The Relationships between Tourism Ethnocentrism, Destination Advocacy, Local Food Motivation, and Destination Food Image: The Case of Gaziantep

Abstract

Ethnocentric attitudes and beliefs are defined as prejudice against those who do not belong to one’s own community and are based on the understanding of considering one’s own nation to be superior. When the concept is interpreted from a tourism perspective, the conformity of the experiences with the norms of society can be described as the ensemble of attitudes and behaviors aimed at glorifying future domestic tourism welfare. When the destination experiences are evaluated, food constitutes the largest experience area within the tourism market. Besides transferring recipes and flavor elements to individuals, food also conveys the culture, beliefs, and value judgments of a society to future generations. Based on this point, the relationships between tourism ethnocentrism, destination advocacy, local food motivation, and destination food image were investigated in this study. In the scope of the study, a survey was conducted on people who visited the Gaziantep region and had a dining experience. Structural equation modeling was utilized in line with the study model. According to the findings of the study, local food motivation has a positive and significant effect on destination food image and tourism ethnocentrism, and tourism ethnocentrism positively and significantly affects destination food image and destination advocacy. Moreover, destination food image has a positive and significant effect on destination advocacy.

1. Introduction

Destinations are tourist areas that aim to attract individuals intending to visit the region by combining tangible and intangible elements while considering the existing resource structure of the area [1]. Tourists’ decisions to visit a particular destination are determined by the region’s sociological structure, local events, and attractions [2]. The service structures of each destination all differ from one another; therefore, the social, cultural, and gastronomic attractions in the region have a strong driving force on individuals’ desire to travel and are also effective in shaping image perception [3]. An essential element of tourism, food, and culinary culture stands out as a significant factor in tourists’ destination choices. Foods encompass a sense of belonging that develops based on the destination and, in this regard, the food experienced during regional visits represents more than just nourishment, also conveying beliefs, social structures, and culture [4]. According to Choe and Kim [5], meeting customers’ expectations and creating satisfaction through the food experienced at a destination lead to a positive overall destination perception, thus enhancing satisfaction with the travel experience. The foods at a destination, intertwined with the culture and beliefs of the society, and its material and immaterial values, provide visitors with a glimpse into the formation and development process of the cultural structure [6]. The formation of an image perception of foods experienced in a region depends on the evaluation of certain criteria, namely the food itself, the area where the food is consumed, and the general perception of the destination visited [7].

The attitudes and behaviors that improve destination loyalty, such as developing a positive perception of the visited place and recommending the visited areas to others after the experience, make individuals advocates of the destination [8]. Therefore, correctly positioning destinations in the minds of individuals has a positive and significant effect on the correct perception of messages given in the context of tourism and destination advocacy behavior [9]. When the destination is evaluated in the context of the visiting experience, establishing social ties within the area that people visit, transitioning from being an outsider to an insider through time, and identifying with the cultural norms of the destination will increase nationalistic and ethnocentric attitudes and behaviors [10]. Individuals with strong ethnocentric attitudes develop a high social value perception towards the services and products they purchase in their own region. In this regard, individuals with ethnocentric attitudes may approach the foods they consume in the visited destinations with the awareness that they can provide economic benefits to the region, and therefore, behaviors that support their understanding of local consumption may emerge. Ethnocentric attitudes encompass nationalistic judgments and positive attitudes towards local products [11].

The studies conducted in the literature have indicated that ethnocentrism has an effect on consumer purchasing decisions [12]. For example, Lever, Elliot, and Joppe [13] claimed that visitor ethnocentrism significantly affects the intention of tourists to recommend local destinations. Moreover, the motivation factor is also thought to influence consumer ethnocentrism. Additionally, the effect of local food motivation on image and ethnocentrism variables can also be considered. At the same time, although there are some studies in the literature on destination image [14,15] and ethnocentrism [13], which can be regarded as antecedents of destination image in destination advocacy, researchers have drawn attention to the need for studies from different samples and specific destinations. In this respect, this study aimed to evaluate the relationships between tourism ethnocentrism, destination advocacy, local food motivation, and destination food image. Depending on this purpose, in Section 2, the relevant literature is presented, the theoretical background of the study is discussed, and hypotheses are proposed. In Section 3, methodological information regarding the measurement of the research is provided, and in Section 4, the measurement results of the research are discussed. In Section 5 and Section 6, implications are presented regarding the conclusion and discussion by making comparisons within the scope of the relevant literature.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Tourism Ethnocentrism

The concept of ethnocentrism, when examined etymologically, is derived from the words “ethnos” and “kentron”, and it is phonetically recognized as a Greek-origin term [16]. In Turkish, the word that corresponds to ethnocentrism in meaning is “halkbencilik”. According to the Turkish Language Association, “halkbencilik” signifies viewing one’s own people as possessing human values while labeling other peoples as barbaric. This understanding is fundamentally rooted in the belief that one’s own society is superior to other societies [17].

Ethnocentrism is the desire to constantly glorify the region where the individual lives and reject services (purchasing) and experiences that are not from one’s own culture and beliefs [18]. For individuals with ethnocentric attitudes, purchasing non-local and non-national products is unacceptable, since it is accepted as damaging their sense of identity [18]. From a socio-psychological perspective, the concept of ethnocentrism is evaluated from different angles. Bizumic and Duckitt [19] consider ethnocentrism within the frameworks of realistic group conflict theory and social identity theory, while Kinder and Kam [20] view ethnocentrism as an extension of the authoritarian personality.

2.1.1. Realistic Group Conflict Theory

The fundamental idea behind realistic group conflict has been defined as the economic, ideological, and sociological stratification of society. The conflicts of interest and superiority of groups over each other reveal discriminatory behavior against people from different ethnic groups and origins [21]. The struggles between countries, reactions to social problems, lives spent in the midst of war and peace, and different processes brought about by life roles have increased conflict situations within and between different groups and reinforced attitudes and behaviors that support ethnocentric phenomena [22].

