How Travel Makes Us Happy: The Integrated Travel-Happiness (T-H) Model of Cognitive Appraisal Theory and Self-Determination Theory

by

You Jia Lee

A Thesis presented to University of Guelph

In partial fulfilment of requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Tourism and Hospitality

Guelph, Ontario, Canada

© You Jia Lee, April, 2018 ABSTRACT

HOW TRAVEL MAKES US HAPPY: THE INTEGRATED TRAVEL-HAPPINESS (T-H) MODEL OF COGNITIVE APPRAISAL THEORY AND SELF-DETERMINATION THEORY

You Jia Lee Advisor: University of Guelph, 2018 Dr. Hwan-Suk Chris Choi

Previous studies have shown that tourism brings happiness or well-being to tourists.

However, how travel leads to tourist well-being is still not fully understood. This research addresses that gap by integrating Cognitive Appraisal Theory (CAT) and Self-Determination

Theory (SDT) to predict tourist well-being. This study used a quantitative approach with a sample population of tourists who have travelled abroad for at least 3 days in the past 12 months.

Data was collected from an online panel owned by the Centre of Tourism Research in Prince

Edward Island (PEI). A final sample of 396 was subjected to data analysis. Two-step analysis,

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Structural Equation Modelling (SEM), was performed.

The findings support the predictions of CAT and SDT and establish connections between the theories. SDT’s psychological needs of autonomy and relatedness mediate between the positive emotions elicited by the trip and tourist psychological well-being.

Keywords: Subjective well-being; Cognitive appraisal theory; Self-determination theory;

Happiness; Tourism experience ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I would like to express my utmost and sincerest gratitude to my advisor, Professor Chris Choi for all your tremendous support, encouragement and guidance throughout my undergraduate and graduate studies. You were such a marvelous mentor from my first year in undergraduate to the completion of graduate study. Other than helping me to discover my interest in research and pushing me to be better, you have taken your time in supporting and guiding me so that I can complete the master program within the timeline set. You have been a great support as an advisor and a family member in Canada. This study would not be possible without your expertise and genuine feedback. Next, I would like to thank my committee members, Professor WooMi Jo and Professor Joan Flaherty. Thank you very much for taking your time reading my thesis and giving me constructive feedback. You helped me to think outside of the box and suggested ways to address challenges encountered. Other than providing academic support, you also took time in giving me general guidance and advice in many aspects of life. Many thanks to Professor Statia Elliot for chairing my thesis defence and Professor Mark Holmes for being my external examiner. I am very grateful to learn from your research knowledge and professional experiences. I would also like to express my sincere appreciation to the faculty and staff members from various departments, namely Marion Joppe, Stephen Smith, Anne Wilcock, Michael von Massow, Barb Piccoli, Amy Tyszka, Melinda Heijl, and Cori Wells for all the support. Thank you to the School of Hospitality, Food and Tourism Management (HFTM) for the funding, teaching opportunities, and scholarships given to make it possible to complete my master’s degree successfully. Special thanks for Dr. Dongkoo Yun from the Centre for Tourism Research in Prince Edward Island. Dr. Yun was generous in assisting me with the data collection process through the online panel. Thank you to all online panels who took your time in completing the survey. The study would not be possible without your sincere participation. My truthful gratitude goes to my co-workers and peers from the Office of Intercultural Affairs (OIA), namely Megan, Yassin, Pugaleni, and Cameron, and all the peer helpers for your encouragement during these two years. Working at the OIA was a wonderful experience. Other than guiding me to grow professionally, you also provided emotional support when I needed it the most. Thank you to Student Financial Services for the opportunities to enrol in the Work Study program and other scholarship opportunities available. Pursuing a master’s degree would not be possible without the financial resources available. Special thanks to my counselor, Kathy Waltner-Toews, for your kindness and services offered. I would like to extend my sincere thank you to my cohort in HFTM and graduate students, namely Katya Van Embden, Jiayin Liu, and Melody Nastegar, Lena Liang, Sandy Shen, Michael Lever, Yi Wen, Zhijun Wan, Brittany Lutes, Songzhe Xuepeng, Yiting Zhao and Tian Yue. I treasure all the memories we made together. Last but not least, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my parents (Chong Yu Lee and Sok Ching Tan), sisters (You Zhuan Lee & You Ning Lee), and brother (Chang Xiu Lee) for all your unconditional love and support. Thank you very much for your trust in my ability and autonomy given to start my adventure in Canada. Thank you to my friends (Shannon, Pallak, Michelle, Parm, Sam, Sabrina, Sarah, Jacqueline) who have shared my joy and tears in completing the master’s degree. You are my family here in Canada.

iii TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ...... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... iv List of Tables ...... v List of Figures ...... v CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...... 1 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 4 2.1 Cognitive Appraisal Theory ...... 4 2.2 Positive emotions ...... 8 2.3 Self-Determination Theory ...... 10 2.4 Subjective well-being...... 13 2.5 Hypotheses development ...... 16 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ...... 20 3.1 Study population and sample ...... 20 3.2 Sample size ...... 20 3.3 Data collection ...... 21 3.4 Measurement scales ...... 22 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS ...... 24 4.1 Profile of the sample ...... 24 4.2 Confirmatory factor analysis...... 28 4.3 Structural model analysis ...... 36 4.4 Direct and indirect effect of the model ...... 37 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION ...... 39 5.1 CAT: Appraisals in eliciting positive emotions ...... 39 5.2 SDT: Impact of psychological needs fulfilment on psychological well-being ...... 41 5.3 Connecting CAT and SDT ...... 42 CHAPTER 6: IMPLICATIONS ...... 44 6.1 Theoretical implications...... 44 6.2 Practical implications ...... 45 CHAPTER 7: LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE STUDIES ...... 48 CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSION ...... 50 REFERENCES ...... 51

iv APPENDICES ...... 63 Appendix 1: Measurement items for each variable ...... 64 Appendix 2: Questionnaire ...... 67

List of Tables

Table 1. The socio-demographic information of the respondents (N=396)...... 25 Table 2. Travel experience of respondents (N=396) ...... 27 Table 3. Descriptive statistics (N=396) ...... 30 Table 4. Results of CFA (N=396) ...... 33 Table 5. Discriminant validity of measurement model ...... 35 Table 6. Result for the path analysis ...... 37 Table 7. Direct and indirect effect ...... 38 Table 8. Measurement items ...... 64

List of Figures

Figure 1. Proposed T-H Model ...... 16 Figure 2. Structural Model ...... 37

v CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Money cannot guarantee happiness, but money wisely spent can increase our chances of being happy. Thus, to a certain extent, people can influence their happiness by deciding how they spend their money, either for materialistic or experiential consumption. Materialism is “the value created for the consumer based on the perceived material and monetary aspects of the purchase and consumption” (Schmitt, Brakus, & Zarantonello, 2015, p. 169). Experientialism is “the value created based on the perceived experiential aspects of the purchase” (Schmitt et al., 2015, p.

169). Schmitt and colleagues (2015) propose that the mix of materialism and experientialism, depending on the individual, lead to happiness.

Research results have revealed that experiential consumption positively affects positive emotions, happiness and well-being more than material consumption (Van Boven & Gilovich,

2003; Van Boven, 2005; Howell & Hill, 2009; Nicolao, Irwin, & Goodman, 2009; Carter &

Gilovich, 2010; Carter & Gilovich, 2012; Guevarra & Howell, 2014). Experiences can help shape one’s identity, enhance social relationships with others through experience sharing, and after consumption, can be favourably reinterpreted over time (Van Boven & Gilovich, 2003).

Experiences gained from an event can help people realize intrinsic goals and self-actualization, which contributes to enhancing their self-concept (Van Boven & Gilovich, 2003; Carter &

Gilovich, 2012). Their self-concept includes beliefs, values, attitudes, and evaluative judgements, all of which help them see the world (Oyserman, Elmore, & Smith, 2012). Experience sharing has more “social value” (p. 1200) than material possession, mostly because experiences are often enjoyable to share due to the narrative characteristics of experience (Van Boven & Gilovich,

2003). Happiness gained from experiences is enduring through positive reinterpretation as experiences persist in the memory (Van Boven & Gilovich, 2003; Carter & Gilovich, 2010). For

1 instance, the experience of getting lost in a city with friends during a vacation can become a funny story to retell, even if the experience is less than wonderful during the trip itself.

Tourism is one of the best-known forms of experiential consumption (Van Boven &

Gilovich, 2003; Nicolao et al., 2009; Carter & Gilovich, 2010; Bhattacharjee & Mogilner, 2014).

It comprises both dimensions of materialism and experientialism. For instance, booking a hotel and flight would fall under the materialism dimension, but visiting a landmark or sharing memorable moments with a travel partner fall under the experiential dimension (Schmitt et al.,

2015). When consumption answers tourist expectations, it leads to happiness that arises from experiencing pleasure, from achieving a meaningful goal. While the term “happiness” is used in daily discourse, social scientists often use “subjective well-being”, “life satisfaction”, or “quality of life”, which indicate an assessment of people’s lives (Diener, 1984).

Past research has focused heavily on the effect of travel quality on tourist satisfaction

(Cohen, Prayag, & Moital, 2014). Since the early 2000s, however, researchers in both consumer behaviour and tourism have shifted their attention to the affective component of consumption experience (Cohen et al., 2014). More than 80% of research into tourism and well-being has come after 2001 (Uysal, Sirgy, Woo, & Kim, 2016), but research on the subjective well-being of tourists remains fairly limited (McCabe & Johnson, 2013; Uysal et al., 2016). Past studies of tourist well-being show that tourists become happier during a holiday trip (Nawijn, 2010;

Nawijn, 2011a; Nawijn, Mitas, Lin, & Kerstetter, 2012) and after a trip (Gilbert & Abdullah,

2004; Nawijn, Marchand, Veenhoven, & Vingerhoets, 2010; Nawijn, 2011b). No recent study, however, has explained how the overall tourism experience leads to this increased sense of happiness or well-being. This study attempts to address this gap by adopting two well- established theories from psychology: Cognitive Appraisal Theory (CAT) and Self-

2 Determination Theory (SDT). The purpose of this study is to integrate CAT and SDT to explain how tourism experience at a destination leads to tourist well-being after the trip.

CAT has demonstrated how emotion is elicited based on one’s evaluation of experiences.

Using CAT has been effective in explaining emotional experiences among tourists (Hosany,

2012). Tourism researchers have also used CAT to investigate the elicitation of positive emotions like joy, love, positive surprise (Hosany, 2012), and delight (Ma, Gao, Scott, & Ding,

2013; 2017) through tourism activities, and have integrated CAT with the script theory, a psychological theory demonstrating humans behave based on a “script”, past experiences stored in their memory, which can explain tourist behavioural intentions (Manthiou, Kang, & Hyun,

2017).

SDT can predict psychological well-being through the fulfilment of the psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 1985). The prediction of well- being through psychological needs satisfaction has been confirmed in other research in different countries and cultures (Deci & Ryan, 2008). Diener and Suh (1999) suggest that, because psychological needs are universal, using the innate needs approach may help researchers understand the well-being of people from different nationalities and cultures (Deci & Ryan,

2008). Past studies have used SDT’s psychological needs fulfilment to examine consumer well- being (Howell & Hill, 2009; Zhang, Howell & Caprariello, 2013; Guevarra & Howell, 2014) as well as tourist well-being (Siu, Kwan, Zhang, & Ho, 2016).

3 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter provides information on the Cognitive Appraisal Theory (CAT), positive emotions, Self-Determination Theory (SDT), and subjective well-being (SWB) and develops the hypotheses.

2.1 Cognitive Appraisal Theory

Physiological and behavioural approaches do not fully explain emotions, so research since the late 1960s has popularized the cognitive approach to better explain emotions (Roseman,

1984). The physiological approach cannot fully capture the causes and processes of emotion elicitation; although the behavioural approach attempts to address the limitations of the physiological approach, it still does not explain why the same event may elicit different emotions among several individuals (Roseman, 1984). Magda Arnold (1960) thought that emotions are based on appraisals, “a form of personal meaning consisting of evaluations of the significance of this knowledge for well-being” (Lazarus & Smith 1988, p. 282). An appraisal of an event can be reflective, intentional, and conscious (Bagozzi, Gopinath, & Nyer, 1999). The cognitive appraisal process depends heavily on personal, meaningful relationships between individuals, possibly including their knowledge (expectations, beliefs, and perception of personal relevance) and any external circumstances that may influence outcomes (Lazarus & Smith, 1988).

How different events stimulate an emotion through appraisal can be explained using

CAT. According to CAT, emotions are produced through one’s interpretation or evaluation of an event(s) and/or situation(s) instead of by the event itself (Roseman, 1984). Emotion may be elicited because of individual motivations, whether the event is a reward or a punishment to the

4 individual (Roseman, 1984). When an event occurs, it stimulates a person to appraise the event; this appraisal consequently elicits emotion (Roseman & Smith, 2001).

Different individuals, or the same individual at different times, may appraise the same situation differently and consequently experience different emotions (Roseman & Smith, 2001).

Conversely, if two different situations are appraised similarly, the same emotion may be evoked

(Roseman & Smith, 2001). For instance, the death of a loved person and the loss of an important item may both be appraised similarly, as significant losses, and thus the emotion of sadness may be elicited in both situations (Roseman & Smith, 2001; Johnson & Stewart, 2005).

