1. Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rapt20
Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rapt20
Do hedonic and utilitarian values increase pro-
environmental behavior and support for festivals?
Yong-Ki Lee, Choong-Ki Lee, Woojin Lee & Muhamamd Shakil Ahmad
To cite this article: Yong-Ki Lee, Choong-Ki Lee, Woojin Lee & Muhamamd Shakil Ahmad
(2021) Do hedonic and utilitarian values increase pro-environmental behavior and
support for festivals?, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 26:8, 921-934, DOI:
10.1080/10941665.2021.1927122
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2021.1927122
Published online: 14 Jun 2021.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 1087
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Citing articles: 11 View citing articles
3. Simultaneously, researchers argue that not only
the relationship between place attachment and atti-
tude (Nunkoo & Ramkissoon, 2011), but also the
relationship with pro-environmental behavior (Miller
et al., 2015) should be included in the scope of
research related to place attachment. The theory of
place attachment is widely employed in the field of
tourism and event/festival settings to explore the
relationship between individuals and place after a
positive experience of visiting the location (Kyle
et al., 2004). Despite the availability of previous litera-
ture on festival attendee motivation, few insights
have been presented regarding the nature of consu-
mer attitudes toward pro-environmental behavior
and related support for tourism, especially in the
case of popular events/festivals. Further investi-
gations are necessary to identify the antecedents
that would be particularly helpful in promoting pro-
environmental behavior among visitors and increase
support for tourism.
Therefore, this research proposes an extended
model that examines hedonic and utilitarian
values and their consequences on place attachment
and visitors’ attitude toward festivals. Further, this
study attempts to explore that place-attached visi-
tors are found to be more environmentally con-
scious and more likely to engage in pro-
environmental behavior compared to those who
are not attached within the festival settings. It
has been stressed by researchers and scholars
that there is a need for more research on the
relationship between place attachment and pro-
environmental behaviors since findings are unclear
and contradictory (Devine-Wright & Howes, 2010;
Scannell & Gifford, 2010). In this sense, this study
proposes a predictive model that explores visitors’
consumption values such as hedonic and utilitarian
values and their impact on place attachment, atti-
tude, pro-environmental behavior, and support for
tourism. More specifically, based on the literature
review of tourism, environmental psychology, and
the concept of consumption experience, the
model incorporates hypotheses pertaining to the
effects of hedonic/utilitarian values on visitors’
pro-environmental behavior and support for the
local festival while investigating the mediating
effect of place attachment and attitude. Under-
standing festival attendee behavior and experiences
can be helpful for resource managers and event
planners in the management of festivals in
natural settings (i.e. the Seoul Lantern Festival).
Literature review
Perceived hedonic and utilitarian values
Multi-dimensional perspectives to perceived values
such as the hedonic and utilitarian values have been
examined through an experiential aspect that
focuses on evaluating the customer experience
gained from the events or festivals (Choi, 2017;
Gursoy et al., 2006). Hedonic values refer to those
esthetic, experiential, and enjoyment-related
benefits such as fun and playfulness (Chitturi et al.,
2008), whereas utilitarian values refer to the func-
tional, instrumental, and practical benefits of con-
sumption offerings (Chitturi et al., 2008). In addition,
utilitarian values are associated with the ability of a
product or service to fulfill certain functional goals
or needs. Thus, hedonic values tap into the sensations
derived from products or services, whereas utilitarian
values reflect the functions performed by them (Voss
et al., 2003). Considering that a tourism product is a
mixture of experiential products, festivals and events
managers should pay attention to the hedonic and
utilitarian values (Gursoy et al., 2006). In terms of fes-
tival attendees, findings indicate that perceived
hedonic values have a stronger effect on festival
attendance than utilitarian values (Gursoy et al., 2006).
The theory of consumption values receives attention
from researchers in different fields, including tourism
and leisure research (Turel et al., 2010) and, integrates
various components derived from consumer behavior
models, positing that consumption choices can be
explained as a function of multiple consumption
values (Sheth et al., 1991; Turel et al., 2010). For instance,
the visitor decision-making process is associated with
hedonic (emotional) and utilitarian (functional) values
when they choose a certain event/festival. Further, the
theory of consumption values underlies the following
concept: “a consumer’s overall assessment of the
utility of a product or service based on perceptions of
what is received and what is given” (Yang & Lin, 2017,
p. 584). This study adopts the theory of consumption
values as a guiding theoretical framework to identify
whether the hedonic/utilitarian consumption values
have an influence on place attachment and attitude
toward the festival.
Place attachment in tourism
Place attachment refers to the affective bonds that
visitors develop with a place and is shaped by
thoughts of incorporating their own experience
922 Y.-K. LEE ET AL.
4. within that place (Low & Altman, 1992). In the
tourism/leisure context, Tsai (2012) notes that place
attachment can be a distinctive strength of tourism
marketing strategy considering that tourists amplify
their own enjoyment within the specific destination
(place) through the functionality, emotionality, and
symbolism of holistic experiences which lead to
long-lasting place attachment. Therefore, it is valuable
to investigate visitor attachment to the place since it
can provide an understanding of how visitors inter-
pret their own experience and fulfill the expectation
of the place (Kim et al., 2017).
Place attachment has often been conceptualized
as two dimensions comprised of place identity and
place dependence (Lee et al., 2019; Smith & Moore,
2013). Place identity can facilitate one’s feelings of
belonging to the destination, and further, the
tourism setting itself can enable individuals to
express and affirm the identity (Lee et al., 2012).
Place dependence is related to visitors’ functional
attachment to a specific place and their awareness
of the uniqueness of a setting, which involves com-
paring a place with alternative places (Ramkissoon
et al., 2012).
The theory of place attachment receives great
attention from tourism researchers. The early work
on place attachment in the field of tourism deals
with recreational activities (Lew, 1988). Recently, the
concept of place attachment in the context of
tourism and leisure study has been adopted to
describe the relationship between visitors and
attached place after having a unique experience at a
particular location (Hinds & Sparks, 2008; Ramkissoon
et al., 2012). More specifically, this theory delineates
that a visitor’s attachment to the specific place can
affect interpreting his/her own experience and
guide expectations and behaviors (Kim et al., 2017).
Regarding the multi-dimensional construct of place
attachment, place identity and place dependence
have been found to be reliable measures in relation
to different samples and various contexts including
recreation and festival settings (Kim et al., 2017; Lee
et al., 2012).
