INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH

Int. J. Tourism Res. 14, 139–152 (2012)

Published online 17 March 2011 in Wiley Online Library
(wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/jtr.842

Place Attachment and Tourism

Marketing: Investigating International
Tourists in Singapore
Shu‐pei Tsai*
Public Relations & Advertising Department, Shih Hsin University, Taiwan

ABSTRACT and Kobrin, 2001; Kaltenborn and Williams,

2002; Kyle et al., 2003; Hwang et al., 2005;
The notion of place attachment has been Alexandris et al., 2006; Matzler et al., 2007;
evidenced impactful on enhancing the Anderson and Fulton, 2008; Hammitt et al.,
performance of tourism marketing. However, 2009; Yuksel et al., 2009). Place attachment refers
the theoretical development of place to the emotional and psychological bonds formed
attachment characterizes obvious diversities. between an individual and a particular place.
The current study integrates and reconfigures When turning into a representation of place
these diversities to propose the Strategic attachment, the tourism destination may induce
Management of Place Attachment model. strong sense of security, trust, confidence, attrac-
According to the model, a comprehensive tiveness, cheerfulness and identification in the
attachment‐nurturing foundation is tourist. Thus, place attachment is deemed as a
constituted by holistic tourist experience, distinctive tourism marketing strength, which
which contains emotional pleasure, cognitive exercises significant impact on the formation of
stimulation, psychological growth, self‐ the tourist’s attitudinal loyalty and revisit behav-
expressiveness and communal awareness. ior to the destination.
Place attachment, nurtured upon such The notion of place attachment, accentuating
foundation, converts into a powerful driver the establishment of long‐lasting relationships
of the tourist’s revisit behavior. Noteworthy with the tourist, is in one way or another related
insights and implications are provided to put to the philosophy of emotional branding that
the notion of place attachment to best use for extends from the paradigm of experiential
tourism marketing. Copyright © 2011 John marketing. As the advocates of this paradigm
Wiley & Sons, Ltd. posit, all sorts of dynamic exchanges and
contact points in the sensory, affective, social
Received 28 May 2010; Revised 18 December 2010; Accepted and intellectual dimensions work together to
16 February 2011 create desirable and memorable experience, out
of which the brand/consumer relationships
Keywords: place attachment; tourism are fostered and strengthened (e.g. Dube and
destination; tourism marketing; revisit behavior. Le bel, 2003; Schmitt, 2003; Brown, 2007; Brakus
et al., 2009; Tsai, 2010). Basically, the experiential
INTRODUCTION marketing paradigm gears marketing strategies
towards pursuing emotional and psychological
bonds, cultivated through the functional and

I
n recent years, the notion of place attachment
has become one of the most engaging topics emotional values of brand attributes, the
for tourism marketing researchers (e.g. Vaske gratifying experience in brand contacts as well
as the personal relevancy gleaned from brand
meaning.
In the line of place attachment studies, re-
*Correspondence to: Shu-pei Tsai, Public Relations &
Advertising Department, Shih Hsin University, Taiwan. searchers generally highlight the important
E-mail: [email protected] role that place attachment plays in eliciting
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
140 S‐P. Tsai

attitudinal loyalty and revisit behavior via the multiphase methodology to orchestrate diversi-
creation of desirable and memorable experi- fied perspectives of place attachment and then to
ence. However, they conceptualize place at- investigate the compositional dimensionality
tachment from diversified perspectives, thus and causal antecedents of place attachment on
adopting variant concepts for defining place the international tourists visiting Singapore.
attachment. The first diversity concerns the Ranked one of the top 10 tourism destinations
compositional dimensionality of place attach- in the Asia–Pacific, Singapore features such
ment. Quite a few scholars propose place attractions as Jurong Bird Park, Singapore
attachment consisting of the two separate Science Center, Little India, Chinal Toown, Kusu
dimensions: place dependence and place identity Island, Hawa Par Villa and Carlesberg Sky
(e.g. Anderson and Fulton, 2008). Some other Tower. In the last 3 years, Singapore drew more
researchers conceptualize place attachment than three hundred million international tourists
generating impact on tourist behavior through from such regions as North America, Europe and
the three separate dimensions of place depend- Asia (Pacific Asia Travel Association (PATA)
ence, affective attachment and place identity (e.g. Annual Report, 2010), so it is viewable as an ideal
Yuksel et al., 2009). Another group of research- place to collect data representing broad range of
ers, who conceive the compositional dimension- national and cultural backgrounds.
ality of place attachment with an overarching The Strategic Management of Place Attach-
framework, favor the approach to treat place ment (SMPA) model is developed and validated.
attachment as a single‐factor construct with only Its model structure and causal path pattern are
one dimension (e.g. Hammitt et al., 2009). The proven applicable to predicting the behavior of
second diversity concerns the delineation on the tourists from different regions. The most signifi-
causal antecedents of place attachment. Some cant contribution of the current study lies in
researchers propose the components of attraction, substantiating the premise that the creation of
self‐expression and centrality to lifestyle as pre- holistic tourist experience is the key to lay a
dictors of place attachment (e.g. Ghumman et al., comprehensive foundation for the three dimen-
2009). Other researchers deem place attachment sions of place attachment: (i) the behavioral
is anteceded by physical environment, interaction dependence on the destination’s superior tan-
quality and outcome quality (e.g. Alexandris et al., gible attributes; (ii) the strong longing and
2006), or the tangible and intangible attributes of passion felt towards the destination; and (iii)
the tourism destination: physical setting, outdoor the identification with the symbolism and image
recreation, emotional connections, social ties, special of the destination. Thus, the tourism marketing
moments, solitude and destination tradition (e.g. manager is advised to make it a priority to
Smaldone et al., 2008). create holistic tourist experience, trying to
The diversities in relevant studies reflect optimize the managerial effectiveness of such
vigorousness of theoretical construction but, in experiential elements as emotional pleasure,
the meantime, cause managerial uncertainty cognitive stimulation, psychological growth,
about how to take appropriate strategic actions self‐expressiveness and communal awareness.
to put the notion of place attachment to best
use for tourism marketing. Another issue arises
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
from the validity and reliability of the research
results. Most of relevant studies examine place
From interpersonal to place attachment
attachment by data obtained from tourists
whose characteristics are not further catego- The notion of place attachment is traceable
rized into distinct segments. Without properly back to the interpersonal attachment theory,
considering the segmentation of tourists, the first proposed by Bowlby (1979, 1982, 1988)
research results on place attachment do not and then further developed by Bretherton and
necessarily lead to conclusions generalizable Munholland (1999), Rholes and Simpson
across broad range of national and cultural (2004), Gillath et al. (2008) and Marvin and
backgrounds. Britner (2008) among others. Within this
To address the issues surrounding the notion theory, attachment originally refers to the
of place attachment, the current study adopts a emotional and psychological bonds formed
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 14, 139 –152 (2012)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr
Place Attachment and Tourism Marketing 141

