Description
The purpose of this paper is to assess whether tourist shopper segments are an attractive
market for shopping centers. This research aims to explore whether or not tourist shoppers are more
satisfied than resident shoppers with their shopping experience and whether tourist shoppers have the
intention to spend more than their resident shopper counterparts
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research
Tourist shoppers' satisfaction with regional shopping mall experiences
Melody L.A. LeHew Scarlett C. Wesley
Article information:
To cite this document:
Melody L.A. LeHew Scarlett C. Wesley, (2007),"Tourist shoppers' satisfaction with regional shopping mall
experiences", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 1 Iss 1 pp. 82 - 96
Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506180710729628
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 22:00 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 54 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 5337 times since 2007*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Zafar U. Ahmed, Morry Ghingold, Zainurin Dahari, (2007),"Malaysian shopping mall behavior: an
exploratory study", Asia Pacific J ournal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 19 Iss 4 pp. 331-348 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/13555850710827841
Mohammed Ismail El-Adly, (2007),"Shopping malls attractiveness: a segmentation approach",
International J ournal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 35 Iss 11 pp. 936-950 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/09590550710828245
Eddie C.M. Hui, Pei-hua Zhang, Xian Zheng, (2013),"Facilities management service and
customer satisfaction in shopping mall sector", Facilities, Vol. 31 Iss 5/6 pp. 194-207 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/02632771311307070
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:115632 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Tourist shoppers’ satisfaction
with regional shopping mall
experiences
Melody L.A. LeHew
Department of Apparel, Textiles and Interior Design,
College of Human Ecology, Kansas State University, Manhattan,
Kansas, USA, and
Scarlett C. Wesley
Department of Merchandising, Apparel and Textiles,
School of Human Environmental Sciences, College of Agriculture,
University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to assess whether tourist shopper segments are an attractive
market for shopping centers. This research aims to explore whether or not tourist shoppers are more
satis?ed than resident shoppers with their shopping experience and whether tourist shoppers have the
intention to spend more than their resident shopper counterparts.
Design/methodology/approach – Data for this report come from personal face-to-face mall
intercepts of shoppers (n ¼ 578) in two new generation malls (West Edmonton Mall and Mall of
America in Bloomington) and two heritage-destination (Pier 39 in San Francisco and Forum Shops in
Las Vegas) centers.
Findings – Analysis concludes that although the shopping center and retail industry place
increasing emphasis on leisure shopping and tourism, the results of this study suggest that the tourist
shopper market may not be the most valuable customer group. Resident shoppers of tourist-focused
shopping centers are more satis?ed than tourist shoppers of those centers.
Research limitations/implications – The non-random nature of the sample for this study is the
primary limitation. Therefore, the results are not generalizable to the greater population of tourist
focused shopping centers.
Practical implications – The shopping center and retail industry place increasing emphasis on
leisure shopping and tourism, but the results of this study suggest that the tourist shopper market
may not be the most valuable customer group. Resident shoppers of tourist-focused shopping centers
are more satis?ed than tourist shoppers of those centers. These ?ndings should encourage shopping
center managers to use caution when modifying strategies to meet the needs of the tourist segment, as
well as to not forget the importance of resident shoppers to their pro?tability.
Originality/value – These ?ndings should encourage shopping center managers to use caution
when modifying strategies to meet the needs of the tourist segment, as well as to not forget the
importance of resident shoppers to their pro?tability.
Keywords Tourism, Shopping, Shopping centres, Customer satisfaction, United States of America
Paper type Research paper
Shopping is a preferred activity for travelers and the shopping center industry
responds by developing new properties or adjusting strategies to encourage
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1750-6182.htm
The authors gratefully acknowledge funding of this study by a grant from the International
Council of Shopping Centers Educational Foundation.
IJCTHR
1,1
82
Received September 2006
Revised October 2006
Accepted November 2006
International Journal of Culture,
Tourism and Hospitality Research
Vol. 1 No. 1, 2007
pp. 82-96
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1750-6182
DOI 10.1108/17506180710729628
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
patronage by tourist shoppers (Paige and Littrell, 2003). Examples of large-scale
tourist-oriented shopping malls currently operating include Mall of America and
West Edmonton Mall. The Mall of America attracts approximately 43 million visitors
per year (Gill, 2007), while the West Edmonton Mall annual visits are around
22 million (Hazel, 2001).
According to the International Council of Shopping Centers (2000, p. 3), malls are
able “to foster the same magical experiences that were once only seen in national
amusement parks such as Disney World”. Similar to retailers, who are placing
increasing emphasis on entertaining customers (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Kruger,
2001; Mazur, 1999; Wilson, 2001), shopping centers recognize that a fun and interesting
shopping experience is important (Anonymous, 2000; Ginsburg, 1999; International
Council of Shopping Centers, 2000). Large, tourist-focused shopping centers typically
include amusement parks, ice skating rinks, water parks, and/or various other
entertainment venues as part of their tenant mix. Emphasizing entertainment
strategies and shopping as a leisure activity allow shopping centers to broaden their
customer base to include tourist shoppers.
The attempt to draw in a tourist-oriented customer base appears to be in opposition
to the retail industry’s increased interest in building customer loyalty (Cuthbertson and
Laine, 2004; Forseter, 2005; Hallowell, 1996; Kumar and Shah, 2004; LeHew et al., 2002;
Macintosh and Lockshin, 1997; Magi, 2003; Oliver, 1999; Stone and Bearman, 2004;
Wallace and Giese, 2004). Attracting non-residents to patronize a shopping center
encourages a temporary relationship with these customers. In an age where
organizations attempt to quantify the lifetime value of a customer, targeting short-term
customers appears illogical. Therefore, evaluating whether tourist shoppers may be an
attractive market for shopping centers is important. The purpose of this paper is to
investigate key differences in shopping satisfaction and behavioral intentions between
tourist and resident shoppers.
Review of literature
Tourism and tourist shopping behavior
For travelers, shopping is the number one trip activity for both domestic and
international tourists (Goeldner et al., 2000; Kent et al., 1983; TIA, 2003), and for many a
trip is not complete without having spent time shopping (Hudman and Hawkins, 1989).
TIA (2003) estimates that 34 percent of all trips by US tourists include shopping as
an activity. However, the importance of shopping as a tourist activity is not well
represented in the literature (Heung and Cheng, 2000; Law and Au, 2000).
The travel industry de?nes persons who travel as visitors (Paci, 1992). These
visitors are persons who travel outside their usual environment for leisure, business, or
other purposes, at which point the act of traveling becomes tourism (Paci, 1992).
Tourism is the activities of people who travel to and stay in places outside their usual
environment. Tourists are temporary visitors to a destination (Paci, 1992) and will
return to their permanent residencies after traveling.
As traveling increases, so does shopping. With many options available to travelers
today, shopping currently accounts for 33 percent of all trips taken in the USA, followed
by outdoor activities (17 percent), visits to historical sites and museums (14 percent),
and travel to beaches, cultural events, and festivals, and national/state parks
(10 percent each), (TIA, 2003). Tourists are also spending money when they travel.
Tourist
shoppers’
satisfaction
83
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
For example, in 2001, General Growth Properties, one of the US’ largest shopping center
owners, reports an estimated 31 percent of its annual sales came from tourist customers
(PRNewswire, 2001a). Similarly, a study by the Travel Industry Association of America
and Taubman Centers (TIA, 2001a) ?nds that for more than half (51 percent) of US
adults traveling named shopping as their primary or secondary reason for travel.
Findings also suggest tourist shoppers spend a lot on their purchases – an average of
$333 during each trip taken, with 22 percent spending more than $500 each trip (TIA,
2001a).
Tourists like to take something home from the trip (Gordon, 1986), and therefore,
they go shopping. A tourist’s shopping behavior is very different from his/her
normal shopping activity. “They spend money on small foolish items because it is
not an ordinary time” (Gordon, 1986, p. 139). As a tourist, a person does not have to
think about their job or any other obligations they have at home. The tourist also
gains satisfaction from the shopping experience, separate from the purchase of the
product (Buttle, 1992; Christiansen and Snepenger, 2002). Tourist shopping is not
only limited to souvenirs but also includes purchases of clothing, jewelry, books,
arts and crafts, and electronics (Timothy and Butler, 1995). Typically, tourists do
not go shopping with a speci?c list; rather shopping becomes a by-product of their
travel experiences (Thomas and LeTourneur, 2001). Tourists spend approximately
one-third of their total expenditures on shopping purchases (Grattan and Taylor,
1987; Littrell et al., 1994) only spending more on their accommodations (Turner and
Reisinger, 2001).
When shopping, tourists base their purchase decisions on several factors. Research
?nds that tourists look for high-quality, well-designed products (Costello and
Fairhurst, 2002; Littrell et al., 1994; Paige and Littrell, 2003; Reisinger and Turner,
2002). Many tourists will spend more money on purchasing an item while they are
away from home, so they want to secure the highest quality item possible. Tourists feel
that purchasing an item by a well-known manufacturer is very important (Littrell et al.,
1994), and therefore, look to ?nd well-known brand names or logos when shopping
(Gee, 1987). These well-known products are brands with which they are familiar;
thereby they feel con?dent in their purchase decisions.
Research shows that tourist shoppers look for unique products unavailable at home
or unique to the tourist destination (Costello and Fairhurst, 2002; Littrell et al., 1994;
Paige and Littrell, 2003; Reisinger and Turner, 2002). The unique quality of the product
enhances the tourism experience by giving the tourist a special memory about their trip
(Turner and Reisinger, 2001), allowing them to positively reminisce about the
experience they had while traveling. However, whether or not this characteristic is
generalizable to all shopping formats is questionable. The researchers ?nding
uniqueness to be important to tourist shoppers were looking at shopping in local retail
areas versus shopping center settings. Many shopping centers are similar from location
to location. Therefore, shoppers of shopping centers may not expect to ?nd unique
retail storefronts, but rather are looking for the shops with which they are the most
familiar.
Shopping satisfaction
The marketing concept suggests that satisfying customers should be the primary goal
for ?rms because satisfaction leads to pro?tability. “One key measure of whether
IJCTHR
1,1
84
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
retailers are ful?lling the marketing concept is that of customer satisfaction” (Ellis and
Marino, 1992, p. 42). Satisfaction with a shopping experience encourages re-patronage
intentions, and customer loyalty (Hallowell, 1996). For retail organizations, whether a
retail store or a shopping center with multiple retail tenants, offering appropriate mix
of products, services, and experiences enhances customer satisfaction. Brown (1978)
identi?es relevant attribute categories through which retail organizations attempt to
satisfy customers: merchandise, service, physical characteristics, employees, and other
shoppers (as cited in Ellis and Marino, 1992). Assessment of customer attitudes
relating to such retail attributes allows management to modify strategies and increase
shopping satisfaction (Ellis and Marino, 1992).
As well as satisfaction, respondent’s intention to spend money during the current
shopping trip is a variable of interest. Research supports the link between satisfaction
and pro?tability (Gomez et al., 2004; Hallowell, 1996). Hallowell (1996) ?nds that
customer loyalty explains nearly 40 percent of the variance in pro?tability. Likewise,
customer satisfaction explains 37 percent of differing customer loyalty levels
(Hallowell, 1996). Since, evidence supports the link between satisfaction and
pro?tability, shopping center strategies increasing tourist shopping satisfaction
should result in greater spending by these customers. Tourism research ?nds tourist
shoppers spending more than other shoppers (McCormick, 2002; TIA, 2001a, b). If so,
shopping center managers may modify center attributes to increase tourists’
satisfaction if they intend to target them as part of the overall marketing strategy.
