a number of limitations that may influence potential future research directions. Firstly, establishing causal links between variables is hindered by the use of cross-sectional data. The evolution of environmental sustainability knowledge, CT, sustainable tourism competencies, and decision-making power through time can be better understood with the aid of longitudinal data. Therefore, it is recommended that future authors use time-lagged data to replicate the model. Secondly, the findings’ generalizability may be limited by this study’s reliance on a small sample size. Thus, more thorough insights could be obtained from future research with larger and more diverse sample sizes. Another limitation of this study is that it is limited to students from just two academic institutions in Northern Cyprus. For that reason, future research could benefit from including a wider variety of educational institutions. Given that climate change and global warming are critical problems that need to be promptly addressed [87], future studies are advised to use qualitative research methodology to understand tourism students’ perceptions of this phenomenon. Finally, this study did not take into account social or economic factors; instead, it only evaluated students’ understanding of environmental sustainability. Given that sustainability covers a wide range of topics, this restricted focus might make the conclusions appear less comprehensive. Future studies should aim to more comprehensively evaluate sustainability knowledge.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.S., A.O., H.R., and O.M.K.; methodology and analysis O.M.K.; data collection, M.S., writing—original draft preparation, M.S., A.O., H.R., and O.M.K.; supervision, A.O. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Ethics Committee Name: Eastern Mediterranean University Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Board (BAYEK). Approval Code: ETK00-2023-0232. Approval Date: 15 November 2023.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in this study.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the authors.

