EN中文

Journal of Resources and Ecology >

2024 , Vol. 15 >Issue 3: 745 - 753

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2024.03.020

Cultural Tourism and Tourism High-quality Development

Understanding Local People’s Support Intentions toward Cultural Heritage Tourism: An Examination through Stimulus-Organism-Response Perspective

  • HUANG Qiuai , 1, 2 ,
  • ZOU Tongqian 2, 3 ,
  • WANG Guowei , 4, * ,
  • SONG Liang 1
Expand
  • 1. School of Tourism Sciences, Beijing International Studies University, Beijing 100024, China
  • 2. Tourism Department, “Silk road” International University of Tourism and Cultural Heritage, Samarkand 999033, Uzbekistan
  • 3. China Academy of Culture & Tourism, Beijing International Studies University, Beijing 100024, China
  • 4. Institute of Basic Theories of Chinese Medicine, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing 100700, China
*WANG Guowei, E-mail:

HUANG Qiuai, E-mail:

Received date: 2023-08-17

  Accepted date: 2023-12-29

  Online published: 2024-05-24

Supported by

The Special Scientific Research Project of Beijing International Studies University(KYZX20A015)

Fold

Abstract

Cultural heritage tourism is gaining more and more attention for the characteristics of cultural heritage. However, developing cultural heritage tourism needs local people’s support. This paper introduces the Stimulus-Organism-Response theory and proposes a research model about the relationships between subjective norms, personal norms, local people’s perceptions (i.e., economic, sociocultural, environmental perceptions), and their support intentions toward cultural heritage tourism. The results show that the subjective norms significantly affect local people’s perceptions and the individual’s support intention toward cultural heritage tourism. In addition, local people’s perceptions and personal norms positively influence their support intentions toward cultural heritage tourism. The results help us understand the influence factors of local people’s support intentions toward cultural heritage tourism and the influence mechanism. Thus this paper has provided some valuable theoretical and practical implications.

Key words： cultural heritage tourism; subjective norms; personal norms; local people’s perceptions; support intentions

Cite this article

HUANG Qiuai , ZOU Tongqian , WANG Guowei , SONG Liang . Understanding Local People’s Support Intentions toward Cultural Heritage Tourism: An Examination through Stimulus-Organism-Response Perspective[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2024 , 15(3) : 745 -753 . DOI: 10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2024.03.020

1 Introduction

Cultural heritage possesses the potential to attract tourists (Silberberg, 1995) and gradually gain people’s attention, making cultural heritage tourism more popular in the tourism industry (Adie and Falk, 2021). As of now, various forms of cultural heritage tourism exist, including visiting historical sites, witnessing traditional dances, and acquiring handicrafts (Besculides et al., 2002). Existing research reveals that cultural heritage tourism offers benefits to local people, such as reciprocity, tolerance, and a sense of ethnic identity, and has some adverse effects on the character and traditional culture (Johnson et al., 1994). Undeniably, tourism development including the development of cultural heritage tourism can benefit local people’s quality of life and induce a more sustainable tourism industry (Abd Aziz et al., 2020).
However, sustainable tourism development is not a static process but constitutes a more complex subject of discussion. Whether local people are willing to participate in tourism development and the level of involvement are two significant factors that influence tourism development. As a social group, local people need to be involved in tourism-related activities to make tourism more sustainable (Ko and Stewart, 2002; Bimonte and Punzo, 2016). Moreover, local people’s support is regarded as a tourism product that can influence visitor rates, consumption, and satisfaction levels (Spenser and Nisiah, 2013). Therefore, local people’s support for tourism development has attracted the attention of practitioners and scholars (Xu and Fox, 2014).
Following the importance of the local people’s support for tourism development, we should explore the influence factors that are related to local people’s support intentions. However, there are very limited studies that focus on these influence factors (Pavlić et al., 2020). In Central Asia, there is a wealth of cultural heritage, and the governments in the region are keenly focused on developing cultural heritage tourism. This emphasis is driven by the expectation that the benefits derived from tourism will outweigh the associated costs. As an area that attaches great importance to tourism, it needs support from local people. The existing literature reveals that there are some relations between local people’s perceptions of tourism development and their support intentions (Lee et al., 2007). However, unlike other types of tourism, cultural heritage is priceless and irreplaceable. Additionally, subjective norms (Duarte Alonso et al., 2015) and personal norms (Gursoy et al., 2019) play a key role in local people’s behavior toward cultural heritage. Given the particular nature of cultural heritage, we need to understand the impact of local people’s perceptions on their support intentions and further explore the impact of subjective norms and personal norms on local people’s support intentions.
Ateş (2020) assumes that subjective norms have a positive effect on local people’s behavioral intentions. Thus, to address the above research gap, we use subjective norms as an independent variable and local people’s support intentions as the dependent variable. Then, we introduce the framework of Stimulus-Organism-Response (S-O-R) to unearth the influence mechanism among subjective norms, personal norms, local people’s perceptions, and local people’s support intentions toward cultural heritage tourism.

