Tourism Management 40 (2014) 321e329

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tourism Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tourman

Environmentally responsible behavior in ecotourism: Antecedents

and implications
Yen-Ting Helena Chiu a,1, Wan-I. Lee a, 2, Tsung-Hsiung Chen b, *
a
Department of Marketing and Distribution Management, National Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology, 1 University Road, Yuanchau
District, Kaohsiung City 824, Taiwan, ROC
b
Graduate Institute of Management, National Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology, 1 University Road, Yuanchau District, Kaohsiung City
824, Taiwan, ROC

h i g h l i g h t s

We developed a new model as to how to promote traveler’s environmentally responsible behavior.

Tourist’s perception of value is a direct determinant of environmentally responsible behavior.

Involvement and satisfaction partially mediate the impact of value perception on environmentally responsible behavior.

Overall travel experience can affect tourist’s environmentally responsible behavior.

We provide managerial implication for sustainable ecotourism.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study explores the environmentally responsible behavior of tourists engaged in ecotourism. It
Received 21 September 2012 proposes a behavioral model in which perceived value, satisfaction and activity involvement with respect
Accepted 29 June 2013 to the eco-travel experience shape the tourist’s environmentally responsible behavior. Unlike other
studies that view environmentally responsible behavior as a generic trait, this study explores whether
Keywords: the level of environmentally responsible behavior can actually change as a result of the eco-travel
Perceived value
experience. A total of 328 valid questionnaires were obtained and analyzed using partial least squares.
Satisfaction
The results show that perceived value, satisfaction and activity involvement can promote environmen-
Activity involvement
Environmentally responsible behavior
tally responsible behavior of tourists. While perceived value directly affects environmentally responsible
Ecotourism marketing behavior, satisfaction and involvement play the roles of partial mediators in the behavioral model. Thus,
enhancing tourist’s value perception about the eco-travel activity is the first in a sequence of steps that
would strengthen environmentally responsible behavior via increasing the ecotourist’s activity
involvement and satisfaction levels. Finally, the implications for the key stakeholders in the ecotourism
industry are discussed.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Ecotourism is a form of tourism that focuses on experiencing
natural areas and emphasizes the appeal of environmental con-
servation (Bjork, 2000). Environmental phenomena such as climate
change have raised awareness about environmental protection and
the maintenance of the ecology, giving rise to ecotourism as a new
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ886 921712819.
E-mail addresses: helena@nkfust.edu.tw (Y.-T.H. Chiu), wilee@nkfust.edu.tw
(W.-I. Lee), edward.talent@msa.hinet.net (T.-H. Chen).
1 protect natural areas through production of revenue, environ-
Tel.: þ886 7 6011000x4223; fax: þ886 7 6011043.
2
Tel.: þ886 7 6011000x4226.
niche within the travel industry. Ecotourism emphasizes the nat-
ural conservation of a tourist site and therefore builds on the
environmental consciousness of tourists. These tourists need to
abide by local regulations and avoid damaging the natural envi-
ronment by exhibiting environmentally responsible behavior.
Sirakaya, Sasidharan, and Sonmez (1999) refer to ecotourism as
a new kind of tourism that does not expend resources, is educa-
tional, adventurous and focuses on undeveloped and undervisited
natural, cultural, and historical areas; the purpose of such tourism
is to understand and appreciate the natural and social culture of the
target location. The developmental objective of ecotourism is to
mental education and the involvement of local residents (Ross &