Acknowledgments

This work came from the first author’s doctoral dissertation, and its data form part of a larger project.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Rezapouraghdam, H.; Akhshik, A. Tracing the complexity-sustainability nexus in a small Mediterranean island: Implications for hospitality and tourism education. Worldw. Hosp. Tour. Themes. 2021, 13, 476–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Rezapouraghdam, H.; Alipour, H.; Kilic, H.; Akhshik, A. Education for sustainable tourism development: An exploratory study of key learning factors. Worldw. Hosp. Tour. Themes. 2022, 14, 384–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Zhuang, X.; Yao, Y.; Li, J. Sociocultural impacts of tourism on residents of world cultural heritage sites in China. Sustainability 2019, 11, 840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Yu, D.; Li, S.; Chen, N.; Hall, M.; Guo, Z. High Temperatures and Tourism: Findings from China. Sustainability 2023, 15, 14138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zahrani, A.A. Team Creativity and Green Human Resource Management Practices’ Mediating Roles in Organizational Sustainability. Sustainability 2022, 14, 12827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Karatepe, O.M.; Rezapouraghdam, H.; Hassannia, R. Does employee engagement mediate the influence of psychological contract breach on pro-environmental behaviors and intent to remain with the organization in the hotel industry? J. Hosp. Mark. Manag. 2020, 30, 326–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Batista, A.A.D.S.; Francisco, A.C.D. Organizational sustainability practices: A study of the firms listed by the corporate sustainability index. Sustainability 2018, 10, 226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Rockström, J.; Steffen, W.; Noone, K.; Persson, Å.; Chapin, F.S., III; Lambin, E.; Lenton, T.M.; Scheffer, M.; Folke, C.; Nykvist, B.; et al. Planetary boundaries: Exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecol. Soc. 2009, 14, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Akhshik, A.; Rezapouraghdam, H.; Ramkissoon, H. Industrialization of nature in the time of complexity unawareness: The case of Chitgar Lake, Iran. J. Hosp. Tour. Res. 2022, 46, 583–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Unesco, U. The Tbilisi Declaration. In Proceedings of the Intergovernmental Conference on Environmental Education, Tbilisi, Georgia, 14–26 October 1977; Available online: https://www.gdrc.org/uem/ee/tbilisi.html (accessed on 20 November 2023).
  11. Yang, Y.T.C. Cultivating critical thinkers: Exploring transfer of learning from pre-service teacher training to classroom practice. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2012, 28, 1116–1130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Ennis, R. A taxonomy of critical thinking dispositions and abilities. In Teaching Thinking Skills: Theory and Practice; Baron, J.B., Sternberg, R., Eds.; W.H.: New York, NY, USA, 1987; pp. 9–26. [Google Scholar]
  13. DeNoyelles, A.; Reyes-Foster, B. Using Word Clouds in Online Discussions to Support Critical Thinking and Engagement. Online Learn. 2015, 19, 13–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Behar-Horenstein, L.S.; Niu, L. Teaching critical thinking skills in higher education: A review of the literature. J. Coll. Teach. Learn. 2011, 8, 25–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Camargo, B.A.; Gretzel, U. What do tourism students know about sustainability and sustainable tourism? An exploratory study of Latin American students. J. Teach. Travel Tour. 2017, 17, 101–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Griffin, P.; Care, E. Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  17. Stone, G.A.; Duffy, L.N.; Pinckney, H.P.; Templeton-Bradley, R. Teaching for critical thinking: Preparing hospitality and tourism students for careers in the twenty-first century. J. Teach. Travel Tour. 2017, 17, 67–84. [Google Scholar]
  18. Hales, R.; Jennings, G. Transformation for sustainability: The role of complexity in tourism students’ understanding of sustainable tourism. J. Hosp. Leis. Sport Tour. Educ. 2017, 21, 185–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. McGrath, G.M.; Lockstone-Binney, L.; Ong, F.; Wilson-Evered, E.; Blaer, M.; Whitelaw, P. Teaching sustainability in tourism education: A teaching simulation. J. Sustain. Tour. 2021, 29, 795–812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Grilli, G.; Tyllianakis, E.; Luisetti, T.; Ferrini, S.; Turner, R.K. Prospective tourist preferences for sustainable tourism development in Small Island Developing States. Tour. Manag. 2021, 82, 104178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. McLeod, M.; Dodds, R.; Butler, R. Introduction to special issue on island tourism resilience. Tour. Geog. 2021, 23, 361–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Thompson, C. Critical thinking across the curriculum: Process over output. Int. J. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2011, 1, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  23. Browne, M.N.; Keeley, S.M. Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking; Pearson Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  24. Garside, C. Look Who’s Talking: A Comparison of Lecture and Group Discussion Teaching Strategies in Developing Critical Thinking Skills. Comm. Educ. 1996, 45, 212–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. McPeck, J.E. Teaching Critical Thinking: Dialogue and Dialectic; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  26. Sheldon, P.J.; Fesenmaier, D.R.; Tribe, J. The tourism education futures initiative (TEFI): Activating change in tourism education. J. Teach. Travel Tour. 2011, 11, 2–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Raybould, M.; Wilkins, H. Over qualified and under experienced: Turning graduates into hospitality managers. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2005, 17, 203–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Vyncke, M. The Concept and Practice of Critical Thinking in Academic Writing: An Investigation of International Students’ Perceptions and Writing Experiences. Doctoral Dissertation, King’s College London, London, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  29. Flores, K.L.; Matkin, G.S.; Burbach, M.E.; Quinn, C.E.; Harding, H. Deficient critical thinking skills among college graduates: Implications for leadership. Educ. Philos. Theory 2012, 44, 212–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Giancarlo, C.A.; Facione, P.A. A look across four years at the disposition toward critical thinking among undergraduate students. J. Gen. Educ. 2001, 50, 29–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kalman, C.S. Developing critical thinking in undergraduate courses: A philosophical approach. Sci. Educ. 2002, 11, 83–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Bailin, S.; Case, R.; Coombs, J.R.; Daniels, L.B. Conceptualizing critical thinking. J. Curric. Stud. 1999, 31, 285–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Botti, M.; Reeve, R. Role of knowledge and ability in student nurses’ clinical decision-making. Nurs. Health Sci. 2003, 5, 39–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Raju, P.S.; Lonial, S.C.; Mangold, W.G. Differential effects of subjective knowledge, objective knowledge, and usage experience on decision making: An exploratory investigation. J. Consum. Psychol. 1995, 4, 153–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Schlegelmilch, B.B.; Bohlen, G.M.; Diamantopoulos, A. The link between green purchasing decisions and measures of environmental consciousness. Eur. J. Mark. 1996, 30, 35–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Bovy, R.C. Successful instructional methods: A cognitive information processing approach. ECTJ 1981, 29, 203–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Tomlinson, P.D. Understanding Teaching: Interactive Education Psychology; McGraw-Hill: London, UK, 1981. [Google Scholar]
  38. Greenwood, J. Critical thinking and nursing scripts: The case for the development of both. J. Adv. Nurs. 2000, 31, 428–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Kirschner, P.; Van Vilsteren, P.; Hummel, H.; Wigman, M. The design of a study environment for acquiring academic and professional competence. Stud. High. Educ. 1997, 22, 151–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Dzhengiz, T.; Niesten, E. Competences for environmental sustainability: A systematic review on the impact of absorptive capacity and capabilities. J. Bus. Ethics. 2020, 162, 881–906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Bean, J.C. Engaging Ideas: The Professor’s Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom, 2nd ed.; Jossey-Bass Publishers: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2011; p. 360. [Google Scholar]
  42. Fisher, A. Critical Thinking; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  43. Ku, K.Y. Assessing students’ critical thinking performance: Urging for measurements using multi-response format. Think. Ski. Creat. 2009, 4, 70–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Rezapouraghdam, H.; Karatepe, O.M.; Enea, C. Sustainable recovery for people and the planet through spirituality-induced connectedness in the hospitality and tourism industry. J. Hosp. Tour. Insights. 2022. ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Gambrill, E. Evidence-based practice and policy: Choices ahead. Res. Soc. Work Pract. 2006, 16, 338–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Xiao, H.; Smith, S.L. The use of tourism knowledge: Research propositions. Ann. Tour. Res. 2007, 34, 310–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Tümkaya, S.; Aybek, B.; Aldaş, H. An Investigation of University Students’ Critical Thinking Disposition and Perceived Problem Solving Skills. Eurasian J. Educ. Res. 2009, 36, 57–74. [Google Scholar]
  48. Saiz, C.; Rivas, S.F. Assessment in critical thinking: A proposal for differentiating ways of thinking. Ergo Nueva Época 2008, 22, 25–66. [Google Scholar]
  49. Walker, S.E. Active learning strategies to promote critical thinking. J. Athl. Train. 2003, 38, 263–267. [Google Scholar]
  50. Facione, N.C.; Facione, P.A. Externalizing the critical thinking in knowledge development and clinical judgment. Nurs. Outlook. 1996, 44, 129–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Wang, S.; Wang, H. Teaching higher order thinking in the introductory MIS course: A model-directed approach. J. Educ. Bus. 2011, 86, 208–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Chen, Q.; Liu, D.; Zhou, C.; Tang, S. Relationship between critical thinking disposition and research competence among clinical nurses: A cross-sectional study. J. Clin. Nurs. 2020, 29, 1332–1340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Jensen, B.B.; Schnack, K. The action competence approach in environmental education. Environ. Educ. Res. 1997, 3, 163–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Walter, C.; Walter, P. Is Critical Thinking a Mediator Variable of Student Performance in School? Educ. Res. Q. 2018, 41, 3–24. [Google Scholar]
  55. Demirbag, B.; Unisen, A.; Yesilyurt, A. Training of Critical Thinking Skills in Teacher Candidates and Placebo Effect: A Quasi-Experimental Study. Eurasian J. Educ. Res. 2016, 63, 375–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Krathwohl, D.R. A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Pract. 2002, 41, 212–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Bloom, B.S. Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. In Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain; McKay: New York, NY, USA, 1956. [Google Scholar]