Research questions
RQ1. Are tourist shoppers more satis?ed than resident shoppers with their
shopping experience?
RQ2. Do tourist shoppers have intention to spend more than resident shoppers?
Method
Responding to the increasing demand for leisure shopping, centers utilize one of three
strategic models: ambient leisure, new generation mall (NGM), or heritage-destination
leisure (Johnson, 1990). The ambient leisure model recommends creating a pleasant
shopping environment to encourage shoppers to extend their stay in the property
(Johnson, 1990). Whereas, the NGM model calls for the property to become the tourist
destination by offering recreational and entertainment attractions as part of the tenant
mix (Johnson, 1990). The third possible model, the heritage-destination model, results
in a shopping center appealing to both shoppers and sightseers to an existing tourist
area (Johnson, 1990). The last two models: NGM and heritage-destination leisure, are of
interest in this study because they represent shopping centers that target tourists as
well as resident shoppers. Therefore, for this study, four North American shopping
centers represent the typical centers attracting tourist shoppers: The Mall of America,
West Edmonton Mall, The Forum Shops, and Pier 39. The Mall of America and West
Edmonton Mall are shopping centers that are travel destinations – NGMs. These
centers draw visitors from around the world. The remaining two centers also attract
tourist shoppers, but these centers may not be the primary destination for travelers.
The Forum Shops and Pier 39 are centers locating within or nearby very popular travel
Tourist
shoppers’
satisfaction
85
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
destinations (Las Vegas, Nevada and San Francisco, California, respectively) and
classify as heritage-destination centers (HDC).
In Bloomington, Minnesota, the Mall of America is the US’ largest retail and
entertainment complex, attracting more visitors annually then Disney World
(PR Newswire, 2001b). The Mall of America is a major tourist destination with
average sales around $860 million per year (Lisanti, 1998) with approximately 50
percent of gross sales attributed to tourism (Pesmen, 1994).
The West Edmonton Mall covers 5.3 million square feet of shopping and
entertainment space and is currently listed as Alberta’s number one tourist attraction
(Fast Facts, 2002). Developers of the mall sought to create a mixed shopping and
entertainment environment powerful enough to become a major tourist destination
(Getz, 1993).
The Forum Shops in Las Vegas, Nevada is one of the earliest shopping-
center-as-theme-park creations, drawing around $1,200 per square foot in annual sales,
whereas the national average for per square foot sales is around $300 (Ginsburg, 1999).
The Forum Shops uniquely simulates ancient Roman streets and connects to Caesar’s
Palace casino and hotel.
Pier 39 is in San Francisco, California and is San Francisco’s number one tourist
attraction with approximately 10.5 million visitors each year (Pier 39 press priorities,
2002). Located just two blocks from Fisherman’s Wharf, Pier 39 provides stunning
views of the Golden Gate Bridge, Alcatraz, Angel Island, and the San Francisco Bay
(Pier 39 press priorities, 2002).
Survey instrument
Items for this study are part of a larger study investigating attribute preferences and
shopping orientations of shopping center customers. Customer satisfaction and their
intention to spend are of interest in this study, as well as characteristics of the
respondents. The questionnaire measures satisfaction using a ?ve-point Likert-type
scale. Responses may range from satis?ed (1) to dissatis?ed (5), with the mid-point (3)
representing an undecided response. Two of the satisfaction items measure overall
satisfaction with the shopping center. A total of 12 remaining items focus on
respondent satisfaction with various aspects of the shopping center: retailer and
merchandise characteristics; service and convenience; and physical characteristics of
the center. Spending intentions of the respondents are measured using nominal scales.
Respondents chose the category representing their intended level of spending.
Choosing only one, respondents selected the category they intended to spend the most
from a list of typical category measures. The instrument also measures speci?c
characteristics of the respondents, such as whether resident or tourist, frequency of
visits, and other demographic details.
Data collection
Shopping center representatives agreed to allow data collection using the mall
intercept technique. Researchers were positioned in a central location of each shopping
center, and an informational sign detailed the study. Shoppers were asked to
participate in the study as they passed by the collection location. Each respondent was
given a participation gift after completing the questionnaire. The ?nal convenience
sample contained 578 respondents.
IJCTHR
1,1
86
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Sample description
Table I presents characteristics of the sample. Females are approximately two-
thirds of the sample. Respondents are primarily young, with 30 percent falling in
the range of 18-24 years old. The next groups are evenly split between the ranges
of 25 and 34 years old (21 percent) and 35-44 years old (23 percent). The sample is
predominantly White/Caucasian ethnic origin (75 percent). The next largest ethnic
group is Asian/Paci?c Islander (9 percent). Marital status is evenly split between
single and married respondents. About 31 percent of respondents report
completing some college (31 percent) and approximately 22 percent report
completing high school (22 percent). About 22 percent have a Bachelor’s degree (22
percent). The demographic characteristics of this sample represent the typical
shopper in the NGMs and HDCs, but may not hold true in all such shopping
centers. The data collection method was not random due to the exploratory nature
of the study.
Frequency Percent N
Gender 573
Female 376 65.62
Male 197 34.38
Age 575
18-24 177 30.78
25-34 123 21.39
35-44 134 23.30
45-54 78 13.57
55-64 41 7.13
65-74 15 2.61
75 þ 7 1.21
Ethnic origin 574
African American 20 3.38
American Indian/Eskimo 6 1.04
Asian/Paci?c Islander 52 9.04
Hispanic 44 7.65
White 429 74.61
Other 23 4.00
Marital status 578
Never married 244 42.21
Married 279 48.27
Divorced 45 7.79
Widowed 10 1.73
Education level 577
Grade school 34 5.89
High school/GED 124 21.49
Some college 178 30.85
Associate’s degree 40 6.93
Bachelor’s degree 126 21.84
Graduate/professional 75 13.00
Note: Total sample size varies due to missing data
Table I.
Description of sample
Tourist
shoppers’
satisfaction
87
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Data analysis
Data analysis includes using SAS 9.1 computer software. The data analysis utilizes the
578 usable surveys from the study. If a response item was missing, that respondent
was dropped from the analysis. Therefore, overall sample size may vary during the
separate analyses.
T-tests analyze the differences between resident and tourist shopper satisfaction. x
2
tests assess the differences between resident and tourist shoppers’ intentions and
behaviors. Respondents were asked to identify the amount of money they were
planning to spend, their primary reason for visiting the shopping center, as well as the
number of times they had visited that center. These items are nominal variables;
therefore, x
2
tests are appropriate.
Results and discussion
The purpose of this research is to investigate the attractiveness of targeting a tourist
market by examining key difference in shopping satisfaction and behavioral
intentions. Two research questions were posed:
RQ1. Are tourist shoppers more satis?ed than resident shoppers with their
shopping experience?
RQ2. Do tourist shoppers have intention to spend more than resident shoppers?
A signi?cant difference occurs in shopping satisfaction between resident and tourist
shoppers along several satisfaction dimensions (Tables II and III). Satisfaction is
higher among resident versus tourist shoppers in regards to:
.
the ease of locating stores;
.
the number of retail stores;
.
the overall convenience of the center;
.
the size of the center;
.
the layout of stores in the center;
.
the variety of stores; and
.
the ability to comparison shop in the center.
Variable Resident mean Tourist mean
Ease of locating stores 1.91 2.23
Number of retail stores 1.52 1.83
Number of food retailers 1.72 1.86
Number of entertainment facilities 1.73 1.92
Prices offered by retailers 2.67 2.83
Fashionability of merchandise 1.83 2.04
Overall convenience 1.73 1.98
Parking facilities 2.20 2.40
Size of center 1.57 1.84
Layout of center 1.75 1.95
Variety of stores 1.70 1.91
Ability to comparison shop 2.02 2.48
Experience in center today 1.66 1.77
When think of center I am 1.74 1.86
Table II.
Mean satisfaction of
resident and tourist
shoppers (1 ¼ satis?ed,
5 ¼ dissatis?ed)
IJCTHR
1,1
88
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
No difference is found in overall satisfaction with the shopping center between resident
and tourist shoppers (Table IV). Tourist shoppers are not experiencing greater
satisfaction, and according to the satisfaction literature should not be as lucrative a
market to target as the satis?ed resident shoppers.
x
2
test results do not show a signi?cant difference in the amount of money that
tourist and resident shoppers were planning to spend in the shopping centers (Table V).
The lack of signi?cant x
2
statistic suggests that differences found are not great
enough to rule out chance. Results indicate that both research questions must be
answered in a negative sense: tourist shoppers were not more satis?ed with the
shopping center and do not intend to spend more money while visiting the center.
To better understand tourist shoppers, two additional questions related to shopping
center behavior were asked:
(1) What was the primary reason for visiting the center?
(2) How often had this particular center been visited in the past?
x
2
results suggest that tourist shoppers are more likely than residents to visit the
shopping center for entertainment and socializing, whereas resident shoppers are more
likely than tourists to visit for other, non-speci?ed, reasons (Table V). The greatest
frequency of response to this question was shopping as the primary reason to visit the
center for both residents and tourists; no signi?cant difference in shopping motivation
of the two groups is found. Resident shoppers are more likely than can be expected by
chance to be regular customers, with more than ?ve visits to that center. Tourists are
more likely to be ?rst time visitors, or to have visited 1-5 times.
Tourists may not be the most valuable target market for shopping centers. Each
data collection center for this study was a tourist destination (NGM) or located within a
Variable t-value df Pr . jtj
Ease of locating stores 22.83 330 0.005
Number of retail stores 22.99 325 0.003
Number of food retailers 21.23 332 0.219
Number of entertainment facilities 21.78 325 0.077
Prices offered by retailers 21.24 332 0.215
Fashionability of merchandise 21.90 331 0.058
Overall convenience 22.34 333 0.020
Parking facilities 21.40 319 0.161
Size of center 22.78 333 0.006
Layout of center 21.95 330 0.053
Variety of stores 22.02 332 0.044
Ability to comparison shop 23.79 331 0.000
Experience in center today 21.16 328 0.247
When think of center I am 21.32 327 0.186
Table III.
Comparison of resident
and tourist satisfaction
using a t-test: individual
items
Variable t-value df Pr . jtj
Center attribute satisfaction 22.66 285 0.008
Overall satisfaction 21.40 320 0.163
Table IV.
Comparison of resident
and tourist satisfaction
using t-test: summed
items
Tourist
shoppers’
satisfaction
89
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
popular tourist area (HDC). Even shoppers in tourist focused centers tend to be less
satis?ed, are not planning to spend signi?cantly more than resident shoppers, are less
frequent shoppers, and are primarily motivated to visit the center for entertainment
and socializing. Therefore, the tourist market may not be the most attractive market for
shopping centers in general.
The unexpected results stimulate a desire to better understand tourist shoppers.
