Contents lists available at ScienceDirectJournal of Destin.docx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Destination Marketing & Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jdmm
Research Paper
The 2014 FIFA World Cup™: Tourists’ satisfaction levels and
likelihood of
repeat visitation to Rio de Janeiro
Kamilla Swarta,⁎, Richard Georgeb, Julia Cassarc, Chesney
Sneydc
a Department of Tourism and Event Management, Faculty of
Business and Management Sciences, Cape Peninsula University
of Technology, PO Box 652, Cape Town 8000,
South Africa
b School of Business and Enterprise, London Campus,
University of West Scotland, London SE1 GNP, UK
c Department of Strategic Applied Management Studies,
University of Cape Town, Private Bag X3, Rondebosch, 7701,
South Africa
A R T I C L E I N F O
Keywords:
FIFA World Cup™
Rio de Janeiro
Information search
Destination image

Crime-risk perceptions
Satisfaction
Repeat visitation
A B S T R A C T
High-profile mega-sporting events have progressively been
positioned in marketing, decision-making and
strategy development of tourism destinations, especially as
platforms for showcasing host destinations. This
study conceptualizes a model of interlinked constructs in order
to predict sports tourists’ likelihood of repeat
visitation to Rio de Janeiro after the 2014 Fédération
Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) World Cup™.
This conceptual model includes the effects of tourists’
information search, destination image and perceptions of
crime risk on satisfaction and ultimately, repeat visitation to
Rio de Janeiro. The results provide support for the
proposed model and confirm that information search negatively
influences tourists’ image of Rio de Janeiro and
that destination image, reduced crime-risk perceptions and
satisfaction positively influence the likelihood of
repeat visitation to Rio de Janeiro. These findings can assist
destination marketers in managing the destination
brand and changing existing perceptions and misconceptions
about Rio de Janeiro, in order to positively
influence tourist satisfaction and repeat visitation.
1. Introduction
High-profile sport mega-events are increasingly the focus of the
marketing, decision-making and strategy development of
tourism
destinations (Gibson, 2010; Knott, Fyall et al., 2015). More
specifically,
the strength and compatibility of the relationship between sport

and
tourism has increased dramatically in recent years, with an
overlapping
of these industries at a global level (Gibson, 2010; Hinch,
Higham, &
Sant, 2014). Gibson (2010) proposes that sport tourism is one of
the
fastest-growing sectors within the tourism industry. Sport
tourism
refers to people who travel outside of their residential
environment
involve themselves to actively or passively in either competitive
or
recreational sport (Gammon & Robinson, 2003; Hinch &
Higham,
2001). Sport tourism has been identified to have three domains
namely:
participatory, celebratory and event-based, the last of which
includes
mega-events (Gibson, 2010; Hinch et al., 2014).
Event-based sport tourism has received the most attention
within
the field of sport tourism literature. Cornelissen and Swart
(2006,
p.108) define mega-events as ‘complex affairs which originate
from a
specific set of economic objectives, but which have potential
and
social outcomes that extend far beyond’. Additionally, sport
mega-
events are large-scale competitions such as the Olympic Games
and
Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) World
Cup™ appeal to a significant number of participants and

spectators
(Knott & Swart, 2015).
In recent years, developing countries such as Brazil, Russia,
India,
China and South Africa (BRICS) have increasingly used mega-
events to
promote socio-economic development and image enhancement
(Grix,
Brannagan, & Houlihan, 2015; Knott & Swart, 2015). The
importance of
clarifying the relationship that exists between perceived crime-
risk and
the future travel behavior of tourists to these destinations is
under-
scored (George & Swart, 2012). Although Brazil hosted the
2014 FIFA
World Cup™ relatively successfully, substantial concerns were
raised
prior to the event regarding the safety and security of the host
nation
(Watts, 2014). These concerns stemmed primarily from elevated
local
crime rates rather than terrorist attacks that are often associated
with
high-profile mega-events such as the Olympic Games and FIFA
World
Cup™ (Taylor & Toohey, 2007). Prior to the 2013 FIFA
Confederations
Cup™, which served as a precursor to the 2014 FIFA World
Cup™, mass
violent protests involving over 5000 residents in Rio de Janeiro
tainted
the host country's reputation (Barchfield, 2013). As a result,
safety and
security concerns were heightened in the lead up to the 2014

FIFA
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2017.01.001
Received 1 August 2016; Received in revised form 9 January
2017; Accepted 9 January 2017
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (K. Swart),
[email protected], [email protected] (R. George),
[email protected] (J. Cassar),
[email protected] (C. Sneyd).
Journal of Destination Marketing & Management xxx (xxxx)
xxx–xxx
2212-571X/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: Swart, K., Journal of Destination
Marketing & Management (2017),
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/2212571X
http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jdmm
World Cup™.
This research aims to better understand how 2014 FIFA World
Cup™
tourists’ information search, perceived crime risk and
satisfaction
influenced their likelihood of repeat visitation to Rio de

Janeiro.
Previous literature on the topic has dealt extensively with
crime-risk
perception (Pizam & Mansfeld, 2006; Maser & Weiermair,
1998), satis-
faction (Cadotte, Woodruff, & Jenkins, 1987; Kozak &
Rimmington,
2000; Oliver & Swan, 1989) and repeat visitation (Baloglu &
Erickson,
1998; Niininen & Riley, 1998; Oppermann, 1996) of tourists to
a
destination. However, there is a dearth of research that covers
the
influence of tourists’ information search on their perceptions of
crime risk at sport mega-events and destination image, and how
these
constructs influence satisfaction and tourists’ likelihood of
repeat
visitation.
2. Literature review
2.1. Tourism and crime-safety
Extensive research has been conducted on the nature of the
relationship between tourism and criminal activity. There are
two
main areas of research on the topic, namely whether crime at a
destination impacts on tourism demand, and whether the tourism
industry possibly encourages criminal activity.
One of the primary concerns tourists have when deciding upon a
travel destination is the potential of experiencing crime
(Levantis &
Gani, 2000). Travelling to developing nations poses an even
bigger

crime risk, as there is often more incentive for locals to commit
crimes
against tourists (Levantis & Gani, 2000). Research conducted on
the
relationship between tourist victimization and crime shows that
high
crime rates have a negative effect on tourist demand (Barker,
Page, &
Meyer, 2002; Chesney-Lind & Lind, 1986). When there is an
excessive
potential threat to their wellbeing, tourists are likely to cancel,
postpone or consider substitute destinations that are less risky
(Pizam, 1999; Pizam, Tarlow, & Bloom, 1997; Richter &
Waugh,
1986). Levantis and Gani (2000) specifically looked at
developing
nations and found this proposition to be correct. However,
contrasting
evidence suggests that there is no general relationship (Tarlow,
2000).
Despite there being conflicting evidence concerning the
relationship
between crime levels and tourism demand, there is no doubt that
crimes
committed against tourists are highly publicized, thus attracting
negative attention to the destination in question (George &
Swart,
2012) as was the case for both South Africa and Brazil in their
respective hosting of the FIFA World Cup.
Tourism research also examines crime and tourist activity from
another perspective. Several researchers propose that the
development
of the tourism industry encourages criminal activity (Walmsley,
Boskovic, & Pigram, 1983; Fujii & Mak, 1980). It has been
suggested

that tourists are more likely to be victimized as they are likely
to find
themselves in unfamiliar settings (Chesney-Lind & Lind, 1986;
Barker
et al., 2002; Boakye, 2010). Harper (2001) identified three
character-
istics that make a tourist susceptible to crime victimization:
having the
status of a tourist, being non-permanent and being transient at
the
destination. Given the fact that sport mega-events attract large
numbers
of domestic and foreign tourists, they become prime criminal
hotspots
due to heightened opportunity for local criminals (Barker, Page,
&
Meyer, 2003). Transient crowds allow for a greater number of
unidentified people at any one time and, therefore, an increased
pool
of potential victims and more difficult identification of
criminals
(Jarrel & Howsen, 1990).
2.2. Information search
Consumer decision-making is the process of obtaining
information and
integrating information into related purchase decisions
(Moutinho, 1987).
Consumers have very few opportunities to rate the quality of a
product or
service before consumption. In order to minimize potential risk,
consumers
require information before deciding on a purchase. The
decision-making of

tourists with regards to destinations is no different. Gathering
information
through a search is an effective method of reducing potential
risk (Bieger &
Laesser, 2004; Gursoy & McClearly, 2004), and consequently
uncertainty or
dissatisfaction (Mitchell, 1999). Sheth and Venkatesan (1968)
propose that
information search to reduce risk is more prevalent among
tourists with
little prior travel experience.
Tourists use a number of information sources to form
perceptions of
a destination and to reduce perceived risk (Fodness & Murray,
1999).
These sources are categorized as internal or external
information
sources (Money & Crotts, 2003). The internal information
search is
the process of retrieving decision-relevant information that has
been
stored in the tourist's memory. This may include previous
experience or
past information searches. External information search is
classified into
four categories (Beatty & Smith, 1987): personal (word-of-
mouth advice
from friends and family), marketer-dominated (advertisements
in print
and electronic media), neutral sources (third-party sources such
as
travel agents and tourist guides) and, lastly, experiential sources
such as
direct contact with the destination. In recent years, the Internet
has

come to be considered a fifth shared source of external
information
(Buhalis & Law, 2008; Money & Crotts, 2003). Categorizing
information
provided by destination marketing organizations (DMOs), such
as
government, state or city tourist offices, is also contentious, as
it could
be categorized as either a neutral source (acting as an
intermediary
between the tourist activities and tourists) or a marketer-
dominated
information source (exclusively promoting destinations
generating
overnight stays and income) (Money & Crotts, 2003).
Baloglu and McClearly (1999) conclude that information
sources,
both internal and external, play a major role in the formation of
the
tourist's cognitive image of a destination. Organic images are
created
from non-tourism information sources. Potential tourists, who
wish to
travel, may then involve themselves in an active information
search
thus engaging with tourism-related information sources. In this
way,
induced images are created. These induced images may be
different
from the original organic images (Gunn, 1972). It is also
suggested that
the type, quality and quantity of information would determine
the
nature of the image formed (Burgess, 1978). Thus, the following
hypothesis was proposed:

