From Sensory Experience to Revisit Intentions: An Embodied Cognition Perspective on Replica Tourism

Comments 1: [1. Expansion of Theoretical Insights:

While the study integrates embodied cognition theory, it could benefit from linking these insights more explicitly to sensory marketing or experiential design theories which focus on creating engaging and memorable customer experiences. This would enrich the theoretical depth and applicability of the findings.]

Response 1: 

We agree with this comment. We have accordingly made revisions to emphasize this point. Specifically, in the manuscript, we have added the following content in lines :383-387

[The sensory marketing theory suggests that tourists' vision, hearing, smell, taste, and touch are important factors during the pre-consumption, actual consumption, and post-consumption stages (Suárez-Jaramillo et al., 2023). Good sensory experiences can effectively create memorable travel memories for tourists (Diţoiu et al., 2014).]

Comments 2: [2. Deeper Analysis of Non-significant Findings:

The manuscript notes non-significant findings for some sensory experiences regarding revisit intentions. These should not only be reported but discussed in detail to provide insights into why these senses might be less impactful. Speculations on cultural, psychological, or contextual reasons could be insightful and could lead to hypotheses for future studies.]

Response 2: We agree with this comment. We have accordingly made revisions to emphasize this point. Specifically, in the manuscript, we have added the following content in lines 341-348: 

[We found that gustatory and olfactory experiences did not significantly affect revisit intention, which aligned with previous research findings that have pointed out that vision is one of the most significant factors in tourism experiences, while olfactory experiences contribute the least and do not significantly impact loyalty (Shao & Lin, 2021). In wine tourism studies, although olfactory and gustatory importance is relatively high, auditory and visual factors have a greater impact on tourists’ satisfaction and revisit intention (Santos et al., 2023). ]

Comments 3:[3. Comparative Analysis:

Given the focus on replica tourism destinations, a comparative analysis between replicas and their original counterparts could offer valuable insights into the unique value and challenges associated with replicas. This comparison could further validate the distinctiveness of sensory experiences at replica destinations.]

Response 3:

We agree with this comment. We have accordingly made revisions to emphasize this point. Specifically, in the manuscript, we have added the following content in lines 456-463:

[Finally, research could collect data from the same group of tourists at different points in time regarding their perceptions of Window of the World in Shenzhen. By comparing their perception changes, this would help to understand how changes at replica tourism destinations affect tourists' experiences and behaviors over the long term.Additionally, this type of study should collect data from non-replica destinations to compare the sensory experiences of tourists at both replica and non-replica destinations. However, Window of the World in Shenzhen mixes attractions from around the world, making it difficult to do such a comparison study.]

Comments 4:

[4.Inclusion of Additional Psychological or Social Variables:

Consider including additional variables such as emotional involvement, cultural affinity, or the novelty-seeking behavior of tourists, which might mediate or moderate the relationships explored in the study. This would provide a more comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing tourist behaviors at replica destinations.]

Response 4: 

We agree with this comment. We have accordingly made revisions to emphasize this point. Specifically, in the manuscript, we have added the following content in lines 447-463:

[For example, additional variables affecting consumer tourism experiences, such as personality and attitudes towards tourism (Kalmár-Rimóczi & Kóródi, 2015). Additionally, consumer knowledge, identification, and perceptions of tourism destinations may also influence travel decisions to some extent (Jiang et al., 2022). It could also explore variables such as tourists' emotional involvement, cultural affinity, or novelty-seeking behavior, as these variables might mediate or moderate the relationship between tourists and tourism destinations(Josiassen, Kock, & Nørfelt, 2020). Therefore, future research could incorporate multiple variables to further refine studies on replica tourism destinations.

Finally, research could collect data from the same group of tourists at different points in time regarding their perceptions of Window of the World in Shenzhen. By comparing their perception changes, this would help to understand how changes at replica tourism destinations affect tourists' experiences and behaviors over the long term.Additionally, this type of study should collect data from non-replica destinations to compare the sensory experiences of tourists at both replica and non-replica destinations. However, Window of the World in Shenzhen mixes attractions from around the world, making it difficult to do such a comparison study.]