Therefore, some additional post-hoc tests were conducted by dividing the sample into
customers of shopping centers located in a tourist area (HDC) and customers of centers
developed as tourist destinations (new generation mall). Statistical t tests compared the
mean scores for satisfaction of respondents in new generation malls (NGM) and
heritage-destination centers (HDC) (Tables VI and VII). Findings suggest that NGM
shoppers are more satis?ed than HDC shoppers with almost all of the shopping center
attributes. New generation mall shoppers are more satis?ed with:
.
the number of retail stores in the center;
.
the number of food retailers in the center;
.
the number of entertainment facilities in the center;
.
prices offered by retailers in the center;
.
the fashionability of merchandise offered in the center;
.
overall convenience of the center;
.
the parking facilities of the center;
.
the size of the center;
.
the layout of the center;
.
the variety of stores in the center; and
.
the ability to comparison shop in the center.
N
Resident n
(percent)
Tourist n
(percent)
Total sample
percent
Amount of money plan to spend
(x
2
¼ 6.19, df ¼ 3, p ¼ 0.103) 332
$1-50 78 (52.7) 70 (47.3) 44.6
$51-100 31 (20.4) 48 (60.8) 23.8
$100-250 25 (37.3) 42 (62.7) 20.2
$251 þ 18 (47.4) 20 (52.6) 11.5
Primary reason for visiting center
(x
2
¼ 16.94, df ¼ 4, p ¼ 0.002) 251
Shopping 51 (44.0) 65 (56.0) 46.2
Entertainment 16 (24.2) 50 (75.8) 26.3
Eating 7 (50.0) 7 (50.0) 5.6
Socializing 8 (34.8) 15 (65.2) 9.2
Other 21 (65.6) 11 (34.4) 12.8
Number times visited the center
(x
2
¼ 186.26, df ¼ 2, p ¼ 0.0001) 339
First visit 3 (4.3) 67 (95.7) 20.7
1-5 times 10 (10.8) 83 (89.3) 27.4
More than ?ve times 144 (81.8) 32 (18.2) 51.9
Table V.
x
2
test: shopping
intention and behavior of
tourist and resident
shoppers
IJCTHR
1,1
90
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
New generation mall (Mall of America and West Edmonton Mall) shoppers are more
satis?ed then HDC (Pier 39 and Forum Shops) shoppers (Table VIII).
x
2
tests reveal the differences in shopping intention and behaviors of NGM and
HDC shoppers (Table IX). Shoppers in NGMs plan to spend more than HDC shoppers.
About 65 percent of shoppers planning to spend $100-250 are respondents from new
generation malls (NGM), while only 35 percent are HDC shoppers. Likewise, those
Variable t-value df Pr . jtj
Ease of locating stores 0.08 562 0.939
Number of retail stores 23.88 550 0.000
Number of food retailers 24.09 562 0.000
Number of entertainment facilities 26.17 549 0.000
Prices offered by retailers 23.32 560 0.001
Fashionability of merchandise 24.65 563 0.000
Overall convenience 23.67 563 0.000
Parking facilities 26.89 548 0.000
Size of center 26.08 566 0.000
Layout of center 24.41 562 0.000
Variety of stores 24.94 563 0.000
Ability to comparison shop 25.06 561 0.000
Experience in center today 23.34 554 0.001
When think of center I am: 25.08 559 0.000
Table VII.
Comparison of NGM and
HDC satisfaction using
t-test: individual items
Variable t-value df Pr . jtj
Center attribute satisfaction 25.87 487 0.000
Overall satisfaction 24.71 545 0.000
Table VIII.
Comparison of NGM and
HDC satisfaction using
t-test: summed items
Variable NGM mean HDC mean
Ease of locating stores 2.07 2.06
Number of retail stores 1.61 1.92
Number of food retailers 1.65 1.98
Number of entertainment facilities 1.66 2.14
Prices offered by retailers 2.51 2.84
Fashionability of merchandise 1.76 2.15
Overall convenience 1.73 2.02
Parking facilities 1.93 2.66
Size of center 1.51 1.96
Layout of center 1.70 2.03
Variety of stores 1.60 1.98
Ability to comparison shop 2.02 2.48
Experience in center today 1.61 1.86
When think of center I am: 1.60 1.97
Table VI.
Mean satisfaction of
NGM and HDC shoppers
(1 ¼ satis?ed,
5 ¼ dissatis?ed)
Tourist
shoppers’
satisfaction
91
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
respondents reporting plans to spend over $250, 65 percent are NGM shoppers and
35 percent are HDC shoppers. The signi?cant p-values of the x
2
test indicate that the
difference is not due to chance.
Primary motivations for visiting the two center types are also signi?cantly
different. Of the respondents reporting shopping as their primary motivation for
visiting the shopping center, 70 percent are NGM shoppers, in comparison to 30 percent
being heritage-destination shoppers. The analysis also identi?es a difference between
the two shopping center types related to the socializing motivation. Those respondents
reporting socializing as their primary motive, 77 percent are HDC shoppers, while only
23 percent are NGM.
The number of times respondents visit the two shopping center types yields an
interesting and signi?cant difference. x
2
results indicate that NGM shoppers visit
these malls more frequently, more than ?ve times (73 percent), than HDC shoppers visit
HDC (27 percent). Whereas, HDC shoppers are more likely than can be expected by
chance to be ?rst time visitors of that center (78 percent) than NGM shoppers as ?rst
time visitors (22 percent).
N
NGM n
(percent)
HDC n
(percent)
Total sample
(percent)
Amount of money plan to spend
(x
2
¼ 20.54, df ¼ 3, p ¼ 0.0001) 568
$1-$50 102 (45.1) 124 (54.9) 39.8
$51-$100 63 (45.3) 76 (54.7) 24.5
$100-$250 84 (65.1) 45 (34.9) 22.7
$251 þ 48 (64.9) 26 (35.1) 13.0
Primary reason for visiting center
(x
2
¼ 47.82, df ¼ 4, p ¼ 0.0001) 441
Shopping 161 (70.0) 69 (30.0) 52.2
Entertainment 37 (40.7) 54 (59.3) 20.6
Eating 11 (40.7) 16 (59.3) 6.1
Socializing 9 (23.1) 30 (76.9) 8.8
Other 26 (48.2) 28 (51.9) 12.2
Number times visited the center
(x
2
¼ 110.96, df ¼ 2, p ¼ 0.0001) 576
First visit 24 (21.8) 86 (78.2) 19.1
1-5 times 58 (35.4) 106 (64.6) 28.5
More than ?ve times 220 (72.9) 82 (27.2) 52.4
Plan to spend most money on:
(x
2
¼ 63.51, df ¼ 7, p ¼ 0.0001) 470
Apparel/shoes 120 (76.4) 37 (23.6) 33.4
Jewelry/accessories 10 (52.6) 9 (47.4) 4.0
Hobbies/toys 14 (51.9) 13 (48.2) 5.7
Food 41 (36.9) 70 (63.1) 23.6
Gifts/collectibles 46 (57.5) 34 (42.5) 17.0
Health/beauty care 8 (88.9) 1 (11.1) 1.9
Souvenirs 1 (6.3) 15 (93.8) 3.4
Entertainment attractions 28 (54.9) 23 (45.1) 10.9
Note: N varies due to missing data
Table IX.
x
2
test: shopping
intention and behavior of
NGM and HDC shoppers
IJCTHR
1,1
92
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Respondents’ intention to spend the most money on speci?c category of
products/services is the last shopping behavior analysis with a x
2
test (Table IX).
NGM shoppers plan to spend the most money on apparel and shoes (76 percent) as well
as health and beauty care (89 percent), more so than HDC shoppers (24 and 11 percent,
respectively). Food and souvenirs are most popular with HDC shoppers. About
63 percent of HDC shoppers plan to spend most of their money on food in comparison
to 37 percent of NGM shoppers. Whereas, 94 percent of HDC shoppers plan to spend
the most on souvenirs, while only 6 percent of NGM shoppers intend to spend their
money in this category.
Implications
The shopping center and retail industry place increasing emphasis on leisure shopping
and tourism, but the results of this study suggest that the tourist shopper market may
not be the most valuable customer group. Resident shoppers of tourist-focused
shopping centers are more satis?ed than tourist shoppers of those centers. These
?ndings should encourage shopping center managers to use caution when modifying
strategies to meet the needs of the tourist segment, as well as to not forget the
importance of resident shoppers to their pro?tability.
The differences in customer satisfaction and behavioral intention of the two
shopping center type customers (NGM and HDC) are interesting. In all cases, speci?c
attributes better satisfy NGM shoppers, with intent to shop and frequency motivating
their visits. Since, the primary reason for visiting the center is to shop, perhaps
expectations regarding the shopping experience are more de?ned in the mind of the
NGM shopper. Therefore, perceptions of center attributes such as layout, number of
retail stores, etc. may meet or exceed their shopping expectations. Whereas, HDC
shoppers schedule a visit to the center as part of their overall tourist experience and
preconceived expectations may not be as well formed.
NGM shoppers also appear to be more loyal customers. Signi?cantly more report
having visited the Mall of America and West Edmonton Mall more than ?ve times,
the highest category for respondents to check. This ?nding may re?ect greater
commitment from resident shoppers, or a combination of resident and tourist
shoppers. Future research should identify the characteristics of loyal customers of
NGMs.
Even though the results of this study do not support the attractiveness of the tourist
shopper segment, shopping centers located within tourist destinations should attempt
to tailor some of their product/service offerings to please such customers. HDC
shoppers do buy souvenirs and patronize food establishments, which can add to the
pro?tability of the shopping center. Drawing in the tourist shopper with such offerings
may enhance the probability of those shoppers purchasing from other product/service
categories.
Limitations and future research
The non-random nature of the sample for this study is the primary limitation.
Therefore, the results are not generalizable to the greater population of tourist focused
shopping centers. The responses of each customer are only for those days the
researchers collected data as well as only those respondents in the center that agreed to
Tourist
shoppers’
satisfaction
93
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
?ll out a survey. Customers over 18 years of age wanting to participate were allowed.
Therefore, conclusions are cautionary.
Future research should explore the link between satisfying tourist shoppers and the
impact on pro?tability. Typical satisfaction studies indicate that the path from
customer satisfaction to pro?tability goes through customer loyalty. Are tourist
shoppers loyal to shopping centers outside of their residential area? What constitutes
loyalty for tourist shoppers? How many visits per year are necessary to be considered a
loyal tourist shopper? Or does a different path to pro?tability exist when investigating
tourism and shopping behavior?
Additionally, a more thorough investigation of the three strategic models (Johnson,
1990) used by the shopping center industry is necessary. Do successful centers have
different attributes among the three models: ambient leisure, NGM, and
heritage-generation? What local conditions and characteristics are best for each
model? Future research will provide a richer understanding of the tourist-shopping
phenomenon and provide shopping center managers with information that can help
better satisfy these customers as well as improve their strategic performance.
References
Anonymous (2000), “Canadian shopping centres head in new direction: Canadian centres need
novelty, ‘main street’ retail to capture youth sales”, Canadian Appraiser, Vol. 44 No. 1,
pp. 33-4.
Arnold, M.J. and Reynolds, K.E. (2003), “Hedonic shopping motivations”, Journal of Retailing,
Vol. 79 No. 2, pp. 77-95.
Brown, D.J. (1978), “Assessing retail trade: a review of the customer behavior literature”,
International Journal of Physical Distribution &Materials Management, Vol. 9 No. 3, p. 122.
Buttle, F. (1992), “Shopping motives: constructionists perspective”, The Service Industries
Journal, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 349-67.
Christiansen, T. and Snepenger, D.J. (2002), “Is it the mood or the mall that encourages tourists to
shop?”, Journal of Shopping Center Research, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 7-26.