between an individual and another person. As identification (e.g. Kyle et al., 2003; Alexandris
Bowlby (1979, 1982, 1988) postulated, human et al., 2006; Matzler et al., 2007; Anderson and
beings are born with an innate psychobiologi- Fulton, 2008; Yuksel et al., 2009).
cal system that motivates them to seek proxim- In relevant studies of tourism marketing, the
ity to significant others in times of need. The notion of place attachment is one of the most
set goal of such system is the attainment of engaging topics. Through recognizing the
actual or perceived protection and security. important role that place attachment plays in
Actual or symbolic proximity to these figures is eliciting favorable tourist attitude and behav-
maintained until attainment of protection and ior, researchers conceptualize the notion of
security. No one of any age or social status is place attachment from diversified perspectives,
completely free of reliance on actual or particularly on the compositional dimension-
symbolic attachment figures, which explains ality of place attachment and the causal
why attachment is a phenomenon over a antecedents of place attachment. These diver-
person’s entire life span. Early experiences sities are depicted in the next sub‐sections.
with attachment figures gradually gave rise
to a mechanism of thoughts, memories, beliefs,
Compositional dimensionality of place
expectations, emotions and behaviors about
attachment
the self and others. This mechanism, called the
‘internal working model of social relation- There have emerged two main diversified
ships’, continues to develop with time and approaches of conceptualizing the compo-
experience. It regulates, interprets and predicts sitional dimensionality of place attachment:
attachment‐related behavior between the self the multiple‐factor approach and the single‐
and the attachment figure (e.g. Bretherton and factor approach.
Munholland, 1999; Gillath et al., 2008). In The researchers who adopted the multiple‐
presence of the attachment figure, the individ- factor approach proposed place attachment
ual may perceive sense of security, trust, comprising the two separate dimensions of
confidence, attractiveness, cheerfulness and place dependence and place identity, establishing
identification. When the attachment figure is the dual‐dimension–dual‐factor solution for
inaccessible, sense of loss, anxiety or even defining the dimensionality of place attach-
hysteria may be induced (e.g. Rholes and ment (e.g. Williams et al., 1992; Vaske and
Simpson, 2004; Marvin and Britner, 2008). Korbin, 2001; Kaltenborn and Williams, 2002;
The target‐specific emotional and psycho- Williams and Vaske, 2003; Hwang et al., 2005;
logical bonds formed by attachment are found Anderson and Fulton, 2008). A little variant
extendable beyond the person‐to‐person rela- from the proponents of this model, there were
tionship context to the person‐to‐object context some researchers who conceived place attach-
(e.g. Belk, 1988; Kleine et al., 1989; Hill and ment generating impact on tourist behavior
Stamey, 1990; Park et al., 2009). For tourism through three separate dimensions. For ex-
marketing, the attachment theory has also ample, Harmon et al. (2005), Brocato (2006) and
drawn growing attention in recent years. The Halpenny (2006) designated place dependence,
first research efforts in systematically analyzing affective attachment and place identity as separate
place attachment appeared in the late 1980s and constructs of place attachment. They explored
the early 1990s (e.g. Williams and Roggenbuck, the cognitive, affective and behavioral struc-
1989; Williams et al., 1992). Since then, place ture of place attachment, which was conceived
attachment has become one of the most en- as a three‐factor notion comprising place‐
gaging topics for researchers and practitioners specific beliefs (place identity), emotions
of tourism marketing. Similar to interpersonal (affective attachment) and behavioral commit-
attachment, place attachment is capable of ments (place dependence). Place dependence
bonding the tourist emotionally and psycho- concerns the behavioral advantage of one’s
logically with the destination. When turning preferred place relative to other settings.
into a representation of attachment figure, the Affective attachment is defined in terms of
destination induces the sense of security, trust, positively strong feelings about the place,
confidence, attractiveness, cheerfulness and whereas place identity refers to the congruence
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 14, 139 –152 (2012)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr
142 S‐P. Tsai

