Assignment 3: Final research proposal Length: 3000 words, Weighting: 60% Description The aim of Assessment 3 is to draw upon the concepts and processes you have learned about throughout the unit, and to prepare a detailed research proposal. This assessment builds upon the research concept you submitted as Assessment 1 and also the methodological insights you gained through Assessment 2. In some instances, students studying certain Masters programs at SCU may actually implement their proposal as a real-life research project in a subsequent, capstone unit. For those students, it is important to take this assessment very seriously as it is an opportunity for you to receive constructive feedback on your ideas and proposed methodology from your lecturer, before putting it to work in the field later on. For other students, this assessment will be an exercise in consolidating and applying the material learnt in BUS00913. Requirements Your research proposal must address the following headings (using these items as section headings): Clear title of project (15 word maximum). Try to capture the essence of your project. 1. Introduction to the research proposal (approx. 250 words) 1.1 Background information: This section will include information regarded as important contextual background to the proposed study. This is where to explain information about the local economy, the local tourism industries, tourism trends, attractions, hotels studied etc. Only include information which you regard as important background for your research project. Be sure to acknowledge your information sources by referencing them. You might find yourself referencing "applied literature" – news articles, websites etc. more often than academic literature in this section. This is perfectly acceptable here. 1.2 Research aim statement: Include the research aim statement from Assessment 1, but refined according to the feedback provided by your lecturer. 1.3 Research objectives: Include the three research objectives from Assessment 1, but refined according to the feedback provided by your lecturer. These should leave the reader in no doubt as to what exactly your research intends to do. Present as numbered points. This is where you break down the research aim statement into answerable components. 1.4 Significance of the Research: In around one paragraph, explain why the research issue you propose is important/deserves to be investigated. Does it investigate an area that has only attracted limited scholarly attention before (a ‘gap’ in the literature)? Does it respond to previous authors’ calls for future research into a certain phenomenon? Will the research assist in solving some sort of applied (organisational) problem? Does your research apply a method or theory in a new context? Be explicit, and ideally support your argument with some supporting references. 1.5 Delimitations: Provide a specific outline of the geographic and demographic delimitations is required (e.g., a study might be delimited to females aged 18–30 years residing in Singapore). Note: delimitations are boundaries put around a study that are controllable by the researcher. 2. Literature review (approx. 750 words) Academic journal articles and textbooks should constitute the majority of your references. The review should follow an "inverted pyramid" structure, in which you start by addressing concepts broadly relating to your research project then gradually narrowing down to the specific concepts related to your project. The literature review should be structured as follows: Introduction: Provide a very brief introduction to your literature review by explaining how the literature review is structured. The structure outlined here should reflect the "inverted pyramid" structure. Main body of the literature review: A literature review is structured similar to an essay – it has an introduction, a main body, and a conclusion. The main body is where you provide your critical review of the literature you have read. The main body should be sub-divided using appropriately labelled sub-headings, and the order of the sub-headings should follow the "inverted pyramid" style – working from the broad to the specific. At the beginning of each sub-section, you should briefly introduce the concepts being reviewed and give a brief rationale as to why this body of literature is being reviewed. This should be done by linking the concept(s) with your research objectives. At the end of each sub-section you should round that sub-section off with a very brief summary, and then link through to the next sub-section. That is, there should be good logical flow throughout the writing. Note: The literature reviewed should predominately be from academic literature sources, for example, articles published in peer reviewed journals, scholarly textbooks, refereed conference proceedings, and research theses. Websites, newspaper articles and other applied literature should be referred to only if relevant to the research design. The hallmark of a good researcher is the ability to think critically. Therefore, you should look not only to summarise the literature you have read, but also critique it. Look for opportunities to make critical comments, e.g.: Was a non-random sample used? Is a study applicable to only one cultural context? Can you see any shortcomings in the theories you have read about? Do studies addressing a similar phenomenon agree or disagree with each other? Do not make critical comments just for the sake of it though. Any critical comments made must be logically argued. Because this is an account of a body of literature, most paragraphs in the main body will contain at least one reference. Most paragraphs will contain multiple references. Ensure that your in-text citations adhere to the prescribed style guide. Direct quotes must be contained within quotation marks and a page number given. This is a Masters level course. There is no excuse for poor referencing. Conclusion: Provide a one-paragraph summary of the literature review. Re-emphasise the key points emerging from the literature review. Most importantly, explicitly state where there is a gap in the literature that your own research is likely to address. 