Costello, C.A. and Fairhurst, A. (2002), “Purchasing behavior of tourists towards
Tennessee-made products”, International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Administration, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 7-17.
Cuthbertson, R. and Laine, A. (2004), “The role of CRM within retail loyalty marketing”, Journal
of Targeting, Measurement & Analysis for Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 290-304.
Ellis, B. and Marino, P. (1992), “A managerial approach for customer satisfaction and ful?llment
of the marketing concept”, Journal of Applied Business Research, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 42-7.
Fast Facts (2002), West Edmonton Mall, available at:http://westedmontonmall.com/info/
fastfacts.html
Forseter, M. (2005), “It’s not business, it’s personal”, Chain Store Age, Vol. 81 No. 3, p. 12.
Gee, C.Y. (1987), “Travel related to shopping and ?nancial services”, The Travel Industry,
pp. 422-56.
Getz, D. (1993), “Tourist shopping villages”, Tourism Management, pp. 15-26.
Gill, N.S. (2007), Mall of America, available at:http://minneapolis.about.com/cs/attractions/a/
mallofamerica.htm (accessed January 12).
Ginsburg, J. (1999), “Xtreme retailing: stores ?ght the online onslaught”, BusinessWeek,
December 20, Cover Story.
IJCTHR
1,1
94
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Goeldner, C.R., Ritchie, J.R.B. and McIntosh, R.W. (2000), Tourism: Principles, Practices,
Philosophies, 8th ed., Wiley, New York, NY.
Gomez, M.I., McLaughlin, E.W. and Wittink, D.R. (2004), “Customer satisfaction and retail sales
performance: an empirical investigation”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 80, pp. 265-78.
Gordon, B. (1986), “The souvenir: messenger of the extraordinary”, Journal of Popular Culture,
Vol. 20, pp. 135-46.
Grattan, C. and Taylor, P. (1987), “Leisure and shopping”, Leisure Management, Vol. 7 No. 3,
pp. 29-30.
Hallowell, R. (1996), “The relationships of customer satisfaction, customer loyalty, and
pro?tability: an empirical study”, International Journal of Service Industry Management,
Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 27-42.
Hazel, D. (2001), “World’s largest mall at a crossroads”, Shopping Centers Today, April 1,
available at: www/icsc.org/srch/sct/current/sct0400/01/html
Heung, V.C.S. and Cheng, E. (2000), “Assessing tourists’ satisfaction with shopping in the Hong
Kong Special Administrative Region of China”, Journal of Travel Research, Spring,
pp. 7-11.
Hudman, L.E. and Hawkins, D.E. (1989), Tourism in Contemporary Society, Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
International Council of Shopping Centers (2000), “A brief history of shopping centers”, June,
available at: www.icsc.org/srch/about/imactofshoppingcenters/briefhistory.html
Johnson, S. (1990), “The leisure market: consumer choice and consumer activity”, in Johnson, S.
(Ed.), Leisure and Retailing, Oxford Institute of Retail Management, Longman, Harlow.
Kent, W., Schock, P. and Snow, R. (1983), “Shopping: tourism’s unsung hero(ine)”, Journal of
Travel Research, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 2-4.
Kruger, R.M. (2001), “Making shopping fun”, Retail Merchandiser, Vol. 41 No. 9, pp. 14-16.
Kumar, V. and Shah, D. (2004), “Building and sustaining pro?table customer loyalty for the 21st
century”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 80 No. 4, pp. 317-29.
Law, R. and Au, N. (2000), “Relationship modeling in tourism shopping: a decision rules
induction approach”, Tourism Management, Vol. 21, pp. 241-9.
LeHew, M.L.A., Burgess, B. and Wesley, S. (2002), “Expanding the loyalty concept to include
preference for a shopping mall”, International Review of Retail, Distribution & Consumer
Research, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 225-36.
Lisanti, T. (1998), “A mega mall for the new millennium”, Discount Store News, available at:http://?ndarticles.com/cf_0/m3092/n17_v37/21122322/print.html (accessed September 7).
Littrell, M.A., Baizerman, S., Kean, R., Gahring, S., Niemeyer, S., Reilly, R. and Stout, J.A. (1994),
“Souvenirs and tourism styles”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 3-11.
McCormick, R.R. (2002), “Shopping industry”, Proceedings of the Travel Industry Association of
America’s 27th, pp. 167-73.
Macintosh, G. and Lockshin, L.S. (1997), “Retail relationships and store loyalty: a multi-level
perspective”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 487-97.
Magi, A.W. (2003), “Share of wallet in retailing: the effects of customer satisfaction, loyalty cards
and shopper characteristics”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 79 No. 2, pp. 97-106.
Mazur, L. (1999), “Retailers need to offer fun, not just ease of use”, Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 1, p. 24.
Oliver, R.L. (1999), “Whence consumer loyalty?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63, pp. 33-44.
Tourist
shoppers’
satisfaction
95
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Paci, E. (1992), “International issues forum: common measures of tourism”, Conference
Proceedings, 23rd Annual Conference of the Travel and Tourism Research Association,
June, pp. 14-17.
Paige, R.C. and Littrell, M.A. (2003), “Tourism activities and shopping preferences”, Journal of
Shopping Center Research, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 7-25.
Pesmen, S. (1994), “It’s a mall world after all”, Advertising Age, Vol. 65 No. 53, pp. 3, 9.
Pier 39 press priorities (2002), Pier 39, available at: www.pier39.com/pier30/english/press/index.
html
PR Newswire (2001a), “General Growth Properties announces new tourism marketing initiative:
America’s favorite shopping destinations”, available at: www.?ndarticles.com/cf_0/
m4PRN/2001_April_17/73302563/print.html
PR Newswire (2001b), “Mall of America continues its nine-year reign as nation’s largest mall”, PR
Newswire, available at:http://?ndarticles.com/cf_0/m4PRN/2001_August_9?77089383/
print.jhtml (accessed August 9).
Reisinger, Y. and Turner, L.W. (2002), “The determination of shopping satisfaction of Japanese
tourists visiting Hawaii and the Gold Coast compared”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 41,
pp. 167-76.
Stone, M. and Bearman, D. (2004), “The effect of retail customer loyalty schemes – detailed
measurement or transforming marketing?”, Journal of Targeting, Measurement &
Analysis for Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 305-18.
Thomas, I.F. and LeTourneur, C. (2001), “Resort retail”, UrbanLand, pp. 50-1.
TIA (2001a), “TIA and Taubman Centers release ?rst ever survey on US shopping and travel
experience”, Travel Industry Association of America, available at:http://tia.org/Press
TIA (2001b), “Economic research: economic impact of travel and tourism”, Travel Industry
Association of America, available at: www.tia.org/Travel/econimpact.asp
TIA (2003), TIA TravelScope, Travel Industry Association of America, available at: www.tia.
org/tiaweb/travel/domestictravel.asp
Timothy, D.J. and Butler, R.W. (1995), “Cross border shopping: a North American perspective”,
Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 16-34.
Turner, L.W. and Reisinger, Y. (2001), “Shopping satisfaction for domestic tourists”, Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 15-27.
Wallace, D.W. and Giese, J.L. (2004), “Customer retailer loyalty in the context of multiple channel
strategies”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 80 No. 4, pp. 249-63.
Wilson, M. (2001), “Rede?ning retailtainment”, Chain Store Age, Vol. 77 No. 3, pp. 71-4.
Further reading
Gattuso, G. (1994), “Kiosks build mall loyalty and database”, Direct Marketing, Vol. 57 No. 6,
pp. 26-7.
Liezl, E.C.S. (2005), “Mall of Asia: the next shopping paradise”, BusinessWorld, p. 28.
Corresponding author
Melody L.A. LeHew can be contacted at: [email protected]
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
IJCTHR
1,1
96
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
This article has been cited by:
1. Miju Choi, Rob Law, Cindy Yoonjoung Heo. 2016. Shopping destinations and trust – Tourist attitudes:
Scale development and validation. Tourism Management 54, 490-501. [CrossRef]
2. Mi Ju Choi, Cindy Yoonjoung Heo, Rob Law. 2015. Progress in Shopping Tourism. Journal of Travel
& Tourism Marketing 1-24. [CrossRef]
3. Changsup Shim, Carla Almeida Santos. 2014. Tourism, place and placelessness in the phenomenological
experience of shopping malls in Seoul. Tourism Management 45, 106-114. [CrossRef]
4. Vikneswaran Nair, Lo May Chiun, Sanjit Singh. 2014. The International Tourists’ Perspective on
Malaysia's Economic Transformation Programme (ETP). Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 144,
433-445. [CrossRef]
5. Nelson K.F. Tsang, Louisa Yee-Sum Lee, Carrie K.L. Liu. 2014. Understanding the Shopping Motivation
of Mainland Chinese Tourists in Hong Kong. Journal of China Tourism Research 10, 323-346. [CrossRef]
6. Jui-Chi Chang. 2014. Selling Strategies and Shopping Behavior—An Example of Taiwanese Guided
Package Tourists to Mainland China Destinations. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism
15, 190-212. [CrossRef]
7. Jeong Hee Kim, Jin Hwa Lee. 2014. The Qualitative Study on the Customer Experience of Shopping
Centers - Focused on Comparison between Internal and External Experience Elements on the Fashion
Brand Stores -. Korean Journal of Human Ecology 23, 101-122. [CrossRef]
8. Juan Gabriel Brida, Marta Disegna, Linda Osti. 2013. The effect of authenticity on visitors’ expenditure
at cultural events. Current Issues in Tourism 16, 266-285. [CrossRef]
9. Bas Spierings, Martin van der Velde. 2013. Cross-Border Differences and Unfamiliarity: Shopping
Mobility in the Dutch-German Rhine-Waal Euroregion. European Planning Studies 21, 5-23. [CrossRef]