Comments 5:

[5. Recommendations for Practical Application:

The practical implications section could be expanded to provide specific, actionable recommendations based on the study’s findings. For instance, the manuscript could suggest particular sensory enhancements that could be implemented at replica destinations to improve tourist satisfaction and revisit intentions.]

Response 5: 

We agree with this comment. We have accordingly made revisions to emphasize this point. Specifically, in the manuscript, we have added the following content in lines 399-431:

[This study empirically demonstrates that good sensory experiences can effectively enhance tourists’ perceptions of authenticity and hedonic well-being at replica tourism destinations, thereby attracting repeat visits. Replica tourism destinations, such as Window of the World in Shenzhen, should focus on enhancing tourists' sensory experiences, particularly gustatory and olfactory. This might include adding more international restaurants, introducing local and international food festivals, holding regular tasting events, and setting up fragrance zones with plants and spices to create specific scent memory points. Additionally, adding features from different parts of the world, such as promotional videos and music, can enhance tourists' auditory experience. Tactile art installations, interactive exhibitions, and activities like craft-making can enhance both touch and auditory experiences. The use of these technologies can also create immersive historical and cultural stories to enhance visual and auditory experiences, achieving a comprehensive experience of all five senses. These strategies can help improve tourists' immediate experiences and strengthen their emotional connections with the destination in the long term.

Enhancing sensory experiences can also improve tourists' perceptions of authenticity in their tourism experience. For example, hosting local specialty food events at replica tourism destinations can effectively enhance tourists' perceptions, thereby increasing the authenticity of their experience (Sarial-Abi et al., 2020). Additionally, improving tourists' emotional attachment to the destination, such as creating cultural activities with local characteristics or unique experiences specific to Window of the World in Shenzhen, can enhance tourists' perceived authenticity at Window of the World and improve their experience (Diţoiu et al., 2014). Therefore, we suggest that Window of the World in Shenzhen could add more events and food festivals from around the world in the future to increase tourists' perceived authenticity and promote their revisit intention.

In addition, the survey results indicate that younger tourists, especially millennials, are the main visitors to replica tourism destinations. Marketing efforts should be targeted towards younger generations to attract more visitors. Replica tourism destinations should refine their offerings to cater to the diverse sensory needs of each tourist, continuously enhancing their hedonic well-being. By doing so, these destinations can not only improve individual tourist experiences but also increase loyalty and revisit intentions on a broader socio-cultural level.]

Comments 6:

[6. Longitudinal Approach:If possible, suggesting a longitudinal approach in future research could be beneficial to understand changes over time in tourist perceptions, especially in response to modifications at the replica destinations based on the insights gained from this study.]

Response 6: 

We agree with this comment. We have accordingly made revisions to emphasize this point. Specifically, in the manuscript, we have added the following content in lines 456-464.

[Finally, research could collect data from the same group of tourists at different points in time regarding their perceptions of Window of the World in Shenzhen. By comparing their perception changes, this would help to understand how changes at replica tourism destinations affect tourists' experiences and behaviors over the long term.]

Comments 7:

[7. Addressing the Limitations More Thoroughly:

The limitations section could be expanded to discuss the implications of these limitations for the study’s findings and how they might influence the generalizability of the results. Suggestions for overcoming these limitations in future research should be offered.]

Response 7: 

We agree with this comment. We have accordingly made revisions to emphasize this point. Specifically, in the manuscript, we have added the following content in lines 433-463.

[This study has several limitations. First, the sample collection was limited to online data, and no field data were collected from Window of the World in Shenzhen. Consequently, the findings may not account for seasonal changes or specific days, preventing more detailed analysis. Studies show that offline surveys are more representative than online surveys. Offline surveys, in particular, have a higher average response rate and are more reliable (Zhang, Liang, & Zhang, 2015). Future research could validate this model by collecting both online and offline data from replica tourism destinations, including Window of the World.