2 Literature review and hypotheses development

2.1 Cultural heritage tourism

The word heritage constitutes a complex term. It may refer to cultures, buildings, landscapes, and artifacts, and it only exists when it is determined to have a utility function (Boyd, 2002). Additionally, heritage has various types, including natural, industrial, cultural, and personal ones (Boyd, 2002). It is also a vital tourism resource for developing tourism (Chen and Chen, 2010) and can even be regarded as a trigger (Gravari-Barbas, 2018).
Based on the above, cultural heritage plays a crucial role in enhancing national cohesion, emotions of patriotism, and the feeling of national pride (Xing et al., 2013). In a broader sense, cultural heritage tourism refers to some kinds of tourism, like artworks, beautiful sceneries, and historical buildings. According to UNESCO, cultural heritage is a group or society’s legacy left by our ancestors (Dela Santa and Tiatco, 2019). It offers various people experiences with culture and heritage and would make more contributions to the local economy than traditional tourism (Bravi and Gasca, 2014).

2.2 The S-O-R theory

The S-O-R theory is rooted in the field of environmental psychology, and the initial letters S, O, and R stand for ‘stimulus’, ‘organism’, and ‘behavior response’, respectively. Among them, the stimulus element refers to the external force, the organism element refers to the individual’s cognitive and affective state, and the response element represents the behavior outcome (Zhou et al., 2022). The S-O-R theory expresses a process in external environmental factors as the stimulus that acts on individuals’ inner cognition, which will further reflect their behavior.
As a comprehensive theory, S-O-R is often utilized to understand people’s behavior (Laato et al., 2020). The advantage of this theory is that it can touch an individual’s inner thought layers and then better clarify emotion-driven responses (Wang et al., 2022). Thus, scholars in the hospitality and tourism industry also have widely used this theory to explore people’s behavior and behavior mechanisms (Chen et al., 2022).
Moreover, we include the S-O-R theory in our studies since it can recognize material and social stimuli. This theory suggests that external stimuli can influence an individual’s psychological mechanisms, leading to the manifestation of specific behaviors. In our study, we consider subjective norms as social stimuli, local people’s perceptions as individuals’ cognitive responses, and local people’s intentions to support cultural heritage tourism as their behavioral responses. We then explore the relationships among subjective norms, personal norms, local people’s perceptions, and their support intentions.

2.3 Local people’s support intentions

Every tourist activity has an impact on the lives of local people across the world. Local people’s support intentions for tourism development plays a key role in achieving sustainable development (Sutawa, 2012). In this context, life satisfaction, perceived tourism benefits, community participation, and involvement can, to some extent, influence local people’s support for tourism development (Abd Aziz et al., 2020). The social exchange theory and the Stakeholder theory have been used to analyze local people’s willingness to support tourism development. Based on these two theories, Lee (2013) thinks that the more benefits the local people perceive, the more willingly they will support tourism development. Although support for tourism development has been widely discussed in Western societies (Abd Aziz et al., 2020), there is little literature that pays attention to local people’s support for tourism development in the areas of Central Asia. However, understanding local people’s support for sustainable tourism development is crucial, as it is the key to successful tourism management.

