UNDERSTANDING THE DECISION OF THE TOURIST WHEN CHOOSING AN ACCOMMODATION: THE IMPACT OF THE IMAGE

Abstract

Accommodation image is a topic that has been scarcely analyzed in the literature and needs further development. Moreover, no research, so far, has been realized on the condominium offer, even when this is the primary offer in some tourist destinations and has a critical role on the overall perception of the destination. This research aims for a deeper understanding of the accommodation image, going through a deep literature review to identify the theoretical dimensions that form the condominium image, obtaining the main dimensions of the cognitive image that characterize this product, as well as analyzing the influence of those different dimensions on the overall image of the accommodation. Interestingly, empirical results of this study suggest that the condominium image is formed by 7 factors: "Secondary services", "Food and Beverage", "Staff and cleanliness", "Kitchen", "Outside areas", "Primary services" and "Price". Moreover, "Staff and cleanliness", "Kitchen", "Outside areas" and "Primary services" are the dimensions that have a greater influence on the overall accommodation image. Academic and practitioners implications are stressed. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

Headnote

Abstract: Accommodation image is a topic that has been scarcely analyzed in the literature and needs further development. Moreover, no research, so far, has been realized on the condominium offer, even when this is the primary offer in some tourist destinations and has a critical role on the overall perception of the destination. This research aims for a deeper understanding of the accommodation image, going through a deep literature review to identify the theoretical dimensions that form the condominium image, obtaining the main dimensions of the cognitive image that characterize this product, as well as analyzing the influence of those different dimensions on the overall image of the accommodation. Interestingly, empirical results of this study suggest that the condominium image is formed by 7 factors: "Secondary services", "Food and Beverage", "Staff and cleanliness", "Kitchen", "Outside areas", "Primary services" and "Price". Moreover, "Staff and cleanliness", "Kitchen", "Outside areas" and "Primary services" are the dimensions that have a greater influence on the overall accommodation image. Academic and practitioners implications are stressed.

Key words: Accommodation image, condominium, non-hotel accommodation product, marketing, hospitality.

Introduction

Although accommodations image is an important topic for both the hospitality industry and Destination Marketing Organizations (DMO's), it has not been widely analyzed by researchers. Moreover, the condominium image, despite its importance in many destinations, has not been studied at all. There are few analyses that focus on accommodations image as a product, as this issue is generally only important for tourism when the phenomenon is analyzed from a general and systemic perspective. Hence, it does not attract the attention of the hospitality industry, as individual enterprises are more focused on their private business and topics such as branding, positioning or quality, and those topics are, in effect, extensively analyzed in the academic literature. Accommodations image, is also an important matter for DMO's, since the tourist's overall perception in the destination reflects the total experience of the trip (Murphy et al., 2000).

A better understanding of the accommodations image and the dimensions that form it, as well as the influence of those dimensions on the overall accommodations image, will help DMO's and the hospitality industry to improve their performance. Moreover, obtaining those general dimensions of image could enable the comparative transnational and cultural study of this topic, since the literature on hospitality has mainly centered its attention on the professional world and lacks a deeper vision (Morrison, 2002).

In conclusion, despite the importance of accommodations image, a key element for the success of the accommodations company (Le Blanc and Nguyen, 1996; Zeithaml and Bitner, 1996; Choi and Chu, 1999) and for that of the destination, few research studies have been developed about it. The literature has favored other approaches, such as quality, rather than image (Laroche and Parsa, 2000; Chen et al., 2001) and moreover, no research studies have analyzed the condominium image. Furthermore, this study centers on analyzing the image of the condominium offering, by first analyzing the theoretical dimensions that compose the functional image, and then empirically testing those dimensions; and identifying which of those dimensions really have greater influence on the overall image.

Literature review

The environment of the hospitality industry is too dynamic and complex to be able to rely on past strategies and guidelines (Brownell, 2003) and it is necessary for research studies to extract from specific contextual problems a generally applicable development to give a better understanding of the situation (Piccoli and Wagner, 2003). In this respect, aspects as segmentation, positioning and image are among the most important issues for the hospitality industry (Morgan and Dev, 1994) and require more attention from the literature.