Impact of hedonic and utilitarian values on
attitude via place attachment
Evaluation of the festival attendees’ hedonic and
utilitarian values is important since it explains the
relations between attendees’ experiential values
and place attachment. The customer experience
evoked by hedonic and utilitarian values could
accelerate place attachment (Allard et al., 2009),
which positively affect the visitors’ attitude toward
festival. A study in the retail setting demonstrates
that place attachment is significantly associated
with a positive evaluation of customer services
and loyalty, which results from the positive attitude
toward and comfort to the place (Alexandris et al.,
2006; Westbrook & Black, 1985). The past research
also discloses that place attachment to natural
resources in a specific setting may influence an
individual’s positive attitude toward the place,
which in turn engenders his/her own responsible
behavior in general (Hines et al., 1987; Relph,
1976). According to Allard et al. (2009), individual
experience reinforced by hedonic and utilitarian
values can trigger place attachment, which has an
impact on the general attitude toward a place. In
the event/festival setting, perceived emotional and
functional benefits are also shown to positively cor-
relate with place attachment dimensions (Lee et al.,
2011) and attitude toward the event or festival
(Gursoy et al., 2006; Lee et al., 2014a). As shown
above, this research indicates the role of place
attachment as a mediator of the relationship
between individuals’ hedonic and utilitarian values
and their own attitudes. Therefore, we hypothesize
as follows:
H1: Perceived hedonic values positively influence place
attachment
H2: Perceived hedonic values positively influence atti-
tude toward the festival
H3: Perceived utilitarian values positively influence
influence visitors’ place attachment
H4: Perceived utilitarian values positively influence atti-
tude toward the festival
H5: Place attachment positively influences visitors’ atti-
tude toward the festival
Effect of place attachment on pro-
environmental behaviors mediated by attitude
Previous studies reveal that place attachment can
be an important factor affecting the formation of
attitude toward a company or place (Lo & Jim,
2015), enhancing the awareness of the value of
conserving natural resources, pro-environmental
attitude, and behaviors in nature-based settings
(Lee et al., 2019; Ramkissoon et al., 2012).
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 923
5. Lo and Jim (2015) indicate that resident commu-
nity attachment influences resident attitude toward
old masonry walls and associates trees in urban
Hong Kong. When place attachment is conceptualized
as community attachment and connectedness to
nature, it is found to be an essential predictor of
and pro-environmental behavioral intentions
(Gosling & Williams, 2010; Lee et al., 2019; Ramkissoon
et al., 2012). Gosling and Williams (2010) also argue
that emotional association with nature can reach an
expanded sense of self that recognizes the greater
value of all types of natural species and finally leads
to responsible environmental behavior. Accordingly,
we hypothesize as follows:
H6: Place attachment indirectly, positively influences
pro-environmental behavior via mediation of attitude.
Effect of place attachment on the support of
the festival mediated by attitude
One of the goals of this study is to identify the role of
the visitor attitude of festivals as a mediator of the
relationship between place attachment and visitors’
support intention to the host festival. Past research
pertaining to place attachment identifies a psycho-
logical connection between people and specific
places or objects, which can facilitate a general
understanding of human behavior (Lee, 2011).
Recently, Yuksel et al. (2010) demonstrate that the
satisfactory sense of place attachment can enhance
the social interactions and visitors’ favorite attitude
toward recreation activities (i.e. festival activities).
Lee et al. (2012) also incorporate the concept of
place attachment into attitude toward festivals and
demonstrate that festival attendees facilitate some
level of emotional attachment to the festival’s host
destination, ultimately developing loyalty to a desti-
nation. Thus, it can be concluded that place attach-
ment is a positive antecedent variable affecting
visitor’s loyalty and support of the destination (Lee
et al., 2012). More specifically, in relation to the
event and festival settings, visitors’ festival experi-
ence within a specific place drives meaningful
social interaction and contributes to the positive
behavioral intention toward festival’s host commu-
nities (Lee et al., 2012; Lee et al., 2014; Roemer,
2007). Hence, we hypothesize as follows:
H7: Place attachment positively influences the support of
the festival mediated by attitude.
Effect of pro-environmental behaviors on
support to the festival
Regarding the relationship between the place attach-
ment and pro-environmental behavior, the majority
of previous studies unveil that place attachment can
be a significant predictor of general pro-environ-
mental behavior especially in the context of commu-
nity-based/natural-based settings (Lee et al., 2019;
Ramkissoon et al., 2012; Scannell & Gifford, 2010).
Especially, when place attachment is conceptualized
as community attachment, connectedness to local
nature settings via festival or leisure activities can be
an essential predictor of pro-environmental behavior
(Gosling & Williams, 2010; Mayer & Franz, 2004),
driving meaningful social interaction and support for
the local festival (Lee et al., 2012). Also, a study by
Weaver (2013) claims that visitors’ willingness to par-
ticipate in post environmental activities can lead to
high levels of attitudinal loyalty of the destination.
Accordingly, we assume that if festival attendees
have a close attachment to festivals and perceive
them to be personal and social resources that
should be cared, loved, or protected in an environ-
ment-friendly way, then they are willing to participate
in support for hosting of the festival. Thus, we hypoth-
esize as follows:
H8: Pro-environmental behavior positively influences
support for hosting the festival.
Methodology
Measures
A preliminary list of measurement items was gener-
ated from the related literature, and multiple items
were used for each construct. Specifically, hedonic
and utilitarian values were measured with 4 items
each adapted from Lee et al. (2014a). Place attach-
ment was measured with two sub-dimensions, place
identity (5 items) and place dependence (5 items),
adapted from Amundsen (2015). Attitude was
measured with 4 items (Lee et al., 2014b), and pro-
environmental behavior was measured with 4 items
(Chiu et al., 2014). Finally, support intention was
measured with 4 items (Lee et al., 2014b).
We tested the content validity by asking two scho-
lars and one festival manager to evaluate all measure-
ment items, checking if these measurements were
appropriate for the Lantern Festival. Then, we also
conducted a pretest for 38 undergraduate and 5
924 Y.-K. LEE ET AL.
6. graduate students. Some ambiguous items were
revised for clarity. These measurement items were
measured on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging
from 1 = “strongly disagree” to 5 = “strongly agree.”
Data collection
Field researchers administered an onsite survey for
the visitors of the Seoul Lantern Festival. The field
researchers consisted of 5 teams from 25 college stu-
dents attending a class called Tourism Research and
Statistical Analysis. The field researchers administered
the survey at multiple exit gates and intercepted visi-
tors using a convenient sampling method, explaining
the purpose of this research project. Upon consent for
their participation in the survey, the field researchers
distributed a self-administered questionnaire to the
festival visitors. The research teams conducted the
surveys during both weekdays and weekends so
that representativeness of the sample could be
secured. The field researchers gave noctilucent brace-
lets to respondents who completed the questionnaire
for their time and effort. The research teams collected
a total of 10 data sets based on 5 teams × 2 days per
team for one weekday and one weekend during the
festival.