CAT has been widely applied in the context of consumer behaviour. Nyer (1997), and

Watson and Spence (2007) applied CAT to explain consumer emotions, satisfaction, and behavioural intentions. Other studies used CAT in the context of service to explain emotions of suspense (Moulard, Kroff, & Folse, 2012), negative emotions triggered by airline ancillary fees

(Tuzovic, Simpson, Kupplewieser, & Finsterwalder, 2014), the effect of customization of service process and service offerings on customer loyalty (Bock, Mangus, & Folse, 2016), and how employee competence reduces negative emotions (Delcourt, Gremler, De Zanet, & Van Riel,

2017). Perceived justice has been used as a cognitive appraisal dimension in the context of service recovery and has proved effective in explaining the elicitation of customer emotions

(Schoefer & Ennew, 2005; Del Rio-Lanza, Vazquez-Casielles, & Diaz-Martin, 2009; Choi &

Choi, 2014; Lastner, Folse, Mangus, & Fennel, 2016).

In tourism, CAT is useful in understanding tourist emotional experiences. Hosany’s

(2012) study demonstrated that the appraisal dimensions of pleasantness (whether an event’s outcome is positive or negative), goal congruence (the degree to which an event fulfills one’s goal), certainty (one’s perceived likelihood of an event happening), and internal self-

5 compatibility (the degree to which an event matches one’s moral standard) determine the positive emotions of joy, love, and positive surprise among tourists. Ma, Gao, Scott, and Ding

(2013) investigated appraisals of goal congruence, goal relevance (goal importance and goal interest), and unexpectedness as determinants of delight in the context of theme parks. The positive emotion of delight is elicited if the appraisal of the event is highly goal congruent, unexpected, or important to the needs or interests of an individual (Ma et al., 2013). Ma et al.

(2017) then differentiated the emotions of delight and satisfaction by using the appraisals of goal realization, goal relevance, and novelty. Manthiou, Kang and Hyun (2017) integrated CAT with the script theory in the context of luxury cruises, and their study showed that goal congruence and agency are the most important appraisal dimensions for eliciting positive emotions, which significantly influence memory recollection and storytelling behaviour among tourists.

Based on the literature, three appraisal dimensions were chosen for this study: goal congruence, goal relevance (with the sub dimensions of goal interest and goal importance), and novelty.

Goal congruence is sometimes called motive consistency (Roseman, 1984), intrinsic pleasantness (Scherer, 1984a), pleasantness (Smith & Ellsworth, 1985), valence (Frijda, 1987), motivational congruence (Lazarus & Smith, 1988), or outcome desirability (Watson & Spence,

2007). It is a primary appraisal dimension in emotion formation (Lazarus & Smith, 1988;

Lazarus, 1991), referring to the degree to which an event, the tourism experience at the destination, is consistent with personal goals or what the person wants (Lazarus & Smith, 1988;

Nyer, 1997). The event outcome is congruent with one’s desire if the goal is achieved, the encounter is a pleasant event, or a distressing event is avoided (Bagozzi et al., 1999). The

6 appraisal of goal congruence was selected in this study to predict the valence of emotions and to differentiate positive and negative emotions (Johnson & Stewart, 2005).

Goal relevance is also known as the motivational state (Roseman, 1984), goal significance (Scherer, 1988), or motivational relevance (Lazarus & Smith, 1988), referring to the degree to which an event is relevant to one’s goals and interests (Lazarus & Smith, 1988; Nyer,

1997; Ma et al., 2013). Goal relevance has two sub-dimensions: goal importance and goal interest. Goal importance involves evaluating the essential value of the goal (Johnson & Stewart,

2005), while goal interest involves assessing interest an event perceived as important (Ma et al.,

2013). In this study, goal relevance was chosen to assess tourist emotion intensity because tourism literature lacks research publications on assessing emotional intensity (Ma et al., 2013).

Novelty, or unexpectedness (Scherer, 1984b), is the appraisal of the degree to which present experience differs from tourist expectations (Ma et al., 2013). It involves quick and immediate stimulus evaluation checks of the suddenness, familiarity, and predictability of an event (Scherer, 1984b; Scherer, 1988). The appraisal of novelty was selected in this study to evaluate the difference between the prior life experience of tourists and current tourism experience gained at a destination (Faison, 1977). Tourists have different capacities and desires for novel tourism experiences (Lee & Crompton, 1992) and may seek a change in their daily routines, an escape from their usual environment, as well as “thrill”, “adventure”, “surprise”, and

“boredom alleviation” (Lee & Crompton, 1992, p. 735). The appraisal process then elicits an emotion ranging from strong interest to disgust depending on how the present experience contrasts with past experience (Smith & Ellsworth, 1985).

CAT can comprehensively explain consumer emotions through the antecedents and consequences of emotions; CAT also offers effective appraisal measurements (John & Stewart,

7 2005). Cognitive appraisal dimensions are the antecedents of emotions, and the emotions elicited may predict consumer behavioural intentions. In tourism, tourist emotions can be explained using different combinations of cognitive appraisal dimensions. Measuring consumer appraisal is more effective than simply measuring emotions with rating scales because appraisals are both conscious and unconscious (Johnson & Stewart, 2005). Measuring appraisals also avoids respondents reporting emotions that may not have been experienced (Johnston & Stewart, 2005).

In addition, the three dimensions of appraisal we chose for this study have been empirically supported (Johnson & Stewart, 2005; Hosany, 2012; Ma, et al., 2013, Manthiou et al., 2017).

Therefore, CAT was used to study tourist emotions and their impact on tourist well-being.

2.2 Positive emotions

Emotion in appraisal theories is defined as “a mental state with a specific referent”

(Johnson & Stewart, 2005, p. 4) and is an essential motivator of human behaviour (Izard, 1977;

Frijda, 2016) as well as an “adaptive response” to an event (Smith & Ellsworth, 1985, p. 836).

Emotion elicited depends on an appraisal of an event, whether the event is beneficial or harmful to the individual (Roseman, 1984; Parkinson, 2001).

Past studies of emotions have applied dimensional approaches, which differentiate emotions using emotional valence and intensity (Russell, 1980; Bagozzi, Baumgartner, &

Pieters, 1998), and category approaches, which differentiate emotions based on the pattern of emotional responses cross culturally (Johnston & Stewart, 2005). These approaches have not captured various subjective emotions fully or differentiated emotions precisely (Johnston &

Stewart, 2005). Appraisal theories may overcome the limitations of dimensional and category

8 approaches, and they can explain the causes and consequences of emotions elicited (Johnston &

Stewart, 2005).

Emotions have become an increasingly important construct in consumer behaviour research (Johnston & Stewart, 2005). Past research (from 2002 to 2013) on the effect of emotions on consumer behaviour focuses mostly on the relationship between the consumer emotions and personality, cognitive, and consumption factors (Gaur, Herjanto, & Makkar, 2014).

For instance, proud customers are more likely than grateful customers to put more effort into purchase decisions to optimize benefits (Watson & Spence, 2007).

Travel is often perceived as a pleasant and happy emotional experience and therefore, the elicitation of positive emotions is the focus of this study. Positive emotions are elicited when an event is appraised as beneficial or when a goal or desire is fulfilled (Lazarus & Smith, 1988;

Bagozzi, Gopinath, & Nyer, 1999). Pleasant emotions are less differentiated than unpleasant emotions, and pure emotions or discrete emotions are impossible to control in a research setting

(Ellsworth & Smith, 1988; Izard, 1972). Thus, positive emotions are treated as one variable in this study. The positive emotions include joy, love, and positive surprise and come from Hosany and Gilbert’s (2010) Destination Emotion Scale. This scale was validated cross-culturally in

Petra and Thailand, and these emotion responses are ubiquitous (Hosany, Prayag, Deesilatham,

Causevic, & Odeh, 2015).

Joy is “a sense of confidence and significance, a feeling of being loved or being loveable”

(Izard, 1977, p. 240), experienced when a need or a desire is fulfilled, when a problem is within one’s coping ability, or when positive experience is gained (Izard, 1977; Scherer, 1984a; Hosany

& Gilbert, 2010). Love involves “feelings of warmth and affection toward platonic others”

(Cavanaugh, Bettman, & Luce, 2015, p. 659). Love enhances relationships between individuals

9 and allows each to be closer to the other (Izard, 1977). Surprise is an immediate feeling caused by an unexpected event that helps individuals cope with a sudden change in a situation (Izard,

1977). This study focuses on positive surprise.

2.3 Self-Determination Theory

SDT comprises macro-theories that use the organismic dialectic approach and the concept of innate needs to explain human motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2000). The organismic dialectic approach assumes that humans have a natural tendency to grow and act within environments, both internal and external, to function optimally and to satisfy their needs (Deci &

Ryan, 1985). Actions include exercising their abilities (being competent), participating in activities of their own interest (having autonomy), and connecting with others (relatedness) to integrate themselves into the self and into larger social groups (Ryan, 1995; Deci & Ryan, 2000;

Wehmeyer, Little, & Sergeant, 2009). To carry out these activities optimally and to achieve psychological health, Deci and Ryan (2000; 2008) identified a set of universal innate psychological needs: for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. This study focuses on SDT’s basic psychological needs and whether they explain tourist happiness, specifically if the psychological needs mediate between emotional tourism experiences and well-being.

SDT treats needs as “innate psychological nutriments that are essential for ongoing psychological growth, integrity and well-being”, which is based on both Hullian and Murray traditions (Deci & Ryan, 2000, p. 229). The Hullian tradition emphasizes physiological need satisfaction, the need for water, air, and food, to maintain optimal functioning (Hull, 1943) while the Murray tradition focuses on psychological needs that contribute to optimal functioning

10 (Murray, 1938). Combining both traditions means psychological needs are also innate and essential and cannot be neglected for psychological health (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

The three psychological needs identified in SDT are the needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Autonomy is sometimes referred to self-governing (Angyal, 1941), self-organization, and self-regulation (Deci & Ryan, 2000). The role of autonomy in regulating behaviour and its impact on well-being are core concepts in SDT (Ryan & Deci, 2006). When someone is autonomous, his or her actions are self-regulated; they correspond to a person’s inner and outer context. They reflect, without pressure or threat, a person’s true-self (Deci & Ryan,

2000; Wehmeyer et al., 2009). Fulfilling the need for autonomy is necessary for well-being, performance, and quality of relationships (Ryan & Deci, 2006).

Relatedness, or belongingness, is the human need for enduring, frequent, and positive interpersonal relationships with others (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). Relatedness reflects the fact that we are social organisms, naturally inclined for connectedness and for organizing ourselves into larger social groups. This need has remained throughout biological and cultural evolution

(Ryan, Kuhl, & Deci, 1997). The emphasis on the need for relatedness is also found in other theories of needs, such as the need for love and belongingness in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs

(Maslow, 1958), relatedness need in Alderfer’s ERG theory (Alderfer, 1969), and the need for affiliation in McClelland’s achievement-power-affiliation triad (McClelland, 1965).

The need for autonomy and relatedness is more relevant in this study than the need for competence. Competence, or self-efficacy, is one’s “capacity to interact with [the] environment”

(White, 1959, p. 297). Tourism experiences involve, to varying degrees, elements of uncertainty, and they largely depend on how tourists interact with tourism destinations (Uriely, 2005).

Tourists may have varying levels of autonomy and relatedness with others during and/or after a

11 trip. The needs for autonomy and relatedness are more applicable to general tourism experiences than the need for competence. Additionally, a trip to a destination does not affect skills or efficacy in completing challenging tasks, unless tourists use tourism experience to improve their skills in doing an activity (e.g., adventure tourism, travel for business/pleasure). For instance, tourism experiences may increase tourist productivity after the vacation, but it does not necessarily affect their abilities or their mastery of their daily jobs. Therefore, the need for competence is not included in this study.

SDT is widely applied in education (Hill, 2013; Wang, Morin, Ryan, & Liu, 2016), religion (Costa, Gugliandolo, Barberis, & Larcan, 2016), healthcare (Ng et al., 2012; Halvari,

Halvari, Bjornebekk, & Deci, 2013), physical activities (Craike, 2008; McDavid, Cox, &

McDonough, 2014), leisure activities (Leversen, Danielsen, Birkeland, & Samdal, 2012;

Abraham, Velenczei, & Szabo, 2012), and organizational domains (Van den Broeck, Ferris,

Chang, & Rosen, 2016). The findings show that autonomous motivation, autonomy-supportive behaviours, and need satisfaction contribute to positive outcomes like enjoyment (Craike, 2008), higher engagement level (Hill, 2013; McDavid et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2016), vitality (Costa et al., 2016), and well-being (Leversen et al., 2012; Halvari et al., 2013).

Meanwhile, applying SDT to consumer behaviour and tourism research has also been effective. In consumer behaviour studies, psychological need satisfaction is used as a mediator to examine the relationship between pro-social spending (expending money for someone else) (Hill

& Howell, 2014), financial security (Howell, Kurai, & Tam, 2013), and well-being. Meanwhile, in tourism, motivational profiles of tourists, using autonomous motivation and controlled motivation, have been widely applied in sport tourism (Aicher & Brenner, 2015) and wine tourism (White & Thompson, 2009). SDT’s regulatory processes have been applied to elderly

12 tourists (Ahn & Janke, 2011) and volunteering for mega-events (Lee, Reisinger, Kim, & Yoon,

2014). While application of SDT’s psychological needs is limited in tourism, Siu, Kwan, Zhang, and Ho (2016) assess the roles of autonomy and relatedness needs as mediators between customer satisfaction and well-being in cultural consumption, and the relationships are significant.

Studies using SDT suggest the theory is effective in predicting psychological well-being across cultures and domains (Ryan & Deci, 2000; Deci & Ryan, 2000; Sheldon & Gunz, 2009).

Ryan (1995) encourages using SDT in other fields to analyze human behaviour. With its strengths in associating well-being in other domains yet limited application in tourism, we chose this theory to help explain tourist well-being through the fulfilment of psychological needs.

2.4 Subjective well-being

The two popular ways to conceptualize happiness (Christopher & Hickinbottom, 2008) are the authentic happiness theory (Seligman, 2008) and subjective well-being (Diener, 1984).