2.4 Local people’s perceptions

Local people’s perceptions have long been studied as a factor influencing the degree of attractiveness a destination holds for tourists (Getz, 1994; Andereck and Vogt, 2000). From the perspective of tourism development, whether local people favor the development of tourism depends on their evaluations. They will welcome tourism development if they think the gains outweigh the losses (Lee, 2013). Thus, local people’s perceptions of tourism play an essential role in achieving sustainable tourism development (Andriotis and Vaughan, 2003).
Most studies point out that local people have friendly attitudes toward tourism if they deem tourism beneficial for them (Andereck and Vogt, 2000). These benefits may be associated with the economy, culture, or the environment (Gursoy et al., 2002; Stylidis et al., 2014). Prior studies demonstrate that social, environmental, and economic factors could affect local people’s perceptions of tourism (Jurowski et al., 1997). Jeon et al. (2016) also divide local people’s perceptions into three categories including perceptions of the economy, society, and environment. Based on this assumption, we further discuss the relationship between local people’s perceptions and their support intentions.
Tourism is a booster of economic development. The areas that rely on tourism have more capacity for the tourism industry (Eckert et al., 2019) since tourism development can spur the economy, improve life satisfaction (Long et al., 1990; Lankford and Howard, 1994), and create more job opportunities (Bravi and Gasca, 2014). Additionally, cultural resources can enhance economic stability (Besculides et al., 2002), and cultural tourism can encourage cultural activities (McCool and Martin, 1994). Moreover, cultural heritage tourism can revive traditional culture and facilitate cultural exchange (Andereck et al., 2005). Tourism can also produce positive elements such as preserving wildlife and parks and therefore, the environment (Andereck et al., 2005). In addition, whether local people are willing to favor tourism relies significantly on local people’s perceptions of tourism (Prayag et al., 2013). Based on the above, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H1a: Local people’s economic perceptions have a positive effect on their support intentions toward cultural heritage tourism.
H1b: Local people’s socio-cultural perceptions have a positive effect on their support intentions toward cultural heritage tourism.
H1c: Local people’s environmental perceptions have a positive effect on their support intentions toward cultural heritage tourism.

2.5 The subjective norms

Subjective norms signify the influence of culture, society, family, or reference groups, and according to Meyer and Allen (1997), they have the potential to shape individuals’ compliance. As two primary components of the subjective norms, motivation to comply means a person’s inclination to observe opinions from a referent individual or specific group, whereas normative belief expresses the perceived expectations from related individuals or groups (Chi et al., 2012). In short, subjective norms can influence an individual’s perception. Based on the above, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H2a: Subjective norms have a positive effect on local people’s perceptions of the economy.
H2b: Subjective norms have a positive effect on local people’s socio-cultural perception.
H2c: Subjective norms have a positive effect on local people’s perceptions of the environment.

2.6 The personal norms

Although subjective norms provide guidelines for what is to be expected, personal norms are individuals’ inner perceptions about what is morally acting (De Groot et al., 2021). Personal norms refer to internal standards concerning a particular behaviour rather than reflecting externally imposed rules (Kallgren et al., 2000). A subjective norm can be a pre-variabe of a personal norm for it may verify the correctness of a person’s behaviour and guide him to ascertain whether his belief is beneficial to himself (Han et al., 2015), thus hypothesis is proposed as follows:
H2d: Subjective norms have a positive effect on the individual’s personal norms.
Existing literature indicates that if one’s norms are strong, one will perform more desired behavior (Hornsey et al., 2007). Brown et al. (2010) reveal that personal norms are related to behavioral intentions. Ateş (2020) further verifies that personal norms have a positive effect on an individual’s behavior. In addition, Doran and Larsen (2016) demonstrate that personal norms have a positive effect on behavioral intentions. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H3: The individual’s personal norms can positively affect his support intentions toward cultural heritage tourism.
In summary, we illustrate the above in the research model that is included in Fig. 1.

3 Methodology

3.1 Research subject

This study was conducted in Samarkand, Uzbekistan. Uzbekistan became independent in 1991 and is now regarded as one of the most promising countries for tourism development. This country is known for its diverse traditional culture and heritage sites. Although the tourism industry in this country has been promoted, it is still one of the least studied tourism destinations (Allaberganov and Preko, 2021). Samarkand, an ancient city in Uzbekistan, is recognized as the historical tourist hub by UNESCO (Kantarci, 2007) and the representative city of cultural heritage (Akhmadova and Uxbekistan, 2021), we selected people in Samarkand city as our research subjects.

