Research Findings

Table 1.1 shows the image variables used for both images and their shortened versions used in the subsequent analysis.

Separation of the Two Images (Naive and Reevaluated)

According to the research objectives of the study, the naive and reevaluated image are recorded as perceived by the five identified segments and are presented in detail in tables 1.2 and 1.3.

Table 1.1 Image Variables for Naive and Reevaluated and Importance-Choice Criteria- Variables

1

Availability of suitable accommodation

Accommodation

2

Giving a feeling of prestige

Prestige

3

Local cuisine

Cuisine

4

Developing friendships with others

Friendships

5

Quality of service personnel

Personnel

6

Cleanliness of sea and beaches

Clean sea

7

Discovering new places/different cultures

New/different

8

Availability of facilities for sports and activities

Sports facilities

9

Availability of entertainment

Entertainment

10

Safety

Safety

11

Unspoiled physical environment

Unspoiled environment

12

Having fun, being entertained

Fun

13

Historical and cultural attractions

Historical attractions

14

Scenic beauty/natural attractions

Natural beauty

15

Relaxing physically and mentally

Relaxing

16

Affordable/reasonable prices overall

Prices

17

Being adventurous/being active

Adventure

18

Escaping from daily routine

Escape routine

19

Sunbathing in the beach and doing nothing

Sunbathing

Table 1.2 Naive Image as Perceived by the Five Identified Segments

Centered Values

Values (5—1)

Total

Segment

1

Segment

2

t Segment

3

Segment

4

: Segment

5

Total

Segment

1

Segment

2

Segment

3

Segment

4

Segment

5

1

Acco m m odat io n

0.20

0.25

0.21

0.28

0.21

0.04

4.27

4.39

4.23

4.31

4.26

4.12

2

Prestige

-0.43

-0.16

-0.77

-0.52

-0.40

-0.46

3.64

3.98

3.24

3.52

3.65

3.63

3

Cuisine

0.14

0.13

0.23

0.25

0.14

-0.01

4.22

4.27

4.24

4.28

4.19

4.07

4

Friendships

-0.59

-0.27

-0.61

-0.85

-0.75

-0.62

3.48

3.87

3.41

3.19

3.30

3.46

5

Personnel

0.23

0.18

0.36

0.25

0.29

0.11

4.30

4.32

4.38

4.28

4.34

4.19

6

Clean sea

0.27

0.13

0.27

0.42

0.39

0.20

4.34

4.27

4.29

4.45

4.44

4.28

7

New/different

0.06

0.02

0.38

0.14

-0.34

0.19

4.13

4.16

4.39

4.17

3.71

4.29

8

Sports facilities

-0.37

-0.35

-0.30

-0.42

-0.53

-0.23

3.70

3.79

3.71

3.61

3.52

3.85

9

Entertainment

-0.14

-0.02

-0.36

-0.27

0.00

-0.16

3.93

4.12

3.65

3.77

4.05

3.93

10

Safety

0.14

0.15

0.03

0.08

0.27

0.15

4.21

4.29

4.05

4.11

4.32

4.24

11

Unspoiled environment

-0.01

0.03

0.00

0.06

-0.06

-0.08

4.06

4.17

4.02

4.09

3.99

4.00

12

Fun

-0.25

-0.17

-0.53

-0.61

0.08

-0.10

3.83

3.97

3.48

3.42

4.13

3.99

13

Historical attractions

-0.15

-0.16

0.20

-0.11

-0.45

-0.16

3.92

3.98

4.21

3.92

3.60

3.93

14

Natural beauty

0.19

0.11

0.42

0.34

-0.01

0.17

4.26

4.25

4.44

4.38

4.04

4.25

15

Relaxing

0.42

0.33

0.36

0.47

0.57

0.38

4.49

4.47

4.38

4.50

4.62

4.46

16

Prices

0.17

0.09

0.20

0.14

0.25

0.21

4.24

4.23

4.21

4.17

4.30

4.30

17

Adventure

-0.46

-0.39

-0.32

-0.61

-0.71

-0.28

3.61

3.75

3.70

3.42

3.34

3.81

18

Escape routine

0.43

0.25

0.42

0.56

0.56

0.42

4.50

4.39

4.44

4.59

4.61

4.51

19

Sunbathing

0.15

-0.12

-0.20

0.42

0.51

0.23

4.22

4.02

3.82

4.45

4.56

4.31

Table 1.3 Reevaluated Image As Perceived by the Five Identified Segments

Centered Values

Values (5—1)