Accommodations Image

The image of the accommodations product is a key element in company success since it plays a leading role in the process of the customer choosing a hotel (Lewis, 1984,1985; Chen and Hsu, 2000) and is even more important in the case of vacation hotels (Dubé and Renaghan, 2000). Furthermore, product image is of great importance in capturing new customers, increasing market share and suitable positioning of the product (Roth, 1995; Chen et al., 2001), as well as in increasing customer satisfaction (Mazanec, 1995), which in turn strengthens the positive attitude toward the product and the intention to purchase (Pizam and Milman, 1993). In this sense, Kandanpully and Suhartanto (2000 and 2003) developed a model applying to hotel chain customers in which image and satisfaction were related to loyalty, and concluded that those factors are an antecedent of loyalty. The studies of Hunt (1975), Ostrowsky et al. (1993), Bhote (1996) and Heung et al. (1996) also clearly show the influence of accommodationss image on loyalty.

However, research into the accommodationss image, unlike that into destination image, is an aspect that has hardly been addressed in the literature (Le- Blanc and Nguyen, 1996; Kandampully and Suhartanto, 2000; Chen et al., 2001; Barsky and Nash, 2002), which has favored other perspectives such as satisfaction (Barsky and Labagh, 1992; Heide et al., 1999; Heung, 2000; Choi and Chu, 2001) and quality (Getty and Thompson, 1994; Yucelt and Marcella, 1995; Min and Min, 1996; Ekinci, Riley and Fife-Schaw, 1998; Qu and Tsang, 1998; Choi and Chu, 1999; Mei et al., 1999; Tsang and Qu, 2000; Min et al., 2002; Ekinci et al., 2003).

Image is a mixture of positive and negative perceptions that represent the reality facing individuals when they take a decision. Only when the positive image outweighs the negative will the potential tourist make that decision (Milman and Pizan, 1995; Chen and Kerstetter, 1999). Following various authors (Echtner and Ritchie, 1991; Echtner and Ritchie, 1993; Baloglu and Mccleary, 1999; Baloglu and Mangaloglu, 2001; and Beerli and Martín, 2004), three main different approaches to contextualize image can be seen in the various definitions of image: (1) from a perceptual or cognitive point of view by means of evaluating the attributes, in other words, the beliefs that individuals have about the product, (2) from an affective perspective, on the basis of the emotional feelings aroused by the offeringing and (3) from an overall approach, or general evaluation of the product, formed by both the affective and the cognitive image. After the review of the literature, the image of the accommodations product can be defined as: "The subjective representation of the set of beliefs, impressions, information and attitudes regarding the accommodations".

Accommodations image dimensions and attributes

The measurement of accommodations image is extremely complicated due to the difficulty in adapting the language to the multiple peculiarities of the service that is being measured. Moreover, Chen et al. (2001) stress the need to define and refine specific scales of perception of accommodations because, despite the attention paid to customer perception of hotel attributes, there has been little progress in the development of precise scales (Getty and Thompson, 1994). However, this is a difficult task to carry out due to the necessity of introducing an extensively high number of items in the measurement (Headley and Millar, 1993; Taylor and Cronin, 1994; Litaca et al., 1995).

Although there is a broad consensus among researchers about the multidimensional nature of the customer's perception of the accommodations product, it must be pointed out that there is no such consensus regarding which dimensions and attributes define that perception in terms of either number or content. Several different approaches in the literature were found, where, apart from the satisfaction perspective, those of brand and quality predominate. Those are two approaches that share a great part of their structure without there being any unanimity about which is more suitable to evaluate consumer perception (Ekinci, 2002).

Trying to identify the specific microdimensions for accommodations, the literature gives large groups of attributes. However, they are the result of studies undertaken in hotels and basically in the USA and Hong Kong, which has been Asia's most popular vacation destination for 30 years (Bailey, 1995), which greatly limits their universality. Studies undertaken in other destinations are less common, and those taken in non-hotel accommodations are the exception in the literature.