3.2 Measurement

This study’s questionnaire consists of three parts: an introductory letter, questions for variables, and participants’ demographic characteristics. Each item was evaluated by a 5-point Likert scale, wherein 5 means strongly agree, and 1 means strongly disagree. Specifically, subjective norms were measured using 5 items, and local people’s support intentions toward cultural heritage tourism were measured using 7 items. All these items were adapted from (Megeirhi et al., 2020). Three components, including economic, environmental, and sociocultural perceptions, constitute people’s perceptions. These three dimensions correspond to 4 items, 3 items, and 4 items, respectively. All these items were adapted from literature (Rasoolimanesh et al., 2019). Finally, personal norms contain 3 items that were adapted from literature (Gursoy et al., 2019). Two academic scholars evaluated the questionnaire to guarantee the content validity. We also asked 2 native bilingual teachers to help us translate questionnaire information from English into UZ to confirm the finding’s meaning. We displayed all items in Table 2. To examine the structural equation modeling of the measurement scales, the data we collected were analyzed in M-plus (Version 7.4) for Windows.

3.3 Data collection

After the questionnaire design was completed, we performed a pilot test, and 60 college students from Silk Road University in Samarkand who were familiar with this study took part in this pilot test. Based on the participants’ feedback, the measurement items were refined. Then we performed the on-site survey in Samarkand from March 2023 to May 2023. During the survey, we delivered 350 survey questionnaires to people and provided 5000 som as a reward per person. After eliminating 29 missing answers, we obtained 321 usable questionnaires for our studies. The valid response rate was 92%. According to (Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994), structural equation modeling needs at least ten times observation as indicators. Thus, the number of valid samples collected meets the research requirements.

4 Results

4.1 Participants’ profiles

Table 1 illustrates participants’ demographic profiles. According to that, 52.6% of the participants are females, and 47.4% are male. Participants in the first age group are primarily between 18 and 30 years (45.8%). The next age group is between 31 years and 45 years (23.1%). Most respondents have enjoyed undergraduate education (37.7%). In addition, 21.2% of participants have a vocational education degree, and 17.8% have a second degree. In general, most participants are employed (11.2% jobs related to tourism and cultural heritage industry and 36.8% employed in other sectors), followed by student groups (22.4%), and the third group is business owners (20.9%). Most participants’ monthly income is between 301 and 600 dollars (36%), and the rest shared the remaining percentage, which constituted 20%, 27%, 17%, respectively.
Table 1 Descriptive statistics of demographic characteristics
Variables Items Frequency Percent (%)
Gender Male 152 47.4
Female 169 52.6
Age <18 years 43 13.4
18-30 years 147 45.8
31-45 years 74 23.1
46-60 years 51 15.9
>60 years 6 1.9


Education


 No formal education 11 3.4
Primary education 37 11.5
Second education 57 17.8
Vocational education 68 21.2
Undergraduate education 127 37.7
Graduate education 21 6.5

Occupation



 Jobs related to tourism and cultural heritage industry 36 11.2
Jobs related to other industry 118 36.8
Business owner 67 20.9
Student 72 22.4
Unemployed 25 7.8
Retired 3 0.9

Monthly income (USD)

 ≤100 64 20
101-300 87 27
301-600 117 36
>600 53 17

4.2 Non-response and Common Method Bias (CMB)

The first 40 and the last 40 questionnaires and t-tests were used to test the non-response bias (Li et al., 2021). The results showed that all P values were greater than 0.5, thus there was no response bias in our study. Furthermore, we used Harman’s single factor to test the common method bias. The results showed that the single factor accounted for 35.69% of the total variance, which is less than the threshold value of 50% (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Thus, non-response bias and common method bias are not a concern for our study.