  58. Dwyer, C.P.; Hogan, M.J.; Stewart, I. An integrated critical thinking framework for the 21st century. Think. Ski. Creat. 2014, 12, 43–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Colucciello, M.L. Critical thinking skills and dispositions of baccalaureate nursing students—A conceptual model for evaluation. J. Prof. Nurs. 1997, 13, 236–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Shakeela, A.; Breakey, N.; Ruhanen, L. Tourism education’s roles in sustainable tourism development: A case study of SIDS introduction. J. Hosp. Tour. Educ. 2012, 24, 35–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Altinay, L.; Altinay, M.; Bicak, M. Political Scenarios: The future of the North Cyprus tourism industry. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2002, 14, 176–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Connolly, J.; Gifford, A.; Kanol, D.; Yilmaz, O. The role of transnational education in public administration and public affairs to support ‘good governance’ the Turkish Republic of North Cyprus. Teach. Public Adm. 2018, 36, 207–221. [Google Scholar]
  63. Yasarata, M.; Altinay, L.; Burns, P.; Okumus, F. Politics and sustainable tourism development—Can they co-exist? Voices from North Cyprus. Tour. Manag. 2010, 31, 345–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Farmaki, A.; Altinay, L.; Botterill, D.; Hilke, S. Politics and sustainable tourism: The case of Cyprus. Tour. Manag. 2015, 47, 178–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Alipour, H.; Kilic, H. An institutional appraisal of tourism development and planning: The case of the Turkish Republic of North Cyprus (TRNC). Tour. Manag. 2005, 26, 79–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Nourafkan, N.J.; Karatepe, O.M.; Rezapouraghdam, H. Corporate social responsibility, workplace spirituality and their effects on green promotive and prohibitive voice behaviours. Curr. Issues Tour. 2023. ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Bogan, E.; Çaliskan, C.; Karatepe, O.M.; Rezapouraghdam, H. An investigation of the selected antecedents and consequences of work engagement among hospitality and tourism academicians. J. Hosp. Tour. Insights. 2023. ahead of print. [Google Scholar]
  68. Karatepe, O.M.; Eslamlou, A. Outcomes of job crafting among flight attendants. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2017, 62, 34–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. 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, 879–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Pintrich, P.R. A Manual for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ); University of Michigan, National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning: Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
  71. Lee, K.; Chuang, N.K.; Lee, S.A.; Israeli, A.A. How COVID-19 influences the future of service management professions. J. Hosp. Tour. Insights. 2022, 5, 629–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Bao, S.; Jolly, P.M. Engaging employees through transformational leadership: The mediating role of emotional energy. J. Hosp. Tour. Insights. 2023. ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Wang, C.-J. Influence of social identity on service sabotage in hospitality organizations: Cross-level roles of job embeddedness, organizational identification, and supervisor support. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2023. ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Tabrizi, R.S.; Karatepe, O.M.; Rezapouraghdam, H.; Rescalvo-Martin, E.; Enea, C. Green human resource management, job embeddedness and their effects on restaurant employees’ green voice behaviors. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2023. ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Fuller, C.M.; Simmering, M.J.; Atinc, G.; Atinc, Y.; Babin, B.J. Common method variance detection in business research. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 3192–3198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Vakira, E.; Shereni, N.C.; Ncube, C.M.; Ndlovu, N. The effect of inclusive leadership on employee engagement, mediated by psychological safety in the hospitality industry. J. Hosp. Tour. Insights. 2023, 6, 819–834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Hooper, D.; Coughlan, J.; Mullen, M.R. Structural equation modeling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electron. J. Bus. Res. Methods. 2008, 6, 53–60. [Google Scholar]
  78. Yavas, U.; Karatepe, O.M.; Avci, T.; Tekinkus, M. Antecedents and outcomes of service recovery performance: An empirical study of frontline employees in Turkish banks. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2003, 21, 255–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Clark, M.; Kang, B.; Calhoun, J.R. Green meets social media: Young travelers’ perceptions of hotel environmental sustainability. J. Hosp. Tour. Insights 2023, 6, 36–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Sthapit, E.; Bjork, P.; Coudounaris, D.N.; Jiménez-Barreto, J.; Vo-Thanh, T. Antecedents and outcomes of memorable volunteer tourism experiences. J. Hosp. Tour. Insights. 2023. ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. 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]
  82. Karatepe, O.M.; Rezapouraghdam, H.; Hassannia, R.; Kim, T.T.; Enea, C. Tourism destination social responsibility and the moderating role of self-congruity. Tour. Rev. 2023. ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Rezapouraghdam, H.; Akhshik, A.; Ramkissoon, H. Application of machine learning to predict visitors’ green behavior in marine protected areas: Evidence from Cyprus. J. Sustain. Tour. 2021, 31, 2479–2505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Anderson, J.C.; Gerbing, D.W. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol. Bull. 1988, 103, 411–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Baba, S.N.; Dada, Z.A.; Qureshi, R.A. Ethnic food tasting and gastronomy online reviews: Incorporating enjoyment in the behavioral intention model. J. Hosp. Tour. Insights. 2023. ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Thompson, C.G.; Kim, R.S.; Aloe, A.M.; Becker, B.J. Extracting the variance inflation factor and other multicollinearity diagnostics from typical regression results. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2017, 39, 81–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. García, D.H.; Rezapouraghdam, H. Climate change, heat stress and the analysis of its space-time variability in European metropolises. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 425, 138892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 16 05655 g001