10. Jessica L. Hurst, Linda S. Niehm. 2012. Tourism shopping in rural markets: a case study in rural Iowa.
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research 6:3, 194-208. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
11. Tammy R. Kinley, Judith A. Forney, Youn?Kyung Kim. 2012. Travel motivation as a determinant
of shopping venue. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research 6:3, 266-278.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
12. David C. Bojanic. 2011. The impact of age and family life experiences on Mexican visitor shopping
expenditures. Tourism Management 32, 406-414. [CrossRef]
13. Joan C. Henderson, Lynette Chee, Chow Ngai Mun, Charmaine Lee. 2011. Shopping, tourism and
retailing in Singapore. Managing Leisure 16, 36-48. [CrossRef]
14. Mark S. Rosenbaum, Daniel Spears. 2009. Using group comparisons in AMOS to explore shopping as a
travel driver. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research 3:4, 313-325. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
15. Hyun-Sook Kim, Eun-Jung Choi. 2009. Seoul Tourists' Perceived Product Satisfaction and Retail
Competitiveness during Fashionable Product Shopping - Comparing Japanese, Chinese, and USA
Tourists -. Journal of the Korean Society of Clothing and Textiles 33, 1441-1451. [CrossRef]
16. BAS SPIERINGS, MARTIN VAN DER VELDE. 2008. SHOPPING, BORDERS AND
UNFAMILIARITY: CONSUMER MOBILITY IN EUROPE. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale
geografie 99:10.1111/tesg.2008.99.issue-4, 497-505. [CrossRef]
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
doc_115200090.pdf
The purpose of this paper is to assess whether tourist shopper segments are an attractive
market for shopping centers. This research aims to explore whether or not tourist shoppers are more
satisfied than resident shoppers with their shopping experience and whether tourist shoppers have the
intention to spend more than their resident shopper counterparts
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research
Tourist shoppers' satisfaction with regional shopping mall experiences
Melody L.A. LeHew Scarlett C. Wesley
Article information:
To cite this document:
Melody L.A. LeHew Scarlett C. Wesley, (2007),"Tourist shoppers' satisfaction with regional shopping mall
experiences", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 1 Iss 1 pp. 82 - 96
Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506180710729628
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 22:00 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 54 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 5337 times since 2007*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Zafar U. Ahmed, Morry Ghingold, Zainurin Dahari, (2007),"Malaysian shopping mall behavior: an
exploratory study", Asia Pacific J ournal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 19 Iss 4 pp. 331-348 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/13555850710827841
Mohammed Ismail El-Adly, (2007),"Shopping malls attractiveness: a segmentation approach",
International J ournal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 35 Iss 11 pp. 936-950 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/09590550710828245
Eddie C.M. Hui, Pei-hua Zhang, Xian Zheng, (2013),"Facilities management service and
customer satisfaction in shopping mall sector", Facilities, Vol. 31 Iss 5/6 pp. 194-207 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/02632771311307070
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:115632 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Tourist shoppers’ satisfaction
with regional shopping mall
experiences
Melody L.A. LeHew
Department of Apparel, Textiles and Interior Design,
College of Human Ecology, Kansas State University, Manhattan,
Kansas, USA, and
Scarlett C. Wesley
Department of Merchandising, Apparel and Textiles,
School of Human Environmental Sciences, College of Agriculture,
University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to assess whether tourist shopper segments are an attractive
market for shopping centers. This research aims to explore whether or not tourist shoppers are more
satis?ed than resident shoppers with their shopping experience and whether tourist shoppers have the
intention to spend more than their resident shopper counterparts.
Design/methodology/approach – Data for this report come from personal face-to-face mall
intercepts of shoppers (n ¼ 578) in two new generation malls (West Edmonton Mall and Mall of
America in Bloomington) and two heritage-destination (Pier 39 in San Francisco and Forum Shops in
Las Vegas) centers.
Findings – Analysis concludes that although the shopping center and retail industry place
increasing emphasis on leisure shopping and tourism, the results of this study suggest that the tourist
shopper market may not be the most valuable customer group. Resident shoppers of tourist-focused
shopping centers are more satis?ed than tourist shoppers of those centers.
Research limitations/implications – The non-random nature of the sample for this study is the
primary limitation. Therefore, the results are not generalizable to the greater population of tourist
focused shopping centers.
Practical implications – The shopping center and retail industry place increasing emphasis on
leisure shopping and tourism, but the results of this study suggest that the tourist shopper market
may not be the most valuable customer group. Resident shoppers of tourist-focused shopping centers
are more satis?ed than tourist shoppers of those centers. These ?ndings should encourage shopping
center managers to use caution when modifying strategies to meet the needs of the tourist segment, as
well as to not forget the importance of resident shoppers to their pro?tability.
Originality/value – These ?ndings should encourage shopping center managers to use caution
when modifying strategies to meet the needs of the tourist segment, as well as to not forget the
importance of resident shoppers to their pro?tability.
Keywords Tourism, Shopping, Shopping centres, Customer satisfaction, United States of America
Paper type Research paper
Shopping is a preferred activity for travelers and the shopping center industry
responds by developing new properties or adjusting strategies to encourage
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1750-6182.htm
The authors gratefully acknowledge funding of this study by a grant from the International
Council of Shopping Centers Educational Foundation.
IJCTHR
1,1
82
Received September 2006
Revised October 2006
Accepted November 2006
International Journal of Culture,
Tourism and Hospitality Research
Vol. 1 No. 1, 2007
pp. 82-96
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1750-6182
DOI 10.1108/17506180710729628
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
patronage by tourist shoppers (Paige and Littrell, 2003). Examples of large-scale
tourist-oriented shopping malls currently operating include Mall of America and
West Edmonton Mall. The Mall of America attracts approximately 43 million visitors
per year (Gill, 2007), while the West Edmonton Mall annual visits are around
22 million (Hazel, 2001).
According to the International Council of Shopping Centers (2000, p. 3), malls are
able “to foster the same magical experiences that were once only seen in national
amusement parks such as Disney World”. Similar to retailers, who are placing
increasing emphasis on entertaining customers (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Kruger,
2001; Mazur, 1999; Wilson, 2001), shopping centers recognize that a fun and interesting
shopping experience is important (Anonymous, 2000; Ginsburg, 1999; International
Council of Shopping Centers, 2000). Large, tourist-focused shopping centers typically
include amusement parks, ice skating rinks, water parks, and/or various other
entertainment venues as part of their tenant mix. Emphasizing entertainment
strategies and shopping as a leisure activity allow shopping centers to broaden their
customer base to include tourist shoppers.
The attempt to draw in a tourist-oriented customer base appears to be in opposition
to the retail industry’s increased interest in building customer loyalty (Cuthbertson and
Laine, 2004; Forseter, 2005; Hallowell, 1996; Kumar and Shah, 2004; LeHew et al., 2002;
Macintosh and Lockshin, 1997; Magi, 2003; Oliver, 1999; Stone and Bearman, 2004;
Wallace and Giese, 2004). Attracting non-residents to patronize a shopping center
encourages a temporary relationship with these customers. In an age where
organizations attempt to quantify the lifetime value of a customer, targeting short-term
customers appears illogical. Therefore, evaluating whether tourist shoppers may be an
attractive market for shopping centers is important. The purpose of this paper is to
investigate key differences in shopping satisfaction and behavioral intentions between
tourist and resident shoppers.
Review of literature
Tourism and tourist shopping behavior
For travelers, shopping is the number one trip activity for both domestic and
international tourists (Goeldner et al., 2000; Kent et al., 1983; TIA, 2003), and for many a
trip is not complete without having spent time shopping (Hudman and Hawkins, 1989).
TIA (2003) estimates that 34 percent of all trips by US tourists include shopping as
an activity. However, the importance of shopping as a tourist activity is not well
represented in the literature (Heung and Cheng, 2000; Law and Au, 2000).
The travel industry de?nes persons who travel as visitors (Paci, 1992). These
visitors are persons who travel outside their usual environment for leisure, business, or
other purposes, at which point the act of traveling becomes tourism (Paci, 1992).
Tourism is the activities of people who travel to and stay in places outside their usual
environment. Tourists are temporary visitors to a destination (Paci, 1992) and will
return to their permanent residencies after traveling.
As traveling increases, so does shopping. With many options available to travelers
today, shopping currently accounts for 33 percent of all trips taken in the USA, followed
by outdoor activities (17 percent), visits to historical sites and museums (14 percent),
and travel to beaches, cultural events, and festivals, and national/state parks
(10 percent each), (TIA, 2003). Tourists are also spending money when they travel.
Tourist
shoppers’
satisfaction
83
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
For example, in 2001, General Growth Properties, one of the US’ largest shopping center
owners, reports an estimated 31 percent of its annual sales came from tourist customers
(PRNewswire, 2001a). Similarly, a study by the Travel Industry Association of America
and Taubman Centers (TIA, 2001a) ?nds that for more than half (51 percent) of US
adults traveling named shopping as their primary or secondary reason for travel.
Findings also suggest tourist shoppers spend a lot on their purchases – an average of
$333 during each trip taken, with 22 percent spending more than $500 each trip (TIA,
2001a).
Tourists like to take something home from the trip (Gordon, 1986), and therefore,
they go shopping. A tourist’s shopping behavior is very different from his/her
normal shopping activity. “They spend money on small foolish items because it is
not an ordinary time” (Gordon, 1986, p. 139). As a tourist, a person does not have to
think about their job or any other obligations they have at home. The tourist also
gains satisfaction from the shopping experience, separate from the purchase of the
product (Buttle, 1992; Christiansen and Snepenger, 2002). Tourist shopping is not
only limited to souvenirs but also includes purchases of clothing, jewelry, books,
arts and crafts, and electronics (Timothy and Butler, 1995). Typically, tourists do
not go shopping with a speci?c list; rather shopping becomes a by-product of their
travel experiences (Thomas and LeTourneur, 2001). Tourists spend approximately
one-third of their total expenditures on shopping purchases (Grattan and Taylor,
1987; Littrell et al., 1994) only spending more on their accommodations (Turner and
Reisinger, 2001).
When shopping, tourists base their purchase decisions on several factors. Research
?nds that tourists look for high-quality, well-designed products (Costello and
Fairhurst, 2002; Littrell et al., 1994; Paige and Littrell, 2003; Reisinger and Turner,
2002). Many tourists will spend more money on purchasing an item while they are
away from home, so they want to secure the highest quality item possible. Tourists feel
that purchasing an item by a well-known manufacturer is very important (Littrell et al.,
1994), and therefore, look to ?nd well-known brand names or logos when shopping
(Gee, 1987). These well-known products are brands with which they are familiar;
thereby they feel con?dent in their purchase decisions.
Research shows that tourist shoppers look for unique products unavailable at home
or unique to the tourist destination (Costello and Fairhurst, 2002; Littrell et al., 1994;
Paige and Littrell, 2003; Reisinger and Turner, 2002). The unique quality of the product
enhances the tourism experience by giving the tourist a special memory about their trip
(Turner and Reisinger, 2001), allowing them to positively reminisce about the
experience they had while traveling. However, whether or not this characteristic is
generalizable to all shopping formats is questionable. The researchers ?nding
uniqueness to be important to tourist shoppers were looking at shopping in local retail
areas versus shopping center settings. Many shopping centers are similar from location
to location. Therefore, shoppers of shopping centers may not expect to ?nd unique
retail storefronts, but rather are looking for the shops with which they are the most
familiar.
Shopping satisfaction
The marketing concept suggests that satisfying customers should be the primary goal
for ?rms because satisfaction leads to pro?tability. “One key measure of whether
IJCTHR
1,1
84
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
retailers are ful?lling the marketing concept is that of customer satisfaction” (Ellis and
Marino, 1992, p. 42). Satisfaction with a shopping experience encourages re-patronage
intentions, and customer loyalty (Hallowell, 1996). For retail organizations, whether a
retail store or a shopping center with multiple retail tenants, offering appropriate mix
of products, services, and experiences enhances customer satisfaction. Brown (1978)
identi?es relevant attribute categories through which retail organizations attempt to
satisfy customers: merchandise, service, physical characteristics, employees, and other
shoppers (as cited in Ellis and Marino, 1992). Assessment of customer attitudes
relating to such retail attributes allows management to modify strategies and increase
shopping satisfaction (Ellis and Marino, 1992).
As well as satisfaction, respondent’s intention to spend money during the current
shopping trip is a variable of interest. Research supports the link between satisfaction
and pro?tability (Gomez et al., 2004; Hallowell, 1996). Hallowell (1996) ?nds that
customer loyalty explains nearly 40 percent of the variance in pro?tability. Likewise,
customer satisfaction explains 37 percent of differing customer loyalty levels
(Hallowell, 1996). Since, evidence supports the link between satisfaction and
pro?tability, shopping center strategies increasing tourist shopping satisfaction
should result in greater spending by these customers. Tourism research ?nds tourist
shoppers spending more than other shoppers (McCormick, 2002; TIA, 2001a, b). If so,
shopping center managers may modify center attributes to increase tourists’
satisfaction if they intend to target them as part of the overall marketing strategy.