Authentic happiness theory focuses on having positive emotions, engagement, and a meaningful life (Seligman, 2002). Tourism researchers have not used this theory widely to conceptualize tourist happiness because of its perceived ethnocentrism and, therefore, lack of applicability to different cultures (Filep, 2014; Christopher & Hickinbottom, 2008). Subjective well-being (SWB) is an assessment of life from respondent perspectives (Diener & Lucas, 1999). Andrews and

Withey (1976) identified three components of SWB: life satisfaction judgements, positive affect, and negative affect. Diener and his colleagues defined SWB as “a broad category of phenomena that includes people’s emotional responses, domain satisfactions and global judgements of life satisfaction” (Diener, Suh, Lucas, & Smith, 1999, p. 277). These definitions cannot capture

13 tourist happiness because they cannot explain meaningful holidays nor tourist engagement at destinations (Filep, 2014). The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development

(OECD, 2013) defines SWB as “Good mental states including all of the various evaluations, positive and negative, that people make of their lives and the affective reactions of people to their experiences.” This definition is broader, capturing the components of life evaluation, affect, and eudaimonia (meaningful and purposeful life) (OECD, 2013). By including eudaimonia, this

SWB definition explains the impact of tourism on tourist well-being beyond on-site experiences

(Tse, 2014; Schmitt et al., 2015; Knobloch, Robertson, & Aitken, 2017).

In tourism research literature, 80% of the studies on tourism and well-being have been published since 2001; these studies encompass a range of issues (Uysal et al., 2016). Tourist well-being has been examined in social tourism (McCabe & Johnson, 2013; Morgan, Pritchard,

& Sedgley, 2015); wine festivals (Kruger, Rootenberg, & Ellis, 2013); and nature based-tourism

(Bimonte & Faralla, 2012; Bimonte & Faralla, 2015; Kim et al., 2015a). Some researchers have explored well-being cross-culturally (Chen, Lehto, & Cai, 2013; Tse, 2014; Chen, Fu, & Lehto,

2016) or focused on a specific demographic like tourists with disabilities (Pagan, 2015) and elderly tourists (Kim et al., 2015b; Morgan et al., 2015). Studies suggest that vacationers are happier than non-vacationers (Gilbert & Abdullah, 2004; Tse, 2014), although the differences are not significant (Nawijn, Marchand, Veenhoven, & Vingerhoets, 2010; Nawijn 2011a; Nawijn,

2011b).

Researchers have begun studying changes in tourist happiness levels before vacation

(Gilbert & Abdullah, 2004; Nawijn, De Bloom, & Geurts, 2013), during vacation (Nawijn, 2010;

Nawijn, Mitas, Lin, & Kerstetter, 2012), and after vacation (Gilbert & Abdullah, 2004; Nawijn et al., 2010; Nawijn, 2011b; Kroesen & Handy, 2014; Chen et al., 2013). Tourists are happier when

14 on vacation than in their daily life regardless of mood fluctuations during a trip (Nawijn, 2011a;

Nawijn, 2010; Nawijn et al., 2012). Tourists are happier and more satisfied with the life domains of self, leisure, and interpersonal relationships after trips than before (Gilbert & Abdullah, 2004), but the effect is temporary (Nawijn et al., 2010; Nawijn, 2011; Kroesen & Handy, 2014).

Antecedents of tourist well-being during a trip have also been explored, specifically motivation (Moscardo, 2011; Kim & Woo, 2014; Kim et al., 2015a), satisfaction with tourism experience (Kim et al., 2015b), and satisfaction with different life domains (Sirgy, Kruger, Lee,

& Yu, 2011). Holiday stress and attitudes towards their travel companion also influence tourist happiness (Nawijn, 2011a; Heimtum & Jordan, 2011; Backer & Schanzel, 2013; Berdychevsky,

Ginson, & Bell, 2013), as well as type of tourist (Bimonte & Faralla, 2012; Bimonte & Faralla,

2015), photography behaviour (Gillet, Schmitz, & Mitas, 2016), and holiday duration (Nawijn,

2010; Chen et al., 2016). Moreover, the consequences of tourist well-being, including revisit intentions, have been examined (Kim et al., 2015a; Kim et al., 2015b; Reitsamer & Brunner-

Sperdin, 2017).

This study investigates tourist psychological well-being specifically. Ryff (1995) stressed that psychological well-being should include “positive evaluations of one’s self and one’s life, a sense of continued growth and development as a person, the belief that life is purposeful and meaningful, the possession of good relationships with people, the capacity to manage one’s life and the surrounding world effectively, and a sense of self-determination” (p. 99). Thus, the measurement items chosen from the psychological well-being dimension accorded with the definition chosen for this study as well.

15 2.5 Hypotheses development

This study integrates CAT and SDT to predict tourist well-being. Thus, the following

Travel-Happiness (T-H) model is proposed (see Figure 1):

Cognitive Appraisal Theory Self-Determination Theory

Goal

Congruence H1

Autonomy H5 H8 Goal Interest H2 Positive Psychological

H3 emotions H7 well-being Goal Importance H6 H9 Relatedness H4

Novelty

Figure 1. Proposed T-H Model

CAT explains that one’s appraisal of an event elicits emotions. Previous studies show that motive-consistent or goal congruent events elicit positive emotions like joy, relief, hope, affection, and pride (Ellsworth & Smith, 1988; Roseman, Spindel, & Jose, 1990; Roseman,

Antoniou, & Jose, 1996; Nyer, 1997). Goal congruence is one of the most important determinants of positive emotions in tourism emotional experience studies (Hosany, 2012;

Manthiou et al., 2017). When tourists appraise goal relevance positively under goal congruent conditions, positive emotions are more intense (Nyer, 1997). Ma et al. (2013; 2017) showed that tourists feel the positive emotion of delight when the tourism experience is perceived as goal

16 congruent, relevant and important to their well-being or needs, and/or tourists perceive tourism activities as relevant to their interests. The appraisal of novelty or unexpectedness produces the positive emotions of positive surprise (Ellsworth & Smith, 1988; Roseman et al., 1996; Hosany,

2012), joy, or pride (Roseman et al., 1996). Based on the discussion, the following hypotheses are proposed:

H1: The appraisal of goal congruence towards a trip is positively associated with positive emotions.

H2: The appraisal of goal interest towards a trip is positively associated with positive emotions.

H3: The appraisal of goal importance for a trip is positively associated with positive emotions.

H4: The appraisal of novelty of a trip is positively associated with positive emotions.

Positive emotions gained from tourism experiences should have a positive effect on psychological needs fulfilment. Frederickson’s (2004) broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions suggests that “positive emotions appear to broaden peoples’ momentary thought-action repertoires and build their enduring personal resources” (p. 1369). In other words, people have increased options in thoughts and actions if they experience positive emotions (Fredrickson,

2004). For example, the positive emotion of joy encourages people to be more resourceful in their social, physical, intellectual, and artistic behaviour (Fredrickson, 2004).

Tay and Diener (2011) suggested that people with positive emotions report higher need fulfilment, particularly psychological needs of relatedness, autonomy, and competence. For instance, the positive emotion of gratitude encourages one to be autonomous (Karshdan, Mishra,

17 Breen, & Froh, 2009). People can regulate their behaviour when they feel positive emotions, and therefore the following hypothesis is proposed:

H5: Positive emotions from a trip have a positive effect on tourist autonomy need fulfilment.

H5a: Tourist autonomy need fulfilment mediates the relationship between positive emotions and psychological well-being.

Positive emotions often lead to other-centered orientations instead of selfish orientation

(Bagozzi, Gopinath, & Nyer, 1999). For instance, the positive emotions of love and gratitude help improve social bonding (Plutchik, 1980; Ellsworth & Smith, 1988; Karshdan et al., 2009).

People are more likely to share desirable outcomes with others when doing so gives them a positive emotion (Bagozzi et al., 1999). Positive emotions also affect the quality of interpersonal relationships at work (Philippe, Vallerand, Houlfort, Lavigne, & Donahue, 2010). Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H6: Positive emotions gained during a trip have a positive impact on tourist relatedness need fulfilment.

H6a: Tourist relatedness need fulfilment mediates the relationship between positive emotions and psychological well-being.

Positive affect is one of the main components of subjective well-being (Andrews &

Withey, 1976), and the definition of subjective well-being emphasizes the importance of experiencing pleasant emotional experiences (Diener, 1984). Fredrickson (2004) argues that positive emotions are important ingredients in achieving psychological growth and improved well-being (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Positive emotions help people either undo negative emotions or cope with them, increasing their psychological resilience by cultivating broadened thoughts and

18 action resources (Fredrickson, 2004). Consequently, these upward spirals produce and improve psychological well-being over time (Fredrickson & Joiner, 2002; Fredrickson, 2004). The following hypothesis is proposed:

H7: Positive emotions gained from a trip are positively related with tourist psychological well-being.

SDT predicts one’s psychological well-being by fulfilling psychological needs like autonomy, competence, and relatedness. In consumer studies, psychological needs fulfilment mediates the effect of income on life satisfaction; the relationship between psychological needs satisfaction and life satisfaction is significant (Howell, Kurai, & Tam, 2013). Psychological needs satisfaction also mediates the relationship between pro-social spending and well-being

(Hill & Howell, 2014). In the tourism context, fulfilling psychological needs through autonomy and relatedness has a significant relationship with physical, psychological, and social well-being during post-cultural consumption (Siu, Kwan, Zhang, & Ho, 2016). Therefore, the following hypotheses are suggested:

H8: Autonomy need fulfilment is positive related with tourist psychological well-being.

H9: Relatedness need fulfilment is positive related with tourist psychological well-being.

19 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

The purpose of this study is to explain how tourism experience at a destination leads to tourist well-being after a trip. The context of the study is general leisure tourism, not a specific tourism context, because travel is commonly perceived as a pleasant emotional experience and people often enjoy travelling no matter what activities they engage in (Nawijn, 2010).

3.1 Study population and sample

The target population of this study was tourists aged 18 or older, who had travelled abroad for leisure with at least three overnight stays at a destination during the past 12 months.

These criteria help differentiate same-day trips and weekend getaways from other vacations

(Chen et al., 2016). The study used a 12-month period to control seasonal variation (Gilbert &

Abdullah, 2004). Convenience sampling through online panel data was used to collect data for this study.

3.2 Sample size

The sample size was determined by criteria suggested by previous studies. Kline (2011) suggests that a large sample size helps reduce the probability of technical problems (e.g., inaccurate standard errors, low statistical power) in data analysis. The ratio of an ideal sample size recommended to the parameter estimate is 10:1 because obtaining that number of samples is more realistic (Kline, 2011; 2005). Researchers also recommend a minimum sample size of 200 to obtain meaningful data (Barrett, 2007; Kline, 2011; Bagozzi & Yi, 2012). This study had 56 parameter estimates, so a sample size of 560 should increase the accuracy of statistical estimates.

The confidence interval approach was also applied to calculate the sample size; the formula is as follows (Burns & Bush, 1995):

20 푧2(푝푞) (1.96)2(0.5 × 0.5) 푛 = = = 385 푒2 0.052

where n = estimated sample size

Z = z-value for desired confidence level 95%

p = estimated variability of 50%

q = 1 – p

h = standard of error ±0.05

The desired confidence level chosen for this study was 95%, and thus the z-value was

1.96. An estimated variability of 50% was chosen to give the largest sample size if the worst- case scenario of 50:50 occurred. This percentage is also widely used in social science research

(Burns & Bush, 1995). The estimated sample size suggested was 385. To get a reasonable sample size while taking into consideration these two suggestions and the resources available, we selected a target sample size of 400.

3.3 Data collection

The study relied on a quantitative approach and used self-administered surveys for data collection. An online survey questionnaire was developed on Qualtrics, an online survey service allowing users to publish surveys and respondents to answer surveys online. The data were collected from online panels owned by the Centre of Tourism Research in Prince Edward Island

(PEI). The online panels included more than 20,000 Canadian and U.S. residents who had visited or expressed an interest in visiting PEI. Screening questions were added to the beginning of the survey to screen out participants who did not meet the requirements. The screening questions were respondent age, “Did you take any out-of-country trip of three or more nights away from home in the last 12 months?” and asked for the main reason for the trip (business or pleasure).

21 Demographic information was included at the end of the questionnaire (See Appendix 2:

Questionnaire for the full questionnaire).

After three weeks of survey distribution, 1047 participants from the online panel responded to the survey. After filtering respondents using the screening questions, 483 of them were eligible to participate fully. Data cleaning was then performed, and we retained 396 usable surveys.

3.4 Measurement scales

To operationalize the study constructs, Churchill’s (1979) recommendations were adopted. A thorough literature review was conducted to gain a deep understanding of the study constructs. Measurement items were adopted from previous empirical studies. All items were refined to avoid double-barrelled questions and ambiguity. A pre-test using 14 graduate and undergraduate students was conducted to improve the wording, questionnaire layout, and order.

As shown in the model (see Figure 1, page 16), the eight variables were goal congruence, goal interest, goal importance, and novelty from CAT; positive emotions; need of competence and relatedness from SDT; and psychological well-being. Positive emotions had three sub- dimensions: joy, love, and positive surprise. All measurement items were measured on a 7-point

Likert type scale with measurements ranging from “never true” to “always true”; or from

“strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”. Goal interest was different. Goal interest was measured on a 7-point semantic differential scale anchored at each end by bipolar adjectives.

All items for any specific variable were adopted from previous studies after considering the composite reliability, standardized factor loadings, and average variance extracted (AVE) to ensure the convergent validity of each variable (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). The composite

22 reliability of specific variables retrieved from previous studies was Cronbach’s alpha of 0.7 or higher (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 2006; George & Mallery, 2016). The standardized factor loadings for the items adopted exceeded the suggested threshold of 0.5 (Hair,

Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 2010). The AVE of each variable was above the recommended cut-off value of 0.5 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).