Both the number and the content of the dimensions and attributes used in the literature are very high and heterogeneous. Thus, Lewis (1984) used 66 attributes to evaluate the perceptions of business and leisure customers. A study conducted by Lockwood et al. (1992) by means of interviews with 47 customers identified 564 separate attributes that defined the quality of a budget hotel, and grouped them into 25 final dimensions that represent 92% of the answers obtained. The dimensions obtained are, in descending order of importance: perceived price, general standard, cleanliness, friendliness, quality of food, style of hotel, service quality, décor and maintenance, concept of accommodations, comfort, location, style of restaurant, leisure facilities, room furniture and fittings, category, telephone, temperature, management, children's facilities, security and consistency, bar, noise, social interaction and security.

Later studies, like that of Callan (1994), have attempted to establish a frame of hotel attributes to be used in research s, based on the criteria that customers use in choosing a hotel. After reviewing 45 articles, Callan determined an initial group of 139 service attributes, refined and enlarged by qualitative analyses, to obtain a final group of 166 heterogeneous attributes that were finally grouped into 10 dimensions: Location and image, additional services, value for money, recreational services, service supplier, room (tangibles), tangibles (others), safety, access, and competence. However, Le- Blanc and Nguyen (1996) identified five dimensions of accommodations image: personal contact, physical atmosphere, quality of service, accessibility and corporate identity. In sum, the number of dimensions found varies from a high number: e.g., McClearly et al. (1998) with 13 dimensions, to a small one: e.g., Min and Min (1996) identified only two dimensions in the customer perception, namely room and front-office. However between five and eight dimensions is the most common result, as those s of Choi and Chu (1999) with seven dimensions; Dube and Renaghan (1999 and 2000) with six; Chu and Choi (2000) with six; Heung (2000) with eight; and Chu (2002) with five.

It can be concluded from the analysis of a representative, but not exhaustive, sample of s conducted [1] (e.g., Barsky and Labagh, 1992; Callan, 1994; Getty and Thompson, 1994; Schaefer et al., 1995; Yucelt and Marcella, 1995; Le Blanc and Nguyen, 1996; Min and Min, 1996; Ekinci, Riley and Fife-Schaw, 1998; McClearly, Choy and Weaver, 1998; Qu and Tsang, 1998; Choi and Chu, 1999; Dubé and Renaghan, 1999 and 2000; Heide et al., 1999; Mattila, 1999; Mei et al., 1999; Oh, 1999; Callan and Bowman, 2000; Chu and Choi, 2000; Heung, 2000; Kandampully and Suhartanto, 2000; Tsang and Qu, 2000; Chen et al., 2001; Choi and Chu, 2001; Barsky and Nash, 2002; Chu, 2002; Mangan and Collins, 2002; Min et al., 2002; Ekinci et al., 2003; Kandampully and Suhartanto, 2003; Yoon and Ekinci, 2003) that, in general, most of those studies used multi-attribute scales, while a minority used qualitative analyses, with a composition rather than a decomposition approach, and have focused on analyzing accommodations attributes from the consumer perspective (Callan, 1994; Bowen and Sparks, 1998; Dubais, 1999; Chen et al. 2001). With regard to the general approaches of the analyses of customer perceptions, the most widespread in the literature is quality, followed by satisfaction, with image relegated to third place. However, many of those s did not conduct an in-depth analysis of the dimensions comprising the cognitive image of accommodations or their importance in the overall accommodations image.

Thus, it is possible to group the principal attributes that the customer considers when forming his/her image of the condominium accommodations into seven specific dimensions and several attributes that include tangible and intangible elements. This will facilitate to conduct comparative studies in different accommodationss and different geographical areas by simple adapting the different attributes to the peculiarities of the accommodations. The seven dimensions are: (1) the establishment in general; (2) primary services; (3) secondary services; (4) accommodations unit; i.e. apartment or bungalow; (5) service personnel; (6) price, and (7) food and beverage offering (F+B); the last only being used when the condominium establishment offering restaurant or cafeteria service. In any case, the number and content of the attributes can vary according to the tourist destination where the accommodations is located.

On the other hand, there is no consensus about the possible influence of each dimension of cognitive image on the overall, holistic image of the accommodations. With regard to the importance that customers attach to the different attributes, various authors, such as Hu and Ritchie (1993), and Chen and Hsu (2000), argue that some attributes have universal importance, while other authors state that each dimension has an importance related to the activity under study (Mackay and Crompton, 1990) or the specific characteristics of the tourist.