Total

Segment

1

t Segment 2

Segment

3

Segment

4

: Segment

5

Total

Segment

1

Segment

2

Segment

3

Segment

4

Segment

5

1

Acco m m odat io n

0.21

0.14

0.25

0.17

0.24

0.25

4.22

4.22

4.23

4.06

4.30

4.30

2

Prestige

-0.36

-0.23

-0.54

-0.45

-0.26

-0.40

3.66

3.85

3.44

3.44

3.79

3.66

3

Cuisine

0.20

0.23

0.27

0.20

0.10

0.22

4.22

4.31

4.24

4.09

4.16

4.27

4

Friendships

-0.25

-0.10

-0.35

-0.47

-0.25

-0.19

3.77

3.98

3.62

3.42

3.81

3.87

5

Personnel

0.29

0.19

0.34

0.39

0.31

0.26

4.31

4.27

4.32

4.28

4.36

4.31

6

Clean sea

-0.01

-0.08

0.07

0.11

-0.04

-0.04

4.01

4.00

4.05

4.00

4.01

4.01

7

New/different

0.02

0.04

0.13

0.06

-0.12

0.02

4.04

4.12

4.11

3.95

3.94

4.07

8

Sports facilities

-0.24

-0.21

-0.34

-0.33

-0.15

-0.20

3.78

3.87

3.63

3.56

3.91

3.85

9

Entertainment

-0.20

-0.13

-0.40

-0.30

-0.11

-0.11

3.82

3.95

3.58

3.59

3.95

3.94

10

Safety

-0.22

-0.11

-0.35

-0.41

-0.13

-0.19

3.80

3.97

3.62

3.48

3.92

3.87

11

Unspoiled environment

-0.14

-0.09

-0.02

-0.17

-0.16

-0.29

3.88

3.99

3.95

3.72

3.90

3.76

12

Fun

-0.29

-0.25

-0.50

-0.41

-0.17

-0.16

3.73

3.83

3.47

3.48

3.88

3.90

13

Historical attractions

-0.20

-0.14

0.00

-0.24

-0.37

-0.25

3.82

3.94

3.97

3.66

3.69

3.81

14

Natural beauty

0.26

0.22

0.53

0.39

0.06

0.16

4.28

4.30

4.50

4.28

4.12

4.21

15

Relaxing

0.48

0.37

0.53

0.64

0.55

0.37

4.50

4.45

4.50

4.53

4.61

4.42

16

Prices

0.00

-0.10

0.13

0.14

0.02

-0.13

4.02

3.98

4.11

4.03

4.08

3.93

17

Adventure

-0.39

-0.29

-0.34

-0.60

-0.54

-0.23

3.63

3.78

3.64

3.30

3.52

3.82

18

Escape routine

0.50

0.35

0.56

0.62

0.50

0.55

4.52

4.43

4.53

4.52

4.56

4.60

19

Sunbathing

0.33

0.16

0.04

0.65

0.52

0.35

4.35

4.24

4.02

4.55

4.57

4.40

In table 1.2, the means of the naive image are recorded, as perceived by the five market segments. It can be observed on the right-hand side of the table that the majority of the variables have high means scores (mean > 4), while the others have a mean >3. This is a common phenomenon in rating scales that tends to create difficulties in discriminating among the variables. In order to minimize this issue and clearly identify the differences, centered values for each one of the 19 variables were structured. The centered values are constructed by subtracting the mean value of all the variables from the mean of the corresponding segment.

The mean scores, in table 1.2, indicate that the segments tend to have a more optimistic view for the variables they consider more important and vice versa. Therefore, segment 1 displays higher means for the naive image of the variables “prestige” and “friendships.” Segment 2 is more “optimistic” regarding the characteristics of the chosen destination (the variables “discovering new places/dif- ferent cultures,” “historical attractions,” “natural beauty”) and less optimistic for the variables “sunbathing,” “entertainment,” and so on, which are of less interest to them. Segment 3 shows lower means for the naive image of “friendships” while segment 5 higher means for “adventure” and “sport facilities.” The variable “friendships” is one of the less important criteria for segment 2; therefore, it gets a very low mean.

In table 1.3 the means of the reevaluated image are recorded, as perceived by the five segments. Also, the centered values are constructed as in the previous table. The mean scores in table 1.3 indicate that the identified market segments display differences in their reevaluated image. For example segment 2 rated “natural beauty” with the higher mean, concerning the naive image and again rates this variable with the higher mean concerning the reevaluation. While segment 4 gives the lowest mean on this variable. On the contrary, concerning some other variables several differences are observed. For example, segment 4 rated “sport facilities” with the lowest naive mean but gives the higher reevaluated mean.