4.3 Reliability and validity

First, each construct’s Cronbach’s ɑ is not lower than 0.7 (see Table 2), which indicates adequate reliability. Then we use the composite reliability (CR) of the construct to measure the latent variable’s internal consistency. Bagozzi and Yi (1988) suggested that the CR value should be higher than 0.6. Table 2 shows that all the CR values are higher than 0.8, thus the model has good internal consistency reliability.
Table 2 Assessment of the factor model
Constructs and items Standardized
factor loading		 Cronbach’s
ɑ		 CR AVE
Subjective norms (SN)
1. People whose opinions I value prefers me to favor local region’s cultural heritage tourism development 0.725
2. My government guidance would impact my participation to favor local region’s cultural heritage tourism development 0.763
3. Local tourism planning organizations would influence me to support local region’s cultural heritage tour ism development 0.792 0.86 0.86 0.55
4. Family members would influence me to support local region’s cultural heritage tourism development 0.712
5. Other residents would influence me to support local region’s cultural heritage tourism development 0.714
Local people’s economic perceptions (RP1)
1. The development of cultural heritage tourism (DCHT) will create more jobs for local people 0.725
2. More investment will be introduced to local community for DCHT 0.768 0.83 0.83 0.54
3. Our living standards will be improved significantly for DCHT 0.746
4. More public facilities and infrastructures will be provided because of DCHT 0.709
Local people’s socio-cultural perceptions (RP2)
1. DCHT protects the cultural identity of host residents 0.747
2. DCHT facilitates cultural communication 0.723 0.84 0.84 0.56
3. Meeting visitors and educational experiences are facilitated because of DCHT 0.757
4. DCHT provides more recreation facilities and opportunities 0.764
Local people’s environmental perceptions (RP3)
1. DCHT is beneficial for the preservation of the natural environment 0.758
2. DCHT is beneficial for the preservation of historic buildings 0.744 0.80 0.80 0.57
3. DCHT improves the appearance of our city 0.772
Personal norms (PN)
1. I am responsible for supporting DCHT, even if it requires me to sacrifice my personal benefits 0.81
2. Even if my actions offend someone, supporting DCHT is my moral obligation 0.884 0.89 0.89 0.73
3. Everybody is responsible for supporting DCHT in Samarkand 0.861
Intentions to support cultural heritage tourism (IS)
1. I will publicize tourist spots in my community 0.723
2. I will offer information to visitors to promote their experience 0.71
3. I will protect the cultural heritage resources on which tourism in my community depends 0.716
4. I will support the creation of laws and regulations protecting cultural heritage resources 0.705 0.86 0.86 0.50
5. I will attend local community meetings regarding tourism planning 0.699
6. I will assist with promotional events/activities on cultural heritage tourism 0.697
7. I will interact positively with area visitors (deleted) 0.494
Second, the factor loading of item ‘Interact positively with area visitors’ was 0.494. Thus, we deleted this item, and then each indicator is above 0.5 (see Table 2), which is considered acceptable (Xie et al., 2020). In addition, each construct’s average variance extracted (AVE) coefficient is above 0.5 (see Table 2) (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). Then the model has achieved the convergent validity.
Third, the square root of AVE values of each construct was not lower than the correlation value (see Table 3), which indicates that the discriminant validity meets the suggestion proposed by Fornell and Larcker (1981). To sum up, the discussion above indicated that all the evaluation criteria were met and measurement models in our study are supported.
Table 3 Discriminant validity
Variables SN RP1 RP2 RP3 PN IS
SN 0.74
RP1 0.446 0.74
RP2 0.565 0.528 0.75
RP3 0.521 0.529 0.584 0.76
PN 0.384 0.270 0.288 0.204 0.85
IS 0.691 0.544 0.602 0.581 0.693 0.71

4.4 Structural model

We used SPSS and M-plus to examine the hypothesized model. First of all, the goodness-of-fit indices are:${{\chi }^{2}}\text{/}df=$1.7; RMSEA=0.048; SRMR=0.062; CFI=0.95; TLI=0.944. Thus, the results demonstrated a good model fit.
The SEM results also showed that local people’s perceptions (i.e., economic perceptions, socio-cultural perceptions, environmental perceptions) positively affect the support intentions toward cultural heritage tourism (βH1a=0.177, PH1a<0.01; βH1b=0.244, PH1b<0.001; βH1c=0.287, PH1c<0.001), thus H1a, H1b, and H1c were supported. Second, subjective norms positively affect local people’s perceptions (i.e., economic perceptions, sociocultural perceptions, environmental perceptions) and support intentions toward cultural heritage tourism (βH2a=0.516, PH2a<0.001; βH2b=0.627, PH2b<0.001; βH2c=0.591, PH2c<0.001). Thus H2a, H2b, and H2c were supported. What is more, subjective norms have a positive effect on the individual’s personal norms (βH2d=0.410, PH2d<0.001), thus H2d was supported. Third, the individual’s personal norms can positively affect his support intentions toward cultural heritage tourism (βH3=0.539, and PH3<0.001), thus H3 was supported (see Fig. 2).
Fig. 2 Empirical results

Note: **P<0.01, *P<0.001.

5 Discussion and conclusions

This study explores the relationships among subjective norms, personal norms, people’s perceptions (i.e., economic, sociocultural, environmental perceptions), and their support intentions toward cultural heritage tourism. These inquiries contribute to both theoretical and practical understanding.