2.1.2. Social Identity Theory

The origin of the social identity theory lies in the social identity doctrine. This theory, developed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the mid-1970s, fundamentally examines interpersonal relationships and the social structures of group members. Henri Tajfel, one of the theory’s creators, experienced life in prison camps in France and Germany during World War II, where he observed people’s behaviors and studied the impacts of social life and identity structure within society [23].

According to the social identity theory, groups within a society are divided into internal and external groups. While internal groups constitute the individual’s thoughts and judgments towards the society in which he/she lives, external groups are formed by people from different ethnic backgrounds and with different ideological approaches. In this respect, the disagreements between groups and hostile attitudes towards outsiders are rooted in ethnocentrism. Regarding the concept of ethnocentrism, if individuals strongly identify with the group they are in, their nationalistic attitudes may increase, fostering a desire to advocate for the community they live in and observe [24].

2.1.3. Authoritarian Personality Theory

The authoritarian personality theory is based on the studies conducted by Adorno in 1950. In the following years, studies on the concept were further developed and examined in studies based on its relationship with prejudice. Studies examining the dimensions of authoritarian personality have evaluated the concept from the perspective of different phenomena such as conservatism, ethnocentrism, prejudice, and xenophobia [25]. According to the authoritarian personality theory, the formation of such prejudiced behaviors dates back to childhood. It is observed that individuals who spent their childhood years under the supervision of an authoritarian father figure cannot express their opinions freely, resulting in an introverted mood and hostile attitudes towards others. These individuals, who make acting with stereotyped judgments a part of their personalities, show aggressive behavior towards a certain group of people in their future lives. This situation establishes the basis of the idea of ethnocentrism, which is called the understanding of considering oneself at the center of the society and evaluating others from the perspective of their own perceptions [26].

When assessed from a tourism perspective, it is observed that if individuals with ethnocentric attitudes develop a sense of belonging towards the destination and position themselves as a part of the visiting group, their positive attitudes towards the destination increase [27]. Concerning their purchase intentions, individuals with ethnocentric attitudes prefer domestic products more than other individuals and develop antipathic attitudes towards foreign products [28].

Kock et al. [29] examined the effects of ethnocentric attitudes on touristic behaviors in their study. According to the findings of the study, tourism ethnocentrism is a strong predictor of tourists’ evaluation processes of the region. Ethnocentric attitudes in tourism create a promising environment for the development of small-scale destinations by supporting inland tourism. There are two main reasons for the predominance of ethnocentric attitudes in consumers’ tendency to visit a place or purchase a product. According to the first phenomenon, individuals with ethnocentric attitudes believe that when they prefer to buy a foreign product or visit a foreign destination, they are acting against national feelings, and according to the second phenomenon, non-local preferences harm the local economy and labor force [30]. Ethnocentric attitudes of individuals also differ according to demographic and socio-psychological variables. In addition to these circumstances, these studies have determined that there is a negative relationship between individuals’ moderate attitudes towards other cultures and ethnocentric attitudes [31]. In the process of the emergence of ethnocentric attitudes and beliefs, ethnocentrism and value perceptions about the destination play an important role. In this sense, it can be considered that ethnocentric (nationalistic) attitudes interact with local food experiences, which are a strong attraction element of destinations [29]. Pagela [32] examined the perspectives of travelers who travel for a gastronomic purpose on food and culture discovery. According to the findings of the study, situations such as visitors’ social beliefs, their perspectives on culture and the social structure in which food emerges, and their level of awareness of esoteric issues have an impact on gastronomic perceptions [32]. The concept of ethnocentrism is also related to individuals’ social conservatism beliefs. Individuals who see themselves as an integral part of their culture and beliefs may develop consumption and experience intentions shaped according to nationalistic attitudes [33]. Another study by Fernandez-Ferrin examined ethnocentric attitudes towards American products in Yugoslavia. According to the findings of the study, there is a positive and significant relationship between consumers’ ethnocentric attitudes and patriotic-nationalist attitudes and behaviors. Another important finding of the study is that individuals with strong ethnocentric attitudes have higher purchase intentions towards domestic products compared to other individuals.

Ethnocentric attitudes and beliefs can sometimes play a suppressive role on the desire to experience the cultural structure of another region [33]. In case of the emergence of positive emotions towards the experienced region, individuals’ positive discourses about the destination and the way of advocating for the destination may develop [8].

2.2. Destination Advocacy

In the most common sense, destinations are the areas where tourists directly encounter the region. Tourists are intensively exposed to the touristic attractions and cultural structure of that region through these encounters. The features that are similar to or different from tourists in these encounters may reveal their nationalist attitudes and behaviors. This is because tourists have the opportunity to observe the national reflections of another nation as well as the behavioral manifestations of their national selves in the destinations they visit [34]. In particular, when individuals who have a highly developed sense of belonging to their own society realize that they develop an understanding close to the social values of the regions they visit, an increase in their sense of satisfaction occurs, depending on their ethnocentric attitudes and perceptions. Destination advocacy behavior emerges in individuals with a strong sense of satisfaction and a sense of belonging in the society in which they live. The emergence of destination advocacy is directly related to the development of positive perceptions towards the visited destination. The fact that the visited destination carries beliefs parallel to the social perspective of the individual will affect the way in which individuals defend the destination. Juric and Worsley [35] examined the relationship between consumers’ nationalistic attitudes and purchasing tendencies in the sample of New Zealand. According to the findings of the study, consumers with highly developed ethnocentric attitudes are more likely to prefer local products considering factors such as safety, domestic market gains, and quality. When nationalistic attitudes are assessed from a food experience perspective, foods convey the geographical structure, identity, and general appearance of the society they are in, both through the way they are presented and with the dishes that combine flavors [36].