A total of 550 questionnaires were distributed to
the festival visitors, and 520 questionnaires were com-
pleted, representing 94.5% of the response rate.
Thirty-three questionnaires were eliminated because
of insincere and missing responses, and thus 517
questionnaires were used as data for the analysis.
According to Hair et al. (2010), sample size require-
ments should be at least ten to one, which reflects a
response to the variable ratio, and hence 517
responses (with a 17:1 ratio) are sufficient to proceed.
Results
Characteristics of the sample
Respondents’ (n = 517) demographic profile is pre-
sented in Table 1. There were slightly more females
(57.3%) than males (42.7%), and the majority of the
Table 1. Profile of the sample.
Characteristics Frequency (n = 517) Percentage (%)
Gender Male 221 42.7
Female 296 57.3
Age <20 65 12.6
20s 259 50.1
30s 89 17.2
40s 57 11.0
≥50s 46 8.9
Missing 1 0.2
Marital status Single 368 71.2
Married 138 26.7
Other 10 1.9
Missing 1 0.2
Monthly income <2.00 million Korean Won (KRW) 226 43.7
2.00–3.99 million KRW 128 24.8
4.00–5.99 million KRW 93 18.0
6.00–7.99 million KRW 26 5.0
≥8.00 million KRW 20 3.9
Missing 24 4.6
Education ≤High school 107 20.7
2-year college 76 14.7
University 292 56.5
Graduate school 41 7.9
Missing 1 0.2
Companion Alone 14 2.7
Friends 169 32.7
Lovers 187 36.2
Family/Relatives 125 24.2
Colleagues 13 2.5
Other 8 3.7
Missing 1 0.2
Frequency of visit First visit 317 61.3
Revisit 197 38.1
Missing 3 0.6
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 925
7. respondents (50.1%) were in their twenties. A majority
of respondents (71.2%) were single. In terms of
monthly income, 43.7% of the respondents reported
a monthly income of less than 2 million Korean won
(KRW) (approximately $2000 in US dollars), followed
by 2.00–3.99 million KRW (24.8%) and 4.00–5.99
million KRW (18.0%). The most prevalent education
category was university (56.5%). The respondents
visited the Seoul Lantern Festival with ‘lovers’
(36.2%), friends (32.7%), and family/relatives (24.2%).
61.3% of the respondents were first-time visitors.
Table 2 demonstrates a comparison between the
current study and previous studies conducted for
the Seoul Lantern Festival (Kah et al., 2018; Kim
et al., 2016; Yoon & Lee, 2014). The demographic
profile of the current study is similar to that of other
studies: most of the festival visitors were young,
single, low income, university educated, and compa-
nions of friends and lovers. This suggests the sample
represents the population of the festival visitors.
Measurement model
This study considered place identity and place depen-
dence as a second-order factor (higher-order factor).
Some previous studies (Gross & Brown, 2006) regard
place attachment as an overarching concept and
treat place attachment as a second-order factor with
place identity and place dependence as sub-dimen-
sions. As shown in Table 3, the results of the
second-order factor show evidence of desirable
measurement properties: χ² = 18.151, df = 8, χ2
/df =
2.269, GFI = 0.983, AGFI = 0.955, CFI = 0.991, NFI =
0.987, and RMSEA = 0.070. In addition, the normality
of the data regarding second-order factor analysis is
verified by checking skewness and kurtosis values.
As shown in Table 3, kurtosis values range from 0.09
to −0.45, and skewness values range from 0.04 to
−0.40. Overall, the univariate values of kurtosis and
skewness are considered adequate since mean kurto-
sis (|M| = 0.22), and mean skewness (|M| = 0.19) are
within an acceptable range of 0–1.00 (Muthén &
Kaplan, 1985).
As shown in Table 4, the results of confirmatory
factor analysis (CFA) suggest a good fit to the data:
(χ2
= 234.690, df = 104 (χ2
/df = 2.257), GFI = 0.946,
AGFI = 0.921, RMSEA = 0.049, NFI = 0.956, CFI =
0.975). After the purification process, all standardized
factor loadings exceed 0.7 (p < 0.01 and all average
variance extracted (AVE) values are higher than 0.5),
suggesting evidence of convergent validity.
Reliabilities of all measures are assessed using two
indices, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and composite
construct reliability (CCR). Tables 4 and 5 show that
Table 2. Comparison of demographic profiles between current study and previous studies.
Characteristics Current study Kah et al. (2018) Kim et al. (2016) Yoon and Lee (2014)
Gender (%) Male 42.7 43.8 49.0 37.8
Female 57.3 56.2 51.0 62.2
Age (%) <20 12.6 10.9
20–29 50.1 57.2 53.5 69.3
30–39 17.2 16.3 31.8 14.8
40–49 11.0 8.7 10.5 8.5
50–59 8.9 6.2 7.4
60+ 0.7
Marital status Single 71.2 74.3 – 73.0
Married 26.7 24.8 – 26.2
Other 1.9 1.0 – .8
Monthly <2.00 43.7 61.4 – 43.9
income 2.00–3.99 24.8 26.0 – 29.9
(million KRW) 4.00–5.99 18.0 12.4 – 12.2
6.00–7.99 5.0 – 4.5
≥8.00 3.9 – 7.4
Education ≤ High school 20.7 14.6 20.4 –
2-year college 14.7 22.3 12.7 –
University 56.5 57.4 63.2 –
Graduate school 7.9 5.7 – –
Companion Alone 2.7 2.2 – –
Friends 32.7 34.7 – –
Lovers 36.2 36.6 – –
Family/relatives 24.2 20.8 – –
Colleagues 2.5 3.7 – –
Other 3.7 2.0 – –
926 Y.-K. LEE ET AL.
8. Cronbach’s alpha (α) coefficients and the values of
CCR exceed the threshold of 0.70, indicating that all
items have good reliability. In order to assess the val-
idity of the measures and overall measurement
quality using AMOS, several items with the highest
modification indices indicating greater than 10 are
dropped to maintain the proper level of convergent
and discriminant validity (Byrne, 2010). The normality
of the data on the measurement constructs was
checked by using kurtosis and skewness. Following
the same idea, the univariate values of kurtosis and
skewness are considered adequate since the mean
kurtosis (|M| = 0.47) and mean skewness (|M| = 0.49)
are within an acceptable range of 0-1.00 (Muthén &
Kaplan, 1985).
Discriminant validity is checked by comparing the
proportion of AVE in each construct to the square of
the coefficients representing its correlation with
Table 3. 2nd order analysis.