5.1 Theoretical implications

Our research findings have some theoretical implications. First, this study contributed to the cultural heritage literature by investigating how subjective norms affect local people’s support intentions toward cultural heritage tourism through people’s perceptions and personal norms. Existing literature indicates that subjective norms can positively affect an individual’s behavioral intentions (Schepers and Wetzels, 2007; Roh et al., 2022), and Megeirhi et al. (2020) even demonstrate that subjective norms have positive influence on people’s intentions to support cultural heritage tourism. However, there is little literature to clarify this influence mechanism. We propose a theoretical model based on the S-O-R theory and verify it through questionnaires. Our findings show that subjective norms can positively affect people’s perceptions (i.e., economic perceptions, socio-cultural perceptions, environmental perceptions) and personal norms, which further affects people’s support intentions toward cultural heritage tourism. Thus, the findings in our paper open the discussions between subjective norms and behavioral intentions in this context.
Second, the same as previous research, this study verifies the relationship between the subjective norms and personal norms (Doran and Larsen, 2016). Taking people in cultural heritage sites as research objects, our study demonstrated that subjective norms positively affected local people’s personal norms.
Third, our research demonstrates the relationship between personal norms and behavioral intentions. Our findings show that personal norms positively affect an individual’s behavioral intention, which is consistent with Ateş (2020).

5.2 Practical implications

Our findings yield some valuable and meaningful implications. First, managers and governments can earn more support from local people by understanding the determinants of people’s perceptions. For example, governments can strengthen the positive consequence of cultural heritage tourism from economic, cultural, and environmental perspectives. If tourism revenue increases, governments can provide appropriate subsidies to people to increase their income and improve facilities for living convenience.
In addition, our study reveals that personal norms are positively associated with the individual’s behavior intentions. Thus, to improve individual support intentions toward cultural heritage tourism, relevant managers should pay more attention to individual’s personal norms.
Last but not least, our results reveal that subjective norms directly affect an individual’s personal norms. Thus, we should pay more attention to subjective norms. Chatzisarantis and Biddle (1998) pointed out that subjective norms represent control but not autonomy, and society can influence subjective norms through the media. Various eco-friendly communication channels (e.g., interpretive services, radio, SMS) can be used by governments to inform people to be responsible for cultural heritage tourism.

5.3 Limitations and further research

While our study holds significant value, it is important to acknowledge some limitations that still exist. First of all, because of the transportation limitation, we only collected sampling near the Silk Road University, where the educational level is relatively high. Whether the educational level influences people’s perceptions or not should be tested further. Second, Doran and Larsen (2016) reveal that personal norms mediate the effect that subjective norms have on behavioral intentions. However, because of the complicity of the model in our study, the mediator effect is not discussed. Third, people’s behavior intentions are influenced by various elements, such as attitude (Yang and Jolly, 2009), social support (Rhodes et al., 2002), and personal value (Dalila et al., 2020). Thus, the model can be extended to better understand an individual’s behavioral intentions.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the editor and anonymous reviewers for their constructive suggestions.

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within
[1]
Abd Aziz N, Muslichah I, Ngah A H. 2020. Understanding factors influencing community life satisfaction towards sustainable heritage tourism destination: The case of Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Journal of Sustainability Science and Management, 15(1): 37-51.

[2]
Adie B A, Falk M. 2021. Residents’ perception of cultural heritage in terms of job creation and overtourism in Europe. Tourism Economics, 27(6): 1185-1201.

[3]
Akhmadova N A Q, Uxbekistan K S U. 2021. Establishing relations of Uzbekistan with the UNO and its specialized agencies. Current Research Journal of History, 2(6): 76-81.

[4]
Allaberganov A, Preko A. 2021. Inbound international tourists’ demographics and travel motives: Views from Uzbekistan. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, 5(1): 99-115.

[5]
Andereck K L, Valentine K M, Knopf R C, et al. 2005. Residents’ perceptions of community tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(4): 1056-1076.

[6]
Andereck K L, Vogt C A. 2000. The relationship between residents’ attitudes toward tourism and tourism development options. Journal of Travel Research, 39(1): 27-36.

[7]
Andriotis K, Vaughan R D. 2003. Urban residents’ attitudes toward tourism development: The case of Crete. Journal of Travel Research, 42(2): 172-185.

[8]
Ateş H. 2020. Merging theory of planned behavior and value identity personal norm model to explain pro-environmental behaviors. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 24: 169-180.

[9]
Bagozzi R P, Yi Y. 1988. On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1): 74-94.