0261-5177/$ e see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.06.013
322 Y.-T.H. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 321e329
Wall, 1999). It is based on the notion that the ecological environ-
ment constitutes a local resource which creates economic value by
attracting tourists.
Academic research on nature-based tourism has investigated
different aspects of eco-tourist travel behavior and behavioral
intention (Kerstetter, Hou, & Lin, 2004; Trangeland, 2011). Hedlund,
Marell, and Garling (2012) found that “tourists’ environmental
concern, assessed as perceived importance of environmental sus-
tainability in vacation choices, is influenced by sex, age education
and income in vacation choices” (p.27). Destination image, motiva-
tion and attitude can be used to predict future behavioral intentions
and differences in tourist environmental attitudes (Lee 2009; Luo &
Deng, 2008; Wurzinger & Johansson, 2006). While tourists go to
ecological areas because they are attracted by the natural resources,
not all of them engage in positive environmental behavior.
Ecotourism emphasizes sustainable development of the envi-
ronment, and environmentally responsible behavior is an envi-
ronmental conservation mechanism. Environmentally responsible
behavior of tourists helps limit or avoid damage to the ecological
environment. In academic research, exploration of the link between
tourists’ perceptions of the site and tourists’ environmentally
responsible behavior is limited. Among the limited number of
studies on environmentally responsible behavior in ecotourism,
most view environmentally responsible behavior as a generic trait
(Lee, 2011; Vaske & Kobrin, 2001). This study proposes a new
framework that describes the relationship between perceived
value, activity involvement, satisfaction and environmentally
responsible behavior of ecotourists. In particular, the framework
proposes that environmental attitudes can change as a result of the
ecotravel experience.
2. Theoretical foundation and hypotheses
Motivational theories provide a broad framework for the
exploration of behavior in general, and environmentally respon-
sible behavior in particular. The Expectancy Theory proposes that
individuals engage in a specific behavior because of the outcome
that they expect from that behavior. Behavioral motivation is
therefore dependent on the personal evaluation of the intended
outcome as well as the expectancy that the efforts will lead to the
outcome (Vroom, 1964). Similarly, the Expectancy-Value-Theory
suggests that individuals first form a belief about the object/
behavior by “evaluating” different attributes associated with that
object/behavior (Fishbein & Aijzen, 1975). The aggregate outcome
of beliefs and values can be summarized in a construct called
“attitude”, which is seen as a basic determinant of actual behavior.
The derivatives of the Expectancy-Value-Theory, the Theory of
Reasoned Action (TRA) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB),
continue their argumentation in line with this belief/value-
attitude-behavior logic, and they have been used to predict
behavior in diverse settings, including tourism behavior (Han &
Kim, 2010). All of these theoretical frameworks agree that the
evaluation of an object/behavior is an important antecedent to
actual behavior.
In an eco-travel context, the evaluation of tourists’ experiences
depends on their feeling regarding the eco site and the services
provided (Chan & Baum, 2007). Blackwell, Minard, and Engel
(2006) stated that feelings are a key part of the experiences of
consumers, impacting their evaluation. Positive feelings attest to
benefits acquired from products/services. Conversely, if consumers
are dissatisfied with products/services, disconfirmation of expec-
tations will result; consequently, they will have a negative attitude
to the purchased products (Assael, 2004). In a tourism context,
travel sites generate positive feelings to tourists and this existential
authenticity leaves them with positive impressions (Lew, 2011).
According to Larsen (2007), what tourists experience is related to
their expectations concerning the sites they visit, their psycholog-
ical cognition and affection. After traveling, they will retain certain
memories. This experience influences the cognition and emotion of
travelers, which leads to positive environmental behavior (Curtin,
2009; Zeppel, 2008). The researchers noticed that the changing
behavior of tourists is related to their cognition and affection
concerning travel sites. As a result, their travel experience helps us
to understand their attitude to ecotourism. As mentioned above,
attitude consists of cognition, affection and behavior, and there is
an interrelation and hierarchy of effects (Reibstein, Lovelock, &
Dabson, 1980). From the viewpoint of standard learning hierar-
chy, consumers’ attitudes are developed by understanding the
related attributes of products/services. Their feelings in relation to
products/services are affected by the evaluation of beliefs which
caused the relevant behavior (Solomon, 2004). From this perspec-
tive it can be argued that tourists’ overall travel experience would
have an impact on their attitude towards ecotourism and, conse-
quently, environmental behavior. Different travel sites offer diverse
experiential values to tourists. The experience is generated through
the contact with and appreciation of the eco-travel site.
This study applies the value-attitude-behavior model in
exploring the nature of environmentally responsible behavior. In
the research framework, perceived value and activity involvement
represent the cognitive dimension of attitude, while satisfaction
with the travel eco-travel experience constitutes the affective part
of attitude. These three attitudinal dimensions are modeled as key
influence factors of environmentally responsible behavior.
2.1. Perceived value
Perceived value is the feeling consumers have when buying
products or services, comparing the input and the output they
received (Zeithaml, 1988). The measurement of perceived value
encompasses both the acquired object as well as the transaction
process (AI-Sabbahy, Ekinci, & Riley, 2004). Bolton and Drew (1991)
pointed out that value is related to service quality in relation to the
costs paid by the customer, in other words, the difference between
customer expectations regarding service and actual service
received. Value reflects the benefits and costs as perceived by
customers in relation to tangible and intangible products, as well as
the combination of quality, service and price (Kotler & Keller, 2006).
Woodruff (1997) stated that value is a source of competitive
advantage for corporations. In the marketing literature, perceived
value is measured as a multi-dimensional construct, consisting of
quality, emotional, price and social aspects (Sweeney & Soutar,
2001), or functional, emotional, epistemic, social and situational
dimensions (Sheth, Newman, & Gross, 1991).
In the tourism literature, perceived value is frequently concep-
tualized as the personal evaluation of the characteristics of travel
products, such as service quality, price, emotions and social factors
(Petrick, 2004). These factors determine whether product value is
worth consumption and influence tourist satisfaction after trav-
eling (Chen & Tasi, 2007). Hence it is posited that:
H1: Perceived value positively influences satisfaction.
2.2. Activity involvement
Involvement refers to the extent to which a person perceives
something as being important. From the marketing perspective,