Observing the means of the variables, segment 3 seems to be the more “demanding” since it is the one that gives lower scores on all variables of the reevaluated image without exception. In general, the fact that a segment originally gave high means to the naive image of a certain variable, due to the fact that it was considered an important criterion, does not mean, in any way, that it also gave high means to the reevaluated image of that variable.

From t able 1.4 it appears that there are modifications (positive or negative) between the natve and reevaluated image for all the variables within all the segments. The acquired experience has impact on the preexisting perception. But for reasons of statistical accuracy we will analyze the statistically important differences (/><0.05) of the attributes.

Also, from table 1.4 , according to ANOVA, it is observed that there are differences among the five market segments concerning their perception of the modifications of the image variables.

Table 1.4 Differences between Naive and Reevaluated Image within and among the Five Segments

Does the reevaluated image differ significantly from the naive within every segment?

ANOVA: are there significant differences among the 5 segments?

Segment

1

Segment

2

Segment

3

Segment

4

Segment

5

p-value a=0.05

1

Accom modation

-0.17

0.00

-0.25

0.04

0.18

0.01

YES

2

Prestige

-0.13

0.20

-0.08

0.14

0.03

0.05

YES

3

Cuisine

0.04

0.00

-0.19

-0.04

0.19

0.10

NO

4

Friendships

0.11

0.21

0.23

0.51

0.40

0.01

YES

5

Personnel

-0.05

-0.06

0.00

0.03

0.12

0.65

NO

6

Clean sea

-0.27

-0.24

-0.45

-0.43

-0.27

0.58

NO

7

New/different

-0.04

-0.29

-0.22

0.22

-0.21

0.00

YES

8

Sports facilities

0.08

-0.08

-0.05

0.39

0.00

0.01

YES

9

Entertainment

-0.17

-0.08

-0.17

-0.10

0.01

0.74

NO

10

Safety

-0.32

-0.42

-0.63

-0.40

-0.37

0.37

NO

11

Unspoiled

environment

-0.18

-0.06

-0.38

-0.09

-0.24

0.29

NO

12

Fun

-0.14

-0.02

0.06

-0.25

-0.09

0.22

NO

13

Historical

attractions

-0.04

-0.24

-0.27

0.09

-0.12

0.05

YES

14

Natural beauty

0.05

0.06

-0.09

0.08

-0.04

0.62

NO

15

Relaxing

-0.02

0.12

0.03

-0.01

-0.04

0.57

NO

16

Prices

-0.25

-0.11

-0.14

-0.22

-0.37

0.52

NO

17

Adventure

0.03

-0.06

-0.13

0.18

0.01

0.23

NO

18

Escape routine

0.04

0.09

-0.08

-0.05

0.09

0.52

NO

19

Sunbathing

0.22

0.20

0.09

0.01

0.09

0.43

NO

Specifically:

  • • The first five columns of this table indicate the modifications between naive and reevaluated image for every market segment. The numbers in bold indicate that the difference is statistically significant (meaning 0). For example segment 1 rates differently the variables accommodation, clean sea, safety, unspoiled environment, sunbathing, concerning the reevaluated and naive image.
  • • The ANOVA analysis presented in the last two columns examines if the modification, for each and every one of the 19 variables, differs among the segments. In other words: is the impact of the visit on the formation of the reevaluated image the same among the segments?
  • 1

For example, concerning the variable of accommodation, segments 1 and 3 shape a lower rate for the reevaluated image while, for the same variable, segment 5 shapes a higher rate, always in comparison to the naive. Accordingly, it is obvious that there is a difference among the segments concerning the formation of their reevaluated image for this specific variable. This is reconfirmed from the ANOVA analysis.

Also, concerning the variable safety, its reevaluated image is significantly lower from its naive, according to all the segments (the respondents associated the variable “safety” with road conditions and lack of pavements). Since the ANOVA analysis does not present differences among the segments, we can conclude that there is not a segment where this negative rating has a peak. For every variable the ANOVA analysis tests the hypothesis:

H0: There are no significant differences among the identified segments, concerning the means (reevaluatednaive) of the image variables.

H1: There are significant differences among the identified segments concerning the means (reevaluatednaive) of the image variables.

  • • (a=0,05). Such differences are identified in six variables, specifically accommodation, prestige, friendships, discovering new places/different cultures, sport facilities, historical attractions.
  • • Accommodation: segment 5 grades with a higher mean while segments 1 and 3 grade with a lower mean, segment 2 and 4 do not display significant differences.
  • • Prestige: There is a significant positive difference only for segment 2. For the other four segments there is no significant difference displayed either way.
  • • Friendships: There is a positive significant modification among all the segments with the exception of segment 1 where the modification is not significant.
  • • Discovering new places /different cultures: segment 4 gives higher rates while segments 2 and 5 lower. There are no significant differences observed for segments 1 and 3.
  • • Sport facilities: There is significant positive modification for segment 4 only. The other four segments do not display any significant differences.
  • • Historical attractions: Significant negative modifications are observed for segments 2 and 3. The other segments do not display significant differences.