Goal congruence was measured using four items adopted from Hosany (2012). Goal relevance was measured using eight items in total that combined goal importance and goal interest (Ma et al., 2013). Novelty was measured using five items from the novelty dimension of

Kim, Ritchie, and McCormick’s (2012) memorable tourism experience scale. The construct of positive emotions had 15 items adopted from Hosany and Gilbert (2010) Destination Emotion

Scale comprising the dimensions of joy, love, and positive surprise.

The constructs need for autonomy and need for relatedness in SDT were adopted from various scales originated in other domains: the Basic Psychological Needs in Exercise Scale

(Wilson, Rogers, Rodgers, & Wild, 2006); Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale (Longo,

Gunz, Curtis, & Farsides, 2016); and Basic Psychological Needs Scale (Siu et al., 2016).

Psychological well-being was measured using 12 indicators adopted from the BBC

(British Broadcasting Corporation) – SWB (subjective well-being) scale (Pontin, Schwannauer,

Tai, & Kinderman, 2013), and WHOQOL-BREF (World Health Organization Quality of Life –

BREF) Scale (WHO, 2013). The full list of measurement items adopted can be found in

Appendix 1: Measurement items for each variable.

23 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS

This chapter discusses the result of the data analysis and hypothesis testing. The first section presents the profile of the sample. The second section illustrates the results of

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) conducted to access the reliability and validity of the measurement model. The third section presents the results of Structural Equation Modelling

(SEM) used to test proposed hypothesis. The last part of the section shows the direct and indirect effect between positive emotions and psychological well-being.

4.1 Profile of the sample

Table 1 shows the socio-demographic information on respondents collected through the online panels. The ratio of male respondents to female respondents was approximately 50 to 50.

Over 75% of the respondents aged 55 or older, and 52.3% of the respondents were retired. For marital status and education, most respondents (73.7%) were married, and almost 88% of the respondents had education of college or university of higher. Most participants (83.3%) were from Canada, and the rest of the respondents were from the United States (US).

24 Table 1. The socio-demographic information of the respondents (N=396)

Features Variables Frequency Percentage Male 196 49.5 Gender Female 200 50.5 30 to 34 3 0.8 35 to 39 11 2.8 40 to 44 19 4.8 45 to 49 23 5.8 50 to 54 36 9.1 Age 55 to 59 60 15.2 60 to 64 70 17.7 65 to 69 69 17.4 70 to 74 64 16.2 75 and over 41 10.4 Single 59 14.9 Marital Married 292 73.7 Status Other 45 11.4 High school or under 49 12.4 College or university 220 55.6 Education Graduate degree 121 30.6 Other 6 1.5 Full-time 149 37.6 Part-time 22 5.6 Employment Student 1 0.3 Retired 207 52.3 Other 17 4.3 Canada 330 83.3 Residence United States 66 16.7

25 Table 2 reveals the travel experiences of 396 respondents over the past 12 months. The top two countries visited were the United States and Canada, with Canadian residents visiting the

US and US residents visiting Canada. Other popular destinations visited included the United

Kingdom (UK), Mexico, Cuba, France, and the Dominican Republic, the top seven countries visited by Canadians (Statistics Canada, 2016). More than 50% of the respondents travelled with spouse or partner, and 20% travelled with family members or relatives. The trips were spread out over the year with no popular season observed. More than 45% of the respondents took a trip lasting fewer than 10 days, and 30.5% of respondents took a trip lasted from 11 to 20 days.

Domestic trips were popular among respondents, with 90% of them taking 1 to 10 trips in the last

12 months.

26 Table 2. Travel experience of respondents (N=396)

Features Variables Frequency Percentage USA 148 37.4 Canada 48 12.1 UK 31 7.8 Destination of the Mexico 19 4.8 last trip taken Cuba 18 4.5 France 17 4.3 Dominican Republic 17 4.3 Others 125 29.5 Alone 33 7.1 Spouse/ partner 249 53.2 Travel Companion Family/ relatives 95 20.3 Friends 84 17.9 Other 7 1.5 Jan – April 129 32.58 Month of trip taken May – Aug 124 31.31 Sept – Dec 143 36.11 <10 185 46.7 11 to 20 121 30.6 The length of the last 21 to 30 51 12.9 trip (nights) 31 to 40 10 2.5 >40 29 7.3 <1 32 8.6 1 to 10 306 82.2 11 to 20 21 5.6 Total number of 21 to 30 3 0.8 domestic trips taken 31 to 40 3 0.8 in the last 12 months 41 to 50 3 0.8 > 50 4 1.1 Missing 24 - 1 to 10 355 89.6 Total number of 11 to 20 16 4.0 oversea trips taken 21 to 30 15 3.8 in the last 12 months 31 to 40 6 1.5 > 40 4 1.0 Note. For the questions such as destination of the last trip taken and travel companion, participations were asked to select all that apply.

27 4.2 Confirmatory factor analysis

SPSS Amos 24 with maximum likelihood method was used to conduct the analysis. The two-step rule recommended by Bollen (1989) was followed. First, the structural model was re- specified as a measurement model. CFA was conducted to evaluate the quality of the measures and how well the measured variables represented reality or the latent constructs (Hair, Black,

Babin, & Anderson, 2010). Second order CFA was conducted for the construct of positive emotions. The second-order factor of positive emotions can be explained by the three first-order factors of joy, love, and positive surprise (Chen, Sousa, & West, 2005). Model fit, construct convergent validity, and discriminant validity were assessed using CFA. Second, the structural model analysis was performed to test causal relationships between latent constructs.

Kline (2005) suggests using more than one index to evaluate the model fit. Fit indices commonly used by researchers include Chi-square (푥2) to degrees of freedom (df), Normed Fit

Index (NFI), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), Goodness of Fit Index (GFI), and Adjusted Goodness of Fix Index

(AGFI) (Kline, 2011; Schreiber, Nora, Stage, Barlow, & King, 2006). Chi-square to degrees of freedom ratio should fall below 2 (Schreiber et al., 2006). An NFI value higher than 0.90 is considered acceptable (Bentler & Bonett, 1980). The cut-off value suggested for both TLI and

CFI is 0.95 (Hu & Bentler, 1999). An RMSEA value of 0.05 or less indicates good model fit (Hu

& Bentler, 1999; Kline, 2011). The value of GFI and AGFI can range from 0 to 1, but the closer to 1, the higher the model fit (Kline, 2005). GFI and AGFI values higher than 0.8 are considered a good fit (Forza & Filippini, 1998; Greenspoon & Saklofske, 1998).

Before modification and re-specification, the model fit of the measurement model was assessed using CFA. Initial analysis suggested poor model fit with 푥2/df = 2.94, NFI = 0.789,

28 TLI = 0.848, CFI = 0.856, RMSEA = 0.07, GFI = 0.692, and AGFI = 0.662. The model fit was improved by removing measurement items with standardized factor loadings that were approximately 0.7 or less (Novelty 4, Novelty 5, Relatedness 5, Relatedness 6, Autonomy 5,

Autonomy 6, PWB 1, PWB 2, PWB 8, PWB 12). Indicators with standardized residual covariance less than -2.0 and more than 2.0 were removed to improve the model fit (Goal

Interest 4, Joy 1, Love 4, Love 5, Surprise 2, Surprise 4). Modification indices were used as guidance to improve the model fit as well. After removing an item with high loading (Goal

Congruence 2) in the goal congruence construct, model fit, reliability, and validity of the measurement model were achieved. (See Appendix 1: Measurement items for each variable for the specific items removed.) The estimation of the re-specified model shows increased model fit and satisfactory model fit to data: 푥2= 1270.47, df = 664, 푥2/df = 1.91, NFI = 0.91, TLI = 0.95,

CFI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.048, GFI = 0.85, and AGFI = 0.83.

The measurement model originally had 56 measurement items. The re-specified measurement model has 39 items after modification. Table 3 shows the descriptive analysis of the remaining measurement items. Among the 10 constructs, goal importance had the highest mean score 푥̅ = 6.215, followed by goal interest (푥̅ = 6.147) and goal congruence (푥̅ = 5.977).

The variable of novelty had the lowest mean score (푥̅ = 4.697).

29

Table 3. Descriptive statistics (N=396)

Variables Items Mean SD Goal The overall travel experience was consistent with what I wanted to achieve. 6.33 1.061 Congruence The overall travel experience was important in achieving my goals/needs/desires. 5.95 1.175 푥̅ = 5.977 The overall travel experience contributed in achieving my personal goals in life. 5.65 1.379 My trip to the destination was dull – neat. 6.11 1.295 Goal Interest My trip to the destination was not fun - fun. 6.13 1.401 푥̅ = 6.147 My trip to the destination was unappealing – appealing. 6.20 1.303 The overall travel experience mattered to me. 6.34 0.819 Goal The overall travel experience meant a lot to me. 6.19 0.989 Importance The overall travel experience was important to me. 6.19 0.960 푥̅ = 6.215 The overall travel experience was relevant to me. 6.14 0.976 My trip at the destination was a once-in-a-lifetime experience. 4.41 1.866 Novelty My trip was very unique. 4.85 1.676 푥̅ = 4.697 This trip was different from previous experiences. 4.83 1.710 I felt a sense of delight. 5.88 0.921 Joy I felt a sense of enthusiasm. 6.00 0.907 푥̅ = 5.958 I felt a sense of joy. 5.87 0.949 I felt a sense of pleasure. 6.08 0.851 I felt a sense of affection. 5.39 1.239 Love I felt a sense of caring. 5.48 1.213 푥̅ = 5.580 I felt a sense of love. 5.26 1.348 I felt a sense of astonishment. 5.11 1.380 Surprise I felt fascinated. 5.40 1.270 푥̅ = 5.183 I felt a sense of surprise. 5.04 1.284 I felt free to decide what to do. 5.91 1.078 Autonomy I felt free to do things in my own way. 5.67 1.160 푥̅ = 5.763 I felt free to decide how I do things. 5.72 1.121 I felt free to make my own decision. 5.75 1.154

30 Variables Items Mean SD I shared a common bond with the people I interacted with. 5.71 1.179 Relatedness I got along with the people I interacted with. 6.14 0.963 푥̅ = 5.703 I was connected with the people I interacted with. 5.78 1.168 I was emotionally attached with the people I interacted with. 5.18 1.487 I feel more able to live my life the way I want. 4.99 1.148 I feel more able to do the things I chose to do. 5.04 1.147 I feel more able to grow and develop as a person. 4.94 1.139 Psychological I feel happier with myself. 5.19 1.180 Well-being I feel happy with my life achievement. 5.32 1.211 푥̅ = 5.074 I feel more satisfied with myself. 5.20 1.156 My life is more meaningful. 4.91 1.191 My satisfaction with life in general increased. 5.00 1.219

31 Before performing SEM, measurement model must meet the standards of validity and reliability (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Construct validity was assessed by ensuring the convergent validity and discriminant validity of the measurement model (Hair et al., 2010). Convergent validity is the degree to which measurement items of each construct share high variance (Hair et al., 2010). To ensure the convergent validity of the measurement model, factor loadings of measurement items, AVE, and composite reliability were calculated and assessed. Standardized factor loadings are higher than the threshold of 0.5 (Hair et al., 2010), ranging from 0.62 to 0.96

(see Table 4). The AVEs of the constructs are higher than 0.5 with a minimum value of 0.614

(Fornell & Larcker, 1981; Hair et al., 2010). Composite reliability ensured the internal consistency of the construct. The composite reliability of all constructs exceeded the suggested threshold of 0.7 (Hair et al., 2001) with a minimum value of 0.824 (see Table 4). Overall, these values suggest satisfactory convergent validity of the measurement model.

Discriminant validity is the degree to which each construct differs from other constructs

(Hair et al., 2010). To ensure discriminant validity of the measurement model, AVE and shared variances between constructs were calculated. Table 5 shows that the square root of AVE of each construct is higher than the correlations between constructs. Thus, the measurement model did achieve discriminant validity (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).

The CFA results indicated satisfactory model fit, and validity and reliability of the measurement model were achieved. With a valid measurement model, SEM can be implemented to test causal relationships between constructs.