3. Research paradigm and role of theory (approx. 300 words) 3.1 Research paradigm: Identify which paradigm your research will be informed by. Note: if utilising mixed methods (a mix of quantitative and qualitative in the same study) then the research may be informed by more than one paradigm. You should discuss and justify your paradigm choice in light of your research aim and objectives, and refer specifically to the ontological and epistemological conditions surrounding your project. One to two paragraphs is sufficient. 3.2 Theoretical underpinning: A discernible difference between applied (consultancy) research and academic research is the application of theory in examining a phenomenon. Here you are required to declare whether your project seeks to test theory (deductive) or generate theory (inductive). You should also identify the key theoretical concepts underpinning your research project. In quantitative research, this is often called a "conceptual framework" and may be presented as a conceptual diagram which defines the theoretical concepts employed in your study and showing the hypothesised relationships between those concepts which will be tested. If a diagram is presented, it is not sufficient to leave it to stand alone, some interpretation/explanation of the diagram must be provided. In particular, provide a definition of each concept, preferably from the scholarly literature. For a qualitative project, conceptual diagrams are generally not applicable as these studies do not seek to test theory, but instead inductively generate it. What is needed is explanation/definition of the theoretical concepts that are embedded within the study. For example, if a study seeks to qualitatively explore the concept of organisational commitment in 5 star hotels, then explanation of "organisational commitment" as a theoretical concept is needed. Use the scholarly literature to guide your explanation/definition. 4. Research design (approx. 400 words) 4.1 Methodology: Explain and justify your choice of methodologcial approach. Have you chosen a quantitative approach or a qualitative approach? Or a combination of both (mixed methods)? Have you elected to collect primary data or secondary data? Explain your choices here, and justify them in light of your research aim and objectives. One paragraph is sufficient. 4.2 Nature of Research: Identify and explain the nature of your research. For example, is it exploratory, descriptive, explanatory etc., or a combination? One paragraph is sufficient. 4.3 Research strategy: Explain and justify your research strategy. Note: you should explain your strategy in reasonable detail – not merely identify a strategy. For example, if you have chosen a case study approach – what will be the context of the case study? How will you gain access to the organisation, and what will the procedures be? At least two paragraphs will be necessary, but depending on the complexity of individual studies, additional detail may be needed. However, it is not necessary in this section to discuss specific data collection methods and their associated procedures; that comes in the next section. Section 4.3 is only concerned with the strategy for undertaking your research. 5. Data collection (approx. 300 words) 5.1 Data required: What sort of information do you require to provide the answer to fulfil your research objectives? Similar to Assessment 1, do you require quantitative data collected from hotel managers in Sydney? Do you require qualitative data from international flight attendants? What is the nature of the information you require? Justify why you have identified this type of information in light of your research aim and objectives. You may revise what you submitted for this section in Assessment 1. One paragraph is sufficient. Be as specific as possible. 5.2 Data sources: Where, or with whom, is this data located? 5.3 Data collection methods and instrumentation: Explain and justify the method(s) you have chosen to collect your data. Be sure the method(s) you select are appropriate with the paradigm informing your research (e.g., in-depth interviews would be inappropriate for a positivistic study testing for relationships between variables). Note: the marker should know exactly how you intend to carry out the project. Give specific detail and be sure to justify your choices by supporting them with appropriate research methodology literature (i.e., references). At least a few paragraphs will be needed to adequately address this section. Quantitative studies inherently require more detail than qualitative studies because of the need to describe instrumentation design. Quantitative studies: Describe how your data collection instrument (questionnaire) was designed. Explain and justify the types of questions and measurement scales utilised. If you have adapted scales to measure certain concepts, explain which previous study (or studies) these were adapted from. Explain how the questionnaire will be administered (street intercept, internet, telephone etc.) A copy of the data collection instrument must be included as an appendix. You may also find it useful to cross-reference between parts of the questionnaire when describing/justifying your instrumentation. Qualitative studies: Describe and justify the method(s) used to collect your data. For example, if in-depth interviews are to be conducted, will these be semi-structured or unstructured? Are the interviews to be conducted face-to-face, over the phone, or via email? What are the benefits and pitfalls of such approaches? Importantly, give a list of possible interview questions and discuss how these contribute to fulfilling the research objectives. Studies collecting secondary data: Describe and justify where the secondary data will be obtained from. What will be your procedures for collecting and cataloguing that data? Note also, you may decide on a mixes methods approach, so carefully explain the reasons why this approach is relevant to your research project. 