Identified Segment 1.

As clear from Figures 1.1 and 1.2: [1]

Modifications between naive and reevaluated image for segment 1—ranking of choice criteria in order of importance

Figure 1.1 Modifications between naive and reevaluated image for segment 1—ranking of choice criteria in order of importance.

Significant and nonsignificant differences for segment 1 (significant differences are those where 0 is not included)

Figure 1.2 Significant and nonsignificant differences for segment 1 (significant differences are those where 0 is not included).

  • • The variables accommodation, clean sea, and safety where significant negative modification is observed are also the criteria that this segment considers the most important for their choice.
  • • Especially the variable safety is considered by them the first choice criterion and has a strong negative modification.

Identified Segment 2

As clear from Figures 1.3 and 1.4:

  • • Significant negative modifications are observed for the variables discovering new places/different cultures, safety, historical attractions, and positive for the variables prestige and friendships.
  • • It is interesting that the criteria that are considered least important receive positive rating, while the ones that are more important, negative.
  • • Especially the variable discovering new places/different cultures that is considered the most important choice criterion for this segment, after the visit receives the lowest rating compared to all the other segments.

Identified Segment 3

As clear from Figures 1.5 and 1.6:

  • • Significant negative modifications are observed for the variables accommodation, clean sea, safety, unspoiled environment, historical attractions. Only the variable friendships received positive rating.
  • • Segment 3 is the one that considered of greatest importance the criteria accommodation, clean sea, safety, and unspoiled environment.
  • • Especially the variable safety has for this segment the most negative modification after the visit compared to all other segments.

Identified Segment 4

As clear from figures 1.7 and 1.8:

  • • Significant positive modifications are observed for the variables friendships, sport facilities, discovering new places/different cultures. Negative significant modifications are observed for clean sea, safety and fun.
  • • For this segment too, the positive modifications concern the less important criteria and vice versa.
  • • This segment that is characterized by its desire for fun displays a significantly negative modification after the visit.

Identified Segment 5

As clear from figures 1.9 and 1.10:

  • • Significant positive modifications are observed for the variables accommodation, local cuisine, and friendships. Significant negative modifications are observed for clean sea, discovering new places/different cultures, safety, unspoiled environment, prices.
  • • Once more, for segment 5 the positive modifications concern the less important criteria and vice versa.
Modifications between naive and reevaluated image for segment 2—ranking of choice criteria in order of importance

Figure 1.3 Modifications between naive and reevaluated image for segment 2—ranking of choice criteria in order of importance.

Significant and nonsignificant differences for segment 2 (significant differences are those where 0 is not included)

Figure 1.4 Significant and nonsignificant differences for segment 2 (significant differences are those where 0 is not included).

Modifications between naive and reevaluated image for segment 3—ranking of choice criteria in order of importance

Figure 1.5 Modifications between naive and reevaluated image for segment 3—ranking of choice criteria in order of importance.

Significant and nonsignificant differences for segment 3 (significant differences are those where 0 is not included)

Figure 1.6 Significant and nonsignificant differences for segment 3 (significant differences are those where 0 is not included).

Modifications between naive and reevaluated image for segment 4—ranking of choice criteria in order of importance

Figure 1.7 Modifications between naive and reevaluated image for segment 4—ranking of choice criteria in order of importance.

Significant and nonsignificant differences for segment 4 (significant differences are those where 0 is not included)

Figure 1.8 Significant and nonsignificant differences for segment 4 (significant differences are those where 0 is not included).

Modifications between naive and reevaluated image for segment 5—ranking of choice criteria in order of importance

Figure 1.9 Modifications between naive and reevaluated image for segment 5—ranking of choice criteria in order of importance.

Significant and nonsignificant differences for segment 5 (significant differences are those where 0 is not included)

Figure 1.10 Significant and nonsignificant differences for segment 5 (significant differences are those where 0 is not included).

  • [1] Significant modifications are observed in the variables accommodation, cleansea, safety, unspoiled environment, prices, sunbathing. • Only the variable sunbathing displays higher reevaluated image in comparisonto the naive. Even though the other variables display negative modificationstheir means remain high (around 4).
 
Source
< Prev   CONTENTS   Source   Next >