H1: A greater information search is positively related to their
destination image of Rio de Janeiro at the 2014 FIFA World
Cup™.
2.3. Destination image
Tourist destinations are becoming increasingly competitive;
there-
fore it is important to understand what motivates tourists to
choose
particular destinations. Like any business, creating a favorable
and
attractive image in customers’ minds, is important to the
success of the
business. The same applies to tourist destinations. Destination
image is
accepted as a vital aspect of successful tourism and destination
market-
ing, due to its influence on supply and demand sides of tourism
marketing (Tasci & Gartner, 2007).
DMOs recognize the important role that the hosting of events
may
have on the formation of the destination's image, despite major
costs,
investments and other social problems related to preparing for
the
event (Getz, 2008). Associations arising from an event can be
used to
inform strong and unique associations for the destination (Cai,
2002;
Waller, Trendafilova, & Daniell, 2015). The value of events lies
in the
benefits of image transfer which refers to the assignment of
abstract

event associations to the destination's image (Deng & Li, 2013).
Deng
and Li (2013) conclude that event image has a strong positive
effect on
destination image. The theory of image transfer has been widely
accepted in event sponsorship literature; especially for the
sponsorship
of sport events (Deng & Li, 2013; Xing & Chalip, 2006).
Perceptions of safety and security are salient purchase criteria
for
K. Swart et al. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management
xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
2
leisure travel; especially in relation to developing nations with
im-
mature tourism development (Donaldson & Ferreira, 2007).
Numerous
researchers have argued that perceptions of crime risk at tourist
destinations have a negative impact on the destination's image
and on
tourism demand (Pizam & Mansfeld, 2006; Dimanche & Leptic,
1999;
Levantis & Gani, 2000). Given this relationship, the associated
hypoth-
esis is as follows:
H2: Destination image is positively related to crime-risk
perceptions of
tourists in Rio de Janeiro during the 2014 FIFA World Cup™.

Destination image is considered to be the most important aspect
when it comes to tourists’ decisions (Castro, Amario & Ruiz,
2007; Chen
& Tsai, 2007). When tourists have positive perceptions and
impressions
of a destination they are more likely to visit the destination in
the future
(Alhemoud & Armstrong, 1996). Furthermore, a favorable
destination
image can positively affect satisfaction and future travel
behavior
(Bigne, Sánchez, & Sánchez, 2001; Lin, Chen, & Liu, 2003).
Satisfaction is seen as a tourist's post-purchase evaluation of the
destination (Wang & Hsu, 2010). Previous research has
concluded that
destination image is a vital factor in influencing tourists’
satisfaction
with the destination (Castro, Amario & Ruiz, 2007). The more
positive
the destination image, the higher tourist satisfaction will be.
Past
findings conclude that destination image is, therefore, a direct
ante-
cedent of satisfaction where there is a positive relationship
(Court &
Lupton, 1997; Yang, Hu, & Yuan, 2009). From this, the
following
hypothesis can be deduced.
H3: Destination image is positively related to tourists’
satisfaction at the
2014 FIFA World Cup™.
2.4. Perceived risk and mega-events

Perceived risk in consumer behavior refers to a customer's
percep-
tion of uncertainty and unfavorable consequences when
performing a
purchase (Dowling & Staelin, 1994; Maser & Weiermair, 1998).
When
risk and safety concerns are experienced within a tourist's
decision-
making process, there is a substantial likelihood of these
aspects
becoming overruling factors resulting in the alteration or
cancellation
of travel itinerary (Sӧnmez & Graefe, 1998). Encounters with
negative
perceptions of a destination could potentially result in negative
destination images (George, 2003; Goodrich, 2002). This could
have
the potential effect of reducing the influx of foreign tourists to
the area,
through negative publicity and word-of-mouth (George, 2003;
Gibson
& Lepp, 2003).
The tourism literature indicates that travel risks are associated
with terrorism (Arana & Leon, 2008; Taylor & Toohey, 2007),
crime
(Pizam & Mansfeld, 2006; Maser & Weiermair, 1998), natural
disas-
ters (Faulkner & Vikulov, 2001; Maser & Weiermair, 1998),
hygiene,
transportation, culture/language barriers, uncertainty related to
destination-specific laws and regulations (Maser & Weiermair,
1998), tourist type (Lepp & Gibson, 2003; Roehl & Fesenmaier,
1992), and previous travel experience (Boo & Gu, 2010; Lepp &
Gibson, 2003; Sӧnmez & Graefe, 1998). Previous literature
suggests

that a tourist's propensity to participate in risk-taking is related
to
personality attributes and personal characteristics (Carr, 2001;
Plog, 1974) and that a tourist's risk perception is uniquely for-
mulated for each situation (Roehl & Fesenmaier, 1992). These
personal characteristics include age and life stage (George,
2010;
Gibson, Attle & Yiannakis, 1998). A further personal
influencing
factor, which is important in terms of mega-events, is
nationality, as
tourists attending the event from different destinations interpret
and perceive the same risk differently (George & Swart, 2012;
Seddighi, Nuttall, & Theocharous, 2001).
Studies have also focused on the behavioral predictors of a
tourist's
perception of risk regarding the desired destination, these
include: past
travel experience (Gibson & Lepp, 2003), intention of visit
(George &
Swart, 2012), period of visit (George, 2003), and travel
information
search (Pizam et al., 2004). Tourists who have travelled abroad
are less
likely to perceive high levels of risk, as they are able to draw
perceptions from previous encounters as opposed to
inexperienced
travels who would perceive risk more highly (Lepp & Gibson,
2003;
Sӧnmez & Graefe, 1998). To favorably influence a tourist's
decision
regarding travel plans, it is essential to understand the nature of
these
potential risk incidents, to be able to predict the likelihood of

them
occurring and finally, project the prospective impacts on the
industry
and economy in an attempt to reduce them (George, 2010).
There is a paucity of research that has been conducted regarding
the
association that exists between a tourist's risk perception and
attending
a sporting event (Qi, Gibson, & Zhang, 2009). Within this
research, it
has been identified that the most influential risk factors
associated with
major sporting events are terrorism and crime (George, 2010).
Terrorists have found sport mega-events to be ideal as they can
target
participating athletes, spectators of the event and corporate
sponsors of
the event (Atkinson & Young, 2002). The more prestigious and
large
scale the sporting event, the greater the chance of a terrorist
attack;
thus, there is considerable concern for sport mega-events such
as the
Olympic Games and FIFA World Cup™ (Toohey, Taylor, &
Lee, 2003).
Since the 1960s, these mega-events have been prime targets for
terrorism given the advances in mass media coverage and
broadcasting
(Toohey et al., 2003). The first notorious instance of terrorism
at a sport
mega-event took place at the 1972 Munich Olympic Games
(Toohey
et al., 2003), with subsequent incidences at 1996 Atlanta Games
as well
as the 2000 Sydney Olympic Games. In a study conducted by

Neirotti
and Hilliard (2006) on the 2004 Athens Olympic Games, it was
suggested that tourists’ perceptions of risk influenced their
attendance
to the event, with a considerable number of tourists avoiding the
event
as a result of the safety and security concerns. In support of this
finding,
Kim and Chalip (2004) identified that a tourist's perception of
increased
risk surrounding safety and security could potentially influence
their
future decision-making to attend or travel to a mega-event. Thus
the
following hypothesis is proposed:
H4: Increased crime-risk perception is positively related to
tourists’
satisfaction at the 2014 FIFA World Cup™.
2.5. Satisfaction
Advances in international tourism have increased the
competition
between tourist destinations (Kozak & Rimmington, 2000; Yoon
&
Uysal, 2005). Furthermore, it has been suggested that tourist
satisfac-
tion regarding a destination may create repeat visitation (Kozak
&
Rimmington, 2000).
There are numerous models used to assess customer
satisfaction.
Yoon and Uysal (2005) identified three main common
components

within models. These components are adapted to analyze tourist
satisfaction. Expectation satisfaction occurs when tourists
develop
expectations about a destination before purchasing the trip
(Oliver,
1997). Therefore, actual performance is compared with prior
expecta-
tions. If actual performance trumps expectations, positive
disconfirma-
tion is attained. The tourist is, therefore, satisfied and is willing
to
revisit the destination. Should the opposite occur, expectations
exceed
actual performance, negative disconfirmation occurs. Should a
tourist
experience this, it is likely that alternative destinations will
prevail.
Simply put, expectation satisfaction is the result of a
comparison
between the tourist's prior image of the destination and what the
tourist actually sees, feels, and achieves at the destination
(Chon,
1989). Equity satisfaction, proposed by Oliver and Swan (1989),
compares the relationship between the tourist's costs and the
benefits
they anticipate. Costs may include price of transportation, the
time it
takes to arrive at the destination and general effort (Heskett,
Sasser, &
Schlesinger, 1997). Therefore, if a tourist perceives the benefits
thereof
to outweigh the costs, the destination is worthwhile. The third
component of satisfaction is relative satisfaction (LaTour &
Peat,