Methodology

The empirical research was performed in the geographical setting of Gran Canaria. The population of the study comprised leisure tourists on Gran Canaria, above 18 years old, staying in condominium establishments and from the destination's main sources of tourists, namely, the United Kingdom, Germany, Spain, Scandinavia The Netherlands and Ireland. Those nationalities constitute 86.3% of the island's total tourism. The choice of individuals to form the sample, 312 in all, was made in the departure terminal of Gran Canaria Airport during April and May 2003. We followed a stratified random sampling method, with proportional stratification according to the dimensions of nationality, age and gender.

There follows a brief presentation of the choice of items and scales used in this study for the different constructs dealt with in this research. To measure the perceived functional accommodations image, 51 attributes were initially selected following a review of the literature (figure 2). After ten in-depth interviews with different experts and practitioners, we developed a scale that included the different dimensions of condominium accommodations image and that contained 42 attributes. After applying an initial pretest which included personal interviews to a sample of 22 tourists from different countries, a final scale was obtained with a 32-item, 7-point Likert scale. Finally, that scale was translated into the various languages and each version was pre-tested, remaining without changes. For the overall accommodations image, a single-item (very negative-very positive image) 7- point Likert scale was used.

Analysis of Results

In order to identify the dimension or factors that determine the cognitive image of condominium type accommodations, and given the high number of items, it was necessary to reduce or refine the scale to select the most relevant to determine the construct. Considering that no specific previous research has been conducted into the condominium product, an exploratory factor analysis [2] with varimax rotation was performed to refine the scale referring to the cognitive image of the condominium offering and try to analyze the suitability of the proposed dimensions.

As table 1 shows, the final result does not include all the initial items of the scale, since it was necessary to eliminate some (accommodations architecture, bathroom size, apartment/bungalow size, airconditioning, location, peace and quiet) that showed communalities, or factorial loads far below 0.5, or had similar values in more than one factor, which made it difficult to interpret the factors, giving rise to lower levels of explained variance. The overall reliability level obtained is satisfactory, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.9133, and those levels for the different factors, with Cronbach's alpha values of between 0.71 and 0.91,

Seven clearly defined dimensions have been extracted from the factor analysis. We have labeled these dimensions "Secondary services" (IACC1), "Food and Beverage" (IACC2), "Staff and cleanliness" (IACC3), "Kitchen" (IACC4), "Outdoor areas" (IACC5), "Primary services" (IACC6) and "Price" (IACC7). It can also be seen that (1) the results of the factor analysis can be deemed satisfactory since they jointly explain 70.34% of variance and individually each dimension explains between 6.66% and 13.89%, all with eigen values above one; and (2) the correlations between the factors and the different items, expressed by means of factorial loads, are highly significant, insofar as they all have levels above 0.5 (Hair et al., 1987), except two in the dimension "primary Services".

The first dimension refers to the secondary services offeringed by the accommodations and all its items have similar weight. The dimension corresponding to food and beverage also has the weight distributed equally among quality, variety and price of the offering. The third factor is defined by the service personnel and secondly by general and accommodations unit cleanliness. This dimension, which contains solely intangible elements, groups cleanliness with personnel; an aspect that may be justified because of the closer contact with the cleaning personnel in this type of establishment, due to the tourist usually spending more time in the apartment or bungalow. The fourth dimension refers to the kitchen, a fundamental element in the accommodations unit of a non-hotel establishment, and also includes the views from the accommodations unit. The fifth dimension includes the outdoor areas of the accommodations, specifically gardens and solarium. The sixth dimension defines the primary services of non-hotel accommodations and covers the reception and mini-market, while also including the swimming pool and size of accommodations unit, albeit with a very low loading that might advise its elimination. The final dimension groups price and discounts.

The dimensions obtained largely coincide with those initially proposed (e.g., price, restaurant, secondary services) although there are some differences. The service personnel include cleanliness, which shows the importance of the housekeeping personnel in this type of establishment where there is very direct and frequent contact. The kitchen plays a leading role in the accommodations unit since it is often the reason why the tourist chooses this type of establishment, being perceived as dimension itself. Finally, the dimension of establishment in general was not obtained in the analysis, being replaced by outdoor areas, which constitute the generic image of the establishment.