Place attachment (α = 0.929) Kurtosis Skewness
Place identity (α = 0.904)
The festival was meaningful to me.* −0.24 −0.10
I feel a strong sense of identity with the festival. −0.19 0.28
I have a strong sense of belonging to the festival. 0.09 0.33
I have a special feeling toward the festival. −0.45 0.06
Place dependence (α = 0.894)
I would like to participate in this festival than other festivals.* −0.14 −0.40
I get more satisfaction from this festival than other festivals. −0.28 −0.19
It is more important to participate in this festival than other festivals. −0.12 0.04
There are no other festivals that can substitute for this festival. −0.21 0.15
Note: χ² = 18.151, df = 8, p = 0.000, GFI = 0.983, AGFI = 0.955, CFI = 0.991, NFI = 0.9987, RMSEA = 0.070.
* Items were deleted during confirmatory factor analysis.
Table 4. Results of confirmatory factor analysis.a
Constructs and items
Standardized factor
loadings
t-
value Kurtosis Skewness
Hedonic Value (α = 0.881)
Visiting the festival was pleasurable. 0.825 19.749 0.62 −0.50
Image of the festival was improved after visit.#
0.795 – 0.37 −0.46
The festival was good event that I enjoyed.* 0.50 −0.55
Visiting the festival was interesting. 0.775 8.404 0.75 −0.57
Utilitarian Value (α = 0.791)
The festival was economical.* 0.24 −0.63
The festival quality exceeded travel expense.#
0.734 – −0.31 −0.31
The festival offered a better value for the money than did other festival. 0.765 15.750 −0.22 −0.27
The festival offered more benefits. 0.730 15.112 −0.24 −0.08
Place Attachment a
(α = 0.834)
Place identity 0.832 0.00 0.10
Place dependence 0.861 17.638 0.13 −0.11
Attitude (α = 0.860)
I like the festival after my visit to the festival.#
0.785 – 0.16 −0.45
My overall evaluation of the festival was favorable.* 0.43 −0.53
The festival was attractive. 0.805 19.017 0.40 −0.54
The festival was appealing. 0.727 16.904 −0.09 −0.32
Pro-environmental Behavior (α = 0.771)
I tried to accept the control policy of the festival.#
0.831 – 0.37 −0.39
I help to maintain the environmental quality of the festival. 0.909 18.901 0.25 −0.39
I report to the park administration any environmental pollution or destruction.* −0.06 −0.44
I try not to disrupt the fauna and flora during my travel. 0.551 12.644 0.22 −0.70
Support (α = 0.917)
I support continuously hosting of the festival.#
0.917 – 1.26 −0.82
It is desirable to continuously host the festival. 0.903 30.294 1.13 −0.85
Continuously hosting of the festival will contribute to development of this
community.*
– – 0.89 −0.80
I support efforts of continuously hosting of the festival by this community. 0.801 24.260 1.79 −0.95
Notes: χ2
= 234.690 (df = 104, χ2
/df = 2.257, p-value = 0.000), GFI = 0.946, AGFI = 0.921, RMSEA = 0.049, NFI = 0.956, CFI = 0.975.
a
2nd order construct. *Items were deleted during confirmatory factor analysis; #
Items were fixed at 1.0 during confirmatory factor analysis.
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 927
9. other constructs. The AVE of each construct exceed
the corresponding squared correlation coefficients,
confirming evidence of discriminant validity (see
Table 5).
Common method bias (CMB) test
In order to detect a common method bias, we add a
common method factor (CLF) in the original CFA
model and compared the standardized regression
weights of the two models both with and without
the CLF (Höber, 2017; Podsakoff et al., 2003). The
findings show that the largest difference is 0.158,
which is less than 0.200. In addition, as an alternative
to Harmon’s one-factor test, a one-factor CFA, in
which all variables are modeled as the indicators of
a single factor, is performed (Lee et al., 2019; Malhotra
et al., 2006). The results indicate that the fit of one-
factor model (χ2
= 1,437.172 with df = 119) is consider-
ably worse compared to the five-dimensional model
(χ2
= 234.690 with df = 104), suggesting common
method bias (CMB) is not problematic in this study.
Structural model and hypothesis testing
The structural model has been estimated using the
maximum-likelihood method with AMOS 21.0 (see
Figure 1). Overall model fit indicators suggest that
the data fit the model well: (χ² = 262.517, df = 110,
χ2
/df = 2.387), GFI = 0.941, AGFI = 0.918, CFI = 0.970,
Table 5. Correlations and discriminant validity.
1 2 3 4 5 6 Mean SD
1. Hedonic value 1 (0.410)a
(0.270) (0501) (0.137) (0.366) 3.97 0.63
2. Utilitarian value 0.640 1 (0.294) (0.413) (0.190) (0.292) 3.67 0.72
3. Place attachment 0.520 0.542 1 (0.389) (0.147) (0.290) 3.17 0.77
4. Attitude 0.708 0.643 0.624 1 (0.169) (0.372) 3.72 0.72
5. Pro-environmental behavior 0.370 0.436 0.384 0.411 1 (0.215) 3.91 0.67
6. Support 0.605 0.540 0.539 0.610 0.464 1 4.14 0.70
AVE 0.769 0.626 0.785 0.676 0.710 0.745
CCR 0.909 0.834 0.879 0.862 0.876 0.897
Note: All correlations are significant at p < 0.01.
a
Squared correlation coefficients.
Figure 1. Estimates of Structural Model. Note: χ² = 262.517, df = 110, χ2
/df = 2.387, GFI = 0.941, AGFI = 0.918, CFI = 0.970, NFI = 0.950, RMSEA
= 0.052. **p < 0.01.
928 Y.-K. LEE ET AL.
10. NFI = 0.950, RMSEA = 0.052. The square multiple cor-
relations (SMC; R2
) for the structural equations for
place attachment, attitude, pro-environmental behav-
ior, and support intentions are 46.9%, 87.4%, 24.9%,
and 56.6%, respectively.
As shown in Figure 1, all hypothesized relation-
ships are positive and significant. Specifically,
hedonic values have a positive effect on place attach-
ment (β = 0.245, p < 0.01) and attitude (β = 0.545, p <
0.01), supporting H1 and H2. Visitors’ utilitarian values
have a positive influence on place attachment (β =
0.476, p < 0.01) and attitude (β = 0.191, p < 0.01).
Hence, H3 and H4 are proven acceptable. Hypothesis
H5 investigate the influence of place attachment on
visitors’ attitude toward the festival. Findings indicate
that place attachment is a significant determinant of
positive attitude (β = 0.306, p < 0.01), confirming H5.