Second, this study only examined tourists’ intentions to revisit replica tourism destinations and did not explore their intentions to visit real destinations, which would be a valuable avenue of research (Wee & Ariffin, 2021). Since replica tourism is a relatively new research topic, many variables still need to be explored. Through in-depth interviews and field surveys, new variables beyond this model could be identified, enriching this line of research.

For example, additional variables affecting consumer tourism experiences, such as personality and attitudes towards tourism (Kalmár-Rimóczi & Kóródi, 2015). Additionally, consumer knowledge, identification, and perceptions of tourism destinations may also influence travel decisions to some extent (Jiang et al., 2022). It could also explore variables such as tourists' emotional involvement, cultural affinity, or novelty-seeking behavior, as these variables might mediate or moderate the relationship between tourists and tourism destinations(Josiassen, Kock, & Nørfelt, 2020). Therefore, future research could incorporate multiple variables to further refine studies on replica tourism destinations.

Finally, research could collect data from the same group of tourists at different points in time regarding their perceptions of Window of the World in Shenzhen. By comparing their perception changes, this would help to understand how changes at replica tourism destinations affect tourists' experiences and behaviors over the long term.Additionally, this type of study should collect data from non-replica destinations to compare the sensory experiences of tourists at both replica and non-replica destinations. However, Window of the World in Shenzhen mixes attractions from around the world, making it difficult to do such a comparison study.]

4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

Point 1:

Response 1: 

Thank you for pointing this out. I have made the necessary revisions as per your request, specifically on line 2

“[From Sensory experience to Revisit Intentions: An Embodied Cognition Perspective on Replica Tourism]”

Comments 2: [Abstract: Line 14—There is ambiguity in "within the past three months". Please provide a reference time. Line 249 is similar. ]

Response 2: 

We have made the necessary modifications based on your suggestions, specifically reflected on line 12-15.

[Utilizing embodied cognition theory, this study empirically tested its application through data collected via an online survey of tourists who visited a well-known replica destination, Window of the World in Shenzhen, within three months prior to completing the survey.]

Comments 3: [Literature review: Both Section 2.3 and Section 2.4 dealt with "Sensory experiences." These terms ought to be taken out of the section 2.4 title, in my opinion. Given that this is the main topic of the research, I'm shocked that the authors neglected to mention revisiting attention. Since sections 2.1 and 2.2 were not your main focus, kindly remove them. The perception of authenticity, the well-being of the traveler, and the intention of revisiting can all be integrated with replica tourism to spotlight the related work in this field. Kindly reorganize.]

Response 3:

We have made the necessary modifications based on your suggestions, specifically reflected on line 65,100,139,183,184-199. I deleted Section 2.3 "Sensory Experiences in Replica Tourism."

Based on your advice, I have made the following adjustments:

[2.1. Sensory Experiences]

[2.2. Travel well-being]

[2.3.Perception of authenticity]

[2.4. Revisit Intention]

[Sensory experiences can enhance overall user satisfaction and intention to reuse by improving perceptions of authenticity and subjective well-being (Kim, 2019). In tourism, sensory experiences such as participating in cultural activities and viewing natural landscapes can enhance tourists' perception of authenticity (Li & Li, 2022). Rich sensory experiences boost this perception, further enhancing hedonic well-being (Huang et al., 2024). The hedonic dimension of tourism experiences increases satisfac-tion, thereby increasing the intention to revisit (Shin et al., 2024). In cultural heritage tourism, tourists with a higher perception of authenticity are more likely to intend to revisit (Nguyen & Cheung, 2016).

Some studies have used embodied cognition theory to explore the relationship between tourists’ experiences and their intention to revisit (Balakrishnan et al., 2024). Research on replica tourism indicates that the main factor driving the intention to re-visit is related to authenticity. When authentic tourism experiences are limited, per-ceived authenticity is lower, leading to a poorer overall tourist experience (Sarial-Abi et al., 2020). These studies suggest that tourists' sensory experiences influence their perceptions of authenticity and well-being, which in turn affect their intention to re-visit.]