Factors of the cognitive image of accommodations that determine the overall image

In order to determine which of the seven factors obtained really define the overall, holistic image of a non-hotel establishment perceived by tourists after a direct experience, a logistic regression was used. Following Ekinci et al. (2003), a new, dichotic variable was created based on the average value, which made it was possible to form two groups of tourists: those who evaluated the accommodations image below the average and those who evaluated it above average. The first group contained 46.6% of the sample, and the second the remaining 53.4%.

A logistic regression was run using that dichotic variable as the dependent variable and the previously described seven factors of establishment image as the independent variables. The results of that analysis (see table 2) revealed that the factors that best define the overall image of accommodations are "personnel and cleanliness", "kitchen", "outdoor areas" and "primary services". That regression shows that 49.2% of the individuals in the first group, and 70.0% in the second, are correctly classified, meaning that 60.3% of the total are correctly classified.

Therefore, it can be stated that the dimensions of the cognitive condominium image differ in their importance in explaining the overall accommodations image, with the dimensions of price, food and beverage offering and secondary services being of little importance in the formation of that overall image.

Conclusions

In spite of the limited number of studies on accommodations image, and even more scarcely in the case of the non-hotel accommodations offering, this study analyzed the literature on tourism and hospitality related to the accommodations product and proposed: (1) a conceptualization of the image of the accommodations product, and (2) a measurement scale and some theoretical dimensions of the cognitive image of condominium type accommodations.

The study used a multicultural sample of tourists and the empirical results show the multidimensional nature of that image, which comprises seven factors: "Secondary services", "Food and Beverage", "Staff and cleanliness", "Kitchen", "Outdoor areas", "Primary services" and "Price". The study also shows empirically that some of the dimensions are more important than others in the formation of the overall image of accommodations, namely: "personnel and cleanliness", "kitchen", "outdoor areas" and "primary services".

The results obtained have significant academic and practical implications. On the one hand, the proposed scale shows good measures of fit, which suggests that it may be used in other tourist destinations to analyze condominium type accommodations. This makes it possible to conduct comparative studies in different accommodationss and different geographical areas by simple adapting the different attributes to the peculiarities of the accommodations. The results also suggest that some differences exist among the different image dimensions in explaining the overall image perceived by the tourists. In any case, further studies are necessary to confirm the dimensions that form the image of the condominium accommodations product and their importance.

On the other hand, the results enable practitioners to better understand the condominium accommodations image perceived by tourists as well as to identify the factors that ultimately influence the final image and so prioritize the actions to be taken to improve their management. For instance, (1) housekeeping personnel and its performance play an important role in forming the overall image, been needed specific trainee; (2) The kitchen and its equipment is a key element to be considered in the design of this accommodations type; (3) The main services of condominiums in sun and see destinations are composed by the reception, mini-market and swimming pool; and (4) the general image of the establishment is mainly based on the outdoor areas (e.g., gardens).

Moreover, the results are also of some use to DMO's, since knowledge of the perceived image of the accommodations and its different dimensions, as well as of the influence exercised by different dimensions on the formation of overall image, will help the public institutions responsible for the destination to act to improve that product and to project the correct image to its target markets, since destination image depends, to a great extent, on accommodations image.

Finally, some limitations of this study and future research lines are stressed. From a conceptual point of view, the affective image has not been included in this research, nor have the different factors that might affect the image formation process, such as the customers' personal characteristics and the specific characteristics of the accommodations itself. In this respect, it would be necessary to undertake further research that considers those aspects in developing a general model of formation of the accommodations product image. Moreover, further research in order to analyze the perception of the tourists of different theoretical concepts (satisfaction, quality, and image) is needed, as well as analyzing the dimensions of those concepts and its relationships. From a methodological perspective, this study has some limitations that affect the evaluation and generalization of its results, such as the transversal nature of this study, which recommends longitudinal studies that address the process of image formation and changes in the image and their relationships. Finally, the generalization of the results is yet another limitation, since the area of research only permits the results to be generalized to the population of the sample and to the tourist destination of Gran Canaria, making it advisable to replicate this research in other destinations. Those studies could improve the understanding of different dimensions between different types of products and destinations, as well as testing the existence of differences between the role played by the different dimensions in the formation of the overall image.