2.3. Local Food Motivation and Destination Food Image

Local food products are generally associated with emotional factors as they reflect the resources, health standards, lifestyle, and cultural structure of the destination [37]. Consumers have several expectations when experiencing local foods, such as getting value for the money spent, feeling excited, and getting an impression of the cultural structure of the region [38]. The motivation factors that emerge as a reflection of expectations may have direct and indirect effects on shaping the attitudes and behaviors of individuals [39]. The cultural perceptions, lifestyles, and unique dining and drinking behaviors of visitors who have different local food experiences in the destinations can positively and negatively affect intrinsic motivation [40]. Furthermore, the external attraction factors in the visited areas also constitute an important part of the motivation. The direct contribution of local foods to destination marketing emphasizes the importance of highlighting the unique and competitive aspects of the food image [41]. When the foods experienced in the destination reflect the core culture, this may have a positive effect on the overall perception of the destination [42]. As Chloe and Kim [5] argued, if the dishes experienced in the destination are liked, visitors’ general image perceptions about the region are positively affected and their sense of belonging to the region can be strengthened. Individuals who have a stronger sense of belonging to a particular destination may engage in more ethnocentric consumption and purchasing behaviors with the aim of contributing to the domestic market [43]. The existing dishes in the destination offer visitors a cross-section regarding the formation and shaping process of the cultural structure by blending with the material and spiritual values of the society and environment in which they are found. The fact that visitors perceive the food experience in line with their expectations strengthens the tourism perception of the destination [6,44].

In the light of the information previously presented, the research hypotheses are as proposed below:

H₁: 

Local food motivation has a positive and significant effect on destination food image.

H₂: 

Local food motivation has a positive and significant effect on tourism ethnocentrism.

H₃: 

Tourism ethnocentrism has a positive and significant effect on destination food image.

H₄: 

Destination food image has a positive and significant effect on destination advocacy.

H₅: 

Tourism ethnocentrism has a positive and significant effect on destination advocacy.

3. Methodology

3.1. Research Instrument

In this study, the relationships between tourism ethnocentrism, destination advocacy, local food motivation, and destination food image have been analyzed. In this respect, to measure tourism ethnocentrism, the six-item ethnocentrism scale developed by Kock et al. [29] was applied; to explain destination advocacy, the six-item scale developed by Lever et al. [8] was applied; and the local food motivation scale was compiled from the study of Kim and Eves [45]. The scale developed by Chi et al. [46], consisting of the 3 dimensions “Accessibility-Discernibility”, “Variety”, and “Quality and Presentation” and 12 statements, was used to measure the destination food image. Since the original language of the questionnaire was English, adaptation support was obtained from experts. In this regard, a two-stage approach was utilized as suggested in the literature [47]. Initially, the questionnaire was translated from English into Turkish by a native language expert. In the second stage, the questionnaire translated into Turkish was translated back into English by another native linguist and a bilateral control was applied to ensure that the questionnaire statements were culturally and semantically comprehensible. Each statement was rated on a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree) and the final version of the questionnaire was created.

3.2. Sampling and Data Collection

Gaziantep has been one of the most important gastronomy tourism destinations in Turkey thanks to its inclusion in the UNESCO creative cities network in the field of gastronomy [48]. When the tourism statistics are analyzed, it can be seen that 978,462 people visited Gaziantep in 2023 [49]. In this context, from the sample calculation made over the universe, it is understood that a minimum of 384 participants will represent the universe [50]. Before collecting the research data, a pilot study was carried out on 42 participants from 10 to 17 May 2024. Based on the results of the pilot study, it was concluded that each statement was comprehensible and the reliability coefficient of each scale was a minimum of 0.79. In this respect, the data were collected in June 2024 from individuals who visited Gaziantep and had a dining experience. The convenience sampling technique was preferred in the data collection process. In total, 500 questionnaires were delivered and 453 questionnaires were found to be suitable for the analyses.

3.3. Data Analysis

Each obtained data was assigned a number and input to the SPSS Statistics 24 package program. Based on the research purpose, a three-stage data screening process was applied before the relationship analysis. In the first stage, the Mahalanobis distance of the data was calculated to identify outliers. As a consequence of the analysis, it was concluded that there were no data with any outliers. In the second stage, the data were examined for multicollinearity. Since the VIF values in all the constructs were below 5 and the tolerance values were above 0.10, it can be stated that there is no multicollinearity problem [51]. In the last stage, the kurtosis and skewness values of the data were analyzed. In conclusion, it was found that the kurtosis and skewness values of the expressions were in the range of −1.5 and +1.5 and it was decided that normality distributions were ensured [52].

In this study, structural equation modeling was applied to test the hypotheses. Considering the characteristics of structural equation modeling, the models are usually designed for theoretical constructs that cannot be directly measured and are not well-defined. Moreover, the models usually account for potential measurement errors in all the observed variables by including an error term for each measurement in the model [53]. Furthermore, a confirmatory factor analysis and path analyses for structural equation modeling were completed via AMOS 24.0 (Analysis of Moment Structures) software, which is one of the most preferred applications among the ready-made software used in structural equation modeling.

4. Findings

Prior to the path analysis of the study, the two-stage approach proposed by Anderson and Gerbing (1988) [51] was adopted. In this context, as the first stage, a confirmatory factor analysis was applied. According to the analysis results, the goodness of fit values were found to be satisfactory (χ2/df = 2.306, NFI = 0.916, RFI = 0.903, TLI = 0.905, RMSEA = 0.074, and CFI = 0.914). The data obtained from the results can be found in Table 1.