In addition, attitude is found to positively contribute
to pro-environmental behavior (β = 0.499, p < 0.01)
and support intention (β = 0.680, p < 0.01), confirming
H6 and H7. Finally, pro-environmental behavior is
positively related to support (β = 0.129, p < 0.01), sup-
porting H8.
Mediation test
In order to test the mediating effect of place attach-
ment and pro-environmental behavior, the Sobel
test has been used (Lee et al., 2014b; Preacher & Leo-
nardelli, 2010–2012). Table 6 shows that place attach-
ment significantly mediates the relationships
between hedonic (γHedonic value → Place attachment →
Attitude; 2.510, p < 0.05) and utilitarian (γUtilitarian value
→ Place attachment → Attitude; 2.404, p < 0.05) values on
attitude. Also, the direct effects of hedonic and utili-
tarian values on attitude toward the festival are sig-
nificant. This result indicates that place attachment
plays a partial mediating role in the relationship
between hedonic and utilitarian values and attitude.
In addition, attitude toward the festival has a signifi-
cant indirect effect on pro-environmental behavior
through attitude (γ Place attachment → Attitude → Pro-environ-
mental behavior; 0.153, p < 0.01), indicating that attitude
plays a mediating role in the relationship between
the place attachment and support of the festival (γ
Place attachment → Attitude → Support; 0.228, p < 0.01).
Conclusion and implications
This study integrated the theory of consumption
values and place attachment theory to test the predic-
tive validity of constructs on pro-environmental
behavior and tourism support at the Seoul Lantern
Festival held at the Cheonggyecheon in Seoul,
Korea. This research mainly contributes to the
theory of consumption values and place attachment
theory, which extends the existing literature in the
event/festival field. This study is also meaningful to
provide practical insights for destination marketing
and managerial implications for festival planners.
Theoretical implications
By considering place attachment and attitude as the
mediating variables and investigating its relationships
with hedonic/utilitarian values and pro-environ-
mental behavior and support for festivals in a single
model, this study provides distinctive theoretical
insights for researchers and scholars.
The findings of the study validate that the theory
of consumption values (i.e. hedonic and utilitarian
values) is a positive attitude generalization,
suggesting that hedonic and utilitarian values have
indirect effects on the pro-environmental behavior
and support for festival. More specifically, the results
of the study reveal that hedonic values are positively
related to placement attachment and attitude. These
findings are in line with Tsaur et al.’s (2019) study,
indicating that hedonic values significantly contribute
to festival attachment, which further enhance visitors’
place attachment. It is also consistent with previous
research in that hedonic values increase the arousal
and positive emotions toward location, which in
turn, significantly impact visitors’ attitude toward
the festival (Hidalgo & Hernandez, 2001). The positive
relationship between hedonic values and attitude is
Table 6. Mediation test.
Paths of mediation role Indirect effect Direct effect Z-value Mediating role
Hedonic value → Place attachment → Attitude 0.075* 0.545** 2.510* Partial
Utilitarian value → Place attachment → Attitude 0.146** 0.191** 2.404* Partial
Attitude → Pro-environmental behavior → Support 0.064* 0.680** 2.846** Partial
**p < 0.01, *p < 0.05.
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 929
11. also confirmed by Babin et al. (1994) and Xiao et al.
(2019), who highlighted that hedonic values are the
antecedent of attitude.
Another unique contribution of this research is a
positive relationship between utilitarian values and
place attachment. Budruk and Lee (2016) point out
the importance of the relationship between utilitarian
values and place attachment in the environmental
research. The current research also identifies the posi-
tive relationship between utilitarian values and visi-
tors’ attitude. This finding is consistent with Gursoy
et al.’s (2006) study that examined the influence of uti-
litarian values on visitors’ attitude toward festival,
highlighting that utilitarian values are the significant
predecessor of visitors’ attitude. It should be noted
that the results of this study indicate that utilitarian
values have a stronger effect on place attachment
than hedonic values, but hedonic values have a stron-
ger effect on attitude than utilitarian values. This
signifies the fact that cost and money are important
determinants for visitors in evaluating the Lantern
Festival site. Meanwhile, the festival’s emotional
factors such as fun and interesting should be included
after addressing utilitarian benefits in organizing and
promoting the Lantern Festival.
The current research also investigates the influence
of place attachment on visitors’ attitude toward the
festival. Place attachment significantly impacts visi-
tors’ attitude toward the festival. This finding is also
consistent with previous research, which demon-
strates that visitors’ attachment with place enhances
their own experience and impact on attitude (Davis,
2016; Kim et al., 2017; Kim et al., 2019; Lo & Jim,
2015). A study on customer shopping mall evaluation
by Allard et al. (2009) indicates that visitors who most
frequently visit a place are more likely to be emotion-
ally and cognitively attached. Similarly, Hwang et al.
(2005) examine the tourist phenomenon of place
attachment in Taiwan’s national parks and identify
that place attachment is an immediate antecedent
of attitude. Another important theoretical contri-
bution of the study is that the current research adds
evidence to the literature that places attachment sig-
nificantly mediates the relationship between hedonic
and utilitarian values on attitude.
Following the guidelines of Bagozzi (1992), this
research also extends the model of attitude-behavior.
The results confirm that the relationship of attitude
toward pro-environmental behavior and support is
significant. The findings are consistent with a study
by Miller et al. (2015), which argues the impact of
different antecedents including attitude of recycling
toward pro-environmental behavior. The develop-
ment of pro-environmental behavior leads to
various benefits like improvement in the park environ-
ment (Ramkissoon et al., 2012) and sustainability of
natural resources (Halpenny, 2010). On the other
hand, the findings are inconsistent with the results
of Zhang et al. (2018) who studied pro-environmental
behavior in urban park settings, indicating that atti-
tude has an insignificant relationship with visitor’s
pro-environmental behavior. The possible reason
might be connected with visitors’ inclination to
respond in a socially desirable way, which was
described by Juvan and Dolnicar (2014) as “denial of
responsibility.” While previous research mainly
focused on the effect of place attachment on pro-
environmental behavioral intentions, a distinctive
theoretical contribution of this study is that it
extends the impact of pro-environmental behavioral
intentions on support for the festival. Further, the
findings of this study extend our understanding of
the mediating role of attitude toward festival in the
relationship between place attachment and support
for festival.
Practical implications
First, the significant effect of hedonic and utilitarian
values on placement attachment has practical impor-
tance. Visitors’ tendency to attend festivals depends
on their own perceived hedonic values like engaging
entertainment opportunities, exploration of new
things, and expanding social bonding relationships.