between the symbolism and image of the place which reflect the tourist involvement in the
and the self‐concept of the tourist. The appro- destination. Attraction is defined as the impor-
priateness of such model structure has been tance assigned to and the pleasure derived
further verified by Yuksel et al. (2009). from the functional, hedonic and aesthetic
In the vein of the single‐factor approach, features of the tourism destination. Self‐expres-
researchers conceived the dimensionality of sion describes the degree to which the tourist
place attachment with an overarching frame- may express his or her self‐concept in visiting
work that conceptualizes place attachment as a the destination. Centrality to lifestyle refers to
substantive construct accounting for the corre- the extent to which the tourist’s social networks
lated entity of several dimensional components. revolve around the unique activities in the
This approach manifests a tendency to treat destination, and whether his or her lifestyle
place attachment as a multiple‐component– is meaningfully represented by visiting the
single‐factor construct. In the studies of destination.
Jorgensen and Stedman (2001, 2006), the di- In another vein of studies on delineating the
mensional components of place dependence, causal antecedents of place attachment, the
affective attachment and place identity form the destination–attribute approach is adopted.
single factor of place attachment. Such structure For example, Warzecha and Lime (2001) found
is expanded by Hammitt et al. (2004, 2006, 2009), that the tangible and intangible attributes of
who substantiate an alternative model that the destination impacted significantly on nur-
composes place familiarity, place belongingness, turing place attachment; tangible attributes
place dependence, place identity and place rooted- resided in the physical setting and functional
ness as the single factor of place attachment. In quality of the destination, and intangible
short, no matter how many dimensional com- attributes resided in the delectable atmosphere
ponents are conceptualized for constituting and emotional gratification created by the
place attachment, the researchers in the line of destination. Later, Alexandris et al. (2006),
the single‐factor theory tend to treat these focusing on the utilitarian and service attri-
components a correlated entity instead of butes of destinations, proved that the forma-
functioning as separate constructs. tion of place attachment is influenced by the
cognitive benefits (utilitarian) and affective
benefits (service attributes). Empirical evi-
Causal antecedents of place attachment
dences revealed the most salient antecedents
There have emerged two main diversified of place attachment should consist of physical
approaches of conceptualizing the causal ante- environment, interaction quality and outcome
cedents of place attachment: the tourist involve- quality. More recently, Smaldone et al. (2008)
ment approach and the destination‐attribute extended this conceptualization and add the
approach. social and symbolic attributes of destination. In
Adopting the tourist involvement approach, result, the components of physical setting,
scholars including Kyle et al. (2003, 2004, 2005), outdoor recreation, emotional connections, social
Hwang et al. (2005), Hou et al. (2005), Iamtrakul ties, special moments, solitude and destination
et al. (2005), Gross et al. (2008) and Ghumman tradition are found as the key predictors of
et al. (2009) combined the consumer involvement place attachment. Briefly, the physical setting,
theory with place attachment research. They functional and service quality, emotional grati-
conceptualized the close relationship between fication and uniqueness of the destination are
tourist involvement and place attachment. essential antecedents of place attachment.
Consumer involvement refers to the perceived
personal relevancy in choosing a suitable des-
Need for integration
tination to fit the consumer’s values, lifestyle and
self‐concept as well as the perceived risk when The previously mentioned tourism marketing
the chosen object does not measure up toprior researchers conceptualize and measure the
expectations. Place attachment is conceptualized dimensionality of place attachment and its
and verified to hinge on the antecedents of causal antecedents from diversified perspec-
attraction, self‐expression and centrality to lifestyle, tives. These diversities reflect vigorousness of
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 14, 139 –152 (2012)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr
Place Attachment and Tourism Marketing 143

theoretical construction but, in the meantime, on the conceptual model for further empirical
cause managerial uncertainty about how to examination. The researcher took into account
take appropriate strategic actions to put the the main points of the attachment theory as
notion of place attachment to best use for well as diversified perspectives on the
tourism marketing. Specifically, in terms of conceptualization of place attachment dimen-
managing place attachment for fostering revisit sionality and on the delineation of place
behavior: (i) What are the constructs that the attachment antecedents. Then the researcher
tourism manager should deal with as the interviewed 85 tourists, who had visited
compositional dimensionality of place attach- Singapore at least twice since 3 years before.
ment? (ii) What are the constructs the tourism The research assistants transferred their state-
manager should pay particular attention to as ments into declarative sentences on a series of
the causal antecedents of place attachment? cards that retained the exact terminology and
Another issue arises from the validity and phrases. All the cards were sorted by the
reliability of the research results. Most of participants according to the importance of each
relevant studies examine place attachment by item. The in‐depth interviews, helping the
data obtained from tourists whose character- researcher to compare in detail the responses of
istics are not further categorized into distinct the target audiences, enhanced the content
segments. Without properly considering the validity of initial measurement development.
segmentation of tourists, the research results On the basis of the main concepts and theoretical
on place attachment do not necessarily lead to contributions that the researcher considered,
conclusions applicable to a broad range of alongside the qualitative research results, the
tourists. These issues give rise to the require- researcher developed a preliminary placement
ment for integrating the diversified perspec- attachment scale and administered it on 116
tives on the notion of place attachment; thus, tourists (37 from North America, 41 from
this notion may become more properly sub- Europe, 38 from Asia), who were frequent re‐
sumable into tourism marketing. visitors to Singapore. The collected data were
first put to Confirmatory Factor Analysis for
MULTIPHASE METHODOLOGY checking the appropriateness of the mea-
surement. Then the statistical technique of
The current study adopts a multiphase method- Structural Equation Modeling was run on the
ology, which is divided into the research stages data for the estimation of causal path parameters
of conceptual framework development and empirical among the constructs proposed in the concep-
model validation. Such arrangement helps to tual framework. Candidate models were com-
orchestrate variant views in relevant studies pared in detail; thus, the best fitting model
and then verifies the hypothetical propositions structure would emerge.
on broad range of tourists. In both research In the research stage of the empirical model
stages, data were collected in Singapore, a city validation, four tasks were accomplished:
country as well as a well‐known destination for (i) confirming the measurement instrumenta-
international tourism. It drew more than three tion; (ii) comparing the principle model with
hundred million international tourists from such competing models; (iii) confirming the best
regions as North America, Europe and Asia in fitting model structure and causal path pattern;
the past 3 years (PATA Annual Report, 2010), and (iv) validating the finalized empirical model
serving as a very suitable research target that for strategic management of place attachment.
reflects broad range of national and cultural The finalized measurement instrumentation
backgrounds of international tourists for inves- developed in the phase of conceptual framework
tigating place attachment. development was successfully administered in
In the stage of conceptual framework develop- large‐scale surveys on 2185 tourists, who had
ment, three purposes were served: (i) establish- visited Singapore more than once during the
ing the initial measurement instrumentation; past 5 years. The participants came from North
(ii) explicating the best possible model struc- America, Europe and Asia: Canada (301), the
ture and causal path pattern of the conceptual United States (379), France (318), Germany (324),
model; and (iii) proposing a framework based Britain (315), Japan (332) and Hong Kong (216).
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 14, 139 –152 (2012)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr
144 S‐P. Tsai