When the table is examined, it can be observed that the values in each construct have a minimum factor loading of 0.50 and above. Furthermore, all the statements are significant at a level of p < 0.001. As for the reliability levels, it is evident that each factor has a minimum level of 0.70 and above. Moreover, it was determined that the AVE values were at least 0.501 and the CR values were at least 0.716. In the light of these data, it was decided to proceed to the second stage of the research.

• Hypothesis tests

The hypotheses derived from the research model have been subjected to examination in the context of structural equation modeling (Table 2). The research findings indicate that the model evaluation is appropriate (χ2/df = 3.605, NFI = 0.905, RFI = 0.903, TLI = 0.907, RMSEA = 0.078, and CFI = 0.924). According to the results obtained from the structural model, local food motivation positively and significantly affects the destination food image (β = 0.805, p < 0.001). Similarly, local food motivation has a positive and significant effect on tourism ethnocentrism (β = 0.701, p < 0.001). Tourism ethnocentrism positively and significantly affects the destination food image (β = 0.337, p < 0.01). The destination food image has a positive and significant effect on destination advocacy (β = 0.514, p < 0.001). Additionally, tourism ethnocentrism positively and significantly influences destination advocacy (β = 0.366, p < 0.001). Based on these findings, it can be concluded that hypotheses H1, H2, H3, H4, and H5 have been supported (Figure 1).

5. Conclusions

When the findings of the study have been evaluated, it can be concluded that local food motivation has a positive and significant effect on destination food image. The studies in the relevant literature highlight the existence of a relationship between motivation and destination image [54]. Pereira, et al. [55] found that destination image mediates the relationship between travel motivation and the attitude of tourists towards the destination. The outcomes of this study also show the direct effect of local food motivation on the destination image. Another result obtained from this study is the significant effect of local food motivation on tourism ethnocentrism. It can be argued that people with a strong local food motivation also strengthen tourism ethnocentrism. As tourism ethnocentrism increases, the food image of the destination is also positively affected. This result is parallel with the studies conducted in the literature [13]. Lever et al. [13] claim that the stronger a person’s national identity, the more likely he/she is to defend his/her country. It can be stated that there is a similar result when compared with the results of this study. As a matter of fact, the destination advocacy of people with a highly developed tourism ethnocentrism also increases at a considerable rate. Within the context of the research, the effect of destination food image on destination advocacy has also been analyzed and a parallel result has been obtained with the results in the literature [14,15]. The research findings have confirmed all the hypotheses (H1, H2, H3, H4, H5). However, the fact that there is no study that has examined the relationships between tourism ethnocentrism, destination advocacy, local food motivation, and destination food image from a holistic perspective can be considered as an indicator of the originality and importance of this study.

6. Discussion

The findings obtained in the study have revealed that the local food image is especially important in the development of both destination food image and tourism ethnocentrism. Moreover, the finding that destination food image has a positive and significant effect on destination advocacy is thought to be effective on the intentions of the participants to revisit the destination and recommend it to others. For, in the relevant literature, it is stated that destination advocacy has an effect on the intention to revisit the destination and recommend it to others [8,13].

The research findings highlight the importance of tourism ethnocentrism in the development of both destination food image and destination advocacy. Consumers with high levels of ethnocentrism avoid purchasing touristic goods and services belonging to the out-group [56], and it is thought that local gastronomic products and businesses will play an important role in the development of destination image and advocacy. Additionally, the fact that consumers with high ethnocentrism attitude level are willing to pay more for local products [57,58] indicates that it will contribute to the economic development of the destination [29].

The data of this study were collected from tourists who visited Gaziantep, as a city of gastronomy, and had a dining experience there. It is thought that the findings derived from the analysis of the data obtained from the Gaziantep sample, which contains rich gastronomic products and values, have provided practical and theoretical contributions to the literature.

6.1. Theoretical Implications

One of the most noteworthy theoretical contributions identified in this study is the positive and meaningful impact of ethnocentric attitudes and behaviors on destination food image and destination advocacy. These findings are consistent with those reported in the literature, including those by Lever et al. [8], Amani [59], and Palmer et al. [10]. An ethnocentric attitude can be defined as a fundamental reflection of an individual’s perception of their own community as being superior to others [60]. When evaluated within the experience dimension, the degree to which individuals identify with the destination has been found to affect their behaviors with regard to telling others about the destination and their level of destination advocacy [61]. Local dishes, as a significant component of destination identification, can positively influence destination food image perception through the excitement and emotional appeal they create in tourists [45]. The findings of this study are in alignment with those of the existing literature. Another noteworthy contribution of this study is the positive effect of destination food image on destination advocacy. The perception of food and visit experiences in the destination as authentic, high-quality, and with a positive orientation reinforces the sharing of these positive aspects with others [62]. In this context, a positive reframing of food-related experiences and broader perceptions of hospitality can bolster destination advocacy. Overall, the results demonstrate that a sense of belonging and excitement associated with the gastronomic experience can markedly foster destination advocacy behavior, enhancing tourists’ satisfaction and encouraging them to disseminate the positive aspects of their experiences with others [63]. It can be concluded that the sharing of positive experiences with others is an important factor in destination advocacy behavior. For tourists visiting a new destination to develop a sense of belonging to the destination, it is necessary to maintain their motivation. According to the findings of the research, it is thought that emphasizing the ethnic characteristics of the region through food is important for transforming visitors into advocates of that destination. In particular, the culture of the destination, centered around its cuisine, should be conveyed more effectively to tourists visiting the region.