Note: The authors would like to knowledge the Gran Canarian Tourism Board (Patronato de Turismo de Gran Canaria) for its financial and logistic support to carry on this research project.

References

References

1. Since the objective of this is to determine the dimensions of condominium type accommodations image, it was considered relevant to make a selective analysis of articles addressing the customer's perception of the accommodations product.

2. Of the great variety of multivariant statistical techniques used to analyze tourism image, factor analysis has been the most commonly used to obtain the dimensions (Pearce, 1982; Fakeye and Crompton, 1991; Echtner and Ritchie, 1993; Walmsley and Jenkins, 1993).

3. Babakus, E. and Boller, G. W.: An empirical assessment of the SERVQUAL scale. Journal of Business Research. 24, 1992, pp. 253-268.

4. Bailey, M.: Hong Kong. EIU International Tourism Reports. 4. 1995, pp. 5-21.

5. Baloglu, S. and Mangaloglu, M.: Tourism Destination Images of Turkey, Egypt, Greece, and Italy as Perceived by US-based Tour Operators and Travel Agents. Tourism Management. 22, 2001, pp. 1-9.

6. Baloglu, S. and Mccleary, K. W.: A model of destination image formation. Annals of Tourism Research. 26, 1, 1999, pp. 868-897.

7. Barsky, J. and Labagh, R.: A strategy for customer satisfaction. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. 35, 3. 1992, pp. 32-40.

8. Beerli, P. A., and Martín, J. D.: Factors influencing destination image. Annals of Tourism Research, 31, 3, 2004, pp. 657-681.

9. Brownell, J.: Applied research in managerial communication: the critical link between knowledge and practice. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. April. 2003, pp. 39-49.

10. Cabildo de Gran Canaria: Gran Canaria Siglo XXI. Plan Estratégico Económico y Social de Gran Canaria. Cabildo de Gran Canaria. 2001.

11. Canarian Government: Informe de llegadas de turistas anuales a Canarias. ISTAC. 2004.

12. Callan, R. J. and Bowman, L.: Selecting a hotel and determining salient quality attributes: a preliminary study of mature British travelers. International Journal of Tourism Research. 2. 2000, pp. 97-118.

13. Chen, J. S. and Hsu, C. H.: Measurement of Korean Tourists Perceived Images of Overseas Destinations. Journal of Travel Research. 38, May, 2000, pp. 411-416.

14. Chen, P. J. and Kerstetter, D. L.: International Students' Image of Rural Pennsylvania as a Travel Destination. Journal of Travel Research. 37, February, 1999, pp. 256-266.

15. Choi, T. Y. and Chu, R. K. S.: Consumer perceptions of the quality of services in three hotel categories in Hong Kong. Journal of Vacation Marketing. 5, 2. 1999, pp. 176-189.

16. Chu, R.: Stated-importance versus derived-importance customer satisfaction measurement. Journal of Services Marketing. 16, 4. 2002, pp. 285-301.

17. Chu, R. K. S. and Choi, T.: An importance-performance analysis of hotel selection factors in the Hong Kong hotel industry: a comparison of business and leisure travelers. Tourism management. 21. 2000, pp. 363-377.

18. Cronin, J. J. and Taylor, S. A.: Measuring service quality: a reexamination and extension. Journal of Marketing. 56. 1992, pp. 55-68.

19. Dubais, B.: Comportamiento del consumidor. Prentice Hall, Madrid,1999.

20. Dubé, L. and Renaghan, L.M.:Creating visible customer value. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. 2000, p. 62-72.

21. Echtner, C.M. and Ritchie, J.R.:The meaning and measurement of destination image. The Journal of Tourism Studies. 2,2. 2001, pp. 2-12.

22. Ekinci, Y., Prokopaki, P. and Cobanoglu, C.: Service quality in Cretan accommodationss: marketing strategies for the UK holiday market. Hospitality Management. 22. 2003, pp. 47-66.