To ensure the validity of the collected data, the analyses, including Confirmatory Factor
large‐scale survey took the randomized purpos- Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling.
ive sampling technique–random selection of The measurement model was double checked,
sampling units within the segment of the and the structure and causal path pattern of the
population with the most suitable information proposed conceptual model were compared
on the characteristic of research interest (e.g. with those of rival models.
Bosch and Wildner, 2003; Guarte and Barrios,
2006). The sample selection criterion is identical
FINDINGS
across regions as shown in Table 1. Making sure
the respondents were equipped with adequate
Conceptual framework development
English proficiency before administering the
measurement on them, the researcher was The conceptual model of SMPA that best fitted
enabled to avoid the negative effect of linguistic the integration of variant views emerged in the
gap. A questionnaire composed of 29 items was research stage of conceptual framework develop-
administered on and completed by these re- ment as shown in Figure 1. Ten latent constructs
spondents. Fully aware of why to participate the were identified in the conceptual model: six
survey, the respondents were asked to fill out the exogenous constructs as the causal antecedents
survey questionnaire in the place and at the time of place attachment (functional benefits, emotional
individually convenient to them. The collected benefits, uniqueness, trust, attractiveness and self‐
data were then put to a series of statistical connection), the three separate constructs of place
attachment dimensionality (place dependence,
affective attachment and place identity) and one
Table 1. Profile of sample for large‐scale survey endogenous construct (revisit frequency).Causal
antecedents of place attachment:
Amount Percentage
2185 100% (1) functional benefits: the perceived utilitarian
Gender and functional benefits of the destination;
Male 1008 46 (2) emotional benefits: the perceived mood‐
Female 1177 54 boosting and worry‐soothing benefits of the
Age destination;
25–35 397 18 (3) uniqueness: the perceived uniqueness and
36–45 746 34 extraordinariness of the destination;
46–55 653 30 (4) trust: the feeling of trust, confidence and
56–65 389 18 security induced by the visiting experi-
Education ences in the destination;
High school 874 40
(5) attractiveness: sense of beauty and attraction
University 923 42
Master 267 12 derived from the visiting experiences in the
Doctorate 121 6 destination; and
Career (6) self‐connection: the connection between the
Business 982 45 destination’s image and the tourist’s self‐
Engineering 705 32 concept/preferred lifestyle.
Public service 317 15
Self‐employment 181 8 Compositional dimensionality of place attach-
Annual income ($US) ment:
2500–3500 530 24
3501–4500 732 34 (1) place dependence: behavioral dependence
4501–5500 586 27
on the non‐substitutable superiority of the
Above 5500 337 15
Region physical features and tangible attributes
North America 601 28 that the destination provides to the tourist;
Europe 918 42 (2) place attachment: strong longing and
Asia 658 30 passion the tourist feels towards the
destination; and
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 14, 139 –152 (2012)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr
Place Attachment and Tourism Marketing 145

FUNCTIONAL
BENEFITS

EMOTIONAL
BENEFITS PLACE
DEPEDENCE

UNIQUENESS

AFFECTIVE
TRUST ATTACHMENT REVISIT
FREQUENCY

ATTRACTIVENESS

PLACE
IDENTITY

SELF-CONNECTION

Figure 1. Strategic Management of Place Attachment (conceptual model).

(3) place identity: deep‐seated identification P3: Amid the said six components some are
the tourist perceives with the symbolism also directly related to revisit frequency.
and image of the destination.

Revisit behavior: EMPIRICAL MODEL VALIDATION

(1) Revisit frequency the total number of The data collected in the research stage of
repeat visits to the destination during a empirical model validation were first put on
certain period. Confirmatory Factor Analysis, checking the
construct reliability, average variance extracted,
The model structure and the causal path squared correlation, standardized loadings and
pattern explicated in the SMPA conceptual items reliability of the measurement model.
model leads to three hypothetical propositions After deleting seven question items in the scale,
for further empirical examination. all fit statistics of the measurement model
containing 22 manifest indicators for 10 latent
P1: Place attachment comprises three separate constructs are quite acceptable by coming up
dimensions (place dependence, affective with the indices of: χ2 [673] = 692, p < 0.05,
attachment and place identity) each of the Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) = 0.959, Adjusted
three dimensions generates direct impact Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI) = 0.945, Com-
on revisit frequency. parative fit index (CFI) = 0.931, Normed fit
index (NFI) = 0.925 and Root mean square
P2: Six components (functional benefits, emo- residual (RMSR) = 0.031. In addition, the lamb-
tional benefits, uniqueness, trust, attractive- das (λ) are all above 0.35, the composite
ness and self‐ connection) antecede the three reliabilities are greater than 0.7 and the average
dimensions of place attachment. variance extracted are above 0.5 on the whole.
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 14, 139 –152 (2012)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr
146 S‐P. Tsai