6.2. Practical Implications

Tourism ethnocentrism is not only effective in the decision to choose a destination and revisit the intention but also in the development of destination advocacy attitude, especially in terms of recommending the destination to others [8,13]. From the perspective of tourism, individuals with strong ethnocentric attitudes and beliefs tend to prefer the integration of elements from their own nation within the destination they visit. This preference affects the overall interpretation of the destination’s image. The culinary experiences available at visited locations represent a significant aspect of destination assessments. For individuals with nationalist attitudes and judgments, the presentation of ethnic and local elements in products within destination areas can contribute to the internal market balance. Therefore, visitors should purchase products that stimulate the internal market balance and develop purchasing intentions toward elements that enhance the attractiveness of the internal market during their tourism experiences. A sense of satisfaction derived from an experience at a destination can lead to the manifestation of destination advocacy behavior among visitors. Individuals who serve as advocates for a particular destination do not merely demonstrate a preference for that destination; they also attract others to visit the area through word-of-mouth promotion [8]. In this context, businesses that provide services in the destination can increase their service quality standards in order to ensure tourist satisfaction. It is necessary to keep the motivation alive for tourists visiting a new destination to develop a sense of belonging to the destination. Within the findings obtained from the study, it is considered crucial to emphasize the ethnic characteristics of the region through food in order to turn visitors into advocates of that destination. The destination culture centered around food should be conveyed more, especially to tourists visiting the region.

It is obvious from the results of this study that it will be important for decision makers in destination management to adopt goals such as developing local gastronomic products, increasing the number and quality of local gastronomy businesses, ensuring the transfer of traditional food culture to future generations and making legal regulations for the protection of traditional food culture in order to improve destination image and destination advocacy in tourists visiting the destination.

6.3. Limitations and Future Research Directions

This study has various limitations even though it makes significant contributions to the literature. In this respect, the fact that the research was conducted in a single destination could be considered as the first limitation. In future research, similar studies to be carried out in different destinations that are valuable in terms of gastronomy will increase the accumulation of concrete knowledge in the literature. In this study, only quantitative research method was utilized. This can be regarded as another limitation of the research. In future research, qualitative research in which in-depth interviews are conducted with the participants can also be compared with the results of this study.

In this research model, local food motivation was used as an antecedent variable and its effects on destination food image, ethnocentrism, and destination advocacy have been assessed. Future studies can investigate the variables that increase or decrease local food motivation. For example, travel barriers, individual barriers, etc., are thought to have an impact on local food motivation. Furthermore, the moderator effect of demographic variables such as age, gender, marital status, or income on the relevant model can also be analyzed.

Author Contributions

This research paper was agreed upon and carried out collaboratively by all the authors, but each one of the authors has made contributions to the paper individually. O.T. and E.D. provided project management and language supervision. E.D. also contributed to the methodology of the study. R.M.G., E.K. and G.K. performed the formal analyses of the article. O.E. and E.K. conducted an extensive literature review and contributed to the writing of the original draft. F.A. contributed to the completion of the conclusion and implications chapters. In addition, the authors used an internal audit system during the preparation phase and monitored each other for any potential setbacks. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data analyzed during this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Footnotes

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Figure and Tables

Generate image description

Figure 1. Path model.

Table 1

Structural model confirmatory factor analysis results.

Factors/Statements	Standard Loads	t-Value	R 2	CR	AVE	CA
Local Food Motivation (LFM)
Factor 1: Cultural Experience				0.857	0.501	0.770
Experiencing local food helps me to learn what local food tastes like.	0.648	8.61 *	0.30
Experiencing the food served by the locals on-site provides a unique opportunity to understand local cultures.	0.814	11.24 *	0.56
Experiencing local food allows me to discover something new.	0.659	9.50 *	0.41
Experiencing local food allows me to see things I don’t normally see.	0.707	10.07 *	0.50
Experiencing local food allows me to see other people’s ways of living.	0.671	9.78 *	0.45
Tasting local food is an authentic experience.	0.736		0.28
Factor 2: Excitement I				0.837	0.508	0.820
Experiencing local food on-site excites me.	0.640	11.62 *	0.41
Tasting local food in the places I visit helps me feel comfortable.	0.744	13.24 *	0.55
Tasting local food makes me feel good.	0.734	13.09 *	0.53
When tasting local foods, I expect it to be exciting.	0.725	12.95 *	0.52
Tasting local food while on holiday helps me get rid of routine worries.	0.680		0.46
Factor 3: Interpersonal Relationships (IPR)				0.730	0.551	0.830
I like talking to everyone about my local food experiences.	0.741	14.49 *	0.54
Local foods increase friendship or intimacy.	0.696	13.61 *	0.48
I would like to give advice to people who want to travel about local food experiences.	0.789	15.40 *	0.62
Tasting local food allows me to have fun with my family and/or friends.	0.741		0.54
Factor 4: Attractiveness (A)				0.719	0.541	0.720
It is important for me that the local foods I eat on holiday smell good.	0.662		0.43
It is important for me that the local foods I eat on holiday taste good.	0.840	14.79 *	0.56
It is important for me that the local food I eat on holiday looks good.	0.726	11.61 *	0.49
Local foods taste different in their home country.	0.704	10.31 *	0.44
LFM Factor 5: Health (H)				0.761	0.518	0.750
Local foods are nutritious.	0.754		0.56
Local foods contain many fresh products produced in the region.	0.626	11.71 *	0.39
Tasting local foods is good for my health.	0.771	14.06 *	0.59
Destination Food Image (DFI)
Factor 1: Discernibility (D)				0.866	0.568	0.806
There are many types of traditional foods in the Gaziantep region.	0.648		0.38
There are many local dishes unique to the Gaziantep region.	0.784	11.84 *	0.48
There are different ethnic foods in the Gaziantep region.	0.862	12.77 *	0.59
There are interesting foods specific to the region in Gaziantep.	0.660	11.29 *	0.42
In Gaziantep, food venues are easy to access.	0.794	11.86 *	0.49
Factor 2: Diversity (D)				0.716	0.539	0.830
There are different food options in Gaziantep.	0.721		0.50
Different cooking methods are used in Gaziantep.	0.694	11.24 *	0.48
In Gaziantep, the dishes are delicious.	0.769	14.45 *	0.53
In Gaziantep, the dishes increase my traveling pleasure.	0.752	13.96 *	0.51
Factor 3: Quality and Presentation (QP)				0.809	0.588	0.850
The presentation of the foods in Gaziantep is good.	0.862	14.39 *	0.61
The dishes in Gaziantep are safe and clean.	0.760	12.22 *	0.52
In Gaziantep, the dishes are prepared with high-quality ingredients.	0.668		0.44
Tourism Ethnocentrism (TE)				0.883	0.564	0.886
I recommend that people visit Gaziantep.	0.652	12.32 *	0.42
I like talking to people I know about the good things about visiting the Gaziantep region.	0.801	14.80 *	0.64
I introduce Gaziantep to people as a place worth traveling to.	0.805	14.86 *	0.65
I praise Gaziantep to others.	0.820	15.10 *	0.67
I often tell people that Gaziantep is a great place to visit.	0.735	13.72 *	0.54
Gaziantep is the first place I recommend that others travel to.	0.678		0.45
Destination Advocacy (DA)				0.910	0.593	0.803
I encourage my friends and relatives to visit Gaziantep.	0.677	12.27 *	0.33
Domestic tourists should support the domestic tourism economy by experiencing the attractions of the Gaziantep region.	0.695	12.73 *	0.35
Domestic tourists should visit Gaziantep and its neighboring regions during national holidays.	0.772	14.71 *	0.45
Everyone should support the Turkish economy by spending their vacations in Gaziantep and neighboring regions.	0.871	20.61 *	0.75
Whenever a local tourist visits Gaziantep as a holiday destination, they will be supporting their future.	0.829	19.28 *	0.65
Domestic tourists support the country’s economy by having a vacation in the Gaziantep region.	0.728	16.26 *	0.53
Domestic tourists spending their vacations in Turkey secure the country’s tourism.	0.799		0.57