Therefore, festival planners should provide different
entertainment strategies such as creating sensory
stimulation entertainment programs at festivals (Han
et al., 2019). It is also essential to emphasize utilitarian
values at local events such as support of the member
of community or socializing with a known group via
local events (Allard et al., 2009; Aziz & Friedman,
2019). Understanding festival attendees’ perceived
utilitarian and hedonic values enables festival market-
ers to identify what their customers want and how to
encourage their positive attitude and future behavior
intentions.
The findings of the study affirm that both utilitarian
and hedonic values are of great importance to festival
attendees. More interestingly, the relationship of utili-
tarian values with place attachment is stronger than
that of hedonic values. These findings highlight that
functional benefits, that is, cost and value for money
930 Y.-K. LEE ET AL.
12. paid by festival attendees, are positively related to
place attachment, which reflects a strong positive
relationship of festival attendees’ attitude toward
the location of festival (Kyle et al., 2004). This points
out that festival marketers should include a variety
of functional programs, including provisions of festi-
val content previews or a history of the particular fes-
tival. In addition, the findings also suggest that the
event management team should collaborate with
the local government officers who are capable of inte-
grating regional resources, including natural land-
scape information, popular historical sites, public
facilities, and convenient transportation, into creating
comfortable “local festival places” (Wu, 2016). This
type of collaboration can enhance the existing atten-
dees’ satisfaction with the festival and bring in more
positive support for the festival.
Second, the results of this study show that festival
attendee attitude is influenced by hedonic values, that
is, encouraging the emotional values would be a good
strategic plan for festival planners when designing festi-
val activities and programs. Prior research demonstrates
that the natural environment significantly affects
emotional values especially referring to the esthetic
experience, which is one of the four realms of experi-
ence of consumption (Lee et al., 2008). The festival for
this study took place on the Cheonggyecheon, an envir-
onmentally friendly locale in which a clear water stream
flows through the heart of the city. As a result, the Seoul
Lantern Festival could stimulate a natural environmental
experience as well as fun and enjoyment while evoking
attendees’ unique, memorable experiences with their
friends and families.
Lastly, this study is among the first attempts to
apply hedonic and utilitarian values and place attach-
ment as theoretical underpinnings as well as to
empirically assess the impact of these two empirical
values on attitude toward pro-environmental behav-
ior and tourism support. The degree to which visitors
are attached to a place may reinforce visitors’
emotional connection toward festival and shape
their attitude towards pro-environmental activities
(Aleshinloye et al., 2020; Woosnam et al., 2018). It is
argued that individual engagement in pro-environ-
mental intention in a natural setting has a great
influence on their general environmental behavior
(Vaske & Kobrin, 2001). For example, the attendees
who participated in a natural setting event would
be more likely to engage in regular water and dom-
estic energy conservation programs, waste reduction
schemes, and join in eco-shopping campaigns
(Ramkissoon et al., 2012). Given these aspects, festival
managers should use a variety of promotions to
inform and educate festival participants to ensure
that the festival is considered as a social and family
capital to be protected, loved, and cared for. They
can also utilize various environmental education pro-
grams such as developing interpretation activities
using relevant themes, storylines, and media as well
as creating interpretation brochures, pro-environ-
mental corners, eco-label tours, and designing a
new ecological homepage (Lee & Kyle, 2014). Accord-
ingly, it can be valuable for event managers to facili-
tate attendees’ environmental practices during the
event and to develop social marketing programs
enhancing environmentally responsible behavior.
Limitations and future research
This study only focused on hedonic and utilitarian
values, so future research should further explore the
impact of each dimension of hedonic (entertainment,
exploration, and social status) and utilitarian (moni-
tory saving, selection, customized product, and con-
venience) values on attitude development and
behavioral outcomes. Practitioners need to take
caution when applying these findings into practice
as the data were collected from Korea and specifically
from the Seoul Lantern Festival on the Cheonggye-
cheon. Therefore, the results cannot be generalized
for all types of settings. Moreover, the utility of
hedonic and utilitarian values differs according to
setting, for instance, Internet shopping and mall shop-
ping experience. Therefore, a careful marketing strat-
egy should be devised for a natural setting like this
festival. Future research should be replicated in
different cultures and settings.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
References
Ahmad, A., Rahman, O., & Khan, M. N. (2017). Exploring the role
of website quality and hedonism in the formation of e-satis-
faction and e-loyalty. Journal of Research in Interactive
Marketing, 11(3), 246–267. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIM-04-
2017-0022
Aleshinloye, K. D., Fu, X., Ribeiro, M. A., Woosnam, K. M., & Tasci,
A. D. (2020). The influence of place attachment on social dis-
tance: Examining mediating effects of emotional solidarity
and the moderating role of interaction. Journal of Travel
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 931
13. Research, 59(5), 828–849. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0047287519863883
Alexandris, K., Kouthouris, C., & Meligdis, A. (2006). Increasing
consumers’ lotalty in a skiing resort. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 18(5), 414–425.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09596110610673547
Allard, T., Babin, B. J., & Chebat, J. C. (2009). When income
matters: Customers evaluation of shopping malls’ hedonic
and utilitarian orientations. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, 16(1), 40–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jretconser.2008.08.004
Amundsen, H. (2015). Place attachment as a driver of adaptation
in coastal communities in northern Norway. Local
Environment, 20(3), 257–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/
13549839.2013.838751
Aziz, N., & Friedman, B. A. (2019). Augmented reality: The pro-
posed moderating role of hedonic and utilitarian motivations
on the intention to visit a destination. Springer proceedings
in Business and EConomics. In Androniki Kavoura, Efstathios
Kefallonitis & Apostolos Givovanis (Eds.), Strategic Innovative
Marketing and Tourism. Springer.
Babin, B. J., Darden, W. R., & Griffin, M. (1994). Work and/or fun:
Measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of
Consumer Research, 20(4), 644–656. https://doi.org/10.1086/
209376
Bagozzi, R. P. (1992). The self-regulation of attitudes, intentions,
and behavior. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55(2), 178–204.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2786945
Budruk, M., & Lee, W. (2016). Importance of managing for per-
sonal benefits, hedonic and utilitarian motivations, and
place attachment at an urban natural setting.
Environmental Management, 58(3), 504–517. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s00267-016-0723-1
Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS:
Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.).
Routledge.
Chen, Z., King, B., & Suntikul, W. (2019). Festivalscapes and the
visitor experience: An application of the stimulus organism
response approach. International Journal of
Tourism Research, 21(6), 758–771. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.
2302
Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R., & Mahajan, V. (2008). Delight by
design: The role of hedonic versus utilitarian benefits.