6. Sampling (approx. 250 words) Describe and justify your sampling procedures. There are three aspects that need consideration: Probability or non-probability sampling: Briefly explain and justify whether your study adopts probability or non-probability sampling. Be sure that the approach you adopt is consistent with your research paradigm. For example, probability sampling is generally not associated with qualitative research. Sampling strategy: Identify and justify the strategy (or strategies) you will use to select your sample; i.e., are you utilising stratified sampling, purposive sampling, or simple random sampling? Explain in a practical sense how this strategy will be put to work in the field. Sample size: Explain and justify how big you anticipate your sample will need to be. For studies undertaking archival analysis or collecting secondary data, some of the above considerations may not be relevant. Instead, focus on explaining how you will select material for inclusion in your study. What criteria will you put in place to guide such decisions? Note also, qualtitative studies need to provide a rationale for who, why and how many participants are required for qualitative methods selected. 7. Data analysis methods (approx. 300 words) Once you have collected your data, how will you organise and present it in order to be able to draw conclusions, and make recommendations? Describe and justify your data analysis strategy. The way you address data analysis will depend on whether your study takes a quantitative or qualitative approach. Quantitative studies: Initially, describe how the data will be prepared for analysis (e.g., coding of variables and responses in preparation for entry into computer-based data analysis software). Then, give specific detail about the procedures and statistical techniques that will be used to fulfil the research objectives. For example, if you will be testing to see whether variable X is related to variable Y, will Pearson's correlation be used? You may find it useful to cross-reference between questions on your questionnaire and your description of the analysis procedures. Qualitative studies: Explain and justify the procedure you will use to organise your data and draw conclusions from it. In qualitative research, data analysis almost universally involves adopting some sort of process to "code" data and draw meaning from it. You will need to consult the methodological literature and identify a coding procedure that best suits your application. Justify your selection of this procedure, and explain in a practical sense how it will be applied to the data you collect. Studies collecting secondary data: Even though these studies will collect secondary as opposed to primary data, most will adopt either a quantitative or qualitative approach. Therefore, look to address the elements described above, depending on whether your study takes a quantitative or qualitative approach. Note also, justification is required for a mixed methods approach. 8. Ethical considerations (approx. 250 words) What are the main human ethics issues which will need to be considered in your project? Be sure to relate these to established principles of ethical research (e.g., freedom of participation, respect for participants, informed consent, data security etc.). Be sure to explain how you will address these issues in a practical sense (e.g., what will you do to ensure privacy and anonymity of participants is protected? How will you obtain informed consent from them?). If applicable, an information sheet addressing ethical aspects of the research should be included as an appendix. 9. Methodological limitations (approx. 200 words) Consider issues that are beyond your control as the researcher that might affect your results. For example, size of sample or limited timeframe for data collection, etc. may come into play here. Reference list All references cited in your text should appear in alphabetical order in Harvard UQ style. No references uncited in the text should appear. The majority of your reference list entries should be from academic journals. In all sections, all work which is not your own work should be referenced in-text as author(s) and date (including internet references) which are then cited fully in your list of references. All pages except in the Results section, are likely to have at least a couple of references. Your Background, Proposed Research Methods sections and especially Literature Review will have many references. If you are using the exact words from a reference, they should be shown in quotation marks for quotes less than 40 words. For quotes longer than 40 words, the quote should be placed on a new line and indented from the left. Appendices This is where additional information which might be useful to the reader, but which would disrupt the flow of your main text, is placed. Your data collection instrument (questionnaire) should appear here as an appendix, if a quantitative study. An information sheet addressing ethical aspects of the research would also be a useful inclusion, if applicable. Note, appendices