3
1979; Oliver & Swan, 1989). Standards operate as a reference
for
assessing the destination. Dissatisfaction occurs when a
destination
outperforms the assessed destination based on ideal standards
(Yoon &
Uysal, 2005).
H5: High levels of satisfaction at the 2014 FIFA World Cup™
positively
influences the likelihood of repeat visitation to Rio de Janeiro.
Satisfaction derived from a destination is likely to affect the
tourist's
post-visit behavior, which in turn is most likely to affect the
tourist's
likelihood of repeat visitation.
2.6. Repeat visitation
Repeat visitation is referred to as the decision made by a tourist
to
return to a certain destination after having visited it
(Rittichainuwat,
Qu, & Leong, 2003) and accounts for more than half of the total
arrivals
at many destinations (Wang, 2004). Sporting events are
particularly
useful vehicles to promote sustainable tourism, with the type of
event

determining the overall effect on destination branding (Taks,
Chalip,
Green, Kesenne, & Martyn, 2009). Tourists attending these
events not
only experience the original attractions of the destination but
are also
exposed to an additional desirable atmosphere (Gratton &
Taylor,
2000). Mega-events, given the international scope and excessive
media
exposure, tend to result in longer-term effects on the tourism
industry,
through repeat visitation (Desbordes & Richelieu, 2012; Taks et
al.,
2009).
Literature has investigated repeat visitation from three
perspectives.
First, Baloglu and Erickson (1998), and Niininen and Riley
(1998)
analyzed this construct surrounding destination loyalty, where
repeat
visitation is a critical factor. Second, Gitelson and Crompton
(1984);
Gyte and Phelps (1989); Oppermann (1996) and Niininen and
Riley
(1998) conducted research on the characterizations of the
division of
tourists that exercise repeat visitations to certain destinations
and how
a tourist's behavior and motivations are influenced by
familiarity.
Third, the influencing factors of repeat visitation by analyzing
the
impact that tourist characteristics, perception of destination
quality,

level of satisfaction and image have on a tourist's future travel
arrangements (Court & Lupton, 1997; Fakeye & Crompton,
1991;
Juaneda, 1996; Mazursky, 1989; Moutinho & Trimble, 1991).
Previous literature on this topic suggests that repeat visitation
can
materialize as a result of different tourists’ attitudes towards the
destination such as the feeling of inertia (Woodside &
McDonald,
1994): the attitude of indifference between similar destinations,
thus
resorting to a previous destination; risk of aversion/ avoiding
uncer-
tainty (Mitchell & Greatorex, 1993); a compensatory attitude
(where a
tourist returns to a destination as it satisfies their travel
motivations,
while avoiding any costs of substitution) (Jones, Mothersbaugh,
&
Beatty, 2002); an attitude of place attachment (where a tourist
decides
on the destination based on their emotional ties) (Gitelson &
Crompton,
1984; Lee & Allen, 1999); and, finally, the most prominent
attitude
given the ability to alter it is the utilitarian attitude established
in the
criteria of cost, quality and satisfaction (Baker & Crompton,
2000;
Appiah-Adu, Fyall, & Singh, 2000; Petrick, 2004; Gursoy &
McCleary,
2004).
A tourist's previous experience of the destination also
influences

repeat visitation (Bowen, 2001; Gyte & Phelps, 1989; Kozak,
2001;
Mazursky, 1989). Oppermann (1998) found that if a tourist is
satisfied
with their experience at a destination, then it is likely that, in
the future,
when making travel decisions, they may not even consider
additional
information relating to other destinations. Further insight into
the
characteristics of repeat visitors and the likelihood of returning
to a
destination, shows that the probability of returning to a
destination is
significantly greater with repeat visitors than tourists visiting
the
destination for the first time (Court & Lupton, 1997; Kozak &
Rimmington, 2000).
One would assume that perceptions of crime risk would
undoubt-
edly deter tourists from visiting a particular destination again.
However, academic literature is divided in this regard. A study
conducted by Sönmez and Graefe (1998) concluded that
perceptions
of crime risk affect travel decisions, especially with regards to
repeat
visitation. In addition, the researchers found that tourists’
perceptions
of crime risk have a greater effect on future travel decisions
than actual
safety and risk might have. George (2003), however,
investigated
tourists’ perceptions of crime risk while visiting Cape Town,
South

Africa, and found that 54% of tourists who encountered a crime
would
still return to the destination. Therefore, given the indecisive
literature,
this relationship between crime-risk perceptions and repeat
visitation
needs to be re-evaluated. The hypothesis testing this
relationship is
given below.
H6: Increased crime risk perception is positively related to a
tourist's
likelihood of return to Rio de Janeiro after the 2014 FIFA
World Cup™.
The link between destination image and behavioral intentions,
in
the form of word-of-mouth and repeat visitation, has been well
researched (Bigne et al., 2001; Fakeye & Crompton, 1991;
Wang &
Hsu, 2010). Court and Lupton (1997), as well as Yang et al.
(2009),
suggest that there is a direct relationship between destination
image
and repeat visitation. Castro, Amario and Ruiz (2007) claim that
repeat
visitation is both directly and indirectly affected by destination
image.
This literature leads to the following hypothesis:
H7: Destination image is positively related to tourists’
likelihood of
repeat visitation to Rio de Janeiro.
3. Conceptual model

After reviewing the literature, the following conceptual model
has
been constructed, in order to gain a sound understanding of the
factors
influencing likelihood of repeat visitation to Rio de Janeiro post
the
event, and word-of-mouth surrounding the host destination.
4. Methodology
Due to the quantitative nature of this study, this research took
the
form of a conclusive descriptive research design in order to test
the
influences of the independent variables of information search,
per-
ceived crime-risk, destination image and satisfaction on the
dependent
variable of repeat visitation. The study made use of a single
cross-
sectional design. This involved the researchers collecting
information
from one chosen sample population only once (Malhotra, 2010).
This
research process was conducted through event-intercept,
personal face-
to-face interviews with the targeted respondents.
The target population for this research comprised international
tourists situated in Rio de Janeiro attending the 2014 FIFA
World Cup™
from 12 June 2014 to 13 July 2014.
Given the international attraction and nature of the study
ultimately
measuring the likelihood of repeat visitation to Rio de Janeiro,

the
researchers restricted the target population to international
sports
tourists. For the purposes of this research, international sports
tourists
refer to those tourists travelling outside the boundaries of their
residential country to attend this event.
Prior to data collection in Rio de Janeiro, a pre-test was carried
out
in South Africa. The pre-test process consisted of two stages.
First, the
questionnaire was tested on a non-probability convenience
sample
attending a Stormers vs. Force Super Rugby (an ‘international
domestic’
tournament featuring the strongest teams in Australia, New
Zealand
and South Africa) match on 17 May 2014 at the Newlands
Rugby
Stadium in Cape Town. This event was chosen as these
attendees
resemble the closest possible similarity to those of the FIFA
World Cup™
4
within a local context of the research. Second, in order to test
the
translated versions of the questionnaire (Portuguese, Italian,
French,

German, Latin American Spanish and Korean), language
teachers
known to the researchers were approached to ensure that the
results
obtained through the translated versions were consistent with
those of
the English questionnaire in order to eliminate any translation
bias.
A non-probability sampling technique was used since there was
no
accurate sampling frame available of international tourists
attending
the 2014 FIFA World Cup™ in Brazil, specifically in Rio de
Janeiro.
Convenience sampling was used to gather the data, as this is the
most
effective method when large quantities of completed
questionnaires are
required, with cost constraints (Malhotra, 2010). Due to the
nature of
spectator events, interviews were conducted as quickly and
efficiently
as possible. In order to account for sampling frame error,
potential
respondents were screened before commencing the
questionnaire to
ensure that they fit the targeted population.
The data collection process took place at the FIFA Fan Fest on
Copacabana Beach in Rio de Janeiro during the period between
17 June
and 8 July 2014. English questionnaires were issued to the
respondents
using iSurvey software on Apple iPod touch devices, thus
enabling the

automation of the process. Other language questionnaires were
admi-
nistered in hard copy when respondents requested a version of
the
questionnaire in their home language. The researchers of this
study
were able to recover 270 usable surveys out of a targeted
sample size of
300. This is in keeping with previous studies (George & Swart,
2012;
Gibson & Lepp, 2003; Taylor & Toohey, 2007) in order to
ensure an
accurate representation of the population who attended the 2014
FIFA
World Cup™.
The questionnaire consisted of a filter question to ensure that
only
international tourists completed the questionnaire. The
remainder of
the questionnaire comprised the following sections: (1)
Satisfaction; (2)
Crime-risk perception; (3) Destination Image; (4) Repeat
visitation; and
(5) Information search. Following this, respondents were asked
whether
they had been to Rio de Janeiro previously, and, if so, how
many times.
The respondents were also asked if they had attended a FIFA
World
Cup™ before and how long they had been in Rio de Janeiro
during this
visit. The last section of the questionnaire consisted of
demographic
questions used to complete the descriptive statistics regarding
the

sample population. The questionnaire comprised fixed-
alternative
questions and respondents chose from a set of predetermined
answers.
This was intended so that respondents required only a short
period of
time and little effort to complete the questionnaire, while still
providing
accurate responses.
Once the raw data was collected, the data preparation process
was
conducted where the data was cleaned and coded by the
researchers in
Microsoft Excel. This organized data was then exported into the
statistical analysis programs SPSS and Smart PLS. Smart PLS
was used
to validate the constructed conceptual model (Fig. 1) by
performing
structural equation modeling and path analysis on the
predetermined
hypotheses. The structural equation modeling approach also
allowed
testing for expected mediating and moderating relationships
between
constructs. SPSS was used to determine the descriptive and
additional
statistics for analysis.
5. Findings
5.1. Test for normality
A number of the statistical techniques used in this study assume
normality of the data. An overall test for normality was thus

