Travel coupon proneness

RESEARCH NOTES AND REPORTS This Department publishes research notes, conference reports, reports on the work of public agencies and associations, field (industry) reports, and other relevant topics and timely issues. Contributions to this department are submitted to its three Associate Editors: Research Notes should be submitted directly via the Elsevier Editorial System web site for this journal at http://ees.elsevier.com/atr; and Conference Reports to Russell Smith . Unsolicited conference and agency reports will not be accepted.

RESEARCH NOTES

Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 38, No. 4, pp. 1653–1657, 2011 0160-7383/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Printed in Great Britain

www.elsevier.com/locate/atoures

TRAVEL COUPON PRONENESS Young A Park Catholic University of Daegu, Korea Ulrike Gretzel University of Wollongong, Australia

Coupons are an important marketing vehicle and the importance of coupons will continue to grow as improved Internet and mobile technologies allow coupons to become more targeted (DelVecchio, 2005). Coupons are important promotional tools and have been studied extensively in the marketing literature. Coupon use is also widespread in tourism. Coupons are particularly used to influence tourists while en route and, consequently, are an important factor in encouraging unplanned stops. The question is whether all tourists are equally likely to be persuaded by such promotional efforts. Coupon proneness, which refers to a consumer’s inherent propensity to use coupons, has been conceptualized as one dimension of deal proneness and as a psychological construct rather than a simple behavioral measure (Lichtenstein, Netemeyer, & Burton, 1990; Bawa & Shoemaker, 1987). According to Colombo, Bawa, and Srinivasan (2003), an individual’s coupon proneness is not the same for all types of coupons. Swaminathan and Bawa (2005) support the idea that coupon proneness needs to be measured at the level of the product category. Thus, it is important to examine coupon proneness regarding tourism-related products using a tourism-specific coupon proneness scale. Despite their practical relevance and widespread use, coupons have been rarely studied in the context of tourism, and those studies that have been concerned with coupons have largely focused on coupon conversion (Ellerbrock, 1981; Woodside, 1981; Hunt & Dalton, 1983). Pennington-Gray, Beland, and Sklar (2002) investigated attitudes and behaviors regarding senior discounts. However, only one of their measurement items specifically addressed coupon usage. 1653

1654

Research notes and reports / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 1653–1662

A study was conducted to test a tourism-related coupon proneness scale. Respondents for the study were recruited using an intercept survey at 10 visitor centers along a major traffic corridor in the Midwest United States during the Fall of 2005 and 2006. The intercept survey was administered by visitor center staff and volunteers and asked questions about the purpose and nature of the stop and specifically if travel information was acquired. A total of 3161 respondents agreed to participate in a follow-up survey. Of those, 984 were randomly selected to receive the mail survey about travel coupon proneness and 443 actually completed the questionnaire (response rate = 45%) after a process that included sending the full survey kit, followed by a reminder postcard, and finally another survey kit. Due to missing values, only 419 questionnaires were used for the analysis. The survey instrument included a coupon proneness scale adapted from Lichtenstein et al. (1990) and modified to fit the tourism context. While the original scale included 8 items, the travel coupon proneness scale included in the questionnaire consisted of 11 items. Also, several items were reworded to fit the tourism context and one item was added to capture the often ongoing nature of tourism information search. All items were measured using 5-point scales ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). The items measured both attitudes toward coupons as well as actual use behaviors. After preliminary analyses, two items were excluded as they were so highly correlated with other items in the scale that they were redundant. Therefore, the resulting scale included 5 attitudinal items and 4 behavioral items (Table 1). A confirmatory factor analysis based on the correlation matrix of these items (Figure 1) was conducted using LISREL 8.8. The one factor model did not represent an adequate fit to the data (Table 2), with RMSEA exhibiting poor fit (Hu & Bentler, 1999) and residuals being large. The Chi Square statistic was also significant; however, given the relatively large sample size, it is likely inflated. As the scale was conceptualized to include both attitudinal as well as behavioral measures, these

Table 1. Properties of Travel Coupon Proneness Items Scales and items Attitudes toward travel coupons Redeeming coupons makes me feel good I enjoy clipping coupons out of brochures or newspapers When I use coupons;I feel that I am getting a good deal I enjoy using coupons;regardless of the amount I save by doing so Beyond the money I save;redeeming coupons gives me a sense of joy