are not counted in the word count for the assignment. Marking Criteria Marks Available 1. Introduction to the research proposal 1.1 Background information 2 1.2 Research aim statement 2 1.3 Research objectives 2 1.4 Significance of the research 2 1.5 Delimitations 2 2. Literature review 30 3. Research paradigm and role of theory 3.1 Research paradigm 5 3.2 Theoretical underpinning 5 4. Research design 4.1 Methodology 3 4.2 Nature of Research 3 4.3 Research Stratgey 3 5. Data collection 5.1 Data required 3 5.2 Data sources 3 5.3 Data collection methods and instrumentation 3 6. Sampling 5 7. Data analysis methods 10 8. Ethical considerations 5 9. Methodological limitations 2 Referencing Compliance of in-text referencing with required referencing style 2.5 Compliance of reference list with required referencing style 2.5 Other general marking criteria Clarity of expression Accuracy Logical sequencing Independent expression of ideas 5 Here is Assignment one and two so that you know what needs to be done as this is related to assessment 1 and 2 Assignment 1 Research proposal TITLE FACTORS AFFECTING THE MOTIVATION OF YOUNG AMERICAN TOURISTS TO CHOOSE AUSTRALIA AS A TRAVEL DESTINATION 1. Background The global tourism sector is experiencing continuous growth, and finding the exact factors that influence tourism has been at the heart of research endeavours for the past few years (Bruch, 2012, p.78). For most parts, scholars find the need to focus in this area of study bearing in mind the central role of motivational factors in supporting the effectiveness of marketing activities related to hospitality activities in question (Lang 2001, p.67). Although the trend finds its justification from empirical and theoretical evidence connection motivation and action, the question of uncovering incentive for choosing tourists' destination has been quite frequently posed in both scientific and professional literature of the recent decades (Lang 2001, p.45). The major problem motivating this categorical study is to offer valuable insights into why young Americans make a decision to visit Australia as their tourist destinations, while widely ignore others. 2. Research aim statement The aim of the underway study is to examine the, intrinsic and extrinsic affect of the decision of young Americans to choose Australia as a tourist destination . 3. Research objectives 1. To examine the demographic preferences of young Americans within the age of 21 years to 29 years who are interested in Australia as a tourist destination; 2. To explore extrinsic factors 3. To explore intrinsic elements that influence young American’s decisions to tour Australia 4. Data required This research will be conducted by semi structured questionnaires from the qualitative method, to obtain the following categories of information including : • General profile of young American tourists • Factors that motivate the young American tourists to choose Australia as a travel destination: Intrinsic and Extrinsic factors 5. Proposed Research Methods The research will be based on the quantitative method of research with the combination of primary and secondary data to attain the highest level of accuracy whereas paying key attention to what has already been established in this field of research (Woodside and Martin, 2008, p.56). Secondary data will be obtained through the literature analysis that was used in the preparation of the survey questions. Semi-structured questionnaires will be used to obtain primary data from 100 American tourists in 5 major hotels in Sydney. The questionnaire will be developed using Woodside and Martin’s Push and Pull model as a guideline. Surveys were deemed appropriate for this study as they are easy and take less time to analyse than other instruments such as interviews (Woodside and Martin, 2008, p.56). List of References 1. Bruch, M 2012, Horse-based Tourism in Iceland - An analysis of the travel motivation of equestrian tourists, Hamburg, Diplomica Verlag. 2. Lang 2001, Travel activities & motivation survey: interest in professional sports (as a spectator) profile report, Toronto, Ont, Publications Ontario. 3. Woodside, A G, & Martin, D 2008, Tourism management: analysis, behaviour and strategy. Wallingford, UK. Assigmnment 2 Essay TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction.............................................................................3 First Empirical study selected..................................................3 Methodological approach.........................................................4 Critique of research strategy ………………………................4 References................................................................................6 Second Empirical Study Reviewed..........................................7 Methodological Review.......................................................... 7 Critique of research methodology used in this paper...............8 References...............................................................................11 Third Empirical study selected................................................12 Methodological Review..........................................................12 Critique of research methodology used in this paper.............12 References..............................................................................13 INTRODUCTION The aim of the underway study is to examine the, intrinsic and extrinsic affect of the decision of young Americans to choose Australia as a tourist destination. This paper is specifically related to Business research proposal and studies in fine detail - three - empirical research papers related to motivation factors of tourists in destination selection process. It studies the research design implemented in these