Zaichkowsky (1985) defined involvement as “a person’s perceived
relevance of the object based on inherent needs, values and in-
terests” (p.342). Rothschild (1984) proposed that “involvement is a
state of interest, motivation or arousal” (p.216). Reid and Crompton
(1993) also believed that the extent of involvement is a key variable
 Y.-T.H. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 321e329
in leisure behavior; for instance, people who like to travel will pay
more attention to relevant travel information, so involvement is the
concern expressed by tourists toward the characteristics and types
of leisure activities that they engage in, and these factors result in
different perception responses. Thus, for tourists, involvement is
their main interest or emphasis in regard to their choice of travel
activities.
According to Kyle, Absher, and Norman (2007), involvement is a
reflection of individual self concept, needs and values. Therefore, in
terms of leisure behavior, differences in involvement generally arise
from differences in individual cognition and stimulation generated
by travel activity. The study by Laurent and Kapferer (1985) used
the dimensions of product importance, pleasure, sign value
attributed, and risk probability in consumer involvement profile
(CIP) to measure perceived reactions of customers to products,
showing that differences in product characteristics influence
customer perceptions toward products. Involvement shows that
tourist leisure behavior involves personal travel preferences, which
influence choices in regard to participation of leisure activities, and
involvement also influences different views toward participation in
leisure activities. Thus, activity involvement can be measured in
terms of attraction, self-expression and centrality in one’s life
(McIntyre & Pigram, 1992). Bloch and Richins (1983) found that
consumer involvement is influenced by the perceived importance
of the offering, and that perceived importance is dependent upon
individual traits, product and situational factors. Furthermore,
Iwasaki and Havitz (1998) mentioned that the involvement of
tourists are affected by personal characteristics, such as values,
attitudes, motivation, needs, initial preferences and experiences.
For example, Lee, Graefe, and Burns (2007) found that “forest vis-
itors who perceived higher service quality tend to higher activity
involvement” (p.475).
Many studies see involvement as an antecedent variable, and
combine it with the leisure psychological variables to explore their
correlations, such as tourist loyalty (Martin, Collado, & Bosque,
2013), satisfaction (Laverie & Arnett, 2000) and place attachment
(Bricker & Kerstetter, 2000; Hou, Lin, & Morais, 2005; Kyle, Graefe,
Manning, & Bacon, 2004). These studies show that involvement can
explain leisure behavior, proving that differences in involvement
with leisure activities produce different tourist preferences.
Involvement is based on personal subjective perceptions regarding
the events and objects that hold the attention of tourists. As Havitz
and Dimanche (1999) noted, involvement is often conceptualized
as a mediating variable, linking the purchase or consumption event
with consumer’s participation intent. Likewise, Hwang, Lee, and
Chen (2005) concluded in their study on tourists at Taiwanese
national parks, that involvement mediates the relationship be-
tween place attachment and interpretation satisfaction, and that
the improvement of satisfaction can be affected by place attach-
ment. Kim (2008) analyzed tourist motivation, involvement, satis-
faction and loyalty, and found that involvement plays a mediating
role that can predict satisfaction. Hence it is posited that:
H2: Perceived value positively influences activity involvement.
H3: Activity involvement positively influences satisfaction.
2.3. Satisfaction
Satisfaction is the cognitive difference between expectations
and actual performance after a consumer makes a purchase (Oliver,
1977). Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (1994) stated that
customer satisfaction is related to service quality, product quality
and price in a transaction context. Woodruff, Cadotte, and Jenkins
(1983) posited that satisfaction results from the confirmation and
disconfirmation of consumer experiences related to the product.
The view of Westbrook (1987) on satisfaction does not only involve
323
cognition after purchases, but also sees individual satisfaction as a
conscious experience or subjective feelings. As Mano and Oliver
(1993) pointed out, satisfaction results from cognition and affec-
tion towards a product, and also includes emotional states. In a
travel context, the measurement of satisfaction is based on pre-
travel expectations of tourists, and the actual formation of posi-
tive feelings for the destination during or after the travel con-
sumption process (Bosque & Martin, 2008). Similarly, Tain-Cole and
Cromption (2003) describe satisfaction as a psychological outcome
that is affective in nature and results from a positive travel expe-
rience. According to Davis, Le, and Coy (2011), when the ‘satisfac-
tion with the environment’ is positive, it can influence protective
ecological behavior.
2.4. Environmentally responsible behavior
According to Cottrell and Graefe (1997), environmentally
responsible behavior is reflected in an individual’s environmental
concern, commitment and ecological knowledge. Iwata (2001)
mentioned that environmentally responsible behavior can be
expressed through different types of behavior, such as waste
recycling and energy management. Environmentally responsible
behavior can be classified into environmental activism, nonactivist
behaviors in the public sphere, and private-sphere environmen-
talism (Stern, 2000). In their meta-analysis Hines, Hungerford, and
Tomera (1987) found that knowledge of issues, knowledge of action
strategies, locus of control, verbal commitment, and sense of re-
sponsibility were correlated to environmentally responsible
behavior. In the context of ecotourism, environmentally respon-
sible behavior is given when tourists understand the impact of their
behavior on the environment and abide by the norms in the eco-
site (Puhakka, 2011). Smith-Sebasto and D’Costa (1995) measured
environmentally responsible behavior based on civil action,
educational action, financial action, legal action, physical action and
persuasion action. For Thapa (2010), environmentally responsible
behavior manifests itself in political action, recycling, education,
green consumption and community activism.
Kang and Moscardo (2006) see environmentally responsible
behavior as a consequence of environmental attitudes, and mea-
sure it in terms of behavioral norms in ecotourism regions, such as
collecting information on destinations before travel and following
behavioral norms. Researchers have also explored the relationship
of place attachment, defined as the traveler’s experience with the
travel site, on individual travel behavior (Kyle, Graefe, & Manning,
2005; Smith, Siderelis, & Moore, 2010). Place attachment is
thought to include the two dimensions of place identity and place
dependence (Jorgensen & Stedman, 2001). Several studies have
explored the link between place attachment and environmentally
responsible behavior, in particular. Vaske and Kobrin (2001), for
example, found that place identity mediated the relationship be-
tween place dependence and environmentally responsible
behavior. Halpenny’s (2010) study on Canadian national park visi-
tors also concluded that place attachment can predict environ-