Research questions
RQ1. Are tourist shoppers more satis?ed than resident shoppers with their
shopping experience?
RQ2. Do tourist shoppers have intention to spend more than resident shoppers?
Method
Responding to the increasing demand for leisure shopping, centers utilize one of three
strategic models: ambient leisure, new generation mall (NGM), or heritage-destination
leisure (Johnson, 1990). The ambient leisure model recommends creating a pleasant
shopping environment to encourage shoppers to extend their stay in the property
(Johnson, 1990). Whereas, the NGM model calls for the property to become the tourist
destination by offering recreational and entertainment attractions as part of the tenant
mix (Johnson, 1990). The third possible model, the heritage-destination model, results
in a shopping center appealing to both shoppers and sightseers to an existing tourist
area (Johnson, 1990). The last two models: NGM and heritage-destination leisure, are of
interest in this study because they represent shopping centers that target tourists as
well as resident shoppers. Therefore, for this study, four North American shopping
centers represent the typical centers attracting tourist shoppers: The Mall of America,
West Edmonton Mall, The Forum Shops, and Pier 39. The Mall of America and West
Edmonton Mall are shopping centers that are travel destinations – NGMs. These
centers draw visitors from around the world. The remaining two centers also attract
tourist shoppers, but these centers may not be the primary destination for travelers.
The Forum Shops and Pier 39 are centers locating within or nearby very popular travel
Tourist
shoppers’
satisfaction
85
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
destinations (Las Vegas, Nevada and San Francisco, California, respectively) and
classify as heritage-destination centers (HDC).
In Bloomington, Minnesota, the Mall of America is the US’ largest retail and
entertainment complex, attracting more visitors annually then Disney World
(PR Newswire, 2001b). The Mall of America is a major tourist destination with
average sales around $860 million per year (Lisanti, 1998) with approximately 50
percent of gross sales attributed to tourism (Pesmen, 1994).
The West Edmonton Mall covers 5.3 million square feet of shopping and
entertainment space and is currently listed as Alberta’s number one tourist attraction
(Fast Facts, 2002). Developers of the mall sought to create a mixed shopping and
entertainment environment powerful enough to become a major tourist destination
(Getz, 1993).
The Forum Shops in Las Vegas, Nevada is one of the earliest shopping-
center-as-theme-park creations, drawing around $1,200 per square foot in annual sales,
whereas the national average for per square foot sales is around $300 (Ginsburg, 1999).
The Forum Shops uniquely simulates ancient Roman streets and connects to Caesar’s
Palace casino and hotel.
Pier 39 is in San Francisco, California and is San Francisco’s number one tourist
attraction with approximately 10.5 million visitors each year (Pier 39 press priorities,
2002). Located just two blocks from Fisherman’s Wharf, Pier 39 provides stunning
views of the Golden Gate Bridge, Alcatraz, Angel Island, and the San Francisco Bay
(Pier 39 press priorities, 2002).
Survey instrument
Items for this study are part of a larger study investigating attribute preferences and
shopping orientations of shopping center customers. Customer satisfaction and their
intention to spend are of interest in this study, as well as characteristics of the
respondents. The questionnaire measures satisfaction using a ?ve-point Likert-type
scale. Responses may range from satis?ed (1) to dissatis?ed (5), with the mid-point (3)
representing an undecided response. Two of the satisfaction items measure overall
satisfaction with the shopping center. A total of 12 remaining items focus on
respondent satisfaction with various aspects of the shopping center: retailer and
merchandise characteristics; service and convenience; and physical characteristics of
the center. Spending intentions of the respondents are measured using nominal scales.
Respondents chose the category representing their intended level of spending.
Choosing only one, respondents selected the category they intended to spend the most
from a list of typical category measures. The instrument also measures speci?c
characteristics of the respondents, such as whether resident or tourist, frequency of
visits, and other demographic details.
Data collection
Shopping center representatives agreed to allow data collection using the mall
intercept technique. Researchers were positioned in a central location of each shopping
center, and an informational sign detailed the study. Shoppers were asked to
participate in the study as they passed by the collection location. Each respondent was
given a participation gift after completing the questionnaire. The ?nal convenience
sample contained 578 respondents.
IJCTHR
1,1
86
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Sample description
Table I presents characteristics of the sample. Females are approximately two-
thirds of the sample. Respondents are primarily young, with 30 percent falling in
the range of 18-24 years old. The next groups are evenly split between the ranges
of 25 and 34 years old (21 percent) and 35-44 years old (23 percent). The sample is
predominantly White/Caucasian ethnic origin (75 percent). The next largest ethnic
group is Asian/Paci?c Islander (9 percent). Marital status is evenly split between
single and married respondents. About 31 percent of respondents report
completing some college (31 percent) and approximately 22 percent report
completing high school (22 percent). About 22 percent have a Bachelor’s degree (22
percent). The demographic characteristics of this sample represent the typical
shopper in the NGMs and HDCs, but may not hold true in all such shopping
centers. The data collection method was not random due to the exploratory nature
of the study.
Frequency Percent N
Gender 573
Female 376 65.62
Male 197 34.38
Age 575
18-24 177 30.78
25-34 123 21.39
35-44 134 23.30
45-54 78 13.57
55-64 41 7.13
65-74 15 2.61
75 þ 7 1.21
Ethnic origin 574
African American 20 3.38
American Indian/Eskimo 6 1.04
Asian/Paci?c Islander 52 9.04
Hispanic 44 7.65
White 429 74.61
Other 23 4.00
Marital status 578
Never married 244 42.21
Married 279 48.27
Divorced 45 7.79
Widowed 10 1.73
Education level 577
Grade school 34 5.89
High school/GED 124 21.49
Some college 178 30.85
Associate’s degree 40 6.93
Bachelor’s degree 126 21.84
Graduate/professional 75 13.00
Note: Total sample size varies due to missing data
Table I.
Description of sample
Tourist
shoppers’
satisfaction
87
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Data analysis
Data analysis includes using SAS 9.1 computer software. The data analysis utilizes the
578 usable surveys from the study. If a response item was missing, that respondent
was dropped from the analysis. Therefore, overall sample size may vary during the
separate analyses.
T-tests analyze the differences between resident and tourist shopper satisfaction. x
2
tests assess the differences between resident and tourist shoppers’ intentions and
behaviors. Respondents were asked to identify the amount of money they were
planning to spend, their primary reason for visiting the shopping center, as well as the
number of times they had visited that center. These items are nominal variables;
therefore, x
2
tests are appropriate.
Results and discussion
The purpose of this research is to investigate the attractiveness of targeting a tourist
market by examining key difference in shopping satisfaction and behavioral
intentions. Two research questions were posed:
RQ1. Are tourist shoppers more satis?ed than resident shoppers with their
shopping experience?
RQ2. Do tourist shoppers have intention to spend more than resident shoppers?
A signi?cant difference occurs in shopping satisfaction between resident and tourist
shoppers along several satisfaction dimensions (Tables II and III). Satisfaction is
higher among resident versus tourist shoppers in regards to:
.
the ease of locating stores;
.
the number of retail stores;
.
the overall convenience of the center;
.
the size of the center;
.
the layout of stores in the center;
.
the variety of stores; and
.
the ability to comparison shop in the center.
Variable Resident mean Tourist mean
Ease of locating stores 1.91 2.23
Number of retail stores 1.52 1.83
Number of food retailers 1.72 1.86
Number of entertainment facilities 1.73 1.92
Prices offered by retailers 2.67 2.83
Fashionability of merchandise 1.83 2.04
Overall convenience 1.73 1.98
Parking facilities 2.20 2.40
Size of center 1.57 1.84
Layout of center 1.75 1.95
Variety of stores 1.70 1.91
Ability to comparison shop 2.02 2.48
Experience in center today 1.66 1.77
When think of center I am 1.74 1.86
Table II.
Mean satisfaction of
resident and tourist
shoppers (1 ¼ satis?ed,
5 ¼ dissatis?ed)
IJCTHR
1,1
88
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
No difference is found in overall satisfaction with the shopping center between resident
and tourist shoppers (Table IV). Tourist shoppers are not experiencing greater
satisfaction, and according to the satisfaction literature should not be as lucrative a
market to target as the satis?ed resident shoppers.
x
2
test results do not show a signi?cant difference in the amount of money that
tourist and resident shoppers were planning to spend in the shopping centers (Table V).
The lack of signi?cant x
2
statistic suggests that differences found are not great
enough to rule out chance. Results indicate that both research questions must be
answered in a negative sense: tourist shoppers were not more satis?ed with the
shopping center and do not intend to spend more money while visiting the center.
To better understand tourist shoppers, two additional questions related to shopping
center behavior were asked:
(1) What was the primary reason for visiting the center?
(2) How often had this particular center been visited in the past?
x
2
results suggest that tourist shoppers are more likely than residents to visit the
shopping center for entertainment and socializing, whereas resident shoppers are more
likely than tourists to visit for other, non-speci?ed, reasons (Table V). The greatest
frequency of response to this question was shopping as the primary reason to visit the
center for both residents and tourists; no signi?cant difference in shopping motivation
of the two groups is found. Resident shoppers are more likely than can be expected by
chance to be regular customers, with more than ?ve visits to that center. Tourists are
more likely to be ?rst time visitors, or to have visited 1-5 times.
Tourists may not be the most valuable target market for shopping centers. Each
data collection center for this study was a tourist destination (NGM) or located within a
Variable t-value df Pr . jtj
Ease of locating stores 22.83 330 0.005
Number of retail stores 22.99 325 0.003
Number of food retailers 21.23 332 0.219
Number of entertainment facilities 21.78 325 0.077
Prices offered by retailers 21.24 332 0.215
Fashionability of merchandise 21.90 331 0.058
Overall convenience 22.34 333 0.020
Parking facilities 21.40 319 0.161
Size of center 22.78 333 0.006
Layout of center 21.95 330 0.053
Variety of stores 22.02 332 0.044
Ability to comparison shop 23.79 331 0.000
Experience in center today 21.16 328 0.247
When think of center I am 21.32 327 0.186
Table III.
Comparison of resident
and tourist satisfaction
using a t-test: individual
items
Variable t-value df Pr . jtj
Center attribute satisfaction 22.66 285 0.008
Overall satisfaction 21.40 320 0.163
Table IV.
Comparison of resident
and tourist satisfaction
using t-test: summed
items
Tourist
shoppers’
satisfaction
89
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
popular tourist area (HDC). Even shoppers in tourist focused centers tend to be less
satis?ed, are not planning to spend signi?cantly more than resident shoppers, are less
frequent shoppers, and are primarily motivated to visit the center for entertainment
and socializing. Therefore, the tourist market may not be the most attractive market for
shopping centers in general.
The unexpected results stimulate a desire to better understand tourist shoppers.