three research papers and critically analyzes them for the merits and demerits of research methodology. The paper forms the basis for further research and study for the development of research proposal in Assessment 3. FIRST EMPIRICAL STUDY: (1) Yiamjanya, S and Wongleedee, K, 2014, International tourists' travel motivation by push-pull factors and the decision making for selecting Thailand as destination choice, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Journal of Social, Behavioral, Educational, Economic, Business and Industrial Engineering, vol. 8, no.5 , pp.1348-1353. METHODOLOGICAL REVIEW This research paper focused on identification of travel motivation using the ‘push and pull' factors which influence decision making during the process selection of Thailand as a travel destination. The researchers sampling for the study were 200 international travelers to Thailand between the months of January and February 2014. The tool used to collect data was a questionnaire, conducted in the city of Bangkok. The questions had 30 questions in two categories - psychological factors as ‘push-factors' and destination factors as ‘pull-factors.' The research resulted in identification of ‘experience in foreign land' as the ‘push-factor‘and ‘Thai food' was the top motivation for the ‘pull-factor' in choosing Thailand as a travel destination. EFFECTIVENESS OF CRITIQUE : RESEARCH STRATEGY The research of study identified the push and pull motives by first defining them and establishing the motive categories through literature review from a cross-section of international travel research work including destinations like Hong Kong to Danish travelers and Korean tourists. Further, the research paper clearly identified the particular push-pull motives with respect to Thailand amongst broad-ranging general information travel. The Methodology used in the research paper was the questionnaire, and included comprehensive coverage of psychological, geographic, financial and gastronomic besides other motivational reasons for selecting Thailand. The demographic background, trip profile; destination factors as ‘pull motives' and psychological factors as ‘push motives' were also clearly defined. The Mean and Standard Deviation were applied to arrive at the top 10 motivation factors which led to their choice of Thailand as the destination. There was further specialized focus in developing the pull motives as - ‘sightseeing based pull motives' and ‘ activity based pull motives,' followed by ranking system to demonstrate the significance of each of the factors. In conclusion, though the research methodology used in this study is fail-proof in its execution, the sampling was limited by its size. Additionally, restricting it to Bangkok city did limit its scope for generalization across destinations in Thailand. Moreover, the research paper did not find ‘concrete findings' for push and pull motives influencing the decision- making process. Perhaps, in addition to the use of quantitative technique, the use of qualitative technique - as in identifying physical and emotional engagement in ‘experiential' activities would have been more exact. REFERNCES: Bruch, M 2012, Horse-based Tourism in Iceland - An analysis of the travel motivationn of equestrian tourists ,Hamburg,Diplomica Verlag,. Jensen, J M, 2011, The relationships between socio-demographic variables, travel motivations and subsequent choice of vacation, In 2nd International Conference on Economics, Business and Management ,Vol. 22, pp. 37-44. Jensen, J M 2015, The Relationship between Socio-demographic Variables, Travel Motivations and Subsequent Choice of Vacation, Advances in Economics and Business, vol.3, no.8 , pp.322-328. SECOND EMPIRICAL STUDY Yüksel, A and Yüksel, F, 2008,Different Nationalities, Different Holiday Motivations and Attribute-seeking Patterns,Tourist satisfaction and complaining behavior: measurement and management issues in the tourism and hospitality industry, pp.167-185. METHODOLOGICAL REVIEW This research paper focused on identifying the motivations, attribute-seeking patterns of holiday motivation amongst different nationalities, and British and German tourists in particular. The researchers based their studies on existing literature and have thoroughly explored them through review in the paper, establishing with clarity the premise on which they developed their research - ‘Exploring the push and pull variables between British and German travelers.' Questionnaire, free-response survey and pilot tests were implemented as part of the research design. CRITIQUE OF RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DATA COLLECTION METHODS In order to achieve objective, they used : (1) ‘self-completed questionnaire' as the tool to collect data. The items included were derived from literature research and included ‘ unstructured interviews' for a sampling of 20 travelers. (2) Free-response survey was the second tool used, and included items for compliments and complaints about destination service attributes. A pilot test across 35 members was also conducted to fine-tune the test, followed by revisions for recommendations. The items were 11 holiday motivations and 28 destination attributes, after the process. The questionnaire in its final form included two segments – (a) general information with respect to respondents and (b) structured segment to identify travelers' holiday motivations, destination. The paper used items rating scale for both pull and push items for lowest rating of 1 for least favored and highest rating of 7 for highest favored attribute variable for each question, in-line with principles of Likert Scale. The researchers justify the use of this scale as necessary for examining the relationships among variables as well