* p < 0.001.

Table 2

Analyses for hypothesis tests.

∆χ²/df	RMSEA	TLI	CFI	RFI	NFI
3.605	0.078	0.907	0.924	0.903	0.905
Relationships	Β	S.H	P	Hypotheses
H1: LFM → DFI	0.805	0.121	0.001	Accepted
H2: LFM → TE	0.701	0.140	0.001	Accepted
H3: TE → DFI	0.337	0.080	0.001	Accepted
H4: DFI → DA	0.514	0.122	0.001	Accepted
H5: TE → DA	0.366	0.105	0.001	Accepted

References

1. Palmer, A.; Bejou, D. Tourism Destination Marketing Alliances. Ann. Tour. Res.; 1995; 22, pp. 616-629. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(95)00010-4]

2. Zeren, H.E. Kent Markalaşması Sürecinde Iç Girişimcilik Faktörü. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilim Fakültesi Derg.; 2012; 2, pp. 95-104.

3. Bayih, B.E.; Singh, A. Modeling Domestic Tourism: Motivations, Satisfaction and Tourist Behavioral Intentions. Heliyon; 2020; 6, e04839. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04839] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32995592]

4. Horng, J.-S.; Tsai, C.-T.S. Government Websites for Promoting East Asian Culinary Tourism: A Cross-National Analysis. Tour. Manag.; 2010; 31, pp. 74-85. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.01.009]

5. Choe, J.Y.J.; Kim, S.S. Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Tourist’s Local Food Consumption Value (TLFCV) Scale. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.; 2019; 77, pp. 245-259. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.07.004]

6. Tsai, C.-T.S.; Wang, Y.-C. Experiential Value in Branding Food Tourism. J. Destin. Mark. Manag.; 2017; 6, pp. 56-65. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2016.02.003]

7. Promsivapallop, P.; Kannaovakun, P. Destination Food Image Dimensions and Their Effects on Food Preference and Consumption. J. Destin. Mark. Manag.; 2019; 11, pp. 89-100. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2018.12.003]

8. Lever, M.W.; Elliot, S.; Joppe, M. Exploring Destination Advocacy Behavior in a Virtual Travel Community. J. Travel Tour. Mark.; 2021; 38, pp. 431-443. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2021.1940421]

9. Kumar, V.; Kaushik, A.K. Achieving Destination Advocacy and Destination Loyalty through Destination Brand Identification. J. Travel Tour. Mark.; 2017; 34, pp. 1247-1260. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2017.1331871]

10. Palmer, A.; Koenig-Lewis, N.; Jones, L.E.M. The Effects of Residents’ Social Identity and Involvement on Their Advocacy of Incoming Tourism. Tour. Manag.; 2013; 38, pp. 142-151. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.02.019]

11. Altınay Özdemir, M.; Kızılırmak, İ. Tüketicilerin Destinasyon Seçim Tutumları Ile Etnosentrik Tutumları Arasındaki Ilişkinin Değerlendirilmesi. Güncel Tur. Araştırmaları Derg.; 2019; 3, pp. 175-201. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.32572/guntad.526885]

12. Ragab, H.; Polo-Peña, A.I.; Mahrous, A.A. Airline Travellers’ Ethnocentric Tendencies and Their Impact on Travellers’ Behaviours: Extending Consumer Ethnocentrism to Airline Services. Tour. Manag. Perspect.; 2023; 49, 101200. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2023.101200]

13. Lever, M.W.; Elliot, S.; Joppe, M. Pride and Promotion: Exploring Relationships between National Identification, Destination Advocacy, Tourism Ethnocentrism and Destination Image. J. Vacat. Mark.; 2023; 29, pp. 537-554. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/13567667221109270]

14. Saini, S.; Arasanmi, C.N. Attaining Digital Advocacy Behaviour through Destination Image and Satisfaction. Int. J. Tour. Cities; 2021; 7, pp. 119-134. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJTC-07-2019-0108]

15. Kesgin, M.; Murthy, R.S.; Pohland, L.W. Residents as Destination Advocates: The Role of Attraction Familiarity on Destination Image. J. Hosp. Tour. Insights; 2019; 2, pp. 55-74. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-06-2018-0034]

16. Yarangümelioğlu, D.; Işler Büyüker, D. Marka Bağlılığı ve Etnosentrizm Çerçevesinde Tüketici Satın Alma Davranışları. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sos. Bilim. Derg.; 2014; 39, pp. 91-110.