Comments 4a:[a) Section 3.2: For every variable, survey questions should be supplied together with a list of references.]

Response 4a:

We have made the necessary modifications based on your suggestions, specifically reflected on line 231-241.

 [The scales used in this study were adapted from existing research scales, with modifications to the wording of the survey questions to suit the research context. Sensory experience was measured across five dimensions: auditory, gustatory, visual, olfactory, and tactile, each comprising three or four items (Zhanget al., 2021). The intention to revisit was assessed with three items (Zhanget al., 2021). Perception of authenticity was measured with four items based on Antón et al. (2019). Hedonic well-being was assessed using two dimensions: hedonic well-being (four items) and eudaimonic well-being (five items), all adapted from the scales by Schwartz and Conti (2008) and Park and Ahn (2022). A seven-point Likert scale was used, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The survey also included demographic questions.]

Comments 4b:[b) Lines 263-264 and 269–271, respectively, were duplicates.]

Response 4b:

We have made the necessary modifications based on your suggestions, specifically reflected on line 231-241.

[The scales used in this study were adapted from existing research scales, with modifications to the wording of the survey questions to suit the research context. Sensory experience was measured across five dimensions: auditory, gustatory, visual, olfactory, and tactile, each comprising three or four items (Zhanget al., 2021). The intention to revisit was assessed with three items (Zhanget al., 2021). Perception of authenticity was measured with four items based on Antón et al. (2019). Hedonic well-being was assessed using two dimensions: hedonic well-being (four items) and eudaimonic well-being (five items), all adapted from the scales by Schwartz and Conti (2008) and Park and Ahn (2022). A seven-point Likert scale was used, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The survey also included demographic questions.]

Comments 5a:[a) Line 290: “VE: Revisit intention”—a conspicuous error]

Response 5a:We have made the necessary modifications based on your suggestions, specifically reflected on line 267.

[VE: Visual experience]

Comments 5b:[b) Table 7 ought to be positioned following the text body's initial appearance. ]

Response 5b:

We have made the necessary modifications based on your suggestions, specifically reflected on line 308-309.

[Table 7 has been repositioned to follow its first mention in the main text. You can find the adjusted location of Table 7 in the text.]

Comments 5c:[c) Figure 2 should be addressed in the text body. ]

Response 5c:

We have made the necessary modifications based on your suggestions, specifically reflected on line 292-293,295-296.

[Figure 2 shows the path relationships between sensory experience dimensions, perceived authenticity, well-being, and the intention to revisit]

Comments 6a:[a) Anything that may be inferred directly from the results ought not to be mentioned here. In other words, kindly relocate section 5.1's second half to the findings section. ]

Response 6a:

We have made the necessary modifications based on your suggestions, specifically reflected on line 312-321,324-339.

[This study examined how tourists' sensory experiences at replica tourism destinations affect perceived authenticity and well-being, and how these sensory experiences, along with perceived authenticity and well-being, ultimately influence tourists' intention to revisit. The study conducted an online survey with visitors who had been to the "Window of the World" in Shenzhen. The findings reveal that tourists' sensory experiences, except for smell and taste, are directly related to the intention to revisit. Positive sensory experiences influence perceived authenticity and well-being, subsequently leading to an increased intention to re-visit. This research provides deeper insights into replica tourism destinations and expands the study of replica tourism. Furthermore, the study extends the application of embodied cognition theory.]

[Through sensory experiences, tourists can better experience the culture and features of a destination, which further enhances their travel experience and increases their perception of authenticity (Wang, 1999).Although many studies in tourism research have explored the relationship between sensory experiences and perception of authenticity, this relationship has not been fully studied in the context of replica destinations. Therefore, this study examines the relationship between sensory experiences and perception of authenticity in replica destinations and further analyzes which senses affect tourists' perception of authenticity.

