TY - JOUR
T1 - Agritourism
T2 - experience design, activities, and revisit intention
AU - Liang, Austin Rong Da
AU - Hsiao, Teng Yuan
AU - Chen, Dun Ji
AU - Lin, Jie Heng
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020, Emerald Publishing Limited.
PY - 2021/11/18
Y1 - 2021/11/18
N2 - Purpose: Previous studies have discussed individual effects that certain agritourism activities have on visitor response while ignoring interaction effects. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to discuss both the individual and interaction effects of agritourism activities on tourist revisit intention. Design/methodology/approach: This study classified agritourism activities into four categories and collected 883 valid samples. Logistic regression was then applied to test the influence of agritourism activities on tourist revisit intention. Findings: Based on the results of the statistical analysis, it was found that those agritourism activities, which required mutual cooperation such as do-it-yourself (DIY), animal interaction/feeding and fruit and vegetable picking, enhanced tourist revisit intention. Furthermore, the agritourism groups participating in activities with or without children did not have consistent revisit intentions regarding animal feeding/interaction activities. In particular, this study found that willingness to revisit for tourists with children was influenced by animal feeding/interaction, but not for tourists without children. Research limitations/implications: This study demonstrates that not all agritourism activities enhance revisit intention. For this reason, agritourism businesses should consider redesigning their activities related to visitor and animal interactions as increasing conscientiousness regarding animal welfare, especially with regard to animal abuse. Additionally, those activities focused on education and ecology are not as appreciated by tourists as they may have been previously assumed between different groups. Originality/value: The findings of this study reveal that if the types of agritourism activities could fulfill visitors' expectations and desires they are more likely to have a satisfying experience. The authors consider some of these notions to be a kind of unrealistic fantasy regarding agritourism and the kind of activities involved therein. This kind of fantasy is likely formed by visitors 2019 past experiences and culture. As a result, the authors conclude that agritourism activities focused on the education of plants and ecology do not achieve the truly preferred aim of better interaction between people.
AB - Purpose: Previous studies have discussed individual effects that certain agritourism activities have on visitor response while ignoring interaction effects. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to discuss both the individual and interaction effects of agritourism activities on tourist revisit intention. Design/methodology/approach: This study classified agritourism activities into four categories and collected 883 valid samples. Logistic regression was then applied to test the influence of agritourism activities on tourist revisit intention. Findings: Based on the results of the statistical analysis, it was found that those agritourism activities, which required mutual cooperation such as do-it-yourself (DIY), animal interaction/feeding and fruit and vegetable picking, enhanced tourist revisit intention. Furthermore, the agritourism groups participating in activities with or without children did not have consistent revisit intentions regarding animal feeding/interaction activities. In particular, this study found that willingness to revisit for tourists with children was influenced by animal feeding/interaction, but not for tourists without children. Research limitations/implications: This study demonstrates that not all agritourism activities enhance revisit intention. For this reason, agritourism businesses should consider redesigning their activities related to visitor and animal interactions as increasing conscientiousness regarding animal welfare, especially with regard to animal abuse. Additionally, those activities focused on education and ecology are not as appreciated by tourists as they may have been previously assumed between different groups. Originality/value: The findings of this study reveal that if the types of agritourism activities could fulfill visitors' expectations and desires they are more likely to have a satisfying experience. The authors consider some of these notions to be a kind of unrealistic fantasy regarding agritourism and the kind of activities involved therein. This kind of fantasy is likely formed by visitors 2019 past experiences and culture. As a result, the authors conclude that agritourism activities focused on the education of plants and ecology do not achieve the truly preferred aim of better interaction between people.
KW - Agritourism
KW - Agritourism activities
KW - Logistic regression
KW - Revisit intention
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85087115017&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85087115017&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1108/TR-10-2019-0438
DO - 10.1108/TR-10-2019-0438
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85087115017
SN - 1660-5373
VL - 76
SP - 1181
EP - 1196
JO - Tourism Review
JF - Tourism Review
IS - 5
ER -