[10]
Besculides A, Lee M E, McCormick P J. 2002. Residents’ perceptions of the cultural benefits of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(2): 303-319.

[11]
Bimonte S, Punzo L F. 2016. Tourist development and host-guest interaction: An economic exchange theory. Annals of Tourism Research, 58: 128-139.

[12]
Boyd S. 2002. Cultural and heritage tourism in Canada: Opportunities, principles and challenges. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 3(3): 211-233.

[13]
Bravi M, Gasca E. 2014. Preferences evaluation with a choice experiment on cultural heritage tourism. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 23(4): 406-423.

[14]
Brown T J, Ham S H, Hughes M. 2010. Picking up litter: An application of theory-based communication to influence tourist behaviour in protected areas. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(7): 879-900.

[15]
Chatzisarantis N L D, Biddle S J H. 1998. Functional significance of psychological variables that are included in the theory of planned behaviour: A self-determination theory approach to the study of attitudes, subjective norms, perceptions of control and intentions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28(3): 303-322.

[16]
Chen C F, Chen P C. 2010. Resident attitudes toward heritage tourism development. Tourism Geographies, 12(4): 525-545.

[17]
Chen G H, So K K F, Hu X Y, et al. 2022. Travel for affection: A stimulus-organism-response model of honeymoon tourism experiences. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 46(6): 1187-1219.

[18]
Dalila D, Latif H, Jaafar N, et al. 2020. The mediating effect of personal values on the relationships between attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control and intention to use. Management Science Letters, 10(1): 153-162.

[19]
De Groot J I M, Bondy K, Schuitema G. 2021. Listen to others or yourself? The role of personal norms on the effectiveness of social norm interventions to change pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 78: 101688. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101688.

[20]
Dela Santa E, Tiatco S A. 2019. Tourism, heritage and cultural performance: Developing a modality of heritage tourism. Tourism Management Perspectives, 31: 301-309.

[21]
Doran R, Larsen S. 2016. The relative importance of social and personal norms in explaining intentions to choose eco-friendly travel options. International Journal of Tourism Research, 18: 159-166.

[22]
Duarte Alonso A, Sakellarios N, Pritchard M. 2015. The theory of planned behaviour in the context of cultural heritage tourism. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 10(4): 399-416.

[23]
Eckert C, Zacher D, Pechlaner H, et al. 2019. Strategies and measures directed towards overtourism: A perspective of European DMOs. International Journal of Tourism Cities, 5(4): 639-655.

[24]
Fornell C, Larcker D F. 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1): 39-51.

[25]
Getz D. 1994. Residents’ attitudes towards tourism: A longitudinal study in Spey Valley, Scotland. Tourism Management, 15(4): 247-258.

[26]
Gravari-Barbas M. 2018. Tourism as a heritage producing machine. Tourism Management Perspectives, 26: 5-8.

[27]
Gursoy D, Jurowski C, Uysal M. 2002. Resident attitudes. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(1): 79-105.

[28]
Gursoy D, Zhang C, Chi O H. 2019. Determinants of locals’ heritage resource protection and conservation responsibility behaviors. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(6): 2339-2357.

[29]
Han H, Hwang J, Kim J, et al. 2015. Guests’ pro-environmental decision-making process: Broadening the norm activation framework in a lodging context. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 47: 96-107.

[30]
Hornsey M J, Smith J R, Begg D. 2007. Effects of norms among those with moral conviction: Counter-conformity emerges on intentions but not behaviors. Social Influence, 2(4): 244-268.

[31]
Jeon M M, Kang M, Desmarais E. 2016. Residents’ perceived quality of life in a cultural-heritage tourism destination. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 11: 105-123.

[32]
Lee T J, Li J, Kim H K. 2007. Community residents’ perceptions and attitudes towards heritage tourism in a historic city. Tourism and Hospitality Planning & Development, 4(2): 91-109.

[33]
Johnson J D, Snepenger D J, Akis S. 1994. Residents’ perceptions of tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research, 21(3): 629-642.

[34]
Jurowski C, Uysal M, Williams D R. 1997. A theoretical analysis of host community resident reactions to tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 36(2): 3-11.

[35]
Kallgren C A, Reno R R, Cialdini R B. 2000. A focus theory of normative conduct: When norms do and do not affect behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(8): 1002-1012.

[36]
Kantarci K. 2007. Perceptions of Central Asia travel conditions: Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan. Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing, 15(2): 55-71.