32

Table 4. Results of CFA (N=396)

Standardized Composite Variables Items Factor Reliability Loadings The trip experience was consistent with what I wanted to achieve. 0.62 Goal Congruence The trip experience was important in achieving my goals, needs, or desires. 0.88 0.824 The trip experience contributed in achieving my personal goals in life. 0.82 My trip to the destination was dull – neat. 0.88 Goal My trip to the destination was not fun – fun. 0.93 0.940 Interest My trip to the destination was unappealing – appealing. 0.94 The overall travel experience mattered to me. 0.82 The overall travel experience meant a lot to me. 0.91 Goal Importance 0.913 The overall travel experience was important to me. 0.86 The overall travel experience was relevant to me. 0.80 My trip at the destination was a once-in-a-lifetime experience. 0.86 Novelty My trip was very unique. 0.91 0.875 This trip was different from previous experiences. 0.72 I felt a sense of delight. 0.88 I felt a sense of enthusiasm. 0.86 Joy I felt a sense of joy. 0.91 I felt a sense of pleasure 0.84 Positive I felt a sense of affection. 0.92 0.831 Emotions Love I felt a sense of caring. 0.92 I felt a sense of love. 0.86 I felt a sense of astonishment. 0.89 Surprise I felt fascinated. 0.83 I felt a sense of surprise. 0.82 I felt free to decide what to do. 0.85 I felt free to do things in my own way. 0.96 Autonomy 0.952 I felt free to decide how I do things. 0.95 I felt free to make my own decision. 0.89

33 Standardized Composite Variables Items Factor Reliability Loadings I shared a common bond with the people I interacted with. 0.83 I got along with the people I interacted with. 0.81 Relatedness 0.910 I was connected with the people I interacted with. 0.89 I was emotionally attached with the people I interacted with. 0.85 I feel more able to live my life the way I want. 0.81 I feel more able to do the things I chose to do. 0.80 I feel more able to grow and develop as a person. 0.82 Psychological I feel happier with myself. 0.87 0.946 Well-being I feel happy with my life achievement. 0.77 I feel more satisfied with myself. 0.85 My life is more meaningful. 0.85 My satisfaction with life in general increased. 0.87

34 Table 5. Discriminant validity of measurement model

Goal Goal Goal Factors AVE PWB Novelty Autonomy Relatedness Emotions Congruence Importance Interest

PWB 0.689 0.830

Goal 0.614 0.512 0.784 Congruence Goal 0.725 0.403 0.724 0.851 Importance Goal 0.839 0.179 0.285 0.306 0.916 Interest

Novelty 0.702 0.311 0.344 0.368 0.234 0.838

Autonomy 0.834 0.279 0.316 0.305 0.091 -0.001 0.913

Relatedness 0.718 0.445 0.555 0.559 0.211 0.262 0.259 0.847

Emotions 0.622 0.560 0.619 0.619 0.416 0.599 0.275 0.566 0.789

35 4.3 Structural model analysis

Structural equation modelling (SEM) was conducted with SPSS Amos 24 to test the proposed hypotheses (Schreiber et al., 2006). The structural model fit shows satisfactory model fit to the data: 푥2= 1349.38, df = 677, 푥2/df = 1.993, NFI = 0.91, TLI = 0.95, CFI = 0.95,

RMSEA = 0.05, GFI = 0.84, and AGFI = 0.82.

Figure 2 and Table 6 show the results of path analysis of the structural model with 푅2 and standardized path coefficient. 푅2 or multiple coefficient of determination measures how much variance can be explained by endogenous constructs. R2 showed the model explains 64.8% variance for positive emotions, 9.3% variance of autonomy, 38.3% variance of relatedness, and

36.2% variance for psychological well-being.

The path coefficient indicates the strength of any relationship between two constructs.

The results showed that all proposed hypotheses are statistically significant and directionally supported. Among the four antecedents of positive emotions, goal congruence has the highest path coefficient (훽 = 0.34, 휌 < 0.001), followed by novelty, (훽 = 0.32, 휌 < 0.001), goal importance (훽 = 0.26,휌 < 0.001), and goal interest (훽 = 0.15,휌 < 0.001). The results also demonstrated that the relationship between positive emotions and relatedness (훽 = 0.62, 휌 <

0.001) is twice as strong as the relationship between positive emotions and autonomy (훽 =

0.31,휌 < 0.001). In addition, the two need fulfilments, autonomy and relatedness, on psychological well-being are a relatively weaker predictor on psychological well-being than positive emotion but statistically significant at the 0.05 level. The impact of both needs fulfilment of autonomy (훽 = 0.10) and relatedness (훽 = 0.12) on psychological well-being are similar.

36

Figure 2. Structural Model Note. *** statistically significant at 휌 < 0.001. * statistically significant at 휌 < 0.05.

Table 6. Result for the path analysis

Hypothesized path Path coefficients Result H1: Goal Congruence → Positive Emotions 0.34*** Supported H2: Goal Interest → Positive Emotions 0.15*** Supported H3: Goal Importance → Positive Emotions 0.26*** Supported H4: Novelty → Positive Emotions 0.32*** Supported H5: Positive Emotions → Autonomy 0.31*** Supported H6: Positive Emotions → Relatedness 0.62*** Supported H7: Positive Emotions → PWB 0.48*** Supported H8: Autonomy → PWB 0.10* Supported H9: Relatedness → PWB 0.12* Supported Note. PWB = Psychological well-being. *** statistically significant at 휌 < 0.001. * statistically significant at 휌 < 0.05.

4.4 Direct and indirect effect of the model

Hypotheses 5a and 6a propose autonomy and relatedness as mediators between positive emotions and psychological well-being. Indirect effects are further analyzed to see if the psychological needs fulfilment of autonomy and relatedness are significant mediators. Baron and

37 Kenny (1986) provide four steps to establish a mediator: (a) there is a significant relationship between positive emotions (predictor variable) and psychological well-being (outcome); (b) positive emotions are positively associated with both needs fulfilment of autonomy and relatedness (mediator); (c) the needs fulfilment of autonomy and relatedness are both positively related with psychological well-being; and (d) the strength of relationship between positive emotions and psychological well-being is weakened when the autonomy and relatedness are included in the model, but still greater than zero.

A bootstrap procedure was applied with 500 samples and a 95% bias-corrected confidence interval to examine the significance of these mediating effects. The results (see Table

7) show that positive emotions have a significant direct effect on psychological well-being, and a significant indirect effect on psychological well-being via autonomy (훽 = 0.036, 휌 < 0.05) and relatedness (훽 = 0.087, 휌 < 0.05). This finding indicates that both the needs fulfilment of autonomy and relatedness partially mediate the relationships between positive emotions and psychological well-being.

Table 7. Direct and indirect effect

Mediation Standardized Hypothesis Standardized Standardized indirect Result direct effect total Effect effect H5a: Positive Emotions → Partially 0.48*** 0.036* 0.52* Autonomy → PWB mediated

H6a: Positive Emotions → Partially 0.48*** 0.087* 0.58* Relatedness→ PWB mediated Note. PWB = Psychological well-being. *** statistically significant at 휌 < 0.001. * statistically significant at 휌 < 0.05.

38 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION

This study proposed the integrated T-H model and then tested the model by combining

CAT and SDT to explain how travel leads to tourist well-being. Specifically, this study investigates the impact of positive emotions from the tourism experience on needs fulfillment of autonomy and relatedness and on psychological well-being. Overall, our findings support the roles of autonomy and relatedness needs as mediators in the relationship between positive emotions and psychological well-being. That is, when tourists appraise a trip as a positive experience and they feel the positive emotions of joy, love, and surprise on the trip, they are more likely to feel autonomy and relatedness and ultimately improve their psychological well- being.

5.1 CAT: Appraisals in eliciting positive emotions

Hypotheses 1, 2, 3, and 4 proposed that goal congruence, goal interest, goal importance, and novelty create positive emotions, and this study supports the hypotheses. The study also confirms that CAT can be applied in tourism studies (Hosany, 2012; Ma et al., 2013; 2017;

Manthiou et al., 2017). The findings suggest that tourists who perceive their trips as goal congruent, appraise their experience as relevant to their goals and interests, and see it as a positively surprising experience are more likely to have the positive emotions of joy, love, and positive surprise.

Of the four, goal congruence was the most important appraisal for predicting positive emotions. At the end of a trip, tourists evaluate whether the trip experience aligned with their motivations, goals, or desires. If tourists perceive a trip matches their goals or desires, they are more likely to feel satisfied and thus experience positive emotions. This finding is consistent

39 with Manthiou et al.’s (2017) study in the cruise setting, Ma et al.’s (2013) study in the theme park context, and Hosany’s (2012) study on tourism experience, suggesting goal congruence was key determinant of positive emotions. In this study, tourists are likely to experience positive emotions if they achieve their goals or needs during the trip.

Novelty was the second most important determinant of positive emotions in this study.

This corresponds to Hosany’s (2012) study showing the appraisal of novelty produces the emotion of surprise. Indeed, tourists often seek new triggers and novel experience (Lee &

Crompton, 1992; Assaker, Vinzi, & O’Connoer, 2011). In other words, tourists often want their trip to include the unexpected and positively surprising. If the tourism experience gained matches the degree of novelty anticipated, then tourists should experience positive emotions about the tourism experience.

This study illustrates that goal relevance (goal importance and goal interest) are the least important predictors of positive emotions. Ma et al. (2013), in a study of theme parks, did argue that goal interest was the most important predictor of satisfaction and goal importance was the least important. In this study, goal importance was slightly more important than goal interest for eliciting positive emotions. That is, tourists who attach a special meaning to their tourism experience are more likely to experience positive emotions than tourists who are simply interested in the experience. Nonetheless, appraisals of goal importance and goal interest are determinants of positive emotions. If tourists perceive the experience as relevant to their needs under the condition of goal congruence, the positive emotions elicited are likely to be intense.

40 5.2 SDT: Impact of psychological needs fulfilment on psychological well-being

Hypotheses 8 and 9 proposed that the needs fulfilment of autonomy and relatedness should be positively associated with tourist psychological well-being. The findings support both the hypothesis and SDT. This study also provides empirical support for the effect of psychological needs fulfilment on psychological well-being even in the tourism context.

Specifically, the results illustrate that the needs fulfilment of autonomy and relatedness are determinants of tourist psychological well-being. In other words, tourists can exercise autonomy and have the sense of belonging, ultimately enhancing their sense of well-being, if they experience positive emotions during a trip. Tourism offers tourists an opportunity for self- improvement and self-transcendence (Carter & Gilovich, 2012; Smith & Diekmann, 2017). For instance, they can decide to do things in their own way. Furthermore, tourism experiences also often have a narrative structure with positive reinterpretation over time (Van Boven & Gilovich,

2003). For instance, reflecting on tourism experience improves bonding with travel partners; sharing tourism experience with others enhances the relationships (Gilovich, Kumar, & Jampor,

2014). The opportunities for autonomy and forming meaningful relationships with others help tourists improve their psychological well-being. This finding is consistent with studies of cultural consumption, demonstrating positive relationships between autonomy and relatedness needs fulfillment and well-being (Siu et al., 2016).

The T-H model explained 36.2% variance in psychological well-being. These results show that tourism experience has a positive effect on tourist psychological well-being, either directly from positive emotions or indirectly through the needs fulfilment of autonomy and relatedness. However, note the occurrence of hedonic adaptation after the trip. Hedonic adaptation happens as people return to their established set-point of well-being before major life

41 events (Brickman & Campbell, 1971; Diener, Lucas, & Scollon, 2006), in this case, a holiday trip. The thrill and joy of a vacation may fade over time. Sheldon and Lyubomirsky (2012) found a fadeout effect of happiness after a positive life event, although people who continue to derive positive emotions from positive life events are more likely to sustain their well-being.

5.3 Connecting CAT and SDT

This study also integrated CAT and SDT. Hypotheses 5a and 6a proposed psychological needs fulfillment of autonomy and relatedness mediate between positive emotions and psychological well-being. The study also tested the direct effect of positive emotions on tourist psychological well-being (H7). In other words, the more positive emotions tourists experience during a trip, the more likely they are to exercise autonomy and share meaningful social bonding with others. Consequently, tourists are prone to feel happier.

On the whole, these findings support the broaden-and-build theory (Fredrickson, 2004).

That is, positive emotions help people cultivate momentary thought-action repertoires and build resilience (Fredrickson, 2004). Positive emotions aroused by tourism experiences expand resources repertoires in thought and behavior and build resilience in the face of adversity. This positive upward spiral helps tourists cope with negative emotions, encourages them to savour their loved ones, or become autonomous (Fredrickson, 2004). Thus, tourist psychological well- being can be enhanced by tourism experiences over time.

The influence of positive emotions on the need fulfilment of relatedness is stronger than on autonomy need fulfillment. Sirgy et al. (2011) also showed that positive affect generated by a trip improved tourist overall satisfaction with life. Other than forming closer relationship with their travel partner, this finding may be explained by storytelling behavior after a trip. People are

42 more likely to share positive events or experiences on social media to improve their online self- presentation. Sharing their travel stories with others strengthens their self-presentation because travel is often greeted with admiration and social connectedness (Gössling & Stavrinidi, 2016;

Gössling, Cohen, & Hibbert, 2016). Therefore, through sharing positive emotional tourism experiences with others, a sense of belonging forms. As a result, tourist relatedness needs are fulfilled.

Alternately, the results suggest that the effect of positive emotions on autonomy needs fulfilment is relatively weaker that relatedness needs fulfilment. The weaker relationship may be due to not feeling entirely autonomous during and/or after a trip. Ryan and Deci (2006) highlight that humans usually act in response to extrinsic motivations like external pressure and social control, which may lead them to act outside their interests or values. In this study, over 90% of the respondents travelled with spouse/partner, families/relatives or friends. During a trip, they may not be fully able to make decisions or do things their own way due to their travel companion. After the trip, once back to their daily routines, tourists may find the fade-out effect has some effect on their psychological well-being (Kirillova & Lehto, 2015). Nevertheless, this study supports the connection between positive emotions derived from the trip and more autonomous behavior both during and after the trip.

43 CHAPTER 6: IMPLICATIONS

6.1 Theoretical implications

This study has shown the importance of theories integration. This study combined two theories: Cognitive Appraisal Theory (CAT) and Self-Determination Theory (SDT) to better explain tourist well-being. A single theory may not effectively answer certain research questions

(Hitt, Gimeno, & Hoskisson, 1998), so integrating theories provides understanding beyond what is in the individual theories and produces unique insights into a complex phenomenon, and in this case, tourist well-being (Mayer & Sparrowe, 2013; Hitt et al., 1998). Integration also allows more effective responses to a complex issue using a common language, which encourages more collaboration across disciplines and subsequently, helps social sciences progress (Steel & König,

2006). This study is integrative not only for linking the predictions of CAT and SDT, but also helps to further our understanding of how travel leads to tourist well-being.