Figure 1. The proposed model of this study.
Figure 1. The proposed model of this study.
Sustainability 16 05655 g001
Sustainability 16 05655 g002
Figure 2. Model test and results.
Figure 2. Model test and results.
Sustainability 16 05655 g002
Table 1. Confirmatory factor analysis results.
Table 1. Confirmatory factor analysis results.
Scale ItemsStandardized Loadingst-ValueCRAlphaAVE
Environmental sustainability knowledge (ESK) 0.800.780.44
(The level of familiarity with environmental sustainability concepts, principles, and mechanisms):
Climate change0.708.97
Ecosystems and biodiversity conservation0.688.34
Environmental certification programs0.719.14
Carbon footprint0.526.29
Greenhouse gases0.698.47
Critical thinking (CT) 0.870.880.58
I often find myself questioning things that I hear or read during my courses to decide if I find them convincing.0.617.66
When a theory, interpretation, or conclusion is presented in class or in the readings, I try to decide if there is good supporting evidence.0.7610.25
I treat the course material as a starting point and try to develop my own ideas about it.0.8512.16
I try to play around with ideas of my own related to what I am learning in courses.0.8512.19
Whenever I read or hear an assertion or conclusion in class, I think about possible alternatives.0.729.52
Sustainable tourism decision-making power (STDMP) 0.910.910.47
I feel able to make meaningful contributions to sustainable tourism.0.729.70
I feel able to initiate changes to achieve sustainable tourism goals.0.7410.05
I feel I can make informed sustainable tourism decisions.0.7710.57
I feel I have the necessary skills to implement sustainable tourism.0.7510.29
I feel I can make a difference in sustainable tourism.0.7510.18
Others will support my efforts to implement sustainable tourism.0.607.74
I feel that I have enough autonomy to make sustainable tourism decisions.0.607.62
I know how to identify resources and information required to make sustainable decisions.0.627.93
I have easy access to resources and information to make sustainable tourism decisions.0.577.23
I feel that I can influence sustainable tourism decision-making.0.719.44
I have a range of options from which to make sustainable tourism choices.0.709.26
Sense of competency in sustainable tourism (SCIST) 0.910.910.52
I am able to identify and classify major impacts of tourism.0.678.85
I am able to explain the meaning and purpose of sustainable tourism.0.7510.28
I can identify the key principles of sustainable tourism.0.7710.64
I am able to identify different tourism stakeholders.0.658.46
I feel able to implement sustainable tourism plans.0.7510.25
I feel able to conduct tourism impact assessments.0.8111.51
I am capable of formulating sustainable tourism strategies.0.739.97
I am aware of the different techniques used to foster community participation in tourism development.0.678.91
I am aware of the different tools and techniques available for developing sustainable tourism.0.699.08
Notes: All loadings are significant at the 0.01 level. CR = composite reliability; AVE = average variance extracted.
Table 2. Discriminant validity check.
Table 2. Discriminant validity check.
Latent Constructs1234
1. Environmental sustainability knowledge0.66
2. Critical thinking0.510.76
3. Sustainable tourism decision-making power0.460.600.69
4. Sense of competency in sustainable tourism0.620.500.810.72
Notes: The square root of the average variance extracted score for each variable was shown on the diagonal.
Table 3. Summary statistics and correlations.
Table 3. Summary statistics and correlations.
Variables123456
1. Age-
2. Gender−0.154-
3. Environmental sustainability knowledge0.1050.001-
4. Critical thinking0.0770.0500.423 *-
5. Sustainable tourism decision making power−0.0380.1230.434 *0.499 *-
6. Sense of competency in sustainable tourism−0.1020.0480.562 *0.448 *0.736 *-
Mean1.440.503.213.713.453.57
Standard Deviation0.710.500.910.780.720.74
Skewness--−0.074−1.083−0.654−0.789
Kurtosis--−0.7351.6071.3441.163
Notes: * p < 0.01. Age was measured in four categories. Gender was coded as 0 = female and 1 = male.
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

Shafieieh, M.; Ozturen, A.; Rezapouraghdam, H.; Karatepe, O.M. Does Critical Thinking Mediate the Relationship between Sustainability Knowledge and Tourism Students’ Ability to Make Sustainable Decisions? Sustainability 2024, 16, 5655. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135655

AMA Style

Shafieieh M, Ozturen A, Rezapouraghdam H, Karatepe OM. Does Critical Thinking Mediate the Relationship between Sustainability Knowledge and Tourism Students’ Ability to Make Sustainable Decisions? Sustainability. 2024; 16(13):5655. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135655

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shafieieh, Masoud, Ali Ozturen, Hamed Rezapouraghdam, and Osman M. Karatepe. 2024. "Does Critical Thinking Mediate the Relationship between Sustainability Knowledge and Tourism Students’ Ability to Make Sustainable Decisions?" Sustainability 16, no. 13: 5655. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135655

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

Article Metrics

Article metric data becomes available approximately 24 hours after publication online.
Back to TopTop