conducted
(see Table A1, Appendix A). The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was
used as
the sample was greater than 50 respondents. The significant
levels for
all items were below .05 and, therefore, we reject the null
hypothesis
and concluded that the data was not normally distributed. Given
the
rejection, we tested for normality in relation to the skewness
within a
range of (−1 and 1) and kurtosis within a range of (−1.5 and
1.5) (see
Table A2, Appendix A). In this case, all the items in the scale
were
normally distributed with the exception of items: Satisfaction 2
and
Crime-risk Perception 6, which were approached with caution.
5.2. Descriptive statistics
The sample of 270 study respondents consisted of 77% male and
23% female. The majority of respondents recruited were male
given the
fact that tourists travelling to Brazil for the World Cup were
predomi-
nantly men. Of the total number of respondents, 56% were
between the
age of 21 and 30, 28% were between 31 and 40, 11% were
between 41
and 50, 3% were older than 51 years of age, and 2% were below
the age
of 20. These demographic statistics are in line with previous
studies
conducted by George and Swart (2012), as well as Kim and
Chalip

(2004). The respondents came from 29 different countries; with
almost
a quarter (22.6%) originating from the United Kingdom, 21.1%
from
the United States of America, 10% from Australia, 6.7% from
Germany,
4.1% from Chile, 4.1% from France, 4.1% from Mexico, 3.7%
from
Canada, 2.2% from Spain and 2.6% from South Africa. These
results are
fairly consistent with previous research conducted by South
African
Tourism (2011) at the 2010 FIFA World Cup™.
Of these respondents, 20.4% had previously been to Rio de
Janeiro,
with 7.4% of these return visitors having travelled to this
destination
once before, 5.2% twice, 4.4% three times, and 3.7% four or
more
times. Eighty per cent of respondents were first-time tourists to
the
destination. This finding is consistent with the FIFA World
Cup™ Global
Fans Survey, and it is therefore assumed that tourists traveling
to FIFA
World Cups have little experience within the host destinations
(Gabara,
2010). Twenty-six per cent of the respondents had previously
attended
a FIFA World Cup™ while, the majority (74%) of the study
respondents
were experiencing the event for the first time. Of those who had
been to
a FIFA World Cup™, 42.9% had attended the World Cup in
Germany,

40% the World Cup in South Africa, 25.7% the World Cup in
the USA,
11.4% the World Cup in Japan, 2.8% the World Cup in Italy,
and 1.4%
the World Cup in Argentina and Mexico respectively.
The duration that the sample respondents had been in Rio de
Janeiro varied with 5.6% having been there for a day, 45.8%
having
been there for between 2 and 5 days, 18.9% between 6 and 9
days,
15.6% between 10 and 13 days and 13.8% had been there for
over two
weeks. Given the respondents’ duration of time in Rio de
Janeiro,
82.6% had not experienced crime with 17.4% experiencing
crime
during this period.
This research aims to determine the impact that information
search,
crime-risk perception, destination image and satisfaction have
on a
tourist's repeat visitation to the host destination of Rio de
Janeiro.
Therefore, these factors make up the constructs of the study.
As seen in Table 1, the mean for information search, crime-risk
perception, destination image, Satisfaction and Repeat visitation
are
3.6, 3.68, 3.00, 3.96 and 1.97 and the standard deviations .84,
.76, .64,
.67 and .80 respectively. This implies that on average,
respondents were
slightly above neutral, as to whether they made use of
InformationFig. 1. Proposed structural model.

5
search prior to their trip, suggesting that on average,
respondents were
likely to make use of information search. In terms of crime-risk
perception, on average, respondents felt average to fairly safe
while
in Rio de Janeiro for the World Cup. Furthermore, on average,
respondents had a neutral destination image of Rio de Janeiro,
which
includes infrastructure, accommodation, hygiene and cleanliness
and
expense. In relation to satisfaction, respondents were on
average
satisfied with the host destination and felt it was worth their
while.
Lastly, on average, respondents were disinclined to return to
Rio de
Janeiro. This may, however, be due to the multidimensional
scale used
to measure this construct. Respondents were asked whether they
would
return to Rio de Janeiro, as well as whether crime would deter
them
from returning, given this, the mean may be negatively skewed
and
should be interpreted with caution.
5.3. Path modeling statistics

This section discusses the results obtained from the PLS output,
including the measurement model and then the structural model.
5.3.1. Measurement model
In relation to the measurement model, the reliability and
validity
were measured. First, the reliability of the model was analyzed
through
internal consistency reliability and indicator reliability.
Following this,
the validity was analyzed through convergent and discriminant
valid-
ity.
5.3.1.1. Reliability. Internal consistency reliability was used to
assess
the reliability of the summated scale and the items measuring it,
where
a Cronbach alpha of greater than .6 and a composite reliability
of
greater than .7 indicate satisfactory reliability (Malhotra, 2010).
Therefore, all the latent constructs within this model exhibit
internal
consistency reliability, except information search, as the
Cronbach
alpha falls below the benchmark (see Table 2). However,
information
search exhibits satisfactory composite reliability and is
approaching
internal consistency with a Cronbach alpha of .59. In order to
obtain
this Cronbach alpha score, the item measuring the use of the
foreign
office website as a form of Information search, was deleted, as
the

Cronbach alpha, when all four items were included, was only
.46.
In relation to repeat visitation, the item measuring the return for
the
tourists to the 2016 Olympic Games was deleted, due to the fact
that the
Cronbach alpha prior was .49. The indicator reliability of the
model
assesses the item loadings, which are sufficiently reliable when
greater
than .7. All the items in the model loaded on the corresponding
latent
variables and most of these loadings, exceeded the benchmark
except
for Information Search item 2 and Destination Image item 4.
Nonetheless, these items were retained as Information search 2
(.55)
exceeds the minimal threshold of .5 and Destination Image 4
(.34) was
approaching this acceptable threshold. As a result of this
output, the
scales used to measure the latent constructs within the model
were
deemed reliable.
5.3.1.2. Validity. To assess the robustness of fit of the
measurement
model, both convergent validity and discriminant validity were
performed. For convergent validity, all items loaded
significantly at
the 5% significance level on the latent constructs and every
latent
constructs exhibited an AVE greater than the .5 threshold as
seen in

Table 2 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). In measuring the
discriminant
validity the Fornell-Larcker criterion was used. In order for the
model
to exhibit discriminant validity the squared root of the AVE of a
latent
variable should be higher than the correlations between the
latent
variable itself and the other latent variable constructs within the
model.
In addition to this, discriminant validity was confirmed by
ensuring that
the factor loadings of the indicators on their assigned latent
variables
were higher than the cross loadings on all the other latent
variables. As
seen in Table 3, the square root AVEs were significantly greater
than the
correlations between the other latent variables. Furthermore, all
the
loadings of the indicators on their assigned latent variables
exceeded
the cross loadings on the other latent variables and the Fornell-
Larcker
criterion was sufficiently met. The proposed model is, therefore,
deemed valid and the structural model can be examined.
5.3.2. Structural model
As illustrated in Fig. 2, the model explains 24% of the variation
that
exists within the repeat visitation construct. This implies that
the
variance explained by the model is moderate (Chin, 1998). In
addition
to this, all the hypothesized paths were found to be significant

at a 5%
significance level with a t-statistic greater than 1.96.
First, the model suggests that there is a significant negative
relationship between Information search and Destination image,
how-
ever this contradicts H1, which suggests a positive relationship
between
information search and destination image. Second, there is a
significant
positive relationship between destination image and crime-risk
percep-
tion, validating H2. Third, there is a significant positive
relationship
between destination image and satisfaction, which validates H3.
Following this, there is a significant positive relationship
between
crime-risk perception and satisfaction, validating H4. Fourth,
there is a
significant positive relationship between satisfaction and repeat
visita-
tion, validating H5. Fifth, within the model there is also a
significant
positive relationship between crime-risk perception and repeat
visita-
tion, validating H6. Finally, it was found that there was a
significant
positive relationship between destination image and repeat
visitation,
validating H7.
In addition to this, given that the beta value of the relationship
between crime-risk perception and repeat visitation decreases
from
.392 to .165 when satisfaction is included in the model and that
the

relationships between crime-risk perception and satisfaction, as
well as
the relationship between satisfaction and repeat visitation are
signifi-
cant, it is concluded that satisfaction partially mediates the
relationship
between crime-risk perception and repeat visitation. The effect
size of
this mediation (.12), however, is weak.
Satisfaction also partially mediates the relationship between
desti-
nation image and repeat visitation as the beta value of the
relationship
between destination image and repeat visitation decreases from
.127 to
.097 when satisfaction is included in the model. This can be
concluded
as the relationships between destination image and satisfaction,
as well
as satisfaction and repeat visitation, are significant. The effect
size of
this mediation of .10 is, however, weak.
Crime-risk perception also partially mediates the relationship
Table 1
Descriptive statistics for the summated constructs.
N Mean Std. Deviation
Information search
Crime-risk-
perception
270