mentally responsible. Likewise, the study by Lee (2011) on three
sites in Taiwan showed that through commitment, place attach-
ment can directly or indirectly affect environmentally responsible
behavior.
Kerstetter et al. (2004) studied tourists in three ecological areas
and found that levels of environmentally responsible behavior
varied, depending on the types of travel motivation (i.e. experience,
learning and ecotravel). Hungerford and Volk (1990) stated that
changing individual behavior toward the environment can be
initiated by environmental education, and pointed out that per-
sonal experience and participation in the environment can promote
environmentally responsible behavior.
324 Y.-T.H. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 321e329
Orams (1995) also found that tourist satisfaction in ecotourism
is dependent upon experiences, and if experiences in ecotourism
are satisfactory, it would result in behavioral changes. For instance,
Otto and Ritchie (1996) defined satisfaction as the subjective feel-
ings of tourists when they use the services and experience sites;
this includes emotional responses to target locations, resulting in
an understanding of, and appreciation for, the environment. Powell
and Ham (2008) used the tourists to the Galapagos National Park as
subjects, and the empirical results showed that guidance in
ecological areas is correlated to tourist personal satisfaction, and
the ecotourism experience can enhance the understanding for and
elevate support for ecological conservation, hence leading to
environmentally responsible behavior. Thus, providing a satisfac-
tory eco-tourist experience can enhance environmentally respon-
sible behavior (Higham & Carr, 2002; Lee & Moscarbo, 2005).
Satisfaction of tourist experience needs and elevation of perceived
value are correlated to the natural environment; therefore envi-
ronmental quality would benefit tourist experience (Coghlan,
2012). Ballanytne and Packer (2011) assert that experiences in
ecological areas primarily provide tourists with the opportunity to
come into contact with the natural environment; besides enjoy-
ment and satisfaction, it can also potentially enhance tourist un-
derstanding of the environment, as well as cause changes in their
attitudes and behaviors. To sum up, tourist satisfaction with
ecological sites arises from services provided by operators. When
the travel experience produces positive feelings, tourists’ knowl-
edge of the ecological environment is also enhanced, eventually
leading to a more environmentally responsible behavior. Thus, it is
hypothesized:
H4: Satisfaction positively influences environmentally respon-
sible behavior.
With respect to perceived value and environmental behavior,
Russell and Russell (2010) used the norm of reciprocity to explain
the relationship between national parks and park visitors, stating
that if tourists could gain beneficial experiences in areas requiring
payment, they would be more motivated to protect the environ-
ment. Moeller, Dolnicar, and Leisch’s (2011) study on eco-travelers
showed that the higher the travel expenditures the stronger the
environmental awareness. Therefore it is hypothesized that:
H5: Perceived value positively influences environmentally
responsible behavior.
Regarding the relationship between involvement and environ-
mental behavior, Barber, Taylor, and Deale (2010) pointed out that
the degree of tourist involvement in the environment expressed
their views and also affects environmental behavior. Thapa, Graefe,
and Meyer’s (2008) study on outdoor recreation found that
increased tourist involvement in leisure specialization can promote
environmentally responsible behavior. Thus, activity involvement
can be used to understand tourists’ perceptions about travel ac-
tivities and predict environmentally responsible behavior. It is
posited that:
H6: Activity involvement positively influences environmentally
responsible behavior.
The overall framework to describe the antecedents of environ-
mentally responsible behavior can be seen in Fig. 1.
3. Methodology
3.1. Questionnaire design
The questionnaire in this study includes five parts (see
Appendix A), which are described as follows. The measurement of
perceived value with 4 items (quality, price, emotions and social
value) was based on Sweeney and Soutar (2001). Activity involve-
ment was measured using 3 items (attraction, enjoyment and
Perceived
H5
Value
H1
Environmentally
Satisfaction H4
H2 Responsible
H3 Behavior
Activity H6
Involvement
Fig. 1. The conceptual model.
centrality in one’s life) based on the study of Havitz and Dimanche
(1997). The satisfaction scale was adapted from Okello and Yerian
(2009) and evaluated 4 items: maintenance of ecological environ-
ment, tour guide interpretation, experience, and wildlife appreci-
ation. For environmentally responsible behavior, 7 items were
chosen and modified based on Kerstetter et al. (2004) and Thapa
(2010). For all constructs a five-point Likert scale was adopted,
ranging from 1 for “strongly disagree” to 5 for “strongly agree”. The
respondents’ demographic variables include gender, age, educa-
tional level, occupation, marital status and monthly income.
To ensure the correctness of content and formulation of ques-
tion items, the questionnaire was subject to the review of both
academics and practitioners. In a first step, the questionnaire was
translated into Chinese and back-translated into English by aca-
demics. The Chinese version of the questionnaire was then sent to
local travel operators for a critical review and feedback. Finally, the
questionnaire underwent a pre-test, in which 30 tourists at Sicao
Ecological Area of Taijiang National Park in Taiwan were used as
pre-test subjects for the reliability and validity analysis of the
questionnaire.
3.2. Sample design and data collection
In order to effectively measure the perceived value of tourists,
this study chose a travel destination that requires an admission fee,
the Sicao Ecological Area in Taijiang National Park. Tourists viewing
the flora and fauna need to pay for locally-provided tourist boats,
and the site has abundant ecological resources, such as rare plants,
animal ecology, wetlands, lagoons, and additional services such as
guided tours. The survey site is both an area of ecotourism as well as
a wildlife protection area.
The questionnaires were administered to ecotourists at the
Sicao ecological site during spring and summer of 2012. System
sampling was used, that is one out of every six tourists was sampled
at the entrance of the site. Tourists willing to participate in the
survey received a questionnaire which they submitted after
completion of their eco-tour. In total, 390 questionnaires were
disseminated and 328 valid questionnaires were retrieved,
excluding the uncompleted questionnaires, resulting in a retrieval
rate of 84%.
3.3. Data analysis
SPSS 15.0 was used for descriptive statistical analysis and cor-
relation analysis. The latent constructs, i.e. perceived value, activity
involvement, satisfaction and environmentally responsible
behavior, were analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM).
Based on the computation technique, SEM can be grouped into two
types (Haenlein & Kaplan, 2004). The Maximum Likelihood Esti-
mation is based on a covariance matrix, while Partial Least Squares
(PLS) primarily works with variance analysis. The benefit of PLS is
that it can handle small samples, non-normal distributions and
 Y.-T.H. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 321e329 325