Journal of Marketing, 72(3), 48–63. https://doi.org/10.1509/
JMKG.72.3.048
Chiu, Y. T. H., Lee, W. I., & Chen, T. H. (2014). Environmentally
responsible behavior in ecotourism: Exploring the role of des-
tination image and value perception. Asia Pacific Journal of
Tourism Research, 19(8), 876–889. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10941665.2013.818048
Choi, M. (2017). Shopping tourist satisfaction: An application of
hedonic and utilitarian values. Journal of Tourism Hospitality,
6(308), 2167–0269. https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-0269.
1000308
Davis, A. (2016). Experiential places or places of experience?
Place identity and place attachment as mechanisms for creat-
ing festival environment. Tourism Management, 55(4), 49–61.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.01.006
Devine-Wright, P., & Howes, Y. (2010). Disruption to place
attachment and the protection of restorative environments:
A wind energy case study. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 30(3), 271–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.
2010.01.008
Gosling, E., & Williams, K. J. (2010). Connectedness to nature,
place attachment and conservation behaviour: Testing con-
nectedness theory among farmers. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 30(3), 298–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.
2010.01.005
Gross, M. J., & Brown, G. (2006). Tourism experiences in a lifestyle
destination setting: The roles of involvement and place
attachment. Journal of Business Research, 59(6), 696–700.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2005.12.002
Gursoy, D., Spangenberg, E. R., & Rutherford, D. G. (2006). The
hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of attendees’ attitudes
toward festivals. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research,
30(3), 279–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348006287162
Guttentag, D., Smith, S., Potwarka, L., & Havitz, M. (2018). Why
tourists choose airbnb: A motivation-based segmentation
study. Journal of Travel Research, 57(3), 342–359. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0047287517696980
Hair, J. F. Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010).
Multivariate data analysis (7th ed). Pearson Prentice Hall.
Halpenny, E. A. (2010). Pro-environmental behaviours and park
visitors: The effect of place attachment. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 30(4), 409–421. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.04.006
Han, J. H., Kim, J. S., Lee, C. K., & Kim, N. (2019). Role of place attach-
ment dimensions in tourists’ decision-making process in
cittáslow. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management,
11, 108–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2018.12.008
Hidalgo, M. C., & Hernandez, B. (2001). Place attachment:
Conceptual and empirical questions. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 21(3), 273–281. https://doi.org/
10.1006/jevp.2001.0221
Hinds, J., & Sparks, P. (2008). Engaging with the natural environ-
ment: The role of affective connection and identity. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 28(2), 109–120. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jenvp.2007.11.001
Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R., & Tomera, A. N. (1987). Analysis and
synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior:
A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1–
8. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.1987.9943482
Höber, B. (2017). Firm internal innovation contests: Work environ-
ment perceptions and employees’ participation. Springer
Gabler.
Hwang, S. N., Lee, C., & Chen, H. J. (2005). The relationship
among tourists’ involvement, place attachment and
interpretation satisfaction in Taiwan’s national parks.
Tourism Management, 26(2), 143–156. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.tourman.2003.11.006
Itani, O. S., El Haddad, R., & Kalra, A. (2020). Exploring the role of
extrovert-introvert customers’ personality prototype as a
driver of customer engagement: Does relationship duration
matter? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 53,
101980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101980
Jackson, L. A. (2008). Residents’ perceptions of the impacts of
special event tourism. Journal of Place Management and
Development, 1(3), 240–255. https://doi.org/10.1108/
17538330810911244
Juvan, E., & Dolnicar, S. (2014). The attitude–behaviour gap in
sustainable tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 48(5), 76–
95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2014.05.012
932 Y.-K. LEE ET AL.
14. Kah, J. A., Kim, J. S., & Lee, C. K. (2018). Effects of motivation on
perceived value, satisfaction, and behavioral intention of
urban festival visitors: The case of the Seoul Lantern festival.
International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research
(Korean Journal), 32(7), 157–169. https://doi.org/10.21298/
IJTHR.2018.07.32.7.157
Kim, M. J., Lee, C. K., Kim, J. S., & Petrick, J. F. (2019). Wellness
pursuit and slow life seeking behaviors: Moderating role of
festival attachment. Sustainability, 11(7), 2020. https://doi.
org/10.3390/su11072020
Kim, S., Lee, Y.-K., & Lee, C. K. (2017). The moderating effect of
place attachment on the relationship between festival
quality and behavioral intentions. Asia Pacific Journal of
Tourism Research, 22(1), 49–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10941665.2016.1176060
Kim, D., Lee, C. K., & Sirgy, M. J. (2016). Examining the differential
impact of human crowding versus spatial crowding on visitor
satisfaction at a festival. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing,
33(3), 293–312. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2015.
1024914
Könecke, T., & Kwiatkowski, G. (2016). Why do people attend
sport events at mature tourist destinations? An analysis of
visitors’ motivation to attend the Windsurf World Cup on
Sylt. Polish Journal of Sport and Tourism, 23(2), 104–112.
https://doi.org/10.1515/pjst-2016-0013
Kyle, G., Graefe, A., Manning, R., & Bacon, J. (2004). Effects of
place attachment on users’ perceptions of social and environ-
mental conditions in a natural setting. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 24(2), 213–225. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jenvp.2003.12.006
Lee, T. H. (2011). How recreation involvement, place attachment,
and conservation commitment affect environmentally
responsible behavior. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(2),
895–915. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2011.570345
Lee, Y.-K., Kim, S., Lee, C. K., & Kim, S. H. (2014a). The impact of a
mega event on visitors’ attitude toward hosting destination:
Using trust transfer theory. Journal of Travel & Tourism
Marketing, 31(4), 507–521. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10548408.2014.883347
Lee, J., & Kyle, G. T. (2014). Segmenting festival visitors using
psychological commitment. Journal of Travel Research, 53
(5), 656–669. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287513513168
Lee, J., Kyle, G., & Scott, D. (2012). The mediating effect of place
attachment on the relationship between festival satisfaction
and loyalty to the festival hosting destination. Journal of
Travel Research, 51(6), 754–767. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0047287512437859
Lee, J. S., Lee, C. K., & Choi, Y. (2011). Examining the role of
emotional and functional values in festival evaluation.
Journal of Travel Research, 50(6), 685–696. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0047287510385465
Lee, Y.-K., Lee, C. K., Choi, J., Yoon, S. M., & Hart, R. J. (2014b).
Tourism’s role in urban regeneration: Examining the impact
of environmental cues on emotion, satisfaction, loyalty, and
support for Seoul’s revitalized Cheonggyecheon stream dis-
trict. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22(5), 726–749. https://
doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2013.871018
Lee, Y.-K., Lee, C. K., Lee, S. K., & Babin, B. J. (2008). Festivalscapes
and patrons’ emotions, satisfaction, and loyalty. Journal of
Business Research, 61(1), 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jbusres.2006.05.009
Lee, Y.-K., Pei, F., Ryu, K. S., & Choi, S. (2019). Why the tripartite
relationship of place attachment, loyalty, and pro-environ-
mental behaviour matter? Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism
Research, 24(3), 250–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.