Therefore, some additional post-hoc tests were conducted by dividing the sample into
customers of shopping centers located in a tourist area (HDC) and customers of centers
developed as tourist destinations (new generation mall). Statistical t tests compared the
mean scores for satisfaction of respondents in new generation malls (NGM) and
heritage-destination centers (HDC) (Tables VI and VII). Findings suggest that NGM
shoppers are more satis?ed than HDC shoppers with almost all of the shopping center
attributes. New generation mall shoppers are more satis?ed with:
.
the number of retail stores in the center;
.
the number of food retailers in the center;
.
the number of entertainment facilities in the center;
.
prices offered by retailers in the center;
.
the fashionability of merchandise offered in the center;
.
overall convenience of the center;
.
the parking facilities of the center;
.
the size of the center;
.
the layout of the center;
.
the variety of stores in the center; and
.
the ability to comparison shop in the center.
N
Resident n
(percent)
Tourist n
(percent)
Total sample
percent
Amount of money plan to spend
(x
2
¼ 6.19, df ¼ 3, p ¼ 0.103) 332
$1-50 78 (52.7) 70 (47.3) 44.6
$51-100 31 (20.4) 48 (60.8) 23.8
$100-250 25 (37.3) 42 (62.7) 20.2
$251 þ 18 (47.4) 20 (52.6) 11.5
Primary reason for visiting center
(x
2
¼ 16.94, df ¼ 4, p ¼ 0.002) 251
Shopping 51 (44.0) 65 (56.0) 46.2
Entertainment 16 (24.2) 50 (75.8) 26.3
Eating 7 (50.0) 7 (50.0) 5.6
Socializing 8 (34.8) 15 (65.2) 9.2
Other 21 (65.6) 11 (34.4) 12.8
Number times visited the center
(x
2
¼ 186.26, df ¼ 2, p ¼ 0.0001) 339
First visit 3 (4.3) 67 (95.7) 20.7
1-5 times 10 (10.8) 83 (89.3) 27.4
More than ?ve times 144 (81.8) 32 (18.2) 51.9
Table V.
x
2
test: shopping
intention and behavior of
tourist and resident
shoppers
IJCTHR
1,1
90
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
New generation mall (Mall of America and West Edmonton Mall) shoppers are more
satis?ed then HDC (Pier 39 and Forum Shops) shoppers (Table VIII).
x
2
tests reveal the differences in shopping intention and behaviors of NGM and
HDC shoppers (Table IX). Shoppers in NGMs plan to spend more than HDC shoppers.
About 65 percent of shoppers planning to spend $100-250 are respondents from new
generation malls (NGM), while only 35 percent are HDC shoppers. Likewise, those
Variable t-value df Pr . jtj
Ease of locating stores 0.08 562 0.939
Number of retail stores 23.88 550 0.000
Number of food retailers 24.09 562 0.000
Number of entertainment facilities 26.17 549 0.000
Prices offered by retailers 23.32 560 0.001
Fashionability of merchandise 24.65 563 0.000
Overall convenience 23.67 563 0.000
Parking facilities 26.89 548 0.000
Size of center 26.08 566 0.000
Layout of center 24.41 562 0.000
Variety of stores 24.94 563 0.000
Ability to comparison shop 25.06 561 0.000
Experience in center today 23.34 554 0.001
When think of center I am: 25.08 559 0.000
Table VII.
Comparison of NGM and
HDC satisfaction using
t-test: individual items
Variable t-value df Pr . jtj
Center attribute satisfaction 25.87 487 0.000
Overall satisfaction 24.71 545 0.000
Table VIII.
Comparison of NGM and
HDC satisfaction using
t-test: summed items
Variable NGM mean HDC mean
Ease of locating stores 2.07 2.06
Number of retail stores 1.61 1.92
Number of food retailers 1.65 1.98
Number of entertainment facilities 1.66 2.14
Prices offered by retailers 2.51 2.84
Fashionability of merchandise 1.76 2.15
Overall convenience 1.73 2.02
Parking facilities 1.93 2.66
Size of center 1.51 1.96
Layout of center 1.70 2.03
Variety of stores 1.60 1.98
Ability to comparison shop 2.02 2.48
Experience in center today 1.61 1.86
When think of center I am: 1.60 1.97
Table VI.
Mean satisfaction of
NGM and HDC shoppers
(1 ¼ satis?ed,
5 ¼ dissatis?ed)
Tourist
shoppers’
satisfaction
91
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
respondents reporting plans to spend over $250, 65 percent are NGM shoppers and
35 percent are HDC shoppers. The signi?cant p-values of the x
2
test indicate that the
difference is not due to chance.
Primary motivations for visiting the two center types are also signi?cantly
different. Of the respondents reporting shopping as their primary motivation for
visiting the shopping center, 70 percent are NGM shoppers, in comparison to 30 percent
being heritage-destination shoppers. The analysis also identi?es a difference between
the two shopping center types related to the socializing motivation. Those respondents
reporting socializing as their primary motive, 77 percent are HDC shoppers, while only
23 percent are NGM.
The number of times respondents visit the two shopping center types yields an
interesting and signi?cant difference. x
2
results indicate that NGM shoppers visit
these malls more frequently, more than ?ve times (73 percent), than HDC shoppers visit
HDC (27 percent). Whereas, HDC shoppers are more likely than can be expected by
chance to be ?rst time visitors of that center (78 percent) than NGM shoppers as ?rst
time visitors (22 percent).
N
NGM n
(percent)
HDC n
(percent)
Total sample
(percent)
Amount of money plan to spend
(x
2
¼ 20.54, df ¼ 3, p ¼ 0.0001) 568
$1-$50 102 (45.1) 124 (54.9) 39.8
$51-$100 63 (45.3) 76 (54.7) 24.5
$100-$250 84 (65.1) 45 (34.9) 22.7
$251 þ 48 (64.9) 26 (35.1) 13.0
Primary reason for visiting center
(x
2
¼ 47.82, df ¼ 4, p ¼ 0.0001) 441
Shopping 161 (70.0) 69 (30.0) 52.2
Entertainment 37 (40.7) 54 (59.3) 20.6
Eating 11 (40.7) 16 (59.3) 6.1
Socializing 9 (23.1) 30 (76.9) 8.8
Other 26 (48.2) 28 (51.9) 12.2
Number times visited the center
(x
2
¼ 110.96, df ¼ 2, p ¼ 0.0001) 576
First visit 24 (21.8) 86 (78.2) 19.1
1-5 times 58 (35.4) 106 (64.6) 28.5
More than ?ve times 220 (72.9) 82 (27.2) 52.4
Plan to spend most money on:
(x
2
¼ 63.51, df ¼ 7, p ¼ 0.0001) 470
Apparel/shoes 120 (76.4) 37 (23.6) 33.4
Jewelry/accessories 10 (52.6) 9 (47.4) 4.0
Hobbies/toys 14 (51.9) 13 (48.2) 5.7
Food 41 (36.9) 70 (63.1) 23.6
Gifts/collectibles 46 (57.5) 34 (42.5) 17.0
Health/beauty care 8 (88.9) 1 (11.1) 1.9
Souvenirs 1 (6.3) 15 (93.8) 3.4
Entertainment attractions 28 (54.9) 23 (45.1) 10.9
Note: N varies due to missing data
Table IX.
x
2
test: shopping
intention and behavior of
NGM and HDC shoppers
IJCTHR
1,1
92
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Respondents’ intention to spend the most money on speci?c category of
products/services is the last shopping behavior analysis with a x
2
test (Table IX).
NGM shoppers plan to spend the most money on apparel and shoes (76 percent) as well
as health and beauty care (89 percent), more so than HDC shoppers (24 and 11 percent,
respectively). Food and souvenirs are most popular with HDC shoppers. About
63 percent of HDC shoppers plan to spend most of their money on food in comparison
to 37 percent of NGM shoppers. Whereas, 94 percent of HDC shoppers plan to spend
the most on souvenirs, while only 6 percent of NGM shoppers intend to spend their
money in this category.
Implications
The shopping center and retail industry place increasing emphasis on leisure shopping
and tourism, but the results of this study suggest that the tourist shopper market may
not be the most valuable customer group. Resident shoppers of tourist-focused
shopping centers are more satis?ed than tourist shoppers of those centers. These
?ndings should encourage shopping center managers to use caution when modifying
strategies to meet the needs of the tourist segment, as well as to not forget the
importance of resident shoppers to their pro?tability.
The differences in customer satisfaction and behavioral intention of the two
shopping center type customers (NGM and HDC) are interesting. In all cases, speci?c
attributes better satisfy NGM shoppers, with intent to shop and frequency motivating
their visits. Since, the primary reason for visiting the center is to shop, perhaps
expectations regarding the shopping experience are more de?ned in the mind of the
NGM shopper. Therefore, perceptions of center attributes such as layout, number of
retail stores, etc. may meet or exceed their shopping expectations. Whereas, HDC
shoppers schedule a visit to the center as part of their overall tourist experience and
preconceived expectations may not be as well formed.
NGM shoppers also appear to be more loyal customers. Signi?cantly more report
having visited the Mall of America and West Edmonton Mall more than ?ve times,
the highest category for respondents to check. This ?nding may re?ect greater
commitment from resident shoppers, or a combination of resident and tourist
shoppers. Future research should identify the characteristics of loyal customers of
NGMs.
Even though the results of this study do not support the attractiveness of the tourist
shopper segment, shopping centers located within tourist destinations should attempt
to tailor some of their product/service offerings to please such customers. HDC
shoppers do buy souvenirs and patronize food establishments, which can add to the
pro?tability of the shopping center. Drawing in the tourist shopper with such offerings
may enhance the probability of those shoppers purchasing from other product/service
categories.
Limitations and future research
The non-random nature of the sample for this study is the primary limitation.
Therefore, the results are not generalizable to the greater population of tourist focused
shopping centers. The responses of each customer are only for those days the
researchers collected data as well as only those respondents in the center that agreed to
Tourist
shoppers’
satisfaction
93
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
?ll out a survey. Customers over 18 years of age wanting to participate were allowed.
Therefore, conclusions are cautionary.
Future research should explore the link between satisfying tourist shoppers and the
impact on pro?tability. Typical satisfaction studies indicate that the path from
customer satisfaction to pro?tability goes through customer loyalty. Are tourist
shoppers loyal to shopping centers outside of their residential area? What constitutes
loyalty for tourist shoppers? How many visits per year are necessary to be considered a
loyal tourist shopper? Or does a different path to pro?tability exist when investigating
tourism and shopping behavior?
Additionally, a more thorough investigation of the three strategic models (Johnson,
1990) used by the shopping center industry is necessary. Do successful centers have
different attributes among the three models: ambient leisure, NGM, and
heritage-generation? What local conditions and characteristics are best for each
model? Future research will provide a richer understanding of the tourist-shopping
phenomenon and provide shopping center managers with information that can help
better satisfy these customers as well as improve their strategic performance.
References
Anonymous (2000), “Canadian shopping centres head in new direction: Canadian centres need
novelty, ‘main street’ retail to capture youth sales”, Canadian Appraiser, Vol. 44 No. 1,
pp. 33-4.
Arnold, M.J. and Reynolds, K.E. (2003), “Hedonic shopping motivations”, Journal of Retailing,
Vol. 79 No. 2, pp. 77-95.
Brown, D.J. (1978), “Assessing retail trade: a review of the customer behavior literature”,
International Journal of Physical Distribution &Materials Management, Vol. 9 No. 3, p. 122.
Buttle, F. (1992), “Shopping motives: constructionists perspective”, The Service Industries
Journal, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 349-67.
Christiansen, T. and Snepenger, D.J. (2002), “Is it the mood or the mall that encourages tourists to
shop?”, Journal of Shopping Center Research, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 7-26.