23. Fakeye, P.C. and Crompton, J.L.:Image Differences between Prospective, First-Time, and Repeat Visitors to the Lower Rio Grande Valley. Journal of Travel Research. Fall, 2001, pp. 10-16.

24. Gee, C.Y. :Resort development and management. Educational Institute of the American Hotel and Motel Association. 1998.

25. Getty, J.M. and Thompson, K.N. : A procedure for scaling perceptions of lodging quality. Hospitality Research Journal. 18,2. 1994, pp. 75-96.

26. Gobierno de Canarias.: Entrada de turistas en Canarias por aeropuerto. Consejería de Turismo y Transportes. Gobierno de Canarias. 2003

27. Grönroos, C.: A service quality model and its marketing implications. European Journal of Marketing, 18, 4,1984, pp. 36-44.

28. Hair, J.K.; Anderson, R.E.; Tatham, T.L. and Blanc, W.C.: Análisis Multivariante. Prentice Hall, Madrid. 1987.

29. Heide, M., Gronhaug, K. and Engset, M.G.: Industry specific measurement of consumer satisfaction: experiences from the business traveling industry. Hospitality Management. 18. 1999, pp 201-213.

30. Hu, Y. and Ritchie, J.R.B.: Measuring destination attractiveness: a contextual approach. Journal of Travel Research. 1993, pp. 25-34.

31. Hunt, J.D.: Images as a factor in tourism development. Journal of Travel Research. 13. 1975, pp. 3-7.

32. Jeong, M. and Oh, H.: Quality function deployment: an extended frame for service quality and customer satisfaction in the hospitality industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management. 17. 1998, pp. 375-390.

33. Jones, P.: Multi-unit management in the hospitality industry: a late twentieth century phenomenon. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 11, 4. 1999, pp. 155-164.

34. Kandampully, J. and Suhartanto, D.:The role of customer satisfaction and image in gaining customer loyalty in the hotel industry. Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing. 10,1/2. 2003, pp. 3-25.

35. Laroche, M. and Parsa, H.G.:Brand management in hospitality: an empirical test of the brisoux-laroche model. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research. 24,2. 2000, pp 200-222.

36. Lewis, R.C.:The basis of hotel selection. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. May. 1984, pp 54-59.

37. Mackay, K.J. and Crompton, J.L.: Measuring the quality of recreation services. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration. 8,3. 1990, pp 47-56.

38. Mangan, E. and Collins, A. Threats to brand integrity in the hospitality sector: evidence from a tourist brand. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 14, 6. 2002, pp. 286-293.

39. Mazursky, D. and Jacoby, J.: Exploring the development of store images. Journal of Retailing, 62, 2, 1986, pp. 145-165.

40. Mei, A.W.O., Dean, A.M. and White, C.J.: Analyzing service quality in the hospitality industry. Managing Service Quality. 9,2. 1999, pp. 136-143.

41. Moreno, G.S.: Tourism development in the Canary Islands. Annals of Tourism Research. 30,3. 2003, pp. 744-747.

42. Morey, R.C. and Dittman, D.A.: An aid in selecting brand, size, and other strategic choices for a hotel. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research. 21,1. 1997, pp. 71-99.

43. Murphy, P, Pritchard, M, and Smith, B.: The destination product and its impact on traveler perceptions. Tourism Management, 21, 1, 2000, pp. 43-52.

44. Oberoi, U. and Hales, C.: Assessing the quality of the conference hotel service product: towards an empirically based model. Service Industries Journal. 10. 2002, pp. 700-721.

45. Olsen, M.; Damonte, T. and Jackson, G.A.: Segmentation in the lodging industry: is doomed to failure?. American Hotel and Motel Association Newsletter. 1989

46. Pearce, P.L.: Perceived Changes in Holiday Destinations. Annals of Tourism Research. Vol. 9, 1982, pp. 145-164.

47. Piccoli, G. and Wagner, E.L.: The value of academic research. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. April. 2003, pp. 29-38.

48. Taylor, S.A. and Cronin, J.J.: Modeling patient satisfaction and service quality. Journal of Health Care Marketing. 14,1. 1994, pp 34-44.