Another theoretical contribution is enhancing research collaboration across disciplines by borrowing well-established theories from the psychology field. CAT and SDT have not been frequently applied with only limited research in the tourism field despite the rich literature and empirical evidence from other fields. Borrowing theories from other disciplines like psychology, sociology, and more for research in tourism may be essential because tourism influences many aspects of life both directly or indirectly or vice versa (Jafari & Ritchie, 1981). This study, through the predictions of CAT and SDT, has extended our understanding of the influence of tourism experiences on emotions and well-being.

This study has broadened our perspectives of tourist well-being. Our study not only establishes a connection between CAT and SDT but enriches our understanding on tourist psychological well-being. Uysal et al. (2016), in their review of current research on tourism and

44 well-being, observed that tourism experiences generally affect tourist well-being significantly.

That is, tourists often feel positive emotions, which in turn positively affect their well-being

(Uysal et al., 2016). Previous researchers examined the relationship between tourism experiences and well-being using different mediators: satisfaction with leisure life (Neal, Sirgy & Uysal,

1999), and satisfaction with various domains of life (Sirgy et al., 2011). This study tested whether psychological needs fulfillment mediated between tourist positive emotions and well- being. On the whole, this study highlights that positive emotions generated by tourism is positively associated with tourist psychological well-being directly and indirectly through psychological needs fulfilment of autonomy and relatedness.

6.2 Practical implications

Looking beyond theoretical implications, this study has several managerial implications for practitioners and governments.

This study results suggested that the appraisals of goal congruence, goal relevance and novelty were the determinants of the positive emotions: joy, love and positive surprise. Based on these findings, tourism marketers should bear in mind about the importance of tourists’ goals and their novelty seeking behaviour as they will influence the elicitation of positive emotions and psychological well-being. Therefore, it is critical to understand tourists’ goals when marketers develop and implement strategies to attract, satisfy and make them loyal to destination. For instance, Canada has a lot to offer in term of nature, landscape and culture. Yet tourists from the key target markets (e.g., Germany, Mexico, and China) travel to Canada for different goals, like to immerse into the nature, to visit families or friends, to seek for luxury indulgence, or to fulfil their social standard through travelling abroad (Canada Tourism Commission, 2015). Marketers

45 need to further investigate about tourists’ goals and their novelty seeking behaviour. With better understanding of tourists’ goals and behaviour, marketers can nail their marketing strategy to meet tourist goals from each target market and deliver appealing messages via effective distribution channels. Also, these results recommend tourism managers to design tourism activities and experiences that encourages the elicitation of positive emotions by improving tourists’ appraisal towards tourism experiences.

Knowledge of cognitive appraisal process allows tourism marketers to plan their strategy in setting tourists’ expectations properly and promoting the destination’s distinctiveness.

Specifically, tourism marketers can manage tourists’ expectations by leading their expectations slightly above the desired performance level and emphasizing potential opportunities for tourists to have novel and unique experiences. Consequently, high yet realistic expectations by the tourists contribute to higher chances of positive evaluation of experience and elicitation of positive emotions. For instance, tourism marketers may invite online influencers (e.g.,

YouTubers, vloggers or bloggers) to destination to offer them first-hand knowledge of destination experiences and activities so that they can better relay genuine destination information (e.g., text, pictures, videos, etc.) to their streamers and followers.

Most importantly, this study highlights improving tourist psychological well-being after a trip, either directly from the elicitation of positive emotions or indirectly through psychological needs fulfilment of autonomy and relatedness. Government should invest more in tourism and use it as a social-welfare intervention tool to enhance community mental health and well-being.

Previous tourism and well-being literature shows that vacationers have a stronger sense of well- being than non-vacationers (Gilbert & Abdullah, 2004; Tse, 2014). Tourism, particularly social tourism, can positively affect life satisfaction and well-being among individuals with financial

46 disadvantages, people with disabilities, and disadvantaged seniors (McCabe & Johnson, 2012;

Pagan, 2015; Morgan, Pritchard, & Sedgley, 2015). Some government and non-profit organizations have provided funds for people with disadvantages to travel or make tourism more inclusive and accessible (International Social Tourism Organization (ISTO), 2017). For instance, the Ministry of Tourism in Uruguay has launched the National System of Social Tourism for

Uruguayans to access tourism through various programmes and subsidies (Uruguay Investment and Export Promotion Agency, 2014). Swiss Travel Fund (Reka) Cooperative, a non-profit organization in Switzerland, provides Reka money for families to enjoy tourism at reduced price

(Reka, n.d.). The impact includes more inclusive and sustainable tourism development by addressing the community need, providing community an opportunity to travel, and leveraging the benefits of tourism to rural areas (ISTO, 2017). With evidences from academic research and initiatives launched thus far, governments must begin to recognize the benefits of tourism and extend it as part of the social welfare benefits for communities (Morgan et al., 2015).

47 CHAPTER 7: LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE STUDIES

This study had several limitations that warrant attention. First, generalizations of study results may be limited because of the samples. The samples include tourists living in North

America, particularly in Canada and the USA. Respondents are mostly well-educated, retiree and elderly tourists who are 55 or older. The T-H model may need to be applied in other demographics and cultures, preferably Eastern cultures, to ensure generalizability of the results.

The future study plan corresponds with Smith and Diekmann (2017) recommendation: to include well-being from the Eastern perspective because happiness is perceived differently in the Eastern cultures than the Western cultures.

Second, the operationalization of the variables was carried out by adopting and modifying measurement items from other empirical studies. While the study approach follows

Churchill’s (1979) recommendation, future research may need to develop and validate scales specifically for CAT and SDT’s psychological needs to further enrich our understanding of emotions and well-being in tourism.

Third, the respondents may have had a retrospective impact bias. That is, respondents may overestimate the positive emotions felt during vacations. Research does show, however, that people can retrieve their past emotional experiences quite accurately, and measures were taken in designing the questionnaire to help them recall their experiences as vividly as possible (Wilson

& Meyers, 2003). Even so, possible retrospective impact bias among respondents remains a concern. Future study is suggested to measure tourist emotions in real time. Investigate the long- term impact of travel on well-being would be interesting as well (Smith & Diekmann, 2017).

48 Fourth, this study disregards the need fulfilment of competence and negative emotions because it was not relevant in this study context. This psychological need should be studied in other settings (e.g., adventure tourism) and to assess its effectiveness in predicting well-being.

Future studies could also consider investigating the connections between psychological needs and negative emotions (e.g., regrets, disappointment, negative surprise) elicited by tourism experience (Hosany, 2012).

49 CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSION

This study developed an integrated-H model: Cognitive Appraisal Theory and Self

Determination Theory to investigate how travel leads to tourist psychological well-being. The data was collected from tourists who have travelled abroad for at least 3 days in the past 12 months. The study results demonstrate the positive effects of three appraisal determinants (goal congruence, goal relevance, and novelty) on positive emotions (joy, love, and positive surprise).

The fulfilment of autonomy and relatedness needs predict tourist psychological well-being. Most importantly, the findings reveal that positive emotions elicited by the trip affect tourist well- being directly and indirectly through the fulfilment of psychological needs.

The implications of this study include establishing a theoretical foundation for examining tourist well-being through psychological needs fulfilment; the importance of examining CAT and SDT’s predictions in the tourism context; and the recognition of tourism as a potential social-welfare tool to enhance community psychological well-being.

Tourism experiences can elicit positive emotions and create memorable experiences. This study reveals how positive emotions felt during a trip can influence tourists’ behavior by fulfilling psychological needs. According to Dolan (2014, p. 56), “You need to consider not only what you do and feel now but also what effect your current actions and feelings might have on what you do and feel next.” With the positive emotions we gain from a trip, finding pleasure in everyday life, such as becoming more autonomous and forming meaningful relationships with others, improves our well-being. The pursuit of happiness tends to be our objective as humans after all.

50 REFERENCES

Abraham, J., Velenczei, A., & Szabo, A. (2012). Perceived determinants of well-being and enjoyment level of leisure activities. Leisure Sciences, 34(3), 199-216.

Ahn, Y., & Janke, M.C. (2011). Motivations and benefits of the travel experiences of older adults. Educational Gerontology, 37(8), 653-673.

Aicher, T.J., & Brenner, J. (2015). Individuals’ motivation to participate in sport tourism: A self- determination theory perspective. International Journal of Sport Management, Recreation & Tourism, 18, 56-81.

Alderfer, C.P. (1969). An empirical test of a new theory of human needs. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 4(2), 142-175.

Andrews, F.M., & Withey, S.B. (1976). Social indicators of well-being: America’s perception of life quality. New York: Plenum Press.

Arnold, M.B. (1960). Emotion and personality: Volume 1 psychological aspects. New York: Columbia University Press.

Assaker, G., Vinzi, V.E., & O’Connor, P. (2011). Examining the effect of novelty seeking, satisfaction, and destination image on tourists’ return pattern: A two-factor, non-linear latent. Tourism Management, 32(4), 890-901. Backer, E., & Schanzel, H. (2013). Family holidays – Vacation or obli-cation? Tourism Recreation Research, 38(2), 159-173.

Bagozzi, R.P., & Yi, Y. (2012). Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(1), 8-34.

Bagozzi, R.P., Baumgartner, H., & Pieters, R. (1998). Goal-directed emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 12(1), 1-26.

Bagozzi, R.P., Gopinath, M., & Nyer, P.U. (1999). The role of emotions in marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(2), 184-206.

Baron R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182. Barrett, P. (2007). Structural equation modelling: Adjudging model fit. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(5), 815-824.

Baumeister, R.F., & Leary, M.R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497-529.

Bentler, P.M., & Bonett. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588-606.

51 Berdychevsky, L., Ginson, H., & Bell, H. (2013). Girlfriend getaways and women’s well-being. Journal of Leisure Research, 45(5), 602-623.

Bhattacharjee, A., & Mogilner, C. (2014). Happiness from ordinary and extraordinary experiences. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(1), 1-17.

Bimonte, S., & Faralla, V. (2012). Tourist types and happiness a comparative study in Maremma, Italy. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(4), 1929-1950.

Bimonte, S., & Faralla, V. (2015). Happiness and outdoor vacations appreciative versus consumptive tourists. Journal of Travel Research, 54(2), 179-192.

Bock, D.E., Mangus, S.M., & Folse, J.A.G. (2016). The road to customer loyalty paved with service customization. Journal of Business Research, 69(10), 3923-3932

Bollen, K.A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley. Burns, A.C., & Bush, R.F. (1995). Marketing research. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Canada Tourism Commission. (2015). EQ Profiles. Retrieved from https://www.destinationcanada.com/sites/default/files/archive/2013-01- 01/Tools_ExplorerQuotient_Profiles_2015_EN.pdf

Carter, T.J., & Gilovich, T. (2010). The relative relativity of material and experiential purchase. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(1), 146-159.

Carter, T.J., & Gilovich, T. (2012). I am what I do, not what I have: The differential centrality of experiential and material purchases to the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(6), 1304-1317.

Cavanaugh, L.A., Bettman, J.R., & Luce, M.F. (2015). Feeling love and doing more for distant others: Specific positive emotions differentially affect prosocial consumption. Journal of Marketing Research, 52(5), 657-673.

Chen, F.F., Sousa, K.H., & West, S.G. (2005). Testing measurement invariance of second-order factor models. Structural Equation Modeling, 12(3), 471-492. Chen, Y., Fu, X., & Lehto, X.Y. (2016). Chinese tourist vacation satisfaction and subjective well-being. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 11(1), 49-64.

Chen, Y., Lehto, X.Y., & Cai, L. (2013). Vacation and well-being: A study of Chinese tourists. Annals of Tourism Research, 42(2013), 284-310.

Choi, B., & Choi, B.J. (2014). The effects of perceived service recovery justice on customer affection, loyalty, and word-of-mouth. European Journal of Marketing, 48(1/2), 108-131.

Christopher, J.C., & Hickinbottom, S. (2008). Positive psychology, ethnocentrism, and the disguised ideology of individualism. Theory and Psychology, 18(5), 563-589.

52 Cohen, S.A., Prayag, G., & Moital, M. (2014). Consumer behaviour in tourism: Concepts, influences and opportunities. Current Issues in Tourism, 17(10), 872-909.

Deci, E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (2000). The “What” and “Why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behaviour. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.

Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behaviour. New York, US: Plenum Press.

Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macro theory of human motivation development, and health. Canadian psychology, 49 (3), 182-185.

Del Rio-Lanza, A.B., Vazquez-Casielles, R., & Diaz-Martin, A.M. (2009). Satisfaction with service discovery: Perceived justice and emotional response. Journal of Business Research, 62(8), 775-781.

Delcourt, C., Gremler, D.D., De Zanet, F., & Van Riel, A.C.R. (2017). An analysis of the interaction effect between employee technical and emotional competencies in emotionally charged service encounters. Journal of Service Management, 28(1), 86-106.

Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 542-575.

Diener, E., & Lucas, R. (1999). Personality and subjective well-being. In Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp.213-229). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Diener, E., & Suh, E.M. (1999). National differences in subjective well-being. In Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp.434-450). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Diener, E., Suh, E.M., Lucas, R.E., & Smith, H.L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276-302.

Dolan, P. (2014). Happiness by design: Change what you do, not how you think. New York: Penguin. Ellsworth, P.C., & Smith, C.A. (1988). Shades of joy: Patterns of appraisal differentiating pleasant emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 2(4), 301-331.

Faison, E. (1977). The neglected variety drive: A useful concept for consumer behaviour. Journal of Consumer Research, 4(3),172-175.

Filep, S. (2014). Moving beyond Subjective well-being: A tourism critique. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 38(2), 266-274.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. Forza, C., & Filippini, R. (1998). TQM impact on quality conformance and customer satisfaction: A causal model. International Journal of Production Economics, 55(1998), 1- 20.

53 Fredrickson, B.L. (2004). The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, 359(1449), 1367-1377.

Fredrickson, B.L., & Joiner, T. (2002). Positive emotions trigger upward spirals toward emotional well-being. Psychological Science, 13(2), 172-175.