Furthermore, the average variance extracted for mediation model (R2 = 0.641) and the non‐
each construct is greater than the squared mediation model (R2 = 0.413).
correlation between a particular construct and In general, the empirical model shown in
any other construct. Judging by these results Figure 2 demonstrates all the hypothetical
indicated by Table 2, the researcher confirms propositions put forth in the research stage of
both convergent and discriminant validity as conceptual framework development receive
well as the appropriateness of other statistical full support. Specifically, the modeling estima-
indices regarding the measuring instrument. tion indicates the best model structure and
To further confirm measurement invariance causal relationships among the exogenous,
across the seven sample groups from three mediating and endogenous constructs in the
different regions, the researcher assessed three SMPA model are explicated as follows.
measurement models. Model 1 assumed an
invariant factor pattern across the seven sample (1) The three separate constructs of place
groups, including 10 latent factors, and only dependence, affective attachment and place
one non‐zero loading for each item (simple identity are the compositional dimension-
structure); this model served as the null model ality of place attachment.
in the model comparison sequence. Model 2 (2) The six components of functional benefits,
assumed that the factor loadings to be variant emotional benefits, uniqueness, trust, attract-
across the samples. Model 3 assumed that the iveness and self‐ connection are the causal
item intercepts t were variant across samples. antecedents of place attachment.
All models were estimated by maximum (3) The dimension of place dependence is
likelihood using LISREL VIII (Scientific Software anteceded by functional benefits, uniqueness
International Inc., Lincolnwood, IL, USA), and and trust.
only Model 1 was found yielding satisfactory (4) The dimension of affective attachment is
goodness‐of‐fit statistic (0.957), thus confirming anteceded by emotional benefits, trust and
measurement invariance across the sample attractiveness.
groups from three different regions. (5) The dimension of place identity is ante-
After confirming the fit in the measurement ceded by uniqueness and self‐ connection.
model, the Structural Equation Modeling was (6) Each of place dependence, affective attach-
run to estimate three possible types of model ment and place identity generates separate
structure and causal path pattern: the full impact on revisit frequency.
mediation structural model (the three place (7) Amid the six components anteceding place
attachment constructs of place dependence, attachment, the three components of func-
affective attachment and place identity fully medi- tional benefits, trust and self‐ connection also
ate the effects of the six exogenous constructs – generate direct impact on revisit frequency.
functional benefits, emotional benefits, uniqueness, (8) Place dependence, affective attachment and
trust, attractiveness and self‐connection–on revisit place identity in tandem directly explain
frequency); the partial mediation model (relaxing 61.2% variance of revisit frequency.
the direct effects of the six exogenous constructs (9) Functional benefits, trust and self‐connection
on revisit frequency); the non‐mediation model directly explain 17.6% variance of revisit
(constraining mediation effects of the three place frequency.
attachment constructs). Both fit index statistics (10) The SMPA model features a partial
and causal path parameters are estimated and mediation model structure and causal
compared in detail. The best fit model eventually path pattern, illustrating an integrative
is validated. As the statistical analyses illustrate, reconfiguration of theoretical diversities
the partial mediation model provides the best fit on the notion of place attachment.
to the data (χ2 [697] = 716, p < 0.05, GFI = 0.959,
AGFI = 0.941, CFI = 0.928, NFI = 0.914 and DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
RMSR = 0.043). Besides, in terms of explaining
the variance of the outcome construct, the partial The current study develops and validates the
mediation model also has greater degree of SMPA model, revealing an interrelated hierar-
explanatory power (R2 = 0.818) than the full chical process to optimize the effectiveness of
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 14, 139 –152 (2012)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr
Place Attachment and Tourism Marketing 147

Table 2. Confirmatory factor Analysis of Measurement Model

Contructs/items Contruct reliability/ Standardized Items
variance extracted/ loadings reliability
squared correlation
Exogenous constructs
Functional benefits 0.85/0.74/0.57
Singapore provides high‐quality 0.86 0.77
settings and facilities
The settings and facilities in 0.84 0.75
Singapore cater to my needs
Emotional benefits 0.83/0.73/0.54
Visiting Singapore boosts my mood 0.83 0.74
My concerns and worries 0.81 0.73
are soothed in Singapore
Uniqueness 0.82/0.72/0.53
Singapore is unique in many aspects 0.78 0.71
Comparing with other 0.82 0.76
destinations Singapore is extraordinary
Trust 0.87/0.78/0.58
The visiting experiences in 0.92 0.83
Singapore give me a sense of trust
I feel confident and secure 0.86 0.79
in visiting Singapore
Attractiveness 0.82/0.74/0.56
Singapore is a beautiful place 0.79 0.72
Singapore is attractive to me 0.78 0.71
Self‐connection 0.84/0.75/0.52
Singapore reflects who I am 0.82 0.78
or who I wish to become
The image of Singapore fits 0.81 0.81 0.76
my preferred lifestyle
Place dependence 0.88/0.79/0.58
I do not find any other destination capable of 0.87 0.79
serving my needs better than Singapore
The settings and facilities provided by 0.82 0.76
Singapore are beyond compare
I enjoy the environment of Singapore 0.86 0.75
more than in any other destination
Affective attachment 0.85/0.77/0.56
I miss Singapore a lot when 0.85 0.78
I am away from it
I am emotionally attached to Singapore 0.81 0.75
as a destination
I am passionate about visiting Singapore 0.79 0.72
Place identity 0.83/0.74/0.51
Singapore seems to be a part of me 0.83 0.76
Visiting Singapore enriches meaning of my life 0.82 0.74
I identify with the image represented by 0.78 0.71
Singapore
Endogenous construct
Revisit frequency (parameter is fixed in model
estimation)
During the past 5 years I have
visited Singapore ___ times

Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 14, 139 –152 (2012)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr
148 S‐P. Tsai

FUNCTIONAL
BENEFITS

0.163

EMOTIONAL
BENEFITS 0.129 PLACE
DEPEDENCE

0.147

UNIQUENESS
0.139
0.226
0.172

0.118 AFFECTIVE 0.205

TRUST ATTACHMENT REVISIT
FREQUENCY
0.154
0.132

0.192
ATTRACTIVENESS
0.125
0.121

0.176 PLACE
IDENTITY

SELF-CONNECTION

Figure 2. Strategic Management of Place Attachment (empirical model). *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.

place attachment for tourism marketing. Based needs to be nurtured upon a comprehensive
on the integrative reconfiguration of diversified foundation constituted by holistic experiential
perspectives put forth by relevant studies on elements. This finding highlights the necessity to
place attachment, the SMPA model was proved orchestrate cognitive functionality, emotionality
generalizable to varieties of international tourists and symbolic congruity for tourism marketing in
visiting Singapore, who come from North accordance with the principle of holistic experi-
America, Europe and Asia. According to the ence management. As management scholars
explicated model structure and delineated including Dube and Le bel (2003), Schmitt
causal path pattern of the model, the holistic (2003), Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2004), Brown
experiential elements constitute a comprehen- (2007), Brakus et al. (2009) and Tsai (2005, 2006,
sive attachment‐nurturing foundation. The three 2010) pointed out, holistic consumer experience
dimensions of place attachment (place depend- plays a critical role in forming the kind of
ence, affective attachment and place identity) are consumer relationships that stand the test of
nurtured upon such foundation. Driving high time. The creation of holistic consumer experi-
revisit frequency of the tourist, place attachment ence is evidenced reliant on the building blocks
is viewable as a distinctive strength of tourism of emotional pleasure, cognitive stimulation,
marketing. Specific insights and implications psychological growth, self‐expressiveness and
of the research findings are discussed in the communal awareness. The SMPA model fur-
following sub‐sections. ther verifies holistic experience as the key
success factor in the process of nurturing place
Holistic experience attachment. The three dimensions of place
The first contribution of the current study lies in attachment are distinguishable from each other
substantiating the premise that place attachment in terms of cognitive, emotional and symbolic
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 14, 139 –152 (2012)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr
Place Attachment and Tourism Marketing 149