Table 1 Table 3
Respondent profile. Reflective measurement.

Demographic traits Frequency Percentage (%) Latent construct Indicators Loading t-values Composite Average
reliability variance
Gender
extracted
Male 154 47
Female 174 53 Environmentally ERB1 0.73 20.47*** 0.89 0.53
Age responsible ERB2 0.77 28.19***
15e20 37 11.3 behavior ERB3 0.77 27.16***
21e30 142 43.3 ERB4 0.69 18.07***
31e40 93 28.4 ERB5 0.76 31.07***
41e50 45 13.7 ERB6 0.71 26.00***
51e60 9 2.7 ERN7 0.68 16.11***
S60 2 0.6
Note: ***p < 0.01.
Educational level
ERB: Environmentally responsible behavior.
Primary 35 10.7
High school 41 12.5
University or college 168 51.2
Postgraduate 84 25.6 extracted, the eigenvalue is greater than 1 and the explained vari-
Occupation ance is 63%. As the majority of variance was not accounted for by
Civil servant or teacher 60 18.3 one single factor, common method variance does not pose a
Laborer 32 9.8
problem in this study.
Self-employed 45 13.7
Service worker 62 18.9
Housewife 11 3.6 4. Empirical results
Student 80 24.4
Retired 9 2.7
Other 29 8.8 4.1. Sample description
Marital status
Unmarried 209 63.7 Table 1 presents the overall sample structure in this study. The
Married 119 36.3 sample is balanced in terms of gender (47% male, 53%, female
Monthly income (NT$)a
tourists) and is characterized by younger aged visitors with higher-
&20,000 95 29
20,001e40,000 106 32.3 level education (43.3% are aged 21w30 years, 51.2% have a college
40,001e60,000 85 25.9 degree). Sample demographics are similar to those of other eco-
60,001e80,000 30 9.1 tourism studies, which have reported of a predominantly younger
S80,001 12 3.7
and well-educated target group (Kerstetter et al., 2004; Lee, 2009,
a
29NT$ ¼ 1 US$. 2011). Further, the sample was drawn directly at the Sicao ecolog-
ical area, which is managed by the National Park Authorities of
Taiwan and belongs to the major ecological zones of the island.
formative constructs (Hair, Sarstedt, Ringle, & Mena, 2012). In this Hence, the sample informants can be considered to be ecotravelers
study, the data analysis is based on VisualPLS 1.04 software. and therefore qualify as questionnaire respondents.
This study uses the concepts of perceived value, activity The Table 2 verified the interrelation of four latent constructs.
involvement, satisfaction and environmentally responsible The results showed the correlation coefficient ranging from 0.44 to
behavior in order to explore the relationships among these latent 0.47, which is below the threshold value of 0.90, as suggested by
variables. The aim is to determine whether a formative construct or Kline (2005). The measurements indicate sufficient discriminant
a reflective construct is involved. In accordance with Fornell and validity.
Bookstein (1982) distinguishing objective between a formative
and reflective construct that should be considered and include the
4.2. Measurement model
theoretical and empirical contingencies. Based on this notion, the
concepts of perceived value, activity involvement and satisfaction
The measurement model is assessed to verify the reflective and
are explained by constructs. We know that the three latent vari-
formative constructs. The approach of PLS threshold values is
ables are formative constructs. Environmentally responsible
suggested by Hair, Ringle, and Sarstedt (2011). Table 3 shows the
behavior is the reflective construct as ecotourism emphasizes the
appeal of environmental protection. Tourists in the context of eco-
travel should be responsive to environmentally responsible Table 4
insights. Formative measurement.
In order to test whether this study has common method vari- Latent Indicators Weights Loading Composite Average
ance, Harmon’s one factor test is used (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, construct reliability variance
Podsakoff, & Lee, 2003). Results show that four factors are extracted

Perceived value PV1 0.37***(4.33) 0.76***(13.58) 0.86 0.60

Table 2 PV2 0.33***(3.40) 0.78***(15.06)
The correlation matrix of latent constructs. PV3 0.02(0.25) 0.70***(10.13)
PV4 0.52***(4.45) 0.84***(18.13)
Constructs Mean S.D. PV AI SA ERB
Activity AI1 0.58***(5.17) 0.92***(23.87) 0.87 0.69
PV 3.92 0.59 0.77 involvement AI2 0.42***(2.58) 0.87***(15.58)
AI 3.60 0.67 0.44** 0.83 AI3 0.15(1.32) 0.67***(7.77)
SA 3.85 0.66 0.44** 0.27** 0.83 Satisfaction SA1 0.25*(1.91) 0.80***(11.86) 0.90 0.69
ERB 4.08 0.58 0.47** 0.42** 0.43** 0.73 SA2 0.05(0.49) 0.80***(12.77)
SA3 0.58***(4.03) 0.92***(22.41)
** Denote p < 0.01; the bold numbers in the diagonal is the square roots of average
SA4 0.29**(2.24) 0.73***(10.57)
variance extracted.
PV: Perceived value; AI: Activity involvement; SA: Satisfaction; ERB: Environmen- Note: *p < 0.1; **p < 0.05; ***p < 0.01; (t-values).
tally responsible behavior. PV: Perceived value; AI: Activity involvement; SA: Satisfaction.
326 Y.-T.H. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 321e329

Table 5 Table 6
The results of hypotheses. Direct, indirect and total effects.