[37]
Ko D W, Stewart W P. 2002. A structual equation model of residents’ attitudes for tourism development. Tourism Management, 23: 521-530.

[38]
Laato S, Islam A K M N, Farooq A, et al. 2020. Unusual purchasing behavior during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic: The stimulus-organism-response approach. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 57: 102224. DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102224.

[39]
Lankford S V, Howard D R. 1994. Developing a tourism impact attitude scale. Annals of Tourism Research, 21(1): 121-139.

[40]
Lee T H. 2013. Influence analysis of community resident support for sustainable tourism development. Tourism Management, 34: 37-46.

[41]
Li Y, Li X, Cai J. 2021. How attachment affects user stickiness on live streaming platforms: A socio-technical approach perspective. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 60: 102478. DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102478.

[42]
Long P T, Perdue R R, Allen L. 1990. Rural resident tourism perceptions and attitudes by community level of tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 28(3): 3-9.

[43]
McCool S F, Martin S R. 1994. Community attachment and attitudes toward tourism development. Journal of Travel Research, 32(3): 29-34.

[44]
Megeirhi H A, Woosnam K M, Ribeiro M A, et al. 2020. Employing a value-belief-norm framework to Gauge Carthage residents’ intentions to support sustainable cultural heritage tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 28(9): 1351-1370.

[45]
Meyer J, Allen N. 1997. Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research, and application. Los Angeles, USA: Sage Publications.

[46]
Nunnally J, Bernstein I. 1994. Psychometric theory. New York, USA: McGraw-Hill.

[47]
Pavlić I, Portolan A, Puh B. 2020. Segmenting local residents by perceptions of tourism impacts in an urban world heritage site: The case of Dubrovnik. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 15(4): 398-409.

[48]
Podsakoff P M, MacKenzie S B, Lee J Y, et al. 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5): 879-903.

DOI PMID

[49]
Prayag G, Hosany S, NunkooR, et al. 2013. London residents’ support for the 2012 Olympic Games: The mediating effect of overall attitude. Tourism Management, 36: 629-640.

[50]
Rasoolimanesh S, Taheri B, Gannon M, et al. 2019. Does living in the vicinity of heritage tourism sites influence residents’ perceptions and attitudes? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 27: 1295-1317.

DOI

[51]
Rhodes R E, Jones L W, Courneya K S. 2002. Extending the theory of planned behavior in the exercise domain: A comparison of social support and subjective norm. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 73(2): 193-199.

PMID

[52]
Silberberg T. 1995. Cultural tourism and business opportunities for museums and heritage sites. Tourism Management, 16(5): 361-365.

[53]
Spenser D M, Nsiah C. 2013. The economic consequences of community support for tourism: A case study of a heritage fish hatchery. Tourism Management, 34: 221-230.

[54]
Stylidis D, Biran A, Sit J, et al. 2014. Residents’ support for tourism development: The role of residents’ place image and perceived tourism impacts. Tourism Management, 45: 260-274.

[55]
Sutawa G K. 2012. Issues on Bali tourism development and community empowerment to support sustainable tourism development. Procedia Economics and Finance, 4: 413-422.

[56]
Wang S, Berbekova A, Uysal M, et al. 2022. Emotional solidarity and co-creation of experience as determinants of environmentally responsible behavior: A stimulus-organism-response theory perspective. Journal of Travel Research, 63(1): 146786. DOI: 10.1177/00472875221146786.

[57]
Xie C W, Huang Q, Lin Z B, et al. 2020. Destination risk perception, image and satisfaction: The moderating effects of public opinion climate of risk. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 44: 122-130.

[58]
Xing H B, Marzuki A, Razak A. 2013. Conceptualizing a sustainable development model for cultural heritage tourism in Asia. Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, 8: 51-66.

[59]
Xu F F, Fox D. 2014. Modelling attitudes to nature, tourism and sustainable development in National Parks: A survey of visitors in China and the UK. Tourism Management, 45: 142-158.

[60]
Yang K, Jolly L D. 2009. The effects of consumer perceived value and subjective norm on mobile data service adoption between American and Korean consumers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 16(6): 502-508.

[61]
Zhou S, Li T, Yang S, et al. 2022. What drives consumers’ purchase intention of online paid knowledge? A stimulus-organism-response perspective. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 52: 101126. DOI: 10.1016/j.elerap.2022.101126.

Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