Mean Std. Dev. Lambda AVE CR 0.66 0.91 3.57 3.12

1.201 1.315

0.83 0.87

3.48

1.113

0.86

2.81

1.227

0.73

2.72

1.247

0.77

1.171

0.80

1.311

0.71

1.237 1.347

0.69 0.87

Travel coupon use behaviors I am more likely to opt for places for which I have a 3.08 coupon Coupons have caused me to eat at restaurants at 3.12 which I normally would not have eaten I have visited attractions because I had a coupon 3.20 I always look for coupons when traveling 3.01

0.59 0.85

Lambda = parameter estimates based on structural equation model;AVE = average variance extracted;CR = composite reliability.

Research notes and reports / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 1653–1662

1655

1 0.731 1 0.749 0.744 1 0.566 0.620 0.649 1 0.575 0.575 0.618 0.528 1 0.481 0.481 0.475 0.397 0.601 1 0.480 0.499 0.533 0.433 0.540 0.575 1 0.625 0.661 0.614 0.632 0.546 0.473 0.513 1 0.614 0.707 0.623 0.566 0.690 0.612 0.576 0.664 1 Figure 1. Correlation Matrix

Table 2. Measures of Model Fit One factor model

Second order factor/structural equation model

Chi square results 155.49, df = 20

106.84, df = 26

Goodness of fit indices NFI = 0.96 GFI = 0.91 CFI = 0.97 NNFI = 0.95

NFI = 0.98 GFI = 0.95 CFI = 0.98 NNFI = 0.98

Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) 0.130 0.086 Residuals RMR = 0.051 Largest fitted residual = 0.19

RMR = 0.032 Largest fitted residual = 0.08

two dimensions provided the basis for a second order factor analysis. The model fit improved significantly (Dv2 = 48.64; df = 6; p < 0.001) with all fit indices improving, the factor loadings being higher, RMSEA reaching an acceptable threshold, RMR suggesting excellent fit, and the residuals being reduced to acceptable levels (Table 2). However, the coefficient from the second order factor to attitude was greater than 1 and the correlation between attitude and behavior so large that two independent dimensions could not be assumed. Attitude—behavior links are well established in the literature (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1977), consequently, the structural relationship between travel coupon-related attitude and behavior was examined. The result showed a significant influence of attitude on behavior, with a standardized coefficient of 0.87. The items, their measurement properties, loadings on the two dimensions, average variance extracted, and the composite reliabilities for the two constructs are reported in Table 1. The results suggest that travel coupon proneness encompasses two distinct yet highly related dimensions that capture positive attitudes towards travel coupons and actual travel coupon use behaviors, and that the attitudes regarding travel coupons greatly influence actual coupon use in a trip context. Additional analyses were conducted to investigate the relationship of travel coupon proneness with demographic variables, travel planning styles and unplanned behavior. The focus was on attitudes toward travel coupons as these were established to influence behaviors. With respect to the demographic characteristics, t-test results suggest that gender has an influence on coupon attitudes, with

1656

Research notes and reports / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 1653–1662