Hypotheses path Cofficient t-values Result Path Direct Indirect Total

effect effect effects
H1:Perceived value / Satisfaction 0.39 6.33** Supported
H2:Perceived value / Activity involvement 0.47 10.07** Supported Perceived value / ERB 0.25 0.23 0.48
H3:Activity involvement / Satisfaction 0.10 1.60 Not supported Perceived value / Satisfaction 0.39 e 0.39
H4:Satisfaction / ERB 0.28 4.83** Supported Satisfaction / ERB 0.28 e 0.28
H5:Perceived value / ERB 0.25 4.77** Supported Perceived value / Activity involvement 0.47 e 0.47
H6: Activity involvement / ERB 0.25 4.64** Supported Activity involvement / Satisfaction e e e
Activity involvement / ERB 0.25 e 0.25
**Denotes p < 0.01; ERB: Environmental responsible behavior.
ERB: Environmentally responsible behavior.

reflective measurement model. The indicators’ loadings are mostly

above the 0.7 threshold value, with indicators ERB 4 and ERB 7 at
the marginal threshold. The evaluation of the formative constructs
is based on the weight (relative importance) and the loading (ab-
solute importance) of formative constructs. As Table 4 shows, all
loadings are significant while some weights are not significant, the
reason for which may be due to sample demographic characteris-
tics (Hair et al., 2011).
The evaluation of construct reliability and validity was based on
convergent validity, discriminant validity, composite reliability and
average variance extracted for latent constructs. Composite reli-
ability from the latent constructs are greater than the threshold
value of 0.7 (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994), demonstrating high in-
ternal consistency. The average variance extracted for all constructs
exceeds the threshold value of 0.5 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981), indi-
cating adequate convergent validity. Discriminant validity refers to
the low correlation coefficients between different constructs, and is
measured using the square root of average variance extracted
(Fornell & Larcker, 1981); for instance, if each construct is greater
than the correlation coefficients of the constructs, then it means
that there is discriminate validity. These values fall between 0.73
and 0.83 (Table 2).
4.3. Structural model
Structural equation modeling is used to test the causal re-
lationships among perceived value, activity involvement, satisfac-
tion and environmentally responsible behavior. In PLS, the path
coefficients (t-values) and R-square are used to measure the
strengths of latent variables.
In testing the correlations among perceived value, activity
involvement, satisfaction and environmentally responsible
behavior, the estimation values are expressed in path coefficients.
The overall results of the hypotheses are shown in Table 5.
Perceived value influences satisfaction at b ¼ 0.39, p < 0.01 and
activity involvement at b ¼ 0.47, p < 0.01; activity involvement does
Perceived
Value
0.39** 0.25**
Satisfaction
0.47**
2
R =20% 0.28**
Activity 0.10
0.25**
Involvement
2
R =22%
**p<0.01
Fig. 2. Results of structural model.
not influence satisfaction at b ¼ 0.10, p > 0.10; satisfaction posi-
tively influences environmentally responsible behavior at b ¼ 0.28,
p < 0.01; perceived value positively influences environmentally
responsible behavior at b ¼ 0.25, p < 0.01; finally, the relationship
between activity involvement and environmentally responsible
behavior is also proven at b ¼ 0.25, p < 0.01.
As shown in Fig. 2, the model’s predictive explanatory power for
environmentally responsible behavior refers to R-square to explain
how much of the variance in the dependent variable can be
explained by the independent variable. Perceived value and activity
involvement can explain 20% of satisfaction, and perceived value
can explain 22% of activity involvement. Finally, 36% of environ-
mentally responsible behavior can be explained by perceived value,
activity involvement, and satisfaction. In addition, Tenenhaus,
Vinzi, Chatelin and Lauro (2005) suggest the inclusion of a “global
fit measure” (GoF), defined as geometric mean of the average
communality and average R-square in PLS path modeling. In the
research model, the GoF equates to 0.40, indicating the model is
satisfactory.
In the model of environmentally responsible behavior,
perceived value has a direct (0.25) and indirect impact (0.11, 0.12)
on environmentally responsible behavior, with total effect of 0.48
(Table 6). This shows that the perceived value of eco-travel activity
positively influences environmentally responsible behavior
directly, while satisfaction and activity involvement can addition-
ally strengthen environmentally responsible behavior.
5. Discussion and conclusions
This study set up a model based on the value-attitude-behavior
theory to explain the formation of environmentally responsible
behavior via tourists’ perceived value, activity involvement and
satisfaction with respect to the eco-travel experience. Unlike past
studies that explore environmentally responsible behavior as a
generic trait, the results of this study suggest that environmentally
responsible behavior unfolds during and after the delivery of the
travel experience. Higher perceived value of the eco-travel expe-
rience enhances environmentally responsible behavior; in addition,
satisfaction and activity involvement can promote environmentally
responsible behavior at ecological sites, lowering the damage to the
environment. This study sees activity involvement as the mediating
Environmentally variable to link perceived value and environmentally responsible
behavior, confirming that tourist involvement tends to be influ-
Responsible
Behavior enced by perceived value of the travel site. Perceived value which
R2=36% can motivate tourists to participate in activities and enhance their
appreciation.
Perceived value is also a strong predictor of satisfaction. This
finding is consistent with Chen and Tasi (2007). Here, satisfaction
about the eco-travel experience refers not only to travel attributes
but also includes affection as an important dimension. Thus, a
number of studies argue that tourist’s satisfaction determine their
evaluation of these experiences. When tourists feel the benefit
 Y.-T.H. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 321e329
associated with participating in such activities, they will identify
themselves with the ecological environment. It will promote their
concern for and sensitivity toward the environment which, in turn,
will shape environmentally responsible behavior. This finding is
consistent with those of Davis et al. (2011), Higham and Carr
(2002), Lee and Moscarbo (2005) and Orams (1995). However, it
is worth noting that activity involvement does not influence
satisfaction, hence an increase in activity involvement does not
mean their cognitions and emotions have been affected.
In conclusion, the emphasis is on perceived value as a key
antecedent to subsequently influence activity involvement, satis-
faction and environmentally responsible behavior.
The theoretical contribution of this study is to set up a frame-
work to explain the antecedents of environmentally responsible
behavior. The framework shows different pathways through which
environmentally responsible behavior can be established and
advanced during and as a result of the eco-travel experience.
Tourists travel in ecological spots because they are attracted by
nature. The perceived value of ecotourism is based on the money
paid and the benefits obtained in a consumption calculus. There-
fore, when providers of ecotourism can offer services that satisfy
tourist needs, positive perceptions of ecotourism are formed, which
would subsequently enhance tourist satisfaction and the degree of
involvement in the ecotourism activity. Further, when the level of
involvement increases, since tourists pay attention to the envi-
ronment, it would also deepen their psychological feelings for the
ecological areas, indirectly promoting their environmentally
responsible behavior. This provides a more comprehensive expla-
nation of the importance of involvement in the model of environ-
mentally responsible behavior. This behavioral model emphasizes
that satisfaction and activity involvement have a partially medi-
ating effect, and thus are drivers of environmentally responsible
behavior.
6. Management implications
Ecotourism is a form of travel that is based on the enjoyment of
natural resources while at the same time minimizing the adverse
impact of travel activities on the travel sites. To ensure tourist’s
environmentally responsible behavior, it is important to under-
stand the relationships among perceived value, activity involve-
ment, satisfaction and environmentally responsible behavior.
When tourists are satisfied with the ecotourism experience, they
can also sense the importance of the environment and have a
greater understanding of the environment, which promotes their
environmentally responsible behavior. Tourist activity involvement
is affected by perceived value, so when tourists participate in
ecotourism activities and their needs are met, they would develop a
stronger involvement in ecotourism, which indirectly influences
their environmentally responsible behavior. With perceived value a
key determinant, managerial attention must focus on the tangible
and intangible benefits that are to be provided to the traveler. The
design of ecotourism packages needs to build on tourist needs and
offer comprehensive services and facilities on the basis of which the
ecotourist can evaluate the travel package. Although ecotourism is
an obvious trend in the travel industry by far not all tourists possess
a high degree of consciousness with regard to environmental pro-
tection; in accordance with the findings of this study, it is advisable
for decision-makers to focus in a first step on the creation and
delivery of value in ecotourism. For this purpose, the emphasis
should be on the management and planning of ecological re-
sources, such as improving guide activities and leisure facilities,
maintaining a good environmental quality and providing an
authentic ecological experience in order to strengthen tourist’s
cognition regarding the ecological environment.
327
7. Limitations and suggestions for future research
The model of environmentally responsible behavior in this
study has the following limitations. First, while environmentally
responsible behavior is conceptualized as multi-item construct, it
may have neglected other possibly relevant dimensions which
could be explored in future research. Furthermore, this study was
conducted at Taiwan’s Sicao Ecological Area, which represents an
ecological site. The framework could be tested in different types of
eco-travel settings, for example in forest areas, natural conserva-
tion areas, at wildlife sites or whale-watching tours. Future
research could also explore what kind of impact the frequency of
eco-travels and the resulting familiarity with ecotourism would
have on traveler’s environmentally responsible behavior.
Appendix A. Questionnaire
Perceived value
1. The quality of the eco-travel experience is acceptable.
2. The eco-travel experience is worth the money.
3. The eco-travel experience makes me feel good.
4. Participating in travel activity makes a good impression on
other people.
Satisfaction
1. Maintenance of ecological environment.
2. Tour guide interpretation.
3. Eco-travel experience is pleasure.
4. Wildlife appreciation.
Activity involvement
1. Eco-travel is interesting.
2. Eco-travel at this place is enjoyable.
3. I share my travel experience with others.
Environmentally responsible behavior
1. I accept the control policy not to enter the wetland.
2. I help to maintain the local environmental quality.
3. I report to the park administration any environmental pollution
or destruction.
4. I spend my money in the local area.
5. I help other tourists to learn about the wetland.
6. I sort my trash at the travel site.
7. I try not to disrupt the fauna and flora during my travel.
Demographic traits
1. Gender: male, female.
2. Age: 15e20, 21e30, 31e40, 41e50, 51e60, S60.
3. Educational level: primary, high school, university or college,
postgraduate.
4. Occupation: civil servant or teacher, laborer, self-employed,
service worker, housewife, student, retired, other.
5. Marital status: unmarried, married.
6. Monthly income: &20,000, 20,001w40,000, 40,001w60,000,
60,001w80,000, S80,001.
328 Y.-T.H. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 321e329