characteristics. Place dependence is more cog- beauty, emotional subtlety, intellectual refine-
nition focused, and affective attachment is ment and conceptual creativeness. Moreover,
more emotionality focused. As for the dimen- the destination can be seen a vehicle conveying
sion of place identity, symbolic meaning is its the symbolic meaning for the tourist to reinforce
pronounced characteristic. Thus, to lay a solid self/social identity and express preferred self/
foundation of place attachment, seamless social image. Therefore, efforts must be made to
integration of pragmatic utilitarianism, emotion- mold and translate the symbolic meaning of the
alism and social symbolism is indispensible. destination into representations that match the
Pragmatic utilitarianism stresses the total socio‐cultural context and fit with the tourist’s
quality management of the tangible attributes harbored desires, dreams and aspirations.
of the destination; emotionalism accentuates
the elicitation of positive emotional responses
Tourist involvement
to the destination’s offerings; social symbol-
ism emphasizes the construction of the desti- The current study also corroborates the conten-
nation’s shared personalities and symbolic tion that tourist involvement and place attach-
meaning. ment correlates closely with each other, as
Briefly, the tourist maximizes his/her enjoy- proposed by the tourist involvement approach
ment during the stay in the destination scholars including Kyle et al. (2003, 2004, 2005),
through the functionality, emotionality and Hwang et al. (2005), Hou et al. (2005), Iamtrakul
symbolism of holistic experience, which leads et al. (2005), Gross et al. (2008) and Ghumman
to long‐lasting place attachment. Therefore, et al. (2009) among others. According to the
the nurturing process of place attachment SMPA model, the congruencies of values,
starts from the effective management of the lifestyle and self‐concept predict tourist involve-
destination’s functional attributes (functional ment and place attachment simultaneously.
benefits and uniqueness), emotional attributes Amid the six attachment‐anteceding compo-
(emotional benefits, trust and attractiveness) and nents, four are the derivative constructs based
symbolic attribute (self‐connection). These basic on the theoretical source of the tourist involve-
attachment‐nurturingcomponents lay a compre- ment approach: the functional quality (functional
hensive foundation. The three dimensions of benefits), the special and unique features (unique-
place attachment nurture upon this foundation, ness), the hedonic and aesthetic features (attrac-
converting into powerful driver of the tourist’s tiveness), and the symbolic meaning and image
attitudinal loyalty and revisit frequency. The of the destination (self‐connection). In fact, the
tourism marketing manager should make it a relationship between involvement and attach-
priority to create holistic tourist experience, ment are also verified by such leisure researchers
attempting to perfect all sorts of dynamic like Bricker and Kerstetter (2000), Sutton (2003),
exchanges and contact points in the destination’s Funk et al. (2004), Matzler et al. (2007), Tosun et al.
sensory, affective, social and intellectual loca- (2007), Bowen and Schouten (2008), Sangpikul
tions and occasions. (2008), Simpson and Siguaw (2008), Chen et al.
The functional attributes of the destination (2009), Nowacki (2009) and Xiao and Kim (2009).
should characterize not only practical utility but In other words, an attached tourist is very likely
also uniqueness, providing the value that the a highly involved tourist, who cares much about
tourist regards indispensible as well as non‐ whether the four aspects of the destination
substitutable for the fulfillment of substantive represent his or her values, lifestyle and self‐
needs and wants. Besides, it is important for the concept. Favorable evaluation of these aspects
destination to deliver services with empathetic intensifies place attachment to greater extent.
thoughtfulness and efficient responsiveness in It is of great importance that the tourism
addition to personalized customization, thus marketing manager deepens understanding of
reaching the highest possible standard of rela- the cherished life experience and stories stored
tionship quality to arouse the feelings of rapport, in the tourist’s autobiographical memory,
affinity and comfort. To cause irresistible attrac- which reflect the involvement‐elevating factors
tiveness for the tourist, the destination is consisted of values system, lifestyle category
supposed to imbue its offerings with artistic and self‐concept schemata. On the basis of
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 14, 139 –152 (2012)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr
150 S‐P. Tsai