Frijda, N.H. (1987). Emotion, cognitive structure, and action tendency. Cognitive and Emotion, 1(2), 115-143.

Frijda, N.H. (2016). The evolutionary emergence of what we call “emotions”. Cognition and Emotion, 30(4), 609-620.

Gaur, S.S., Herjanto, H., & Makkar, M. (2014). Review of emotions research in marketing, 2002-2013. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(6), 917-923.

George, D., & Mallery, P. (2016). IBM SPSS Statistics 23 step by step (14th ed.). New York: Routledge.

Gilbert, D., & Abdullah, J. (2004). Holiday taking and the sense of well-being. Annals of Tourism Research, 13(1), 103-121.

Gillet, S., Schmitz, P., & Mitas, O. (2016). The snap-happy tourist: The effects of photographing behaviour on tourists’ happiness. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 40(1), 37- 57.

Gilovich, T., Kumar, A., & Jampol, L. (2014). A wonderful life: Experiential consumption and the pursuit of happiness. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25(1), 152-165. Gössling, S., & Stavrinidi, I. (2016). Social networking, nobilities, and the rise of liquid identities. Mobilities, 11(5), 723-743. Gössling, S., Cohen, S.A., & Hibbert, J.F. (2016). Tourism as connectedness. Current Issues in Tourism, 1-15. Greenspoon, P.J., & Saklofske, D.H. (1998). Confirmatory factor analysis of the multidimensional Students’ Life Satisfaction Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(1998), 965-971. Guevarra, D., & Howell, R.T. (2014). To have in order to do: Exploring the effects of consuming experiential products on well-being. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25(1), 28-41.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NY: Prentice Hall. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., & Tatham, R.L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th edition). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Halvari, A.E.M., Halvari, H., Bjornebekk, G., & Deci, E.L. (2013). Oral health and dental well- being: testing a self-determination theory model. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(2), 275-292.

54 Heimtum, B., & Jordan, F. (2011). ‘Wish you weren’t here!’: Interpersonal conflicts and the touristic experiences of Norwegian and British women travelling with friends. Tourist Studies, 11(3), 271-290.

Hill, A.P. (2013). Motivation and university experience in first-year university students: A self- determination theory perspective. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 13(2013), 244-254.

Hill, G., & Howell, R.T. (2014). Moderators and mediators of pro-social spending and well- being: The influence of values and psychological need satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 69(October 2014), 69-74.

Hitt, M.A., Gimeno, J., & Hoskisson, R.E. (1998). Current and future research methods in strategic management. Organizational Research Method, 1(1), 6-44. Hosany, S. (2012). Appraisal determinants of tourist emotional response. Journal of Travel Research, 51(3), 303-314.

Hosany, S., & Gilbert, D. (2010). Measuring tourists’ emotional experiences toward hedonic holiday destinations. Journal of Travel Research,49(4), 513-526.

Hosany, S., Prayag, G., Deesilatham, S., Causevic, S., & Odeh, K. (2015). Measuring tourists’ emotional experiences: Further validation of the destination emotion scale. Journal of Travel Research, 54(4), 482-495.

Howell, R.T., & Hill, G. (2009). The mediators of experiential purchases: Determining the impact of psychological needs satisfaction and social comparison. Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(6), 511-522.

Howell, R.T., Kurai, M., & Tam, L. (2013). Money buys financial security and psychological need satisfaction: Testing need theory in affluence. Social Indicators Research, 110(1), 17- 29.

Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modelling, 6(1), 1-55. Hull, C.L. (1943). Principles of behaviour: An introduction to behaviour theory. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

International Social Tourism Organization. (2017). Tourism in action: 20 examples of social policies programmes around the world. Retrieved from http://www.oits- isto.org/oits/files/resources/1093.pdf

Izard, C.E. (1972). Patterns of emotions: A new analysis of anxiety and depression. New York: Academic Press.

Izard, C.E. (1977). Human Emotions. New York: Plenum Press.

55 Jafari, J., & Ritchie, J.R.B. (1981). Toward a framework for tourism education: Problems and prospects. Annals of Tourism Research, 8(1), 13-34.

Johnson, A.R., & Stewart, D.W. (2005). A reappraisal of the role of emotion in consumer behaviour. In N.K. Malhotra (Ed.), Review of Marketing Research Volume 1(pp.3-34). New York: M.E.Sharp.

Karshdan, T.B., Mishra, A., Breen, W.E., & Froh, J.J. (2009). Gender differences in gratitude: Examining appraisals, narratives, the willingness to express emotions and changes in psychological needs. Journal of Personality, 77(3), 691-730.

Kim, H., & Woo, E. (2014). An examination of missing links between quality of life and tourist motivation. Tourism Analysis, 19(5), 629-636.

Kim, H., Lee, S., Uysal, M., Kim, J., & Ahn, K. (2015a). Nature-based tourism: Motivation and subjective well-being. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 32(1), 76-96.

Kim, H., Woo, E., & Uysal, M. (2015b). Tourism experience and quality of life among elderly tourists. Tourism Management, 46, 465-476.

Kim, J.H., Ritchie, J.R.B., & McCormick, B. (2012). Development of a scale to measure memorable tourism experiences. Journal of Travel Research, 51(1), 12-25.

Kirillova, K., & Lehto, X. (2015). An existential conceptualization of the vacation cycle. Annals of Tourism Research, 55(1), 110-123. Kline, R.B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modelling (3rd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

Kline, R.B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modelling (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

Knobloch, U., Robertson, K., & Aitken, R. (2017). Experience, emotion and Eudaimonia: A consideration of tourist experiences and well-being. Journal of Travel Research, 56(5), 651-662.

Kroesen, M., & Handy, S. (2014). The influence of holiday-taking on affect and contentment. Annals of Tourism Research, 45(2014), 89-101.

Kruger, S., Rootenberg, C., & Ellis, S. (2013). Examining the influence of the wine festival experience on tourists’ quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 111(2), 435-452.

Lastner, M.M., Folse, J.A.G., Mangus, S.M., & Fennell, P. (2016). The road to recovery: Overcoming service failures through positive emotions. Journal of Business Research, 69(10), 4278-4286.

Lazarus, R.S. (1991). Emotions and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press.

56 Lazarus, R.S., & Smith, C.A. (1988). Knowledge and appraisal in the cognition-emotion relationship. Cognition and Emotion, 2(4), 281-300.

Lee, C., Reisinger, Y., Kim, M.J., & Yoon, S. (2014). The influence of volunteer motivation on satisfaction, attitudes, and support for a mega-event. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 40(July), 37-48.

Lee, T.H., & Crompton, J. (1992). Measuring novelty seeking in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 19(4), 732-751.

Leversen, I., Danielsen, A.G., Birkeland, M.S., & Samdal, O. (2012). Basic psychological need satisfaction in leisure activities and adolescents’ life satisfaction. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 41(12), 1588-1599.

Longo, Y., Gunz, A., Curtis, G.J., & Farsides, T. (2016). Measuring need satisfaction and frustration in educational and work contexts: The need satisfaction and frustration scale (NSFS). Journal of Happiness Studies, 17(1), 295-317.

Ma, J., Gao, J., Scott, N., & Ding, P. (2013). Customer delight from theme park experiences: The antecedents of delight based on Cognitive Appraisal Theory. Annals of Tourism Research, 42(2013), 359-381.

Ma, J., Scott, N., Gao, J., & Ding, P. (2017). Delighted or satisfied? Positive emotional responses derived from theme park experiences. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 34(1), 1- 19.

Manthiou, A., Kang, J., & Hyun, S.S. (2017). An integration of cognitive appraisal theory and script theory in the luxury cruise sector: The bridging role of recollection and storytelling. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 1-18.

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370-396. Hiroto, D.S., & Seligman, M.E.P. (1972). Generality of learned helplessness in man. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 311-327.

Mayer, K.J., & Sparrowe, R.T. (2013). Integrating theories in AMJ articles. Academy of Management Journal, 56(4), 917-922. McCabe, S., & Johnson, S. (2013). The happiness factor in tourism: Subjective wellbeing and social tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 41(1), 42-65.

McClelland, D.C. (1965). N Achievement and entrepreneurship: A longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1(4), 389-392.

McDavid, L., Cox, A.E., & McDonough, M.H. (2014). Need Fulfillment and motivation in physical education predict trajectories of change in leisure-time physical activity in early adolescence. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 15(5),471-480.

Morgan, N., Pritchard, A., & Sedgley, D. (2015). Social tourism and well-being in later life. Annals of Tourism Research, 52, 1-15.

57 Moscardo, G. (2011). Searching for well-being: Exploring change in tourist motivation. Tourism Recreation Research, 36(1), 15-26.

Moulard, J.G., Kroff, M.W., & Folse, J.A.G. (2012). Unraveling consumer suspense: The role of hope, fear, and probability fluctuations. Journal of Business Research, 65(3), 340-346.

Murray, H.A. (1938). Explorations in personality. New York: Oxford University Press.

Nawijn, J. (2010). The holiday happiness curve, a preliminary investigation into mood during a holiday abroad. International Journal of Tourism Research, 12(3), 281-290.

Nawijn, J. (2011a). Determinants of daily happiness on Vacation. Journal of Travel Research, 50(5), 559-566.

Nawijn, J. (2011b). Happiness through vacationing: Just a temporary boost or long-term benefits? Journal of Happiness Study, 12(4), 651-665.

Nawijn, J., De Bloom, J., & Geurts, S. (2013). Pre-vacation time: Blessing or burden? Leisure Sciences, 35(1), 33-44.

Nawijn, J., Marchand, M., Veenhoven, R., & Vingerhoets, A. (2010). Vacationers happier, but most not happier after a holiday. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 5(1), 531-541.

Nawijn, J., Mitas, O., Lin, Y., & Kerstetter, D. (2012). How do we feel on vacation? A closer look at how emotions change over the course of a trip. Journal of Travel Research, 52(2), 265-274.

Neal, J., Sirgy, M.J., & Uysal, M. (1999). The role of satisfaction with leisure travel/tourism services and experience in satisfaction with leisure life and overall life. Journal of Business Research, 44(3), 153-163 Ng, J.Y.Y., Ntoumanis, N., Thogersen-Ntoumani, C., Deci, E.L., Ryan, R.M., Duda, J.L., & Williams, G.C. (2012). Self-determination theory applied to health contexts: A meta- analysis. Perspectives on psychological science, 7(4), 325-340.

Nicolao, L., Irwin, J.R., & Goodman, J.K. (2009). Happiness for sale: Do experiential purchases make consumers happier than material purchases? Journal of Consumer Research, 36(2), 188-198.

Nyer, P.U. (1997). A study of the relationships between cognitive appraisals and consumption emotions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25(4), 296-304.

OECD. (2013). OECD guidelines for measuring subjective well-being. Paris: OECD Publishing.

Oyserman, D., Elmore, K., & Smith, G. (2012). Self, self-concept, and identity. In M.R.Leary & J.P. Tangney, Handbook of Self and Identity (pp. 69-104). New York: Guilford Press.

Pagan, R. (2015). The impact of holiday trips on life satisfaction and domains of life satisfaction: Evidence for German Disabled Individuals. Journal of Travel Research, 54(3), 359-379.

58 Parkinson, B. (2001). Putting appraisal in context. In K.R.Scherer, A.Schorr, & T.Johnstone (Eds). Appraisal processes in emotion: theory, methods, research (pp. 188-201). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Philippe, F.L., Vallerand, R.J., Houlfort, N., Lavigne, G.L., & Donahue, E.G. (2010). Passion for an activity and quality of interpersonal relationship: The mediating role of emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(6), 917-932.

Plutchik, R. (1980). Emotion: A psychoevolutionary synthesis. New York: Harper & Row.

Reitsamer, B.F., & Brunner-Sperdin, A. (2017). Tourist destination perception and well-being: What makes a destination attractive. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 23(1), 55-72.

Reka. (n.d.). Reka: The leisure-time money. Retrieved from https://reka.ch/en/rekamoney/privatepersons/Seiten/private-persons.aspx

Roseman, I.J. (1984). Cognitive determinants of emotions: A structural theory. In P. Shaver (Ed.), Review of Personality and Social Psychology Volume 5 (pp.11-36). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Roseman, I.J. & Smith, C.A. (2001). Appraisal Theory: Overview, assumptions, varieties, controversies. In K.R.Scherer, A.Schorr, & T.Johnstone (Eds). Appraisal processes in emotion: theory, methods, research (pp. 18-34). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Roseman, I.J., Antoniou, A.A., & Jose, P.E. (1996). Appraisal determinants of emotions: Constructing a more accurate and comprehensive theory. Cognitive and Emotions, 10(3), 241-277.

Roseman, I.J., Spindel, M.S., & Jose, P.E. (1990). Appraisals of emotion-eliciting events: Testing a theory of discrete emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(5), 899-915.

Russell, J.A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(6), 1161-1178.

Ryan, R.M. (1995). Psychological needs and the facilitation of integrative processes. Journal of Personality, 63(3), 397-427.

Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2000). Self-Determination Theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.

Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 141-166.

Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2006). Self-regulation and the problem of human autonomy: Does psychology need choice, self-determination and will? Journal of Personality, 74(6), 1557- 1586.

59 Ryan, R.M., Kuhl, J., & Deci, E.L. (1997). Nature and autonomy: Organizational view of social and neurobiological aspects of self-regulation in behaviour and development. Development and Psychopathology, 9(4), 709-728.

Ryff, C.D (1995). Psychological well-being in adult life. Current Direction in Psychological Science, 4(4), 99-104.