2018.1564344
Lee, C. K., Reisinger, Y., Kim, M. J., & Yoon, S. M. (2014). The
influence of volunteer motivation on satisfaction, attitudes,
and support for a mega-event. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 40, 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhm.2014.03.003
Lew, A. A. (1988). Tourism and place studies: An example of
older retail districts in oregon. Journal of Geography, 87(4),
122–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221348808979777
Li, C. J., & Lin, S. Y. (2016). The service satisfaction of jazz festivals
in structural equation modeling under conditions of value
and loyalty. Journal of Convention & Event Tourism, 17(4),
266–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/15470148.2015.1133360
Lo, A. Y., & Jim, C. Y. (2015). Community attachment and resident
attitude toward old masonry walls and associated trees in
urban Hong Kong. Cities, 42, 130–141. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.cities.2014.09.006
Low, S. M., & Altman, I. (1992). Place attachment. In I. Altman & S.
M. Low (Eds.), Human behavior and environment (Advances in
Theory and Research) (vol 12., pp. 1–12). Springer.
Mair, J., & Weber, K. (2019). Event and festival research: A review
and research directions. International Journal of Event and
Festival Management, 10(3), 209–216. https://doi.org/10.
1108/IJEFM-10-2019-080
Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Patil, A. (2006). Common method var-
iance in IS research: A comparison of alternative
approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Management
Science, 52(12), 1865–1883. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.
1060.0597
Mayer, E. S., & Franz, C. M. (2004). The connectedness to nature
scale: A measure of individual’s feeling in community with
nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(4), 503–515.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.10.001
Miller, D., Merrilees, B., & Coghlan, A. (2015). Sustainable urban
tourism: Understanding and developing visitor pro-environ-
mental behaviours. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23(1),
26–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2014.912219
Muthén, B., & Kaplan, D. (1985). A comparison of some method-
ologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables.
British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 38(2),
171–189. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1985.tb00832.x
Nunkoo, R., & Ramkissoon, H. (2011). Developing a community
support model for tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 38
(3), 964–988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2011.01.017
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P.
(2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A
critical review of the literature and recommended remedies.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/
10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
Preacher, K. J., & Leonardelli, G. J. (2010–2012). Calculation for
the Sobel test: An interactive calculation tool for mediation
test. http://quantpsy.org/sobel/sobel.htm
Ramkissoon, H., Weiler, B., & Smith, L. D. G. (2012). Place attach-
ment and pro-environmental behaviour in national parks:
The development of a conceptual framework. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 20(2), 257–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/
09669582.2011.602194
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 933
15. Relph, E. (1976). Place and place rootedness. Pion.
Roemer, M. K. (2007). Ritual participation and social support in a
major Japanese festival. Journal for the Scientific Study of
Religion, 46(2), 185–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-
5906.2007.00350.x
Scannell, L., & Gifford, R. (2010). The relations between natural
and civic place attachment and pro-environmental behavior.
Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(3), 289–297. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.01.010
Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., & Gross, B. L. (1991). Why we buy what
we buy: A theory of consumption values. Journal of Business
Research, 22(2), 159–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963
(91)90050-8
Smith, J. W., & Moore, R. L. (2013). Social-psychological factors
influencing recreation demand: Evidence from two rec-
reational rivers. Environment and Behavior, 45(7), 821–850.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916512446335
Tsai, S. P. (2012). Place attachment and tourism marketing:
Investigating international tourists in Singapore.
International Journal of Tourism Research, 14(2), 139–152.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.842
Tsaur, S. H., Wang, Y. C., Liu, C. R., & Huang, W. S. (2019). Festival
attachment: Antecedents and effects on place attachment
and place loyalty. International Journal of Event and Festival
Management, 10(1), 17–33. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEFM-
02-2018-0014
Turel, O., Serenko, A., & Bontis, N. (2010). User acceptance of
hedonic digital artifacts: A theory of consumption values per-
spective. Information & Management, 47(1), 53–59. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2009.10.002
Vaske, J. J., & Kobrin, K. C. (2001). Place attachment and environ-
mentally responsible behavior. Journal of Environmental
Education, 32(4), 16–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958960
109598658
Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Measuring
the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude.
Journal of Marketing Research, 40(3), 310–320. https://doi.org/
10.1509/jmkr.40.3.310.19238
Weaver, D. B. (2013). Protected area visitor willingness to partici-
pate in site enhancement activities. Journal of Travel
Research, 52(3), 377–391. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0047287512467704
Westbrook, R. A., & Black, W. C. (1985). A motivation based
shopper typology. Journal of Retailing, 61(1), 78–103.
Woosnam, K. M., Aleshinloye, K. D., Strzelecka, M., & Erul, E. (2018).
The role of place attachment in developing emotional solidar-
ity with residents. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 42
(7), 1058–1066. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348016671396
Wu, F. (2016). China’s emergent city-region governance: A new
form of state spatial selectivity through state-orchestrated
rescaling. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research,
40(6), 1134–1151. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12437
Xiao, Y., Ren, X., Zhang, P., & Ketlhoafetse, A. (2019). The effect of
service quality on foreign participants’ satisfaction and
behavioral intention with the 2016 Shanghai International
Marathon. International Journal of Sports Marketing and
Sponsorship, 21(1), 91–105. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSMS-
04-2019-0037
Yang, H. L., & Lin, R. X. (2017). Determinants of the intention to
continue use of SoLoMo services: Consumption values and
the moderating effects of overloads. Computers in Human
Behavior, 73, 583–595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.04.
018
Yoon, S. M., & Lee, C. K. (2014). Examining the relationships
among perceived risk, expectancy-disconfirmation,
emotion, satisfaction, and behavioral intention: The case of
visit experience in a festival. Journal of Tourism Sciences
(Korean Journal), 38(10), 153–174.
Yuksel, A., Yuksel, F., & Bilim, Y. (2010). Destination
attachment: Effects on customer satisfaction and
cognitive, affective and conative loyalty. Tourism Management,
31(2), 274–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.03.007
Zhang, Y., Moyle, B. D., & Jin, X. (2018). Fostering visitors’ pro-
environmental behaviour in an urban park. Asia Pacific
Journal of Tourism Research, 23(7), 691–702. https://doi.org/
10.1080/10941665.2018.1487457
934 Y.-K. LEE ET AL.