the deepened understanding in this regard, the elements, reduce redundant or overlapping ele-
marketing manager is better enabled to plan ments and raise necessary but inadequate
appropriate marketing programs to elevate elements in the managerial process. Eventually,
tourist involvement and then intensifies place the best possible scenario can be worked out for
attachment. The delivered messages and orga- nurturing place attachment by the creation of
nized activities in the marketing programs can holistic tourist experience and the elevation of
aim to forge connectivity with the tourist tourist involvement.
by evoking his/her autobiographical memory.
Such connectivity triggers the tourist’s active Future research direction
imagination to turn the encounters in the The current study used samples of internation-
destination into memorable sceneries and al tourists who had visited Singapore more
meaningful events, which eventually become than once since 5 years before. These tourists
integral part of his/her life stories. Hence, the came from Canada, the United States, France,
tourist not only enjoys what is seen and heard Germany, Britain, Japan and Hong Kong,
during the visit but also savors the sweet helping to elevate the validity and reliability
recollection of it after going home. Connected of the research findings across broad range of
with the tourist in this way, the destination national and cultural backgrounds. However,
gets deep inside the tourist’s mind and heart. the collected data was restricted to highly
As a result, the destination transforms into developed countries; the tourists from compara-
an extraordinary place full of emotional and tively less affluent countries were not covered.
symbolic referents, serving to enrich the life Future research may move on to examining
meaning of the tourist. The stronger the tourism whether such tourists perceive place attachment
marketing manager is capable of forging such differently. It is worthwhile to test if the model
connectivity, the higher involvement the tourist structure and path pattern of the SMPA model
may perceive in the destination. validated by the current study may vary and
alter because of changed affluence level of the
Synergized efforts country the tourist comes from.
The SMPA model also accentuates the neces-
sity to transcend departmental boundaries of REFERENCES
the destination’s managerial body to synergize
different efforts, conducive to achieving the Alexandris K, Kouthouris C, Meligdis A. 2006. In-
outcome of nurturing place attachment through creasing customers’ loyalty in a skiing resort:
creating holistic tourist experience. Managing the contribution of place attachment and service
quality. International Journal of Contemporary Hos-
various elements of holistic tourist experience
pitality Management 18(5): 414–425.
requires the synergy of the managerial body Anderson DH, Fulton DC. 2008. Experience prefer-
to ensure the tourism destination: (i) offers the ences as mediators of the wildlife‐related recreation
high‐quality settings and facilities; (ii) pro- participation: place attachment relationship. Hu-
vides mood‐boosting and worry‐soothing man Dimensions of Wildlife 13(2): 73 –88.
benefits; (iii) maintains its uniqueness and Belk RW. 1988. Possessions and the extended self.
extraordinariness by comparison with competi- Journal of Consumer Research 15(2): 139–168.
tors; (iv) induces the feeling of trust, confidence Bosch V, Wildner R. 2003. Optimum allocation of
and security; (v) evokes the sense of beauty and stratified random samples designed for multiple
attraction; and (vi) strengthens the connection mean estimates and multiple observed variables.
between the destination’s symbolism/image Communications in Statistics: Theory & Methods
32 (10): 1897–1909.
and the tourist’s self‐concept/preferred lifestyle.
Bowen D, Schouten AF. 2008. Tourist satisfaction
The different divisions in the managerial body and beyond: tourist migrants in Malloca. Inter-
are advised to make it a routine to meet regularly national Journal of Tourism Research 10(2): 141–153.
and discuss strengths and weakness in the Bowlby J. 1979. The Making and Breaking of
performance of their marketing efforts. Hence, Affectional Bonds. Tavistock: London.
they can formulate strategic actions based on Bowlby J. 1982. Attachment and Loss. Vol. 3. Loss.
collective wisdom to eliminate unnecessary Basic Books: New York, NY.
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 14, 139 –152 (2012)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr
Place Attachment and Tourism Marketing 151

Bowlby J. 1988. A Secure Base: Clinical Applications of Hammitt WE, Backlund EA, Bbder RD. 2006. Place
Attachment Theory. Routledge: London. bonding for recreation places: conceptual and
Brakus JJ, Schmitt B, Zarantonello L. 2009. Brand empirical development. Leisure Studies 25(1): 17– 41.
experience: what is it? How is it measured? Does Hammitt WE, Kyle GT, Oh CK. 2009. Comparison
it affect loyalty? Journal of Marketing 73(3): 52–68. of place bonding models in recreation resource
Bretherton I, Munholland KA. 1999. Internal work- management. Journal of Leisure Research 41(l):
ing models in attachment relationships: a construct 57–72.
revisited. In Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Harmon LK, Zinn HC, Gleason M. 2005. Place
Research and Clinical Applications, Cassidy J, Shaver identity, place dependence, and place‐based affect.
PR (eds). Guilford Press: New York. 2005 George Wright Society Conference Proceedings.
Bricker KS, Kerstetter DL. 2000. Level of speciali- George Wright Society: Hancock, MI, USA; 149–156.
zation and place attachment: an exploratory study Hill RP, Stamey M. 1990. The homeless in America: an
of whitewater recreationists. Leisure Sciences 22(4): examination of possessions and consumption be-
233–257. haviors. Journal of Consumer Research 17(3): 303–321.
Brocato ED. 2006. Place attachment: an investiga- Hou JS, Lin CH, Morais DB. 2005. Antecedents of
tion of environments and outcomes in service attachment to a cultural tourism destination: the
context. Doctoral Thesis, University of Texas: case of Hakka and non‐Hakka Taiwanese visitors
Arlington, TX. to Pei‐Pu, Taiwan. Journal of Travel Research 44(2):
Brown S. 2007. Are we nearly there yet? On the retro‐ 221–233.
dominant logic of marketing. Marketing Theory 7(3): Hwang SN, Lee C, Chen HJ. 2005. The relationship
291–300. among tourists’ involvement, place attachment and
Chen CM, Chen SH, Lee HT. 2009. The influence of interpretation satisfaction in Taiwan’s national
service performance and destination resources on parks. Tourism Management 26(2): 143–156.
consumer behavior: a case study of mainland Iamtrakul P, Kardi T, Jian GE, Kazunori H. 2005.
Chinese tourists to Kinmen. International Journal of Interaction of activity involvement and recreational
Tourism Research 11(3): 269–282. location selection behavior in Lowland City. Journal
Dube L, Le bel J. 2003. The categorical structure of of Zhejiang University Science 6(8): 900–906.
pleasure. Cognition and Emotion 17(1): 263–297. Jorgensen BS, Stedman R. 2001. Sense of place as an
Funk DC, Ridinger LL, Moorman AM. 2004. attitude: lakeshore property owners’ attitudes
Exploring origins of involvement: understanding toward their properties. Journal of Environmental
the relationship between consumer motives and Psychology 21(3): 233–248.
involvement with professional sport teams. Lei- Jorgensen BS, Stedman R. 2006. A comparative
sure Sciences 26(1): 35–61. analysis of predictors of sense of place dimen-
Ghumman AR, Khan MB, Hashmi HN, Tahir SI. sions: attachment to, dependence on, and identi-
2009. A building, a symbol of a beautiful culture fication with lakeshore. Journal of Environmental
and the effects of its fall in Pakistan. Environmen- Management 79(3): 316–327.
tal Justice 2(3): 135–146. Kaltenborn BP, Williams DR. 2002. The meaning of
Gillath O, Shaver PR, Baek JM, Chun DS. 2008. Ge- place: attachments to Femundsmarka National
netic correlates of adult attachment style. Personality Park, Norway among tourists and locals. Norwegian
and Social Psychology Bulletin 34(10): 1396– 405. Journal of Geography 56(3): 189–198.
Gross MJ, Brien C, Brown G. 2008. Examining the Kleine RE III, Kleine SS, Kernan JB. 1989. These are
dimensions of a lifestyle tourism destination. Inter- a few of my favorite things: toward an explication
national Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality of attachment as a consumer‐behavior construct.
Research 2(1): 44 – 66. Advances in Consumer Research 16(1): 359–366.
Guarte JM, Barrios EB. 2006. Estimation under Kyle G, Graefe A, Manning R, Bacon J. 2003. An
purposive sampling. Communications in Statistics‐ examination of relationship between leisure activity
Simulation and Computation 35(2): 277–284. involvement and place attachment among hikers
Halpenny EA. 2006. Environmental behavior, place along the Appalachian Trail. Journal of Leisure
attachment and park visitation: a case study of Research 35(3): 249–273.
visitors to Point Pele National Park. Doctoral Kyle G, Bricker K, Graefe, A, Wickham T. 2004. An
Thesis, University of Waterloo: Waterloo, Ontario. examination of recreationists’ relationships with
Hammitt WE, Backlund EA, Bixler RD. 2004. Experi- activities and settings. Leisure Sciences 26(2):
ence use history, place bonding and resource 123– 142.
substitution of trout anglers during recreation Kyle G, Graefe A, Manning R. 2005. Spatial variation
engagements. Journal of Leisure Research 36(3): in level and type of place attachment. Northeastern
356– 378. Recreation Research Symposium Proceedings. USDA

Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 14, 139 –152 (2012)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr
152 S‐P. Tsai

Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station: Tosun C, Temizkan SP, Timothy DJ, Fyall A.
Washington, DC; 14–19. 2007. Tourist shopping experiences and satis-
Marvin RS, Britner PA. 2008. Normative develop- faction. International Journal of Tourism Research
ment: the ontogeny of attachment. In Handbook of 9(2): 87–102.
Attachment: Theory, Research and Clinical Applica- Tsai SP. 2005. Utility, cultural symbolism and emotion:
tions, Cassidy J, Shaver PR (eds). Guilford Press: a comprehensive model of brand purchase value.
New York, NY; London. International Journal of Research in Marketing 22(3):
Matzler K, Füller J, Faullant R. 2007. Customer 277–291.
satisfaction and loyalty to Alpine ski resorts: the Tsai SP. 2006. Investigating archetype‐icon trans-
moderating effect of lifestyle, spending and cus- formation in brand marketing. Marketing
tomers’ skiing skills. International Journal of Tourism Intelligence & Planning 24(6): 648–663.
Research 9(6): 409– 421. Tsai SP. 2010. Shopping‐mall management & enter-
Nowacki MM. 2009. Quality of visitor attractions, tainment experience: a cross‐regional investiga-
satisfaction, benefits and behavioral intentions of tion. Service Industries Journal 30(3): 321–337.
visitors: verification of a model. International Vaske JJ, Kobrin KC. 2001. Place attachment and
Journal of Tourism Research 11(3): 297–309. environmentally responsible behavior. The Journal
Park CW, Macinnis DJ, Priester J. 2009. Brand of Environmental Education 32(4): 16–21.
Attachment: Construct, Consequences and Causes. Warzecha CA, Lime DW. 2001. Place attachment in
Now Publishers: Boston, MA. Canyoniands National Park: visitors’ assessment
PATA Annual Report 2010. Pacific Asia Travel of setting attributes on the Colorado and Green
Association. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Rivers. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration
Prahalad CK, Ramaswamy V. 2004. The Future of 19(1): 59–78.
Competition: Co‐ Creating Unique Value with Cus- Williams DR, Roggenbuck JW. 1989. Measuring
tomers. Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA. place attachment: some preliminary results.
Rholes WS, Simpson JA. 2004. Attachment theory: Paper Presented at the Symposium on Outdoor
basic concepts and contemporary questions. In Recreation Planning and Management NRPA
Adult Attachment: Theory, Research, and Clinical Symposium on Leisure Research. National Recre-
Implications, Rholes WS, Simpson JA (eds). Guilford ation and Park Association: San Antonio, TX
Press: New York, NY. (October). 22–27.
Sangpikul A. 2008. Travel motivations of Japanese Williams DR, Patterson ME, Roggenbuck JW,
senior travelers to Thailand. International Journal Watson AE. 1992. Beyond the commodity meta-
of Tourism Research 10(1): 81–94. phor: examining emotional and symbolic attach-
Schmitt B. 2003. Customer Experience Management. ment to place. Leisure Sciences 14(1): 29–46.
The Free Press: New York, NY. Williams DR, Vaske JJ. 2003. The measurement of
Simpson PM, Siguaw JA. 2008. Destination word of place attachment: validity and generalizability of
mouth: the role of traveler type, residents, and a psychometric approach. Forest Science 49(6):
identity salience. Journal of Travel Research 47(2): 830–840.
167–182. Xiao G, Kim JO. 2009. The investigation of Chinese
Smaldone D, Harris CC, Sanyal N. 2008. The role of consumer values, consumption values, life satis-
time in developing place meaning. Journal of faction, and consumption behaviors. Psychology
Leisure Research 40(4): 479–504. and Marketing 26(7): 210–264.
Sutton S. 2003. Personal and situational determi- Yuksel A, Yuksel F, Bilim Y. 2009. Destination
nants of catch‐and‐release choice of freshwater attachment: effects on customer satisfaction and
anglers. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 8(2): cognitive, affective and conative loyalty. Tourism
109–126. Management 31(2): 274–284.

Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Tourism Res. 14, 139 –152 (2012)
DOI: 10.1002/jtr