Scherer, K.R. (1984a). Emotions as a multicomponent process: A model and some cross-cultural data. In P. Shaver (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology volume 5 (pp.37-63). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Scherer, K.R. (1984b). On the nature and function of emotion: A component process approach. In K.R.Scherer, & P.Ekman (Eds), Approaches to emotion (pp. 293-317). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Scherer, K.R. (1988). Criteria for emotion-antecedent appraisal: A review. In V.Hamilton, & P.Ekman (Eds.). Approaches to emotion (pp. 89-126). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Schoefer, K., & Ennew, C. (2005). The impact of perceived justice on consumers’ emotional responses to service complaint experiences. Journal of Services Marketing, 19(5), 261-270.

Schreiber, J.B., Nora, A., Stage, F.K., Barlow, E.A., & King, J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(6), 323-338. Seligman, M.E.P. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realize your potential for lasting fulfillment. New York: NY: Free Press.

Sheldon, K.M., & Gunz, A. (2009). Psychological needs as basic motives, not just experiential requirement. Journal of Personality, 77(5), 1467-1492.

Sheldon, K.M., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2012). The challenge of staying happier: Testing the hedonic adaptation prevention model. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(5), 670-680.

Sirgy, M.J., Kruger, P.S., Lee, D.J., & Yu, G.B. (2011). How does a travel trip affect tourists’ life satisfaction. Journal of Travel Research, 50(3), 261-275.

Siu, N.Y., Kwan, H., Zhang, T.J., & Ho, C.K. (2016). Arts consumption, customer satisfaction and personal well-being: A study of performing arts in Hong Kong. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 28(2), 77-91.

Smith, C.A., & Ellsworth, P.C (1985). Patterns of cognitive appraisal in emotion. Attitudes and Social Cognition, 48(4), 813-838.

Smith, M.K., & Diekmann, A. (2017). Tourism and wellbeing. Annals of Tourism Research, 66(September), 1-13.

60 Statistics Canada. (2016). Travel by Canadians to foreign countries, top 15 countries visited (2016). Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum- som/l01/cst01/arts37a-eng.htm Steel, P., & König, C.J. (2006). Integrating theories of motivation. The Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 889-913. Tay, L., & Diener, E. (2011). Needs and subjective well-being around the world. Personality Processes and Individual Differences, 101(2), 354-365.

Tse, S.M. (2014). Does tourism change our lives? Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 19(9), 989-1008.

Tuzovic, S., Simpson, M.C., Kupplewieser, V.G., & Finsterwalder, J. (2014). From ‘free’ to fee: Acceptability of airline ancillary fees and the effects on customer behaviour. Journal of Retailing and Customer Services, 21(2), 98-107.

Uriely, N. (2005). The tourist experience: Conceptual developments. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(1), 199-216.

Uruguay Investment and Export Promotion Agency. (2014). Tourism sector: Investment opportunities in Uruguay. Retrieved from http://www.uruguayxxi.gub.uy/invest/wp- content/uploads/sites/4/2014/09/Tourism-Sector-Uruguay-XXI-2014.pdf

Uysal, M., Sirgy, M.J., Woo, E., & Kim, H. (2016). Quality of life (QOL) and well-being research in tourism. Tourism Management, 53, 244-261.

Van Boven, L. (2005). Experientialism, materialism, and the pursuit of happiness. Review of General Psychology, 9(2), 132-142.

Van Boven, L., & Gilovich, T. (2003). To do or to have? That is the question. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(6), 1193-1202.

Van den Broeck, A., Ferris, D.L., Chang, C.H., & Rosen, C.C. (2016). A review of self- determination theory’s basic psychological needs at work. Journal of Management, 42(5), 1195-1229.

Wang, J.C.K. , Morin, A.J.S., Ryan, R.M., & Liu, W.C. (2016). Students’ motivational profiles in the physical education context. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 38(6), 612-630.

Watson, L., & Spence, M.T. (2007). Causes and consequences of emotions on consumer behaviour: A review and integrative cognitive appraisal theory. European Journal of Marketing, 41(5/6), 487-511.

Wehmeyer, M.L., Little, T.D., & Sergeant, J. (2009). Self Determination. In S.J. Lopez & C.R. Snyder (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Positive Psychology (2 ed.). Retrieved from Oxford Handbooks Online.

61 White, C.J., & Thompson, M.T. (2009). Self Determination Theory and the wine club attribute formation process. Annals of Tourism Research, 36(4), 561-586.

White, R.W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological Review, 66, 297-333.

Wilson, P.M., Rogers, W.T., Rodgers, W.M., & Wild, T.C. (2006). The psychological need satisfaction in exercise scale. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 28(3), 231-251.

Wilson, T.D., & Meyers, J. (2003). “How happy was I, anyway?” A retrospective impact bias. Social Cognition, 21(6), 421-446. World Health Organization (WHO). (2013). WHO quality of life – BREF (WHOQOL-BREF). Retrieved from http://www.who.int/mental_health/media/en/76.pdf

Zhang, J.W., Howell, R.T., & Caprariello, P.A. (2013). Buying life experiences for the “Right” reasons: A validation of the motivations for experiential buying scale. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(3), 817-842.

62

APPENDICES

63 Appendix 1: Measurement items for each variable

Table 8. Measurement items

Variables Items’ Label Items Citations The overall travel experience at the destination was consistent with what I Goal Congruence 1 wanted to achieve. The overall travel experience at the destination was consistent with what I Goal Congruence 2 Goal desired. Hosany Congruence The overall travel experience at the destination was important in achieving (2012) Goal Congruence 3 my goals, needs, or desires. The overall travel experience at the destination contributed in achieving my Goal Congruence 4 personal goals in life. Goal Interest 1 My trip to the destination was dull – neat. Goal Interest 2 My trip to the destination was not fun – fun. Ma et al. Goal Interest Goal Interest 3 My trip to the destination was unappealing – appealing. (2013) Goal Interest 4 My trip to the destination was boring – interesting. Goal Importance 1 The overall travel experience at the destination mattered to me. Goal Goal Importance 2 The overall travel experience at the destination meant a lot to me. Ma et al. Importance Goal Importance 3 The overall travel experience at the destination was important to me. (2013) Goal Importance 4 The overall travel experience at the destination was relevant to me. Novelty 1 My trip at the destination was a once-in-a-lifetime experience. Kim, Ritchie Novelty 2 My trip was very unique. & Novelty Novelty 3 This trip was different from previous experiences. McCormick Novelty 4 I experienced something new during this trip. (2012) Novelty 5 The cultures I experienced during this trip was different from my culture.

64

Variables Items’ Label Items Citations Joy 1 During the trip, I felt cheerful. Joy 2 During the trip, I felt a sense of delight. Joy Joy 3 During the trip, I felt a sense of enthusiasm. Joy 4 During the trip, I felt a sense of joy. Joy 5 During the trip, I felt a sense of pleasure Love 1 During the trip, I felt a sense of affection. Love 2 During the trip, I felt a sense of caring. Hosany & Love Love 3 During the trip, I felt a sense of love. Gilbert Love 4 During the trip, I felt a sense of tenderness. (2010) Love 5 During the trip, I felt warm-hearted. Surprise 1 During the trip, I felt a sense of astonishment. Surprise 2 During the trip, I felt a sense of amazement. Surprise Surprise 3 During the trip, I felt fascinated. Surprise 4 During the trip, I felt a sense of inspiration. Surprise 5 During the trip, I felt a sense of surprise. Autonomy 1 During and/or after my trip to the destination, I felt free to decide what to do. During and/or after my trip to the destination, I felt free to do things in my Autonomy 2 own way. Wilson et al., During and/or after my trip to the destination, I felt free to decide how I do (2006); Autonomy 3 things. Longo et al., Autonomy During and/or after my trip to the destination, I felt free to make my own (2016); Autonomy 4 decision. Siu et al., During and/or after my trip to the destination, I felt free to express my (2016) Autonomy 5 opinion. Autonomy 6 During and/or after my trip to the destination, I felt free to express my ideas.

65

Variables Items’ Label Items Citations After my trip to the destination, I shared a common bond with the people I Relatedness 1 interacted with. Relatedness 2 After my trip to the destination, I got along with the people I interacted with. Wilson et al., After my trip to the destination, I was connected with the people I interacted (2006); Relatedness 3 with. Longo et al., Relatedness After my trip to the destination, I was emotionally attached with the people I (2016); Relatedness 4 interacted with. Siu et al., After my trip to the destination, I considered the people I regularly interact (2016) Relatedness 5 to be my friends. Relatedness 6 After my trip to the destination, people in my life care about me. PWB 1 After my trip to the destination, I feel more in control of my life. PWB 2 After my trip to the destination, I feel happy with myself as a person. After this trip to the destination, I feel more able to live my life the way I PWB 3 want. After this trip to the destination, I feel more able to do the things I chose to PWB 4 do. Psychological After this trip to the destination, I feel more able to grow and develop as a Pontin et al., PWB 5 Well-being person. (2013); (PWB) PWB 6 After this trip to the destination, I feel happier with myself. WHO (2013) PWB 7 After this trip to the destination, I feel happy with my life achievement. PWB 8 After my trip to the destination, I feel more satisfied with myself. PWB 9 After this trip to the destination, I feel more satisfied with myself. PWB 10 After this trip to the destination, my life is more meaningful. After this trip to the destination, my satisfaction with life in general PWB 11 increased. After my trip to the destination, overall, my experience with this trip is PWB 12 memorable and it has enriched my quality of life.

66 Appendix 2: Questionnaire

Section 1 Please recall one of your most recent trip you took and take some time to reminisce your travel experience at the destination.

1. What is your current age?  Under 18  45 to 49  18 to 19  50 to 54  20 to 24  55 to 59  25 to 29  60 to 64  30 to 34  65 to 69  35 to 39  70 to 74  40 to 44  75 and above

2. Did you take any out-of-country trip(s) (international or overseas) of three or more nights away from home in the last 12 months?  Yes  No

3. Which of the following best describes the main reason that the trip took place?  Pleasure  Others

4. Where was your destination region?  United States  Canada  Mexico  Cuba  UK  France  Other. Please specify: ______

5. How many nights were you away from home on this trip? _____ nights

6. When did the trip indicated earlier take place? _____ Year _____ Month

7. Were you involved in the trip planning?  A great deal  Somewhat  Little  Not at all 8. Who did you travel with on your most recent travel?

67  Alone  Spouse/ partner  Family members/ relatives  Friends  Other. Please specify: ______

9. In general, how many overnight trips did you take for pleasure purposes in the last 12 months? Please enter a numeric value. Domestic trips: _____ Overseas trips: _____

68 Section 2 In conjunction with your most recent pleasure trip to the overseas/international destination as indicated earlier, please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statements, from 1=Strongly disagree, 2=Disagree, to 6=Agree, 7=Strongly agree.

The overall travel experience at the destination… 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 was consistent with what I wanted to achieve. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ was consistent with what I desired. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ was important in achieving my goals, needs, or desires. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ contributed in achieving my personal goals in life. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

The overall travel experience at the destination… 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 mattered to me. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ meant a lot to me. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ was important to me. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ was relevant to me. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 My trip at the destination was once-in-a-lifetime experience. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ My trip was very unique. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ This trip was different from previous experiences. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ I experienced something new during this trip. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ The cultures I experienced during this trip was different from my ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ culture.

How would you describe your experience at the destination? Rate the overall experience of your most recent pleasure trip indicate earlier by checking the appropriate spaces on each of the following dimensions.

My trip to the My trip to the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 destination was… destination was… Dull ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Neat Not Fun ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Fun Unappealing ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Appealing Boring ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Interesting

69 In conjunction with your most recent pleasure trip to the overseas/international destination as indicated earlier, please rate the intensity of the overall emotional experience, from 1=Never true, 2=Rarely true to 6=Usually true, 7=Always true.

During the trip, I felt… 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 cheerful. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ a sense of delight. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ a sense of enthusiasm. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ a sense of joy. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ a sense of pleasure. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ a sense of affection. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ a sense of caring. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ a sense of love. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ a sense of tenderness. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ warm-hearted. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ a sense of astonishment. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ a sense of amazement. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ fascinated. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ a sense of inspiration. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ a sense of surprise. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

70 Section 3 In conjunction with your most recent pleasure trip to the overseas destination indicated earlier, please state how much you agree or disagree with the following items, from 1=Strongly disagree, 2=Disagree to 6=Agree, 7=Strongly Agree. During and/or after my trip to the destination, I felt free to… 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 decide what to do. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ do things in my own way. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ decide how I do things. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ make my own decision. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ express my opinion. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ express my ideas. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

After my trip to the destination, … 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I shared a common bond with people I interact with. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ I got along with people I interacted with. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ I was connected with people I interacted with. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ I am emotionally attached with people I interacted with. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ I considered the people I regularly interact to be my friends. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ People in my life care about me. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Overall, how did your trip impact on your psychological well-being after returning from the destination? Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with the following items, from 1=Strongly disagree, 2=Disagree to 6=Agree, 7=Strongly Agree. After your trip to the destination, … 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I feel more in control of my life. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ I feel happy with myself as a person. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ I feel more able to live my life the way I want. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ I feel more able to do the things I chose to do, ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ I feel more able to grow and develop as a person. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ I feel happier with myself. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ I feel happy with my life achievement. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ I enjoy my life. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ I feel more satisfied with myself. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ My life is more meaningful. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ My satisfaction with life in general increased. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Overall, my experience with this trip is memorable and it has enriched ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ my quality of life.

71 Section 4 1. What is your gender?  Male  Female  Other

2. What is your current marital status?  Single  Married  Other

3. What is your highest level of education?  High school or under  College or university  Graduate degree or above  Other

4. What is your employment status?  Full-time  Part-time  Student  Retired  Other

5. Where is your current country of residence?  Canada  United States  Other. Please specify: ______

72