17. Türkmen, S. Tüketici Etnosentrizminin ve Destinasyon Kişiliğinin Yerli Turistlerin Paket Tur Satın Alma Niyetleri Üzerindeki Etkisinin Belirlenmesi, Balıkesir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. 2015; Available online: https://dspace.balikesir.edu.tr/xmlui/handle/20.500.12462/2939 (accessed on 8 April 2024).

18. Shimp, T.A.; Sharma, S. Consumer Ethnocentrism: Construction and Validation of the CETSCALE. J. Mark. Res.; 1987; 24, pp. 280-289. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002224378702400304]

19. Bizumic, B.; Duckitt, J. “My Group Is Not Worthy of Me”: Narcissism and Ethnocentrism. Political Psychol.; 2008; 29, pp. 437-453. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00638.x]

20. Kinder, D.R.; Kam, C.D. Us against Them: Ethnocentric Foundations of American Opinion; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 2010.

21. Akdağ, İ. Çatışma Teorisi Bağlamında Tarihsel-Toplumsal Çatışmanın Değişen Biçimleri Üzerine Bir Inceleme. OPUS Int. J. Soc. Res.; 2020; 15, pp. 5231-5251.

22. Pratto, F.; Stewart, A.L. Social Dominance Theory. The Encyclopedia of Peace Psychology; Christie, D.J. Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2011; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470672532.wbepp253]

23. Demirtaş, H.A. Sosyal Kimlik Kuramı, Temel Kavram ve Varsayımlar. İletişim Araştırmaları; 2003; 1, pp. 123-144.

24. Brewer, M.B.; Miller, N. Intergroup Relations; Open University Press: Buckingham, UK, 2003.

25. Katz, D.; Stotland, E. A Preliminary Statement to a Theory of Attitude Structure and Change. Psychol. Study Sci.; 1959; 3, pp. 423-475.

26. Erdoğan, M.; Vatandaş, C. Individual and Social Exclusion Practice: Prejudice and Discrimination. J. Hum. Soc. Sci. JOHASS; 2020; 3, pp. 474-485.

27. Xiaolong, M.; Litian, Z.; Lu, Y.; Rong, W. Tourist Ethnocentrism and Tourism Intentions during a Political Crisis. J. Tour. Cult. Change; 2023; 21, pp. 71-93. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14766825.2022.2064224]

28. Ehmke, M.D. International Differences in Consumer Preferences for Food Country-of-Origin: A Meta-Analysis. Proceedings of the 2006 Annual Meeting; Long Beach, CA, USA, 23–26 July 2006.

29. Kock, F.; Josiassen, A.; Assaf, A.G.; Karpen, I.; Farrelly, F. Tourism Ethnocentrism and Its Effects on Tourist and Resident Behavior. J. Travel Res.; 2019; 58, pp. 427-439. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0047287518755504]

30. Armağan, E.A.; Gürsoy, Ö. Satın Alma Kararlarında Tüketici Etnosentrizmi ve Menşe Ülke Etkisinin Cetscale Ölçeği Ile Değerlendirilmesi. Organ. Önetim Bilim. Derg.; 2011; 3, pp. 67-77.

31. Jain, S.K.; Jain, R. Consumer Ethnocentrism and Its Antecedents: An Exploratory Study of Consumers in India. Asian J. Bus. Res.; 2013; 3, pp. 1-18. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.14707/ajbr.130001]

32. Pagella, P. Antropologia Culturale per Viaggi Enogastronomici. Lo Sguardo Etno-Gastronomico in Viaggio. ECHO; 2022; 4, pp. 120-131.

33. Lymperopoulos, C.; Koob, C.; Chaniotakis, I.; Mavragani, E. Consumer Ethnocentrism and Tourists’ Visit Intention: The Case of Greece and Germany. Proceedings of the Tourism Trends and Advances in the 21st Century; Rhodes, Greece, 24–28 June 2014.

34. Griffiths, I.; Sharpley, R. Influences of Nationalism on Tourist-Host Relationships. Ann. Tour. Res.; 2012; 39, pp. 2051-2072. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2012.07.002]

35. Juric, B.; Worsley, A. Consumers’ Attitudes towards Imported Food Products. Food Qual. Prefer.; 1998; 9, pp. 431-441. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(98)00027-5]

36. Leer, J. Monocultural and Multicultural Gastronationalism: National Narratives in European Food Shows. Eur. J. Cult. Stud.; 2019; 22, pp. 817-834. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1367549418786404]

37. Kovács, I.; Balázsné Lendvai, M.; Beke, J. The Importance of Food Attributes and Motivational Factors for Purchasing Local Food Products: Segmentation of Young Local Food Consumers in Hungary. Sustainability; 2022; 14, 3224. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su14063224]

38. Arsil, P.; Li, E.; Bruwer, J.; Lyons, G. Motivation-Based Segmentation of Local Food in Urban Cities: A Decision Segmentation Analysis Approach. Br. Food J.; 2018; 120, pp. 2195-2207. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-01-2018-0060]