Mean and standard deviations of scale items. Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of
partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research.
Scale items Number Mean S.D. Journal of the Academy Marketing Science, 40, 414e433.
Halpenny, E. A. (2010). Pro-environmental behaviours and park visitors: the effect
Perceived value of place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(4), 409e421.
PV1 328 3.68 0.85 Han, H., & Kim, Y. (2010). An investigation of green hotel customers’ decision for-
PV2 328 3.85 0.74 mation: developing an extended model of the theory of planned behavior. In-
PV3 328 4.03 0.69 ternational Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(4), 659e668.
PV4 328 4.13 0.69 Havitz, M. E., & Dimanche, F. D. (1997). Leisure involvement revisited: conceptual
Activity involvement and measurement advances. Journal of Leisure Research, 29(3), 245e278.
AI1 328 3.70 0.77 Havitz, M. E., & Dimanche, F. D. (1999). Leisure involvement revisited: drive prop-
AI2 328 3.59 0.79 erties and paradoxes. Journal of Leisure Research, 31(2), 122e149.
Hedlund, T., Marell, A., & Garling, T. (2012). The mediating effect of value orientation
AI3 328 3.51 0.82
on the relationship between socio-demographic factors and environmental
Satisfaction
concern in Swedish tourists’ vacation choices. Journal of Ecotourism, 11(1), 16e
SA1 328 3.85 0.80 33.
SA2 328 3.82 0.78 Higham, J., & Carr, A. (2002). Ecotourism visitor experiences in Aotearoa/New
SA3 328 3.91 0.72 Zealand: challenging the environmental values of visitors in pursuit of pro-
SA4 328 3.85 0.83 environmental behavior. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 10(4), 277e294.
Environmentally responsible behavior Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R., & Tomera, A. N. (1987). Analysis and synthesis of
ERB1 328 4.43 0.73 research on responsible environmental behavior: a meta-analysis. The Journal of
ERB2 328 4.30 0.74 Environmental Education, 18(2), 1e8.
ERB3 328 3.96 0.82 Hou, J. S., Lin, C.-H., & Morais, D. B. (2005). Antecedents of attachment to a cultural
ERB4 328 3.77 0.86 tourism destination: the case of Hakka and non-Hakka Taiwanese visitors to
ERB5 328 3.94 0.83 Pei-Pu, Taiwan. Journal of Travel Research, 44(2), 221e233.
ERB6 328 3.90 0.80 Hungerford, H. R., & Volk, T. L. (1990). Changing learner behavior through envi-
ronmental education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 21(3), 8e21.
ERB7 328 4.26 0.84
Hwang, S.-N., Lee, C., & Chen, H.-J. (2005). The relationship among tourists’
involvement, place attachment and interpretation satisfaction in Taiwan’s na-
tional parks. Tourism Management, 26(2), 143e156.
Iwasaki, Y., & Havitz, M. F. (1998). A path analytic model of the relationships be-
tween involvement, psychological commitment and loyalty. Journal of Leisure
References Research, 30(2), 256e280.
Iwata, O. (2001). Attitudinal determinants of environmentally responsible behavior.
AI-Sabbahy, H. Z., Ekinci, Y., & Riley, M. (2004). An investigation of perceived value Social Behavior and Personality, 29(2), 183e190.
dimensions: implications for hospitality research. Journal of Travel Research, Jorgensen, B. S., & Stedman, R. C. (2001). Sense of place as an attitude: lakeshore
42(3), 226e234. owners attitudes toward their properties. Journal of Environmental Psychology,
Assael, H. (2004). Consumer behavior: A strategic approach. Boston: Houghton Mif- 21(3), 233e248.
flin Company. Kang, M., & Moscardo, G. (2006). Exploring cross-cultural differences in attitudes
Ballantyne, R., & Packer, J. (2011). Using tourism free-choice learning experiences to towards responsible tourist behavior: a comparison of Korean, British and
promote environmentally sustainable behavior: the role of post-visit ‘action Australian tourists. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 11(4), 303e320.
resources’. Environmental Education Research, 17(2), 201e215. Kerstetter, D. L., Hou, J.-S., & Lin, C.-H. (2004). Profiling Taiwanese ecotourists using
Barber, N., Taylor, D. S., & Deale, C. S. (2010). Wine tourism, environmental concerns a behavioral approach. Tourism Management, 25(4), 491e498.
and purchase intentions. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 27(2), 146e165. Kim, K. (2008). Analysis of structural equation model for the student pleasure travel
Bjork, P. (2000). Ecotourism from a conceptual perspective, an extended definition market: motivation, involvement, satisfaction and destination loyalty. Journal of
of a unique tourism form. International Journal of Tourism Research, 2(3), 189e Travel and Tourism Marketing, 24(4), 297e313.
202. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.).
Blackwell, R. D., Miniard, P. W., & Engel, J. F. (2006). Consumer behavior (10th ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
South-Western: Thomson. Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2006). Marketing management (12th ed.). NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bloch, P. H., & Richins, M. L. (1983). A theoretical model for the study of product Kyle, G., Absher, J., & Norman, W. (2007). A modified involvement scale. Leisure
importance perceptions. Journal of Marketing, 47(3), 69e81. Studies, 26(4), 399e427.
Bolton, R. N., & Drew, J. H. (1991). A multistage model of customers’ assessment of Kyle, G., Graefe, A., & Manning, R. (2005). Testing the dimensionality of
service quality and value. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(4), 375e384. place attachment in recreational settings. Environment and Behavior, 37(2),
Bosque, I. R. D., & Martin, H. S. (2008). Tourist satisfaction: a cognitive-affective 153e177.
model. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(2), 551e573. Kyle, G., Graefe, A., Manning, R., & Bacon, J. (2004). Effect of activity involvement
Bricker, K. S., & Kerstetter, D. L. (2000). Level of specialization and place attachment: and place attachment on recreationists’ perceptions of setting density. Journal
an exploratory study of whitewater recreationists. Leisure Sciences, 22(4), 233e of Leisure Research, 36(2), 209e231.
257. Larsen, S. (2007). Aspects of a psychology of the tourist experience. Scandinavian
Chan, J. K. L., & Baum, T. (2007). Ecotourists’ perception of ecotourism experience in Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 7(1), 7e18.
Lower Kinabatangan, Sabah, Malasia. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(5), 574e Laurent, G., & Kapferer, J.-N. (1985). Measuring customer involvement profiles.
590. Journal of Marketing Research, 22(1), 41e53.
Chen, C.-F., & Tasi, D. C. (2007). How destination image and evaluative factors affect Laverie, D. A., & Arnett, D. B. (2000). Factors affecting fan attendance: the influence
behavioral intentions? Tourism Management, 28(4), 1115e1122. of identity salience and satisfaction. Journal of Leisure Research, 32(2), 225e246.
Coghlan, A. (2012). Linking natural resource management to tourist satisfaction: a Lee, T. H. (2009). A structural model to examine how destination image, attitude
study of Australia’s Great Barrier reef. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(1), 41e and motivation affect the future behavior of tourists. Leisure Sciences, 31(3),
58. 215e236.
Cottrell, S. P., & Graefe, A. R. (1997). Testing a conceptual framework of responsible Lee, T. H. (2011). How recreation involvement, place attachment and conservation
environmental behavior. The Journal of Environmental Education, 29(1), 17e27. commitment affect environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of Sustainable
Curtin, S. (2009). Wildlife tourism: the intangible psychological benefits of human- Tourism, 19(7), 895e915.
wildlife encounters. Current Issues in Tourism, 12(5e6), 451e474. Lee, J., Graefe, A., & Burns, R. (2007). Examining the antecedents of destination
Davis, J. L., Le, B., & Coy, A. E. (2011). Building a model of commitment to the natural loyalty in a forest setting. Leisure Sciences, 29(5), 463e481.
environment to predict ecological behavior and willingness to sacrifice. Journal Lee, W. H., & Moscardo, G. (2005). Understanding the impact of ecotourism resort
of Environmental Psychology, 31(3), 257e265. experiencing on tourists’ environmental attitudes and behavioural intentions.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An intro- Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 13(6), 546e565.
duction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Lew, A. A. (2011). Tourism place: a discussion forum understanding experiential
Fornell, C., & Bookstein, F. L. (1982). Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS authenticity through the best tourism places. Tourism Geographies, 13(4), 570e
applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4), 575.
440e452. Luo, Y., & Deng, J. (2008). The new environmental paradigm and nature-based
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with un- tourism motivation. Journal of Travel Research, 46(4), 392e402.
observable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, Mano, H., & Oliver, R. L. (1993). Assessing the dimensionality and structure of the
18(1), 39e50. consumption experience: evaluation, feeling and satisfaction. Journal of Con-
Haenlein, M., & Kaplan, A. M. (2004). A beginner’s guide to partial least squares sumer Research, 20(3), 451e466.
analysis. Understanding Statistics, 3(4), 283e297. Martin, H. S., Collado, J., & Bosque, I. R. D. (2013). An exploration of the effects of
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet. Journal past experiences and tourist involvement on destination formation. Current
of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139e151. Issues in Tourism, 16(4), 327e342.
 Y.-T.H. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 321e329 329