Costello, C.A. and Fairhurst, A. (2002), “Purchasing behavior of tourists towards
Tennessee-made products”, International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Administration, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 7-17.
Cuthbertson, R. and Laine, A. (2004), “The role of CRM within retail loyalty marketing”, Journal
of Targeting, Measurement & Analysis for Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 290-304.
Ellis, B. and Marino, P. (1992), “A managerial approach for customer satisfaction and ful?llment
of the marketing concept”, Journal of Applied Business Research, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 42-7.
Fast Facts (2002), West Edmonton Mall, available at:http://westedmontonmall.com/info/
fastfacts.html
Forseter, M. (2005), “It’s not business, it’s personal”, Chain Store Age, Vol. 81 No. 3, p. 12.
Gee, C.Y. (1987), “Travel related to shopping and ?nancial services”, The Travel Industry,
pp. 422-56.
Getz, D. (1993), “Tourist shopping villages”, Tourism Management, pp. 15-26.
Gill, N.S. (2007), Mall of America, available at:http://minneapolis.about.com/cs/attractions/a/
mallofamerica.htm (accessed January 12).
Ginsburg, J. (1999), “Xtreme retailing: stores ?ght the online onslaught”, BusinessWeek,
December 20, Cover Story.
IJCTHR
1,1
94
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Goeldner, C.R., Ritchie, J.R.B. and McIntosh, R.W. (2000), Tourism: Principles, Practices,
Philosophies, 8th ed., Wiley, New York, NY.
Gomez, M.I., McLaughlin, E.W. and Wittink, D.R. (2004), “Customer satisfaction and retail sales
performance: an empirical investigation”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 80, pp. 265-78.
Gordon, B. (1986), “The souvenir: messenger of the extraordinary”, Journal of Popular Culture,
Vol. 20, pp. 135-46.
Grattan, C. and Taylor, P. (1987), “Leisure and shopping”, Leisure Management, Vol. 7 No. 3,
pp. 29-30.
Hallowell, R. (1996), “The relationships of customer satisfaction, customer loyalty, and
pro?tability: an empirical study”, International Journal of Service Industry Management,
Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 27-42.
Hazel, D. (2001), “World’s largest mall at a crossroads”, Shopping Centers Today, April 1,
available at: www/icsc.org/srch/sct/current/sct0400/01/html
Heung, V.C.S. and Cheng, E. (2000), “Assessing tourists’ satisfaction with shopping in the Hong
Kong Special Administrative Region of China”, Journal of Travel Research, Spring,
pp. 7-11.
Hudman, L.E. and Hawkins, D.E. (1989), Tourism in Contemporary Society, Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
International Council of Shopping Centers (2000), “A brief history of shopping centers”, June,
available at: www.icsc.org/srch/about/imactofshoppingcenters/briefhistory.html
Johnson, S. (1990), “The leisure market: consumer choice and consumer activity”, in Johnson, S.
(Ed.), Leisure and Retailing, Oxford Institute of Retail Management, Longman, Harlow.
Kent, W., Schock, P. and Snow, R. (1983), “Shopping: tourism’s unsung hero(ine)”, Journal of
Travel Research, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 2-4.
Kruger, R.M. (2001), “Making shopping fun”, Retail Merchandiser, Vol. 41 No. 9, pp. 14-16.
Kumar, V. and Shah, D. (2004), “Building and sustaining pro?table customer loyalty for the 21st
century”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 80 No. 4, pp. 317-29.
Law, R. and Au, N. (2000), “Relationship modeling in tourism shopping: a decision rules
induction approach”, Tourism Management, Vol. 21, pp. 241-9.
LeHew, M.L.A., Burgess, B. and Wesley, S. (2002), “Expanding the loyalty concept to include
preference for a shopping mall”, International Review of Retail, Distribution & Consumer
Research, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 225-36.
Lisanti, T. (1998), “A mega mall for the new millennium”, Discount Store News, available at:http://?ndarticles.com/cf_0/m3092/n17_v37/21122322/print.html (accessed September 7).
Littrell, M.A., Baizerman, S., Kean, R., Gahring, S., Niemeyer, S., Reilly, R. and Stout, J.A. (1994),
“Souvenirs and tourism styles”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 3-11.
McCormick, R.R. (2002), “Shopping industry”, Proceedings of the Travel Industry Association of
America’s 27th, pp. 167-73.
Macintosh, G. and Lockshin, L.S. (1997), “Retail relationships and store loyalty: a multi-level
perspective”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 487-97.
Magi, A.W. (2003), “Share of wallet in retailing: the effects of customer satisfaction, loyalty cards
and shopper characteristics”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 79 No. 2, pp. 97-106.
Mazur, L. (1999), “Retailers need to offer fun, not just ease of use”, Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 1, p. 24.
Oliver, R.L. (1999), “Whence consumer loyalty?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63, pp. 33-44.
Tourist
shoppers’
satisfaction
95
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Paci, E. (1992), “International issues forum: common measures of tourism”, Conference
Proceedings, 23rd Annual Conference of the Travel and Tourism Research Association,
June, pp. 14-17.
Paige, R.C. and Littrell, M.A. (2003), “Tourism activities and shopping preferences”, Journal of
Shopping Center Research, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 7-25.
Pesmen, S. (1994), “It’s a mall world after all”, Advertising Age, Vol. 65 No. 53, pp. 3, 9.
Pier 39 press priorities (2002), Pier 39, available at: www.pier39.com/pier30/english/press/index.
html
PR Newswire (2001a), “General Growth Properties announces new tourism marketing initiative:
America’s favorite shopping destinations”, available at: www.?ndarticles.com/cf_0/
m4PRN/2001_April_17/73302563/print.html
PR Newswire (2001b), “Mall of America continues its nine-year reign as nation’s largest mall”, PR
Newswire, available at:http://?ndarticles.com/cf_0/m4PRN/2001_August_9?77089383/
print.jhtml (accessed August 9).
Reisinger, Y. and Turner, L.W. (2002), “The determination of shopping satisfaction of Japanese
tourists visiting Hawaii and the Gold Coast compared”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 41,
pp. 167-76.
Stone, M. and Bearman, D. (2004), “The effect of retail customer loyalty schemes – detailed
measurement or transforming marketing?”, Journal of Targeting, Measurement &
Analysis for Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 305-18.
Thomas, I.F. and LeTourneur, C. (2001), “Resort retail”, UrbanLand, pp. 50-1.
TIA (2001a), “TIA and Taubman Centers release ?rst ever survey on US shopping and travel
experience”, Travel Industry Association of America, available at:http://tia.org/Press
TIA (2001b), “Economic research: economic impact of travel and tourism”, Travel Industry
Association of America, available at: www.tia.org/Travel/econimpact.asp
TIA (2003), TIA TravelScope, Travel Industry Association of America, available at: www.tia.
org/tiaweb/travel/domestictravel.asp
Timothy, D.J. and Butler, R.W. (1995), “Cross border shopping: a North American perspective”,
Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 16-34.
Turner, L.W. and Reisinger, Y. (2001), “Shopping satisfaction for domestic tourists”, Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 15-27.
Wallace, D.W. and Giese, J.L. (2004), “Customer retailer loyalty in the context of multiple channel
strategies”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 80 No. 4, pp. 249-63.
Wilson, M. (2001), “Rede?ning retailtainment”, Chain Store Age, Vol. 77 No. 3, pp. 71-4.
Further reading
Gattuso, G. (1994), “Kiosks build mall loyalty and database”, Direct Marketing, Vol. 57 No. 6,
pp. 26-7.
Liezl, E.C.S. (2005), “Mall of Asia: the next shopping paradise”, BusinessWorld, p. 28.
Corresponding author
Melody L.A. LeHew can be contacted at: [email protected]
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
IJCTHR
1,1
96
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
This article has been cited by:
1. Miju Choi, Rob Law, Cindy Yoonjoung Heo. 2016. Shopping destinations and trust – Tourist attitudes:
Scale development and validation. Tourism Management 54, 490-501. [CrossRef]
2. Mi Ju Choi, Cindy Yoonjoung Heo, Rob Law. 2015. Progress in Shopping Tourism. Journal of Travel
& Tourism Marketing 1-24. [CrossRef]
3. Changsup Shim, Carla Almeida Santos. 2014. Tourism, place and placelessness in the phenomenological
experience of shopping malls in Seoul. Tourism Management 45, 106-114. [CrossRef]
4. Vikneswaran Nair, Lo May Chiun, Sanjit Singh. 2014. The International Tourists’ Perspective on
Malaysia's Economic Transformation Programme (ETP). Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 144,
433-445. [CrossRef]
5. Nelson K.F. Tsang, Louisa Yee-Sum Lee, Carrie K.L. Liu. 2014. Understanding the Shopping Motivation
of Mainland Chinese Tourists in Hong Kong. Journal of China Tourism Research 10, 323-346. [CrossRef]
6. Jui-Chi Chang. 2014. Selling Strategies and Shopping Behavior—An Example of Taiwanese Guided
Package Tourists to Mainland China Destinations. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism
15, 190-212. [CrossRef]
7. Jeong Hee Kim, Jin Hwa Lee. 2014. The Qualitative Study on the Customer Experience of Shopping
Centers - Focused on Comparison between Internal and External Experience Elements on the Fashion
Brand Stores -. Korean Journal of Human Ecology 23, 101-122. [CrossRef]
8. Juan Gabriel Brida, Marta Disegna, Linda Osti. 2013. The effect of authenticity on visitors’ expenditure
at cultural events. Current Issues in Tourism 16, 266-285. [CrossRef]
9. Bas Spierings, Martin van der Velde. 2013. Cross-Border Differences and Unfamiliarity: Shopping
Mobility in the Dutch-German Rhine-Waal Euroregion. European Planning Studies 21, 5-23. [CrossRef]
10. Jessica L. Hurst, Linda S. Niehm. 2012. Tourism shopping in rural markets: a case study in rural Iowa.
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research 6:3, 194-208. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
11. Tammy R. Kinley, Judith A. Forney, Youn?Kyung Kim. 2012. Travel motivation as a determinant
of shopping venue. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research 6:3, 266-278.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
12. David C. Bojanic. 2011. The impact of age and family life experiences on Mexican visitor shopping
expenditures. Tourism Management 32, 406-414. [CrossRef]
13. Joan C. Henderson, Lynette Chee, Chow Ngai Mun, Charmaine Lee. 2011. Shopping, tourism and
retailing in Singapore. Managing Leisure 16, 36-48. [CrossRef]
14. Mark S. Rosenbaum, Daniel Spears. 2009. Using group comparisons in AMOS to explore shopping as a
travel driver. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research 3:4, 313-325. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
15. Hyun-Sook Kim, Eun-Jung Choi. 2009. Seoul Tourists' Perceived Product Satisfaction and Retail
Competitiveness during Fashionable Product Shopping - Comparing Japanese, Chinese, and USA
Tourists -. Journal of the Korean Society of Clothing and Textiles 33, 1441-1451. [CrossRef]
16. BAS SPIERINGS, MARTIN VAN DER VELDE. 2008. SHOPPING, BORDERS AND
UNFAMILIARITY: CONSUMER MOBILITY IN EUROPE. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale
geografie 99:10.1111/tesg.2008.99.issue-4, 497-505. [CrossRef]
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
0
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
doc_115200090.pdf