Tourism experiences can enhance tourists' hedonic and eudaimonic well-being through satisfying sensory experiences (Huang et al., 2024). However, current research does not explore which specific sensory experiences improve tourists' well-being. In our study, we found that all sensory experiences, except olfactory experience, positively impacted tourists' hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Some studies suggest that the impact of olfactory experience on well-being usually needs interaction with other senses, and that olfactory experience alone does not have a clear effect on improving tourists' well-being (Spence, 2020).]

Comments 6b:[Lines 368–378: This paragraph was disorganized since it covered methods in the second half of the paragraph and research aspects in the first. ]

Response 6b:

I have reorganized the overall structure of the paper according to your request, specifically reflected on line 361-368,392-397

[This study enriches research on replica tourism destinations through empirical data. Research on sensory experiences and revisit intention has been lacking, within the context of replica destinations. Previous studies on replica tourism primarily con-ducted in Western contexts, without sufficiently exploring the five human senses or other cultural contexts. Our study extends research in this area and also comprehen-sively explores the impact of the five senses on experiences of replica destinations. This study answers that call by providing new quantitative evidence of the relationship between tourists’ sensory experiences and replica tourism destinations in an Asian cultural context.

…

Methodologically, most studies have relied on case studies and theoretical analyses, which have limitations, and there is still considerable space for quantitative research on replica tourism destinations. This study explores a theoretical pathway for sensory experiences impacting replica tourism destination experiences through empirical data, laying a foundation for future research.]

Comments 6c:[What implication can be made of the assertions in lines 399–404?]

Response 6c:

We have made the necessary modifications based on your suggestions. In addition, this study also adds some new practical contributions, specifically reflected on line 399-424.

[This study empirically demonstrates that good sensory experiences can effectively enhance tourists’ perceptions of authenticity and hedonic well-being at replica tourism destinations, thereby attracting repeat visits. Replica tourism destinations, such as Window of the World in Shenzhen, should focus on enhancing tourists' sensory experiences, particularly gustatory and olfactory. This might include adding more international restaurants, introducing local and international food festivals, holding regular tasting events, and setting up fragrance zones with plants and spices to create specific scent memory points. Additionally, adding features from different parts of the world, such as promotional videos and music, can enhance tourists' auditory experience. Tac-tile art installations, interactive exhibitions, and activities like craft-making can enhance both touch and auditory experiences. The use of these technologies can also create immersive historical and cultural stories to enhance visual and auditory experiences, achieving a comprehensive experience of all five senses. These strategies can help improve tourists' immediate experiences and strengthen their emotional connections with the destination in the long term.

Enhancing sensory experiences can also improve tourists' perceptions of authen-ticity in their tourism experience. For example, hosting local specialty food events at replica tourism destinations can effectively enhance tourists' perceptions, thereby in-creasing the authenticity of their experience (Sarial-Abi et al., 2020). Additionally, im-proving tourists' emotional attachment to the destination, such as creating cultural ac-tivities with local characteristics or unique experiences specific to Window of the World in Shenzhen, can enhance tourists' perceived authenticity at Window of the World and improve their experience (Diţoiu et al., 2014). Therefore, we suggest that Window of the World in Shenzhen could add more events and food festivals from around the world in the future to increase tourists' perceived authenticity and promote their revisit intention.]

Comments 7:[Conclusion: There was no conclusion. The significance of the subject, the goal of the investigation, the approach taken, and the primary conclusions should all be emphasized. The authors can relocate the first part of section 5.1 to this section, followed by possible contributions, limitations, and ideas for further investigation.]