McIntyre, N., & Pigram, J. J. (1992). Recreation specialization reexamined: the case of Trangeland, T. (2011). Why do people purchase nature-based tourism activity
vehicle-based campers. Leisure Sciences, 14(1), 3e15. products? A Norwegian case study of outdoor recreation. Scandinavian Journal
Moeller, T., Dolnicar, S., & Leisch, F. (2011). The sustainability-profitability trade-off of Hospitality and Tourism, 11(4), 435e456.
in tourism: can it be overcome. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(2), 155e169. Vaske, J. J., & Kobrin, K. C. (2001). Place attachment and environmentally respon-
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw- sible behavior. The Journal of Environmental Education, 32(4), 16e21.
Hill. Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.
Okello, M. M., & Yerian, S. (2009). Tourist satisfaction in relation to attractions and Westbrook, R. A. (1987). Product/consumption-based affective responses and
implication for conservation in the protected areas of the Northen Circuit, postpurchase processes. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(3), 258e270.
Tanzania. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17(5), 605e625. Woodruff, R. B. (1997). Customer value: the next source for competitive advantage.
Oliver, R. L. (1977). Effect of expectation and disconfirmation on postexposure Journal of The Academy of Marketing Sciences, 25(2), 139e153.
product evaluations: an alternative interpretation. Journal of Applied Psychology, Woodruff, R. B., Cadotte, E. R., & Jenkins, R. L. (1983). Modeling consumer satis-
62(4), 480e486. faction processes using experience-based norms. Journal of Marketing Research,
Orams, M. B. (1995). Towards a more desirable form of ecotourism. Tourism Man- 20(3), 296e304.
agement, 16(1), 3e8. Wurzinger, S., & Johansson, T. (2006). Environmental concern and knowledge of
Otto, J. E., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (1996). The service experience in tourism. Tourism ecotourism among three groups of Swedish tourists. Journal of Travel Research,
Management, 17(3), 165e174. 45(2), 217e226.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, Va. A., & Berry, L. L. (1994). Reassessment of expectations Zaichkowsky, J. D. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Con-
as a comparison standard in measuring service quality: implications for further sumer Research, 12(3), 341e352.
research. Journal of Marketing, 58(1), 111e124. Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality and value: a means-
Petrick, J. F. (2004). The role of quality, value and satisfaction in predicting cruise end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2e22.
passengers’ behavioral intentions. Journal of Travel Research, 42(4), 397e407. Zeppel, H. (2008). Education and conservation benefits of marine wildlife tours:
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenize, S. B., Podsakoff, N. P., & Lee, J. Y. (2003). Common developing free-choice learning experiences. The Journal of Environmental Ed-
method biases in behaviroral research: a critical review of the literature and ucation, 39(3), 3e18.
recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879e903.
Powell, R. B., & Ham, S. H. (2008). Can ecotourism interpretation really lead to pro-
Yen-Ting Helena Chiu is a faculty member of the
conservation knowledge, attitude and behavior? Evidence from the Galapagos
Department of Marketing and Distribution Management at
Islands. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16(4), 467e489.
National Kaohsiung First University of Science and Tech-
Puhakka, R. (2011). Environmental concern and responsibility among nature tour-
nology in Taiwan, Republic of China. Her teaching and
ists in Oulanka Pan park, Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and
research interests include service marketing, service in-
Tourism, 11(1), 76e96.
novations, innovation marketing and relationship
Reibstein, D. J., Lovelock, C. H., & Dobson, R. De. P. (1980). The direction of causality
marketing.
between perceptions, affect and behavior: an application to travel behavior.
Journal of Consumer Research, 6(4), 370e376.
Reid, I. S., & Crompton, J. L. (1993). A taxonomy of leisure purchase decision para-
digms based on level of involvement. Journal of Leisure Research, 25(2), 188e
202.
Ross, S., & Wall, G. (1999). Ecotourism: towards congruence between theory and
practice. Tourism Management, 20(1), 123e132.
Rothschild, M. L. (1984). Perspective on involvement: current problems and future
directions. Advances in Consumer Research, 11, 216e217.
Russell, D. W., & Russell, C. A. (2010). Experiential reciprocity: the role of direct
experience in value perceptions. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 27(6),
Wan-I Lee is a faculty member of the Department of
624e634.
Marketing and Distribution Management at National
Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., & Gross, B. L. (1991). Why we buy what we buy: a theory
Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology in
of consumption values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 159e170.
Taiwan, Republic of China. Her teaching and research focus
Sirakaya, E., Sasidharan, V., & Sonmez, S. (1999). Redefining ecotourism: the need
is on service marketing, service innovation, service quality
for a supply-side view. Journal of Travel Research, 38(2), 168e172.
and customer relationship management.
Smith-Sebasto, N. J., & D’Costa, A. (1995). Designing a likert-type scale to predict
environmentally responsible behavior in undergraduate students: a multistep
process. The Journal of Environmental Education, 27(1), 14e20.
Smith, J. W., Siderelis, C., & Moore, R. L. (2010). The effects of place attachment,
hypothetical site modifications and use levels on recreation behavior. Journal of
Leisure Research, 42(4), 621e640.
Solomon, M. R. (2004). Consumer behavior: Buying, having and being (6th ed.). New
Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant
behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407e424.
Sweeney, J. C., & Soutar, G. N. (2001). Consumer perceived value: the development
Tsung-Hsiung Chen is a Ph.D. Candidate of the Graduate
of a multiple item scale. Journal of Retailing, 77(2), 203e220.
Institute of Management at National Kaoshsiung First
Tain-Cole, S., & Cromption, J. L. (2003). A conceptualization of the relationships
University of Science and Technology in Taiwan, Republic
between service quality and visitor satisfaction and their links to destination
of China. His research interests include tourism marketing,
selection. Leisure Studies, 22(1), 65e80.
recreational behavior and travel management.
Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V. E., Chatelin, Y.-M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modeling.
Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 48(1), 159e205.
Thapa, B. (2010). The mediation effect of outdoor recreation participation on
environmental attitude-behavior correspondence. The Journal of Environmental
Education, 41(3), 133e150.
Thapa, B., Graefe, A. R., & Meyer, L. A. (2008). Specialization and marine based
environmental behavior among Scuba divers. Journal of Leisure Research, 38(4),
601e615.