as create reliability estimates as per literature review. Interestingly, it included translation from English to German and back. The location of the research was the passenger departure lounge in one of Turkey's international airports. The numbers of people answering included 905 travelers for a period of three weeks at the Dalaman Airport in September 1999, and relied on the design concept propounded by Denstadli, for intercept survey designing. Number of travelers who refused were 25, while in-completed responses were 30. The analysis of the data included chi-square tests which determined the significant difference between the demographic profile of respondents as well as two groups. The tests were significant enough to conclude the differences in terms of age as well as gender. The analysis concluded that both the groups were homogenous in terms of characteristics. It was suggested that the measured differences occurred due to the limitations of the research design, rather than the characteristics differing. The analysis included a second step-use of Principal Components and Orthogonal (Varimax) rotation methods in terms of factor analysis to summarize the original information into minimum number of factors. The criteria are well established here, in terms of Eigenvalue and a significance factor loading also well defined. Data was further analyzed for independent t-tests which employed factors and attributed when order and test if British and German travelers differed in the motivating and attribution selection, when deciding on the travel destinations. The final step to the data analysis was Cluster analysis, which helped in further identification of British travelers group. The ANOVA test was also used to identify the difference in importance between push and pull forces, in terms of statistical significance. The sampling was related to package tourists, and included 52% of British respondents and 48% of German respondents. Of these female respondents were 55% of the British segments, while 56% were of the German segment. The age groups amongst the two were also identified. The accommodation these travelers used was hotels. The use of empirical data for the research is of high application of methodology. The results of the study are comprehensive and suggest that the achievement of the objective - if motivational attributes differed between German and British travelers? The empirical data collection and the result s prove that there are nationality-based sensitivity issues for motivation in terms of pull and push factors. The results prove that the multiplicity of motives also leads to different types of rewards being sought by the travelers. Hence, tourism professionals will have to view every country as different and hence adjust their advertising messages, within the context of cultural differences. The data helped identify that ‘relaxation' was s sensory word for both British and the German travelers. Germans greatly favored sensors such as social rewards - friendliness, socializing more than the British travelers. British travelers responded to opportunities of less crowded spaces more than the German travelers. In conclusion, it can be said that the research design used in this academic paper for empirical data collection, analysis and inference is of exceptional exactitude. It is highly detailed and comprehensive in its coverage of all segments of motivations and attributes, thus helping in terms of arriving at generalized conclusions as well as specific market applications. Reference: De Albuquerque, K and McElroy, J L, 2001, Tourist harassment: Barbados survey results, Annals of Tourism Research, vol.28, no. 2, pp.477-492. Yüksel, A and Y üksel, F, 2008, “Different Nationalities, Different Holiday Motivations and Attribute-seeking” Patterns,Tourist satisfaction and complaining behavior: measurement and management issues in the tourism and hospitality industry, pp.167-185. THIRD EMPIRICAL STUDY Lehto, X Y , O'Leary, JT, and Morrison, AM , 2002, Do psychographics influence vacation destination choices? A comparison of British travellers to North America, Asia and Oceania.Journal of Vacation Marketing, vol.8, no.2, pp.109-125. METHODOLOGICAL REVIEW Researchers of this paper used national survey data in the UK, for long-distance pleasure travel to conduct their study. The Study focused on the comparison of British travelers who preferred 3 destinations : Asian, North American and Oceanic., based on psychographic dimensions. CRITIQUE OF RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DATA COLLECTION USED IN THIS PAPER The research methodology is interesting, since psychographic factors are used to arrive at conclusions on selection of destination to travel. The research findings delivered the empirical evidence required - three travel groups were formed - travel philosophies, travel benefits, destination attribute and preferences. Significantly, the research provided evidence that the demographic, socio-economic reasons were not the differentiating factors in the decision-making process. The research found that the factors were related to attitudes, preferences, apart from benefits and attributes for highly valued travelers. Recommended the need for better marketing alliances among countries of a region, and the study also noted that there was homogeneity among the groups of a region. The research design adapted in this study is in line with the psychographic needs and justifies the results with empirical results. REFERENCES 1. Woodside, A G, and Martin, D 2008, Tourism management: analysis, behaviour and strategy, Wallingford, UK. 2. Jenkins, OH, 1999, Understanding and measuring tourist destination images, The International Journal of Tourism Research, vol.1 , no. 1, p.1.