270
3.60
3.68
.84
.76
Destination image
Satisfaction
270
270
3.00
3.96
.64
.67
Repeat visitation 270 1.97 .80
Table 2
Reliability indicators for measurement model.
Latent construct AVE Composite Reliability Cronbach's Alpha
Crime-risk perception 0,57 0,89 0,85
Destination image 0,54 0,81 0,70
Information search 0,55 0,78 0,59
Repeat visitation 0,73 0,84 0,63
Satisfaction 0,60 0,82 0,66

6
between destination image and satisfaction, as when crime-risk
percep-
tion is included in the model, the beta value of this relationship
decreases from .302 to .101, while the relationships between
destina-
tion image and crime-risk perception, as well as the between
crime-risk
perception and satisfaction, are both significant. The effect size
of this
mediation of .159 is moderate.
6. Discussion
Overall, the results of the conceptual model show that the more
information search conducted by tourists prior to their travels to
Rio de
Janeiro for the 2014 FIFA World Cup™, the less favorable their
destination image. In contrast to this, literature suggests tourists
conduct information search to form favorable perceptions of
destina-
tions and to ultimately reduce perceived risk (Fodness &
Murray, 1999).
However, given the mass protests that took place prior to the
World
Cup, which were the largest and most significant protests in
Brazil for a
generation, shaking the country's entire political system, the
informa-
tion search conducted by tourists was likely to be negatively
influenced
by the mass media coverage of these violent events, creating an

unfavorable image of Rio de Janeiro (Saad-Filho, 2013).
It was also found that the more favorable the destination image
of
Rio de Janeiro, the more satisfied the tourists were with their
travels to
the host destination. This relationship is well supported by
previous
research conducted by Castro, Amario and Ruiz (2007), Court
and
Lupton (1997), as well as Yang et al. (2009) all reporting a
positive
relationship between destination image and satisfaction. In
relation to
this, this research concludes that those tourists with a more
favorable
destination image felt safer within Rio de Janeiro. It was also
found that
the more favorable the destination image, the more likely they
are to
return to the host destination. Lepp and Gibson (2003) support
this
finding as they concluded that the safer a tourist feels, the more
favorable their image of the destination, which, in turn, made
them feel
even safer, leading to positive touristic behavior of repeat
visitation.
The positive relationship between destination image and repeat
visita-
tion supports previous studies by Fakeye and Crompton (1992),
Court
and Lupton (1997) as well as Castro, Amario and Ruiz (2007).
Unsurprisingly, given the heavy security presence in stadium
precincts,
tourists felt safer at the event venues such as the stadiums and

fan parks
and general event atmosphere, as opposed to when in general
public
areas in the day, within Rio de Janeiro at night, and when using
public
transport (Table A3, Appendix A).
Furthermore, it was found that the tourists who perceived Rio
de
Janeiro to be safer were more satisfied with their decision to
travel to
the host destination. This finding is in line with extensive
mega-event
research, which finds a significant relationship between crime-
risk
perception indicating that a more positive perception of crime
increases
satisfaction levels drastically (Boo & Gu, 2010; George, Swart,
&
Jenkins, 2013). This study also found that those tourists who
felt safer
within the host city during this event, exhibited a greater
intention to
return to the destination. This relationship is endorsed by
previous
mega-event research (Boo & Gu, 2010; George et al., 2013;
George,
2010; Qi et al., 2009).
The final core relationship finding of this study indicates that
the
more satisfied tourists were during their stay in Rio de Janeiro
during
the 2014 FIFA World Cup™, the stronger their intention of
returning to
this destination. This finding is also in line with previous

literature
surrounding mega-events, which illustrate a positive
relationship
between satisfaction and repeat visitation, as the increased
satisfaction
instils a greater desire to re-experience these satisfying
occasions
(Baker & Crompton, 2000; Boo & Gu, 2010; George & Swart,
2012,
George et al., 2013).
In addition to the conceptual model, it was found that gender
does
not influence the crime-risk perception of tourists (Table A4, at
a p-
value of .112 (p > .05)), supporting earlier studies by Sӧnmez
and
Graefe (1998), George (2003) and Lepp and Gibson (2003).
Previous
FIFA World Cup™ attendance, however, did influence a
tourist's crime-
risk perception, with those who had previously attended feeling
more
unsafe (Table A5, at a p-value of .029 (p < .05)). A possible
explanation
for this is that 42.9% of the 25.9% of tourists who had
previously
attended a World Cup, attended the World Cup in Germany,
which is
perceived to be safer than Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, while those
who had
not attended had no point of reference of crime at an event of
this
nature. It was also found that previous experience within Rio de
Janeiro
had no influence on the tourist’s information search. It can be

concluded that both first-time tourists to the host destination, as
well
Table 3
Latent variable cross correlation matrix.
Crime-risk perception Destination image Information search
Repeat visitation Satisfaction
Crime-risk perception .75 0 0 0 0
Destination image 0,4595 .74 0 0 0
Information search −0,1193 −0,2093 .74 0 0
Repeat visitation 0,386 0,2801 −0,1077 .85 0
Satisfaction 0,5329 0,3242 0,0201 0,4502 .77
Fig. 2. Structural model.
7
as repeat visitors, did a fair amount of information search prior
to their
travels (Table A6, at a p-value of .695 (p > .05)). This can be
explained
through the hosting of the 2014 FIFA World Cup™ within this
city, thus
even those who had previously experienced Rio de Janeiro did
extensive information search surrounding the event within the
city.
While Teigen, Brun, and Slovic (1988) as well as Reisinger and
Mavondo (2006) suggest that international tourists’ perceptions

of
crime risk vary between different nationalities, this study found
that
there was no difference between different nationality's crime-
risk
perceptions (p-value of .242 (p > .05) in Table A7, Appendix A)
albeit
the unequal quota of nationalities in the study.
7. Conclusion
This research aimed to test the influence of an information
search,
destination image and perceived crime risk on satisfaction, and
ultimately the likelihood of repeat visitation to Rio de Janeiro
after
attending the 2014 FIFA World Cup™ in the city. This study
adds to
previous literature surrounding tourists’ perceptions of crime
risk and
their future travel intentions during a sporting mega-event by
devel-
oping a conceptual model (Fig. 1), which included information
search
and destination image as constructs to improve the explanation
of
variance in repeat visitation. This conceptual model proved to
be both
reliable and valid with 24% variance explained.
Overall, the results of the conceptual model showed that the
more
information search conducted by tourists prior to their travels to
Rio de
Janeiro for the 2014 FIFA World Cup™, the less favorable was
their

destination image. This could have been influenced by the
significant
protests in the lead-up to the event, creating an unfavorable
image of
Rio de Janeiro. Additionally, the more favorable the destination
image
of Rio de Janeiro, the more satisfied were the tourists with their
travels
to the host destination and the more likely they are to return to
the host
destination. This study also concludes that those tourists who
felt safer
within the host city during this event, exhibited a greater
intention to
return to the destination.
Although gender does not influence the crime-risk perception of
tourists, previous FIFA World Cup™ attendance did influence a
tourist's
crime-risk perception, with those who had previously attended
feeling
more unsafe possibly as a result of a 'safer' World Cup
experience in
Germany. However, previous visitation to Rio de Janeiro had no
influence on the tourists’ information search, which is likely
linked to
the hosting of the mega-event itself as opposed to experience
with the
destination. Finally, it was found that nationality did not
influence a
tourist's crime-risk perception; given the unequal quota of
nationalities,
however, this finding cannot be accurately concluded.
8. Managerial implications

This study's main contribution to the sport tourism literature is
the
formation of a valid model, illustrating that a positive
destination image
and a perception of safety is likely to create repeat visitation
through
heightened satisfaction. The formation of this destination image
and
crime-risk perception is influenced by the tourist's information
search.
Hence, this study's main suggestion is that destination
marketers must
ensure that information available to tourists through various
media
forms is positive and accurate.
This research suggests that the destination marketer's role is to
attract potential first-time tourists to Rio de Janeiro. This is
done by the
creation and marketing of a positive destination image through
information sources and by allaying tourists’ concerns about
safety.
Destination marketers do little to directly influence repeat
visitation,
since satisfaction and crime-risk perception are positively
related to
repeat visitation. Hence, the focus of destination marketers
should be to
attract first-time tourists to Rio de Janeiro. Mega-events, such
as the
2014 FIFA World Cup™, are useful tools in attracting first-time
visitors.
This is illustrated by the fact that 80% of respondents during
the 2014
FIFA World Cup™ had never previously been to Rio de Janeiro.