females being more coupon prone (Female mean = 3.26; Male mean = 2.90; t = 2.74; p = 0.007). No significant influences were found for age and children living in the household. As far as income is concerned, travelers with household incomes below $20,000 are more likely to enjoy coupons ($20,000 mean = 3.12; t = 2.19; p = 0.036). No relationships were found between the travel coupon proneness scales and the extent to which trips are planned in advance, how far in advance trips are planned, and when (before or during the trip) specific trip-related decisions are taken. Several promising relationships were found between coupon proneness and unplanned travel behavior. Respondents were classified as either coupon-prone (score of 3 or higher on the coupon attitude scale) or not. About half (50.8%) of the respondents fall into the highly coupon-prone category. Chi-square tests were conducted to test the relationships between unplanned behavior and coupon proneness. Coupon-prone travelers were somewhat more likely to have made an unplanned stop during their trip (93.9% compared to 87.6%; p = 0.036). They are more likely to indicate that their unplanned stop was prompted by a coupon (10.1% compared to 0.6%; p = 0.000). They were also more likely to use coupon books to find out about potential stops when en route (16% compared to 4.9%; p = 0.001). In general, coupon-prone travelers were more likely to indicate that they would deviate from their planned trip route and make an unplanned stop if that stop provided them with good value for money (31.0% compared to 16.6%; p = 0.007), a special discount or reduced rate (23.8% compared to 4.1%; p = 0.000), or a cheaper alternative than the planned option (16.7% compared to 5.2%; p = 0.000). The results indicate that travel coupon proneness can be successfully measured with the proposed items. They also suggest coupon attitudes are generally not linked to socio-demographic characteristics, although women and very low income households seem to enjoy coupons more. Importantly, coupon proneness is not a travel planning style-related variable. It can, however, significantly influence travel plans in that it makes individuals more prone to respond to special deals and coupons when en route. Indeed, deal-proneness has been positively linked to impulsebuying in past research (DelVecchio, 2005). These findings are of significance for tourism marketers in that they indicate that not everyone will respond equally to coupon-related offers. The research is of importance for future studies in that it provides a tested measure for travelspecific coupon proneness. It also suggests that coupon proneness might be an important variable to consider when studying unplanned travel behavior. Ulrike Gretzel: University of Wollongong, Northfields Ave, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia. E-mail:

REFERENCES Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888–918. Bawa, K., & Shoemaker, R. W. (1987). The coupon-prone consumer: Some findings based on purchase behavior across product classes. Journal of Marketing, 51, 99–110. Colombo, R., Bawa, K., & Srinivasan, S. S. (2003). Examining the dimensionality of coupon proneness: A random coefficients approach. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 10, 27–33. DelVecchio, D. (2005). Deal-prone consumers’ response to promotion: The effects of relative and absolute promotion value. Psychology and Marketing, 22(5), 373–391.

Research notes and reports / Annals of Tourism Research 38 (2011) 1653–1662

1657

Ellerbrock, M. J. (1981). Improving coupon conversion studies: A comment. Journal of Travel Research, 19, 37–38. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. Hunt, J. D., & Dalton, M. J. (1983). Comparing mail and telephone for conducting coupon conversion studies. Journal of Travel Research, 21(3), 16–18. Lichtenstein, D., Netemeyer, R., & Burton, S. (1990). Distinguishing coupon proneness from value consciousness: An acquisition-transaction utility perspective. Journal of Marketing, 54, 54–67. Pennington-Gray, L., Beland, R., & Sklar, S. (2002). Examining the influences of senior discount usage in the hospitality industry. International Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Administration, 3(4), 77–93. Swaminathan, S., & Bawa, K. (2005). Category-specific coupon proneness: The impact of individual characteristics and category-specific variables. Journal of Retailing, 81(3), 205–214. Woodside, A. (1981). Measuring the conversion of advertising coupon inquirers into visitors. Journal of Travel Research, 19(4), 38–39. Submitted 10 October 2008. Resubmitted 31 March 2009. Resubmitted 23 July 2009. Resubmitted 1 April 2009. Final version 13 May 2009. Accepted 2 May 2009. Refereed anonymously. Coordinating Editor: Juergen Gnoth doi:10.1016/j.annals.2011.05.005

Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 38, No. 4, pp. 1657–1662, 2011 0160-7383/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Printed in Great Britain

PLANNED LEISURE BEHAVIOUR AND PET ATTACHMENT Annie Huiling Chen, Kuang-peng Hung Ming Chuan University, Taiwan, ROC Norman Peng University of Westminster, United Kingdom As modern individuals place more value on leisure and become more attached to their pets, one dilemma for pet owners when planning their leisure activities is whether to take their companion animals along with them. To date, there have been few attempts to address this question. This presents two significant gaps in the current leisure research. First, we do not know how this development influences pet owners’ leisure behaviour. Second, the current literature provides few models to explain how leisure activities are planned and engaged in by multiple participants, including pets. On the one hand, although leisure research is now a mature discipline with many significant studies, the gap regarding when leisure activities are jointly consumed still remains (March & Woodside, 2005). For this reason, the details and implications of such behaviour remain largely unexplained. Further, studies by anthrozoologists have yet to capture pets’ influence on owners’ leisure activities, although human-pet joint participation in some general events have been re-