Jurnal Pengurusan 33(2011) 61 - 76

An Investigation of International and Domestic Tourists’ Satisfaction

in Heritage Context: Implications for Destination Marketing
(Kajian Kepuasan Pelancong Antarabangsa dan Domestik dalam Konteks
Pelancongan Warisan: Implikasi Pemasaran Destinasi)

Norzalita Abd Aziz

Ahmad Azmi M. Ariffin
Nor Asiah Omar
Siow Kim Yoon

ABSTRACT

The marketing of heritage coincides with the emergence of marketing as an academic discipline in the 1950s. This
research seeks to determine domestic and international tourists’ expectations and perceptions of the heritage site of
Melaka in Malaysia by measuring their satisfaction level using eight travel attributes. This study examines the overall
satisfaction among international and domestic tourists who visited Melaka using a conceptual model that combines
the concepts of the Expectancy Disconfirmation Paradigm and Service Quality framework. A sample of 322 respondents
was surveyed with a structured questionnaire. A series of analyses were performed on both domestic and international
tourists groups. It is important to understand that the R-square value obtained in the perception-only or perceived
performance model is higher compared to Expectancy Disconfirmation Paradigm approach in determining tourists’
satisfaction. By using the perceptions-only model for predicting overall satisfaction, the results showed that there are
two factors namely ‘Attractions’ and ‘Climate & Image’ that appealed to international and domestic tourists. Theoretical,
managerial and marketing implications of tourists’ satisfaction in visiting heritage sites are discussed.

ABSTRAK

Pemasaran pelancongan warisan telah berkembang secara serentak dengan kewujudan pemasaran sebagai salah
satu dispilin akademik. Kajian ini ingin mengenal pasti jangkaan dan juga tanggapan pelancong domestik dan
antarabangsa terhadap pelancongan warisan di Melaka, Malaysia. Pengukuran tahap kepuasan pelancong dengan
menganalisis lapan atribut penting untuk tujuan melancong ke sesebuah destinasi warisan telah diguna pakai.
Kajian ini mengenal pasti tahap kepuasan keseluruhan pelancong yang melawat Melaka dangan menggunakan
konsep ‘Expectancy Disconfirmation Paradigm’ dan juga rangka kerja kualiti perkhidmatan. Jumlah sampel yang
digunakan dalam kaji selidik ini adalah sebanyak 322 responden dengan menggunakan soal selidik berstruktur.
Analisis kajian mendapati nilai R-kuasa dua yang diperolehi daripada model persepsi atau prestasi tanggapan
adalah lebih tinggi daripada pendekatan ‘Expectancy Disconfirmation Paradigm’. Dengan menggunakan model
persepsi sahaja, kajian mendapati terdapat dua faktor utama iaitu ‘Attractions’ dan ‘Climate & Image’