Destination marketers, in conjunction with security officials,
should
aim to identify crime-risk factors associated with Rio de Janeiro
in
order to better understand destination image in terms of crime
risk and
safety. As tourists felt safer when at the 2014 FIFA World
Cup™ venues,
perceptions of safety in the host city need more attention than
perceptions of safety at the event specifically. Destination
specific
measures, such as visible policing and surveillance cameras
beyond
the stadium precincts, should be strictly enforced by officials
and
communicated effectively by destination marketers.
9. Limitations
This study's primary limitation is that the model constructed,
explains only 24% of the variance within the model. This means
that
there are additional factors that influence a tourist's likelihood
of repeat
visitation that were not included in this study's model.
Secondary to this, the sample size of 270 is small in comparison
to
the 1 million foreign tourists who visited Brazil during the 2014
FIFA
World Cup™ (Marcopoto, 2014). This was due to financial,
time and
human resource constraints. Although this sample size is an
improve-
ment from studies highlighted previously, it may not be entirely

representative of the tourist population. In order for more
accurate
results and possibly a better explanation of the variation in
repeat
visitation, a more robust sample is required.
This study focused on foreign tourists visiting Rio de Janeiro to
attend the FIFA World Cup™. However, these tourists very
likely visited
other cities in Brazil as well. The differences in social and
geographic
factors between cities, especially São Paolo and Rio de Janeiro
are
underscored (Arantes & Tanaka, 2014). Many respondents
stated how
different Rio de Janeiro was compared to other cities, such as
São
Paolo, with regards to their perceptions of crime risk. Hence,
tourists
who had travelled to São Paulo and experienced crime, could
have
allowed this experience to subconsciously influence their
perceptions of
Rio de Janeiro.
Based on the findings of the study, managerial implications and
the
study's limitations, further research is needed to discover more
about
interactions within the constructed model as well as to
overcome some
of the limitations experienced within this study.
10. Future research
One possible research avenue could be to further explore the

effect
of event image on destination image and vice versa. This inter-
relationship needs to be scrutinized within the theoretical
framework,
so as to determine their mutual dependence and their impact on
tourist
behavior. Limited research into image transfer has been
conducted in
relation to sports mega-events (Kaplanidou & Vogt, 2007). For
success-
ful destination and event marketing, marketers need to better
under-
stand how event images impact upon the image of the
destination.
In order to gain a better understanding of the repeat-visitation
construct, it may be valuable to adapt it to explore repeat
visitation to
the World Cup and not necessarily to the destination. In
adapting the
repeat-visitation construct, destination marketers can determine
where
a tourist's behavioral intentions lie and, therefore, how to best
persuade
the tourist to visit the destination again rather than following
the World
Cup.
An additional construct exploring safety measures implemented
at
sporting mega-events, and the effect thereof, could assist in
explaining
more of the variance within the repeat visitation construct,
especially in
relation to safety at event venues versus the destination itself.

8
Appendix A. Statistical tables
See Tables A1–A7.
Table A1
Test for normality: Kolmogorov-Smirnov.
Kolmogorov-Smirnova
Statistic Sig.
Satisfaction
How does Rio de Janeiro, as a tourist destination, rate compared
to what you expected?
.269 .000
Was this visit worth your time and effort? .271 .000
How would you rate Rio de Janeiro as a holiday destination
compared to similar places you have
visited|?
Crime Risk Perception
.279 .000
Perceive Rio de Janeiro to be .211 .000
Feel in public (i.e. restaurants and shopping malls) in Rio de
Janeiro during the day .262 .000

Feel in public in Rio de Janeiro at night .192 .000
The event atmosphere in Rio de Janeiro makes you feel .248
.000
Feel using public transport in Rio de Janeiro .198 .000
Feel when at 2014 FIFA World Cup venues (i.e. stadiums, fan
parks)
Destination Image
.293 .000
Rio de Janeiro has quality infrastructure (roads & airports) .244
.000
Rio de Janeiro has suitable accommodation .246 .000
Rio de Janeiro has a good standard of hygiene and cleanliness
.210 .000
Rio de Janeiro is not an expensive place to visit .242 .000
Repeat Visitation
I do not plan to return to Rio de Janeiro in the future .258 .000
I will not return to Rio de Janeiro for the 2016 Olympics .257
.000
I will not return to Rio de Janeiro for fear of crime .264 .000
Information Search
I made use of news reports and media before arriving in Rio de
Janeiro .245 .000
I made use of the official FIFA website before arriving in Rio
de Janeiro .270 .000
I spoke to friends and family about Rio de Janeiro .255 .000
I made use of the foreign office website before arriving in Rio
de Janeiro .250 .000
Table A2
Test for normality.
Mean Standard Deviation Skewness Kurtosis

Satisfaction
How does Rio de Janerio, as a tourist destination, rate compared
to what you expected?
Was the visit worth your time and effort?
How would you rate Rio de Janerio as a holiday destination
compared to similar places you have visited?
3.86
4.25
3.78
.831
.921
.837
-.403
-1.461
-.442
-.328
2.253
-.067
Crime Risk Perception
Perceived Rio de Janerio to be
Feel safe in public (i.e. restaurants and shopping malls) in Rio
de Janerio during the day
Feel safe in public in Rio de Janerio at night
The event atmosphere in Rio de Janerio makes you feel
Feel using public transport in Rio de Janerio
Feel when at 2014 FIFA World Cup Venues (i.e. stadiums and

fan parks)
3.24
4.01
3.10
3.93
3.50
4.26
1.073
.860
1.144
.956
1.086
.945
-.319
-.693
-.107
-.786
-.421
-1.399
-.545
.135
-.873
.340
-.360
1.699
Destination image
Rio de Janerio has quality infrastructure (roads and airports)
Rio de Janerio has quality has suitable accommodation
Rio de Janerio has a good standard of hygiene and cleanliness

2.68
3.36
2.58
1.138
.879
1.066
.162
-.495
.166
-1.127
.123
-.878
Information search
I made use of news reports and media before arriving in Rio de
Janerio
I made use of the official FIFA website before arriving in Rio
de Janerio
I spoke to family and friends about Rio de Janerio
I made use of the foreign office website before arriving in Rio
de Janerio
3.51
3.33
3.97
2.19
1.120
1.273
1.025
1.162

-.509
-.428
-.990
.728
-.524
-1.01
.558
-.525
Repeat Visitation
I do not plan to visit Rio de Janerio in the future
I will not return to Rio de Janerio for the 2016 Olympics
I will not return to Rio de Janerio for fear of crime
3.82
2.7
1.76
1.049
1.23
.807
−.682
.529
.892
-.331
-.728
.275
9

References
Alhemoud, A., & Armstrong, E. (1996). Image of tourism
attraction in Kuwait. Journal of
Travel Research, 34(4), 46–80.
Appiah-Adu, K., Fyall, A., & Singh, S. (2000). Marketing
culture and customer retention in
the tourism industry. Service Industries Journal, 20(2), 95–113.
Arana, J., & Leon, C. (2008). The impact of terrorism on
tourism demand. Annals of
Tourism Research, 35(2), 299–315.
Table A3
Descriptive statistics of crime-risk perception items.
N Minimum (Very Unsafe) Maximum (Very Safe) Mean Std.
Deviation
Perceive Rio de Janeiro to be 270 1 5 3.24 1.073
Feel in public (i.e. restaurants and shopping malls) in Rio de
Janeiro during the day 270 1 5 4.01 .860
Feel in public in Rio de Janeiro at night 270 1 5 3.10 1.144
The event atmosphere in Rio de Janeiro makes you feel 270 1 5
3.93 .956
Feel using public transport in Rio de Janeiro 270 1 5 3.50 1.086
Feel when at 2014 FIFA World Cup venues (i.e. stadiums, fan
parks) 270 1 5 4.26 .945
Table A4
Independent sample t-test for gender.

Levene's Test for Equality of
Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Crime risk
perception
Equal variances
assumed
1.647 .200 1.594 268 .112 .175 .110 −.041 .392
Equal variances not
assumed
1.448 87.977 .151 .175 .121 −.065 .416
Table A5
Independent sample t-test for previous World Cup attendance.

Variances
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
Difference
Lower Upper
Crime
risk
perception
Equal variances
assumed
2.947 .087 −2.192 268 .029 −.230 .105 −.437 −.023
Equal variances not
assumed
−2.067 109.241 .041 −.230 .111 −.451 −.010
Table A6
Independent sample t-test for previous experience.

Variances
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
Difference
Lower Upper
Information search Equal variances
assumed
.546 .461 .393 268 .695 .042 .107 −.169 .254
Equal variances not
assumed
.387 82.351 .699 .042 .109 −.174 .259
Table A7
ANOVA of nationality and crime-risk perception.
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between groups 18.948 28 .677 1.189 .242
Within groups 137.143 241 .569
Total 156.091 269

10
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-571X(16)30168-8/sbref1
Arantes, M., & Tanaka, G. (2014). The case of São Paulo,
Brazil. University of São Paulo,
1–40.
Atkinson, M., & Young, K. (2002). Terror games: Media
treatment of security issues at the
2002 Winter Olympic Games. Olympika: The International
Journal of Olympic Studies,
11(1), 53–78.
Baker, D., & Crompton, J. (2000). Quality, satisfaction and
behavioral intentions. Annals
of Tourism Research, 27(3), 785–804.
Baloglu, S., & Erickson, R. (1998). Destination loyalty and
switching behavior of
travellers: A Markov analysis. Tourism Analysis, 2(1), 119–
127.
Baloglu, S., & McClearly, K. (1999). A model of destination
image formation. Annals of

Barchfield, J. (2013). Confederation Cup protests target match
in Rio [Online]. Available:
⟨ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/30/confederation-
cup-protests_n_
3526184.html⟩ (accessed 16.03.14).
Barker, M., Page, S., & Meyer, D. (2002). Modeling tourism
crime: The 2000 America's
Cup. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(2), 762–782.
Barker, M., Page, S., & Meyer, D. (2003). Urban visitor
perceptions of safety during a
special event. Journal of Travel Research, 41(4), 355–361.
Beatty, S., & Smith, S. (1987). External search effort: An
Investigation across several
product categories. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(1), 83–
95.
Bieger, T., & Laesser, C. (2004). Information sources for travel
decisions: Towards a
source process model. Journal of Travel Research, 42(1), 357–
371.
Bigne, J., Sánchez, M., & Sánchez, J. (2001). Tourism image,
evaluation variables and
after purchase behaviour: Interrelationship. Tourism
Management, 22(6), 607–616.
Boakye, K. (2010). Studying tourists' suitability as crime
targets. Annals of Tourism
Research, 37(3), 727–743.
Boo, S., & Gu, H. (2010). Risk perception of mega-events.
Journal of Sport & Tourism,