Response 7:

We have made the necessary modifications based on your suggestions, specifically reflected on line 312-464. As per your request, we have added Section 5.1 Conclusion, which includes the significance of the study, the methodology, and its contributions. Limitations and future research directions were mentioned in the original Section 5.4. The specific content is as follows:

[This study examined how tourists' sensory experiences at replica tourism destinations affect perceived authenticity and well-being, and how these sensory experiences, along with perceived authenticity and well-being, ultimately influence tourists' intention to revisit. The study conducted an online survey with visitors who had been to the "Window of the World" in Shenzhen. The findings reveal that tourists' sensory experiences, except for smell and taste, are directly related to the intention to revisit. Positive sensory experiences influence perceived authenticity and well-being, subsequently leading to an increased intention to re-visit. This research provides deeper insights into replica tourism destinations and expands the study of replica tourism. Furthermore, the study extends the application of embodied cognition theory.

…

Finally, research could collect data from the same group of tourists at different points in time regarding their perceptions of Window of the World in Shenzhen. By comparing their perception changes, this would help to understand how changes at replica tourism destinations affect tourists' experiences and behaviors over the long term. Additionally, this type of study should collect data from non-replica destinations to compare the sensory experiences of tourists at both replica and non-replica destinations. However, Window of the World in Shenzhen mixes attractions from around the world, making it difficult to do such a comparison study.]

Comments 1: [1) Simply rearranging the pieces. Kindly transfer subsections 5.1 and 5.5 to a new section after section 5, for example, "Section 6 Conclusions and limitations" or "Section 6 Conclusions and future directions". Subsections in Section 6 are not necessary.]

Response 1: 

Thank you for pointing this out. I have made the necessary revisions as per your request, specifically on line 413-453.

“[6.Conclusions and future directions

This study examined how tourists' sensory experiences at replica tourism destinations affect perceived authenticity and well-being, and how these sensory experiences, along with perceived authenticity and well-being, ultimately influence tourists' intention to revisit. The study conducted an online survey with visitors who had been to the "Window of the World" in Shenzhen. The findings reveal that tourists' sensory experiences, except for smell and taste, are directly related to the intention to revisit. Positive sensory experiences influence perceived authenticity and well-being, subsequently leading to an increased intention to re-visit. This research provides deeper insights into replica tourism destinations and expands the study of replica tourism. Furthermore, the study extends the application of embodied cognition theory.

This study has several limitations. First, the sample collection was limited to online data, and no field data were collected from Window of the World in Shenzhen. Consequently, the findings may not account for seasonal changes or specific days, preventing more detailed analysis. Studies show that offline surveys are more representative than online surveys. Offline surveys, in particular, have a higher average response rate and are more reliable [78]. Future research could validate this model by collecting both online and offline data from replica tourism destinations, including Window of the World.

Second, this study only examined tourists’ intentions to revisit replica tourism destinations and did not explore their intentions to visit real destinations, which would be a valuable avenue of research [79]. Since replica tourism is a relatively new research topic, many variables still need to be explored. Through in-depth interviews and field surveys, new variables beyond this model could be identified, enriching this line of research.

For example, additional variables affecting consumer tourism experiences, such as personality and attitudes towards tourism [80]. Additionally, consumer knowledge, identification, and perceptions of tourism destinations may also influence travel decisions to some extent [81]. It could also explore variables such as tourists' emotional involvement, cultural affinity, or novelty-seeking behavior, as these variables might mediate or moderate the relationship between tourists and tourism destinations [82]. Therefore, future research could incorporate multiple variables to further refine studies on replica tourism destinations.

Finally, research could collect data from the same group of tourists at different points in time regarding their perceptions of Window of the World in Shenzhen. By comparing their perception changes, this would help to understand how changes at replica tourism destinations affect tourists' experiences and behaviors over the long term. Additionally, this type of study should collect data from non-replica destinations to compare the sensory experiences of tourists at both replica and non-replica destinations. However, Window of the World in Shenzhen mixes attractions from around the world, making it difficult to do such a comparison study.]”

Comments 2: [Survey questions should be provided using a table with references for each variable. ]

Response 2: 

We have added the questionnaire as requested, specifically reflected in lines 234-235.

[Table 2.Sources of measurement scale items.

...

...]