39. Semerci, H.; Akbaba, A. Bodrum’a Gelen Uluslararası Ziyaretçilerin Yerel Yemek Tüketimindeki Motivasyon Faktörlerinin Değerlendirilmesi. Int. J. Contemp. Tour. Res.; 2018; 2, pp. 41-57. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.30625/ijctr.433081]

40. Mak, A.H.; Lumbers, M.; Eves, A.; Chang, R.C. Factors Influencing Tourist Food Consumption. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.; 2012; 31, pp. 928-936. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.10.012]

41. Alderighi, M.; Bianchi, C.; Lorenzini, E. The Impact of Local Food Specialities on the Decision to (Re) Visit a Tourist Destination: Market-Expanding or Business-Stealing?. Tour. Manag.; 2016; 57, pp. 323-333. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.06.016]

42. Lertputtarak, S. The Relationship between Destination Image, Food Image, and Revisiting Pattaya, Thailand. Int. J. Bus. Manag.; 2012; 7, pp. 111-121. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v7n5p111]

43. Prince, M.; Yaprak, A.N.; Palihawadana, D. The Moral Bases of Consumer Ethnocentrism and Consumer Cosmopolitanism as Purchase Dispositions. J. Consum. Mark.; 2019; 36, pp. 429-438. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JCM-11-2017-2432]

44. Reynolds, P.C. Food and Tourism: Towards an Understanding of Sustainable Culture. J. Sustain. Tour.; 1993; 1, pp. 48-54. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09669589309450700]

45. Kim, Y.G.; Eves, A. Construction and Validation of a Scale to Measure Tourist Motivation to Consume Local Food. Tour. Manag.; 2012; 33, pp. 1458-1467. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.01.015]

46. Chi, C.G.-Q.; Chua, B.L.; Othman, M.; Karim, S.A. Investigating the Structural Relationships Between Food Image, Food Satisfaction, Culinary Quality, and Behavioral Intentions: The Case of Malaysia. Int. J. Hosp. Tour. Adm.; 2013; 14, pp. 99-120. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15256480.2013.782215]

47. Brislin, R.W. Comparative Research Methodology: Cross-cultural Studies. Int. J. Psychol.; 1976; 11, pp. 215-229. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207597608247359]

48. Alan, A.A.; Belma, S. Gastronomi Şehri “Gaziantep’te” Menü Planlama Uygulamalarına Güncel Bakış (A Contemporary Outlook on Menu Planning Applications in the City of Gastronomy “Gaziantep”). J. Tour. Gastron. Stud.; 2019; 7, pp. 1328-1343. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.21325/jotags.2019.423]

49. Ministry of Culture and Tourism. Tourism Statistics. 2024; Available online: https://yigm.ktb.gov.tr/TR-9851/turizm-istatistikleri.html (accessed on 9 January 2024).

50. Yamane, T. Problems to Accompany “Statistics, an Introductory Analysis”; Harper & Row: Manhattan, NY, USA, 1967.

51. Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E.; Tatham, R.L. Multivariate Data Analysis; 6th ed. Pearson Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2006.

52. Kline, R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling; Guilford Publications: New York, NY, USA, 2023.

53. Raykov, T.; Marcoulides, G.A. A First Course in Structural Equation Modeling; Routledge: London, UK, 2012.

54. Tang, H.; Wang, R.; Jin, X.; Zhang, Z. The Effects of Motivation, Destination Image and Satisfaction on Rural Tourism Tourists’ Willingness to Revisit. Sustainability; 2022; 14, 11938. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su141911938]

55. Pereira, V.; Gupta, J.J.; Hussain, S. Impact of Travel Motivation on Tourist’s Attitude Toward Destination: Evidence of Mediating Effect of Destination Image. J. Hosp. Tour. Res.; 2022; 46, pp. 946-971. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1096348019887528]

56. Kim, H.L.; Hyun, S.S. Impact of Travelers’ Consumer Ethnocentrism on Purchase and Behavior Intention: Moderating Effect of Implicit Prejudice. Int. J. Tour. Res.; 2024; 26, e2607. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2607]

57. Tomić, M.; Alfnes, F. Effect of Normative and Affective Aspects on Willingness to Pay for Domestic Food Products—A Multiple Price List Experiment. J. Food Prod. Mark.; 2018; 24, pp. 681-696. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10454446.2017.1323067]

58. Yen, Y.-S. Extending Consumer Ethnocentrism Theory: The Moderating Effect Test. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist.; 2018; 30, pp. 907-926. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/APJML-09-2017-0226]

59. Amani, D. The Interplay between Tourism Ethnocentrism, Residents’ Support for Tourism and Destination Brand Value Co-Creation in Emerging Tourism Destinations: Lessons from Tanzania. J. Qual. Assur. Hosp. Tour.; 2023; pp. 1-31. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1528008X.2023.2293135]

60. Hammond, R.A.; Axelrod, R. The Evolution of Ethnocentrism. J. Confl. Resolut.; 2006; 50, pp. 926-936. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022002706293470]

61. Unurlu, Ç. Yer Bağliliğinin Turizm Etnosentrizmi Üzerine Etkisi. J. Appl. Tour. Res.; 2024; 4, pp. 45-60.

62. Ali, R.; Irfan, S.; Hamid, S. Emerging Themes in Food Tourism: A Systematic Literature Review and Research Agenda. Br. Food J.; 2024; 126, pp. 372-408.

63. Testa, R.; Galati, A.; Schifani, G.; Di Trapani, A.M.; Migliore, G. Culinary Tourism Experiences in Agri-Tourism Destinations and Sustainable Consumption—Understanding Italian Tourists’ Motivations. Sustainability; 2019; 11, 4588. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su11174588]