15(2), 139–161.
Bowen, D. (2001). Antecedents of consumer satisfaction and
dissatisfaction on long-haul
inclusive tours: A reality check on theoretical considerations.
Tourism Management,
22(1), 49–61.
Buhalis, D., & Law, R. (2008). Progress in information
technology and tourism
management: 20 years on and 10 years after the Internet: The
state of eTourism
research. Tourism Management, 29(4), 609–623.
Burgess, J. A. (1978). Image and Identity. Occasional Papers in
Geography. No. 23.
University of Hull Publications.
Cadotte, E., Woodruff, R., & Jenkins, R. (1987). Expectations
and norms in models of
consumer satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(1),
305–314.
Cai, L. (2002). Cooperative branding for rural destinations.
Annals of Tourism Research,
29(3), 720–742.
Carr, N. (2001). An exploratory study of gendered differences
in young tourists'
perceptions of danger within London. Tourism Management,
22(1), 565–570.
Castro, C., Armario, E., & Ruiz, D. M. (2007). The influence of
market heterogeneity on
the relationship between a destination's image and tourists'
future behavior. Tourism

Management, 28(1), 175–187.
Chen, C., & Tsai, D. (2007). How destination image and
evaluative factors affect
behavioral intentions?. Tourism Management, 28(1), 1115–
1122.
Chesney-Lind, M., & Lind, I. (1986). Visitors as victims:
Crimes against tourists in Hawaii.
Annals of Tourism Research, 13(1), 167–191.
Chin, W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural
equation modeling.
Modern Methods for Business Research, 29(2), 295–336.
Chon, K. (1989). Understanding recreational travelers'
motivation, attitude and
satisfaction. The Tourist Review, 44(1), 3–7.
Cornelissen, S., & Swart, K. (2006). The 2010 World Cup as a
political construct: The
challenge of making good on an African promise. Sociological
Review, 54(1), 108–123.
Court, B., & Lupton, R. (1997). Customer portfolio
development modeling destination
adopters, inactives and rejecters. Journal of Travel Research,
36(1), 35–43.
Deng, Q., & Li, M. (2013). A model of event-destination image
transfer. Journal of Travel
Research, 53(1), 69–82.
Desbordes, M., & Richelieu, A. (Eds.). (2012). Global sport
marketing: Contemporary
issues and practice., Oxfordshire: Routledge.

Dimanche, F., & Leptic, A. (1999). New Orleans tourism and
crime: A case study. Journal
of Travel Research, 38(1), 19–23.
Donaldson, R., & Ferreira, S. (2007). Crime, perceptions and
touristic decision-making:
Some empirical evidence and prospects for the 2010 World Cup.
South African Journal
of Political Studies, 34(3), 353–371.
Dowling, G., & Staelin, R. (1994). A model of perceived risk
and intended risk-handling
activity. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 119–134.
Fakeye, P., & Crompton, J. (1991). Image differences between
prospective, first-time, and
repeat visitors to the lower Rio Grande Valley. Journal of
Travel Research, 21(1),
10–16.
Fakeye, P., & Crompton, J. (1992). Importance of socialization
to repeat visitation. Annals
of Tourism Research, 19(1), 364–367.
Faulkner, B., & Vikulov, S. (2001). Katherine, washed out one
day, back on track the next:
A post-mortem of a tourism disaster. Tourism Management,
22(1), 331–344.
Fodness, D., & Murray, B. (1999). A model of tourist
information search behavior. Journal
of Travel Research, 37(3), 220–230.
Fornell, C., & Larker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural
equation models with

unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of
Marketing Research, 18(1),
39–50.
Fujii, E., & Mak, J. (1980). Tourism and crime: Implications for
regional development
policy. Regional Studies, 14(1), 27–36.
Gabara, R. (2010). World Cup legacy: World Cup surveys
highlight success [Online].
Available: ⟨ http://www.southafrica.info/2010/fifa-
surveys.htm#.V5EdJWi7ikr⟩
(accessed 21.07.16).
Gammon, S., & Robinson, T. (2003). Sports tourism: A
conceptual framework. Journal of
Sport Tourism, 8(1), 21–26.
George, R. (2003). Tourists' perceptions of safety and security
while visiting Cape Town.
Tourism Management, 24(5), 575–585.
George, R. (2010). Visitor perceptions of crime-safety and
attitudes towards risk: The case
of Table Mountain National Park, Cape Town. Tourism
Management, 31(6), 806–815.
George, R., & Swart, K. (2012). International tourists'
perceptions of crime-risk and their
future travel intentions during the 2010 FIFA World Cup ™ in
South Africa. Journal of
Sport & Tourism, 17(3), 201–223.
George, R., Swart, K., & Jenkins, D. W. (2013). Harnessing the
power of football: Safety-

risk perceptions of sport tourists at the 2013 FIFA
Confederations Cup™ in Brazil.
Journal of Sport & Tourism, 18(4), 241–263.
Getz, D. (2008). Event tourism: Definition, evolution and
research. Tourism Management,
29(3), 403–428.
Gibson, H. (2010). Active sport tourism: Who participates?
Journal of Leisure Studies,
17(2), 155–170.
Gibson, H., Attle, S., & Yiannakis, A. (1998). Segmenting the
sport tourist market: A
lifespan perspective. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 4(1), 52–
64.
Gibson, H., & Lepp, A. (2003). Tourist roles, perceived risk and
international tourism.
Gitelson, R., & Crompton, J. (1984). Insights into the repeat
vacation phenomenon.
Goodrich, J. (2002). September 11, 2001 Attack on America: A
record of the immediate
impacts and reactions in the USA travel and tourism industry.
Tourism Management,
23(6), 573–580.
Gratton, C., & Taylor, P. (2000). The economics of sport and
recreation. New York, NY: E &
FN Spon.
Grix, J., Brannagan, P. M., & Houlihan, B. (2015). Interrogating

states' soft power
strategies: A case study of sports mega-events in Brazil and the
UK. Global Society,
29(3), 463–479.
Gunn, C. (1972). Vacationscape: Designing tourist regions.
Austin: Bureau of Business
Research, University of Texas.
Gursoy, D., & McCleary, K. (2004). An integrative model of
tourists' information search
behavior. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(2), 353–373.
Gyte, D., & Phelps, A. (1989). Patterns of destination repeat
business: British tourists in
Mallorca, Spain. Journal of Travel Research, 28(1), 24–28.
Harper, D. (2001). Comparing tourists' crime victimization.
Annals of Tourism Research,
28(4), 1053–1056.
Heskett, J., Sasser, W., & Schlesinger, L. (1997). The service
profit chain. New York: The
Free Press.
Hinch, T., & Higham, J. (2001). Sport Tourism: A framework
for research. International
Journal of Tourism Research, 3(1), 45–48.
Hinch, T., Higham, J., & Sant, S.-L. (2014). Taking stock of
sport tourism research. In A.
Lew, M. C. Hall, & A. M. Williams (Eds.). The Wiley
Blackwell companion to tourism,
(pp. 413–424). Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.
Jarrel, S., & Howsen, R. (1990). Transient crowding and crime.

American Journal of
Economics and Sociology, 49(4), 483–493.
Jones, M. A., Mothersbaugh, D., & Beatty, S. (2002). Why
customers stay: Measuring the
underlying dimensions of services switching costs and
managing their differential
strategic outcomes. Journal of Business Research, 55(6), 441–
450.
Juaneda, C. (1996). Estimating the probability of return visits
using a survey of tourist
expenditure in the Balearic Islands. Tourism Economics, 2(4),
339–352.
Kaplanidou, K., & Vogt, C. (2007). The interrelationship
between sport event and
destination image and sport tourists' behaviours. Journal of
Sport & Tourism, 12(3),
183–206.
Kim, N., & Chalip, L. (2004). Why travel to the FIFA World
Cup? Effects of motives,
background, interest, and constraints. . Tourism Management,
25(1), 695–707.
Knott, B., Fyall, A., & Jones, I. (2015). The nation branding
opportunities provided by a
sport mega-event: South Africa and the 2010 FIFA World Cup.
Journal of Destination
Marketing & Management, 4, 45–56.
Knott, B., & Swart, K. (2015). Sport tourism. In R. George
(Ed.), Managing tourism in South
Africa, (pp. 417–437). 2nd ed.Cape Town: Oxford University
Press.

Kozak, M. (2001). Repeaters' behavior at two distinct
destinations. Annals of Tourism
Research, 28(3), 784–807.
Kozak, M., & Rimmington, M. (2000). Tourist satisfaction with
Mallorca, Spain, as an off-
season holiday destination. Journal of Travel Research, 30(3),
260–269.
LaTour, S., & Peat, N. (1979). Conceptual and methodological
issues in consumer
satisfaction research. In R. Ralph Day, & B. Wilkie (Eds.).
Advances in consumer
research, (pp. 31–35). Indiana, USA: Indiana University Press.
Lee, C., & Allen, L. (1999). Understanding individuals'
attachment to selected
destinations: An application of place attachment. Tourism
Analysis, 4(1), 173–185.
Lepp, A., & Gibson, H. (2003). Tourist roles, perceived risk and
international tourism.
Levantis, T., & Gani, A. (2000). Tourism demand and the
nuisance of crime. International
Journal of Social Economics, 27(1), 959–967.
Lin, J., Chen, T., & Liu, C. (2003). The influence of tourism
image on tourists' behavioral
intention on Taiwan's coastal scenic area: Testing the mediating
variable of tourists'
satisfaction. Journal of Outdoor Recreation Study, 16(2), 1–22
(Chinese with English
summary).

Malhotra, N. (2010). Marketing research: An applied orientation
(6th ed.). New Jersey, NJ:
Pearson Education, Inc.
Marcopoto, T. (2014). Brazil claims ‘victory’ in World Cup
[Online]. Available: ⟨ http://
edition.cnn.com/2014/07/16/travel/brazil-world-cup-tourism/⟩
(accessed 08.
09.14).
Maser, B., & Weiermair, K. (1998). Travel decision-making:
From the vantage point of
perceived risk and information preferences. Journal of Travel
and Tourism Marketing,
7(4), 155–170.
11
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/30/confederation-cup-
protests_n_3526184.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/30/confederation-cup-

protests_n_3526184.html

http://www.southafrica.info/2010/fifa-
surveys.htm#.V5EdJWi7ikr

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/07/16/travel/brazil-world-cup-
tourism/
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/07/16/travel/brazil-world-cup-
tourism/
Mazursky, D. (1989). Past experience and future tourism
decisions. Annals of Tourism
Research, 16(1), 333–344.
Mitchell, V. (1999). Consumer perceived risk:
Conceptualizations and models. European
Journal of Marketing, 33(2), 163–195.
Mitchell, V., & Greatorex, M. (1993). Risk perception and
reduction in the purchase of
consumer services. Service Industries Journal Research, 13(4),
179–200.
Money, B., & Crotts, J. (2003). The effect of uncertainty
avoidance on information search,
planning and purchases of international travel vacations.
Tourism Management, 24(1),
191–202.

Moutinho, L. (1987). Consumer behaviour in tourism. European
Journal of Marketing,
21(10), 3–44.
Moutinho, L., & Trimble, J. (1991). A Probability of
revisitation model: The case of winter
visits to the Grand Canyon. Service Industrial Journal, 11(4),
439–457.
Neirotti, L., & Hilliard, T. (2006). Impact of Olympic spectator
safety perception and
security concerns on travel decisions. Tourism Review
International, 10(4), 269–284.
Niininen, O., & Riley, M. (1998). Towards the
conceptualization of tourism destination
loyalty. Tourism Analysis, 8(1), 243–246.
Oliver, R. (1997). Satisfaction: A behavioural perspective on
the consumer (2nd ed.). New
York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Oliver, R., & Swan, J. (1989). Consumer perceptions of
interpersonal equity and
satisfaction in transactions: A field survey approach. Journal of
Marketing, 53(2),
21–35.
Oppermann, M. (1996). Visitation of tourism attractions and
tourist expenditure patterns:
Repeat versus first-time visitors. Asia Pacific Journal of
Oppermann, M. (1998). Destination threshold potential and the
law of repeat visitation.
Journal of Travel Research, 37(2), 131–137.

Petrick, J. (2004). The roles of quality, value and satisfaction in
predicting cruise
passengers' behavioural intentions. Journal of Travel Research,
42(1), 397–407.
Pizam, A. (1999). A comprehensive approach to classifying acts
of crime and violence at
tourism destinations. Journal of Travel Research, 38(3), 5–12.
Pizam, A., Jeong, G., Reichel, A., Van Boemmel, H., Lusson, J.,
& Steynberg, L. (2004).
The relationship between risk taking, sensation seeking and the
tourist behavior of
young adults: A cross cultural study. Journal of Travel
Research, 42, 251–260.
Pizam, A., & Mansfeld, Y. (Eds.). (2006). Tourism security and
safety: From theory to
practice. Butterworth Heinemann., New York, NY: John Wiley.
Pizam, A., Tarlow, P., & Bloom, J. (1997). Making tourists feel
safe: Whose responsibility
is it?. Journal of Travel Research, 36(1), 23–28.
Plog, S. (1974). Why destination areas rise and fall in
popularity. The Cornell Hotel and
Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 14(3), 55–58.
Qi, C., Gibson, H., & Zhang, J. (2009). Perceptions of risk and
travel intentions: The case
of China and the Beijing Olympic Games. Journal of Sport &
Tourism, 14(1), 43–67.
Reisinger, Y., & Mavondo, F. (2006). Travel anxiety and
intentions to travel

internationally: Implications of travel risk perception. Journal
of Travel Research,
43(1), 212–225.
Richter, L., & Waugh, W. (1986). Terrorism and tourism as
logical companions. Tourism
Management, 7(1), 230–238.
Rittichainuwat, B., Qu, H., & Leong, J. (2003). The collective
impacts of a bundle of travel
determinants on repeat visitation. Journal of Hospitality and
Tourism Research, 27(1),
217–236.
Roehl, W., & Fesenmaier, D. (1992). Risk perception and
pleasure travel: An exploratory
analysis. Journal of Travel Research, 30(4), 17–26.
Saad-Filho, A. (2013). Mass protests under left neoliberalism:
Brazil, June–July 2013.
Critical Sociology, 39, 657.
Seddighi, H., Nuttall, M., & Theocharous, A. (2001). Does
cultural background of tourists
influence the destination choice: An empirical study with
special reference to
political instability. Tourism Management, 22(1), 181–191.
Sheth, J., & Vankatesan, M. (1968). Risk-reduction processes in
repetitive consumer
behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 5(3), 307–310.
Sӧnmez, S. & Graefe, A (1998). Influence of terrorism risk on
foreign tourism decisions.

South African Tourism (2011). Highlights of tourism’s
performance in 2010. Available:
⟨ http://southafruca.net/sat/action/media/downloadFile?Media_f
ielod=116401⟩ .
(accessed 15.07.11).
Taks, M., Chalip, L., Green, B., Kesenne, S., & Martyn, S.
(2009). Factors affecting repeat
visitation and flow-on tourism as sources of event strategy
sustainability. Journal of
Sport & Tourism, 14(2–3), 121–142.
Tarlow, P. (2000). Creating safe and secure communities in
economically challenging
times. Tourism Economics, 6(2), 139–149.
Tasci, A., & Gartner, W. (2007). Destination image and its
functional relationships.
Journal of Travel Research, 45(4), 413–425.
Taylor, T., & Toohey, K. (2007). Perceptions of terrorism
threats at the 2004 Olympic
games: Implications for sport events. Journal of Sport and
Tourism, 12(2), 99–114.
Teigen, K., Brun, W., & Slovic, P. (1988). Societal risks as seen
by a Norwegian public.
Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 1(1), 111–130.
Toohey, K., Taylor, T., & Lee, C. (2003). The FIFA World Cup
2002: The effects of
terrorism on sport tourists. Journal of Sport Tourism, 8(3), 167–
185.
Waller, S., Trendafilova, S., & Daniell, R. (2015). Did the 2012
World Series positively

impact the image of Detroit?: Sport as a transformative agent in
changing images of
tourism destinations. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 19(1), 79–
100.
Walmsley, D., Boskovic, R., & Pigram, J. (1983). Tourism and
crime: An Australian
perspective. Journal of Leisure Research, 13(2), 136–155.
Wang, D. (2004). Tourist behavior and repeat visitation to Hong
Kong. Tourism
Geographies, 6(1), 99–118.
Wang, C., & Hsu, M. (2010). The relationships of destination
image, satisfaction and
behavioral intentions: An integrated model. Journal of Travel &
Tourism Marketing,
27(1), 829–843.
Watts, J. (2014). Brazil’s World Cup courts disaster as delays,
protests and deaths mount
[Online]. Available:
⟨ http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/16/brazil-
world-cup-disaster-delays-protests-deaths⟩ (accessed
15.03.15).
Woodside, A., & McDonald, R. (1994). General systems
framework of customer choice
processes for tourism services: Spoilt for choice: Decision
making processes and
preference changes of tourists. Intertemporal and Intercountry
Perspectives, 30–59.
Xing, X., & Chalip, L. (2006). Effects of hosting a sport event
on destination brand: A test
of co-branding and match-up models. Sport Management

Review, 9(1), 49–78.
Yang, J., Hu, P., & Yuan, B. (2009). The impact of familiarity
of perceptive behavior of
tourism image: A case study of Chongqing residents' perception
of Shanghai tourism
image. Tourism Tribune, 24(4), 56–60.
Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of
motivation and satisfaction
on destination loyalty: A structural model. Tourism
Management, 26(1), 45–56.
Kamilla Swart is Full Professor in the Department of Tourism
and Event Management in
the Faculty of Business and Management Sciences at Cape
Peninsula University of
Technology. Her research focus is on sport tourism and events,
with a particular interest
in policies, strategies and evaluation. She has co-edited three
special issues on mega-
events and the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ and has extended her
work in this area to other
developing context as well.
Richard George is a Principal Lecturer in Business Management
at the Department of
Business and Enterprise at the University of West Scotland
(UWS). His research interests
include safety and security issues in tourism and tourism
marketing. He is the author of
several academic books and journals related to this topic, in
particular Marketing Tourism
in South Africa 5th edition published by Oxford University
Press Southern Africa.

Julia Cassar and Chesney Sneyd conducted their research on the
2014 FIFA World Cup™
as students in the Department of Strategic and Applied
Management at UCT.
12

http://southafruca.net/sat/action/media/downloadFile?Media_fie
lod=116401

Contents lists available at ScienceDirectJournal of Destin.docx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirectJournal of Destin.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Contents lists available at ScienceDirectJournal of Destin.docx

Similar to Contents lists available at ScienceDirectJournal of Destin.docx (20)

More from donnajames55

More from donnajames55 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Contents lists available at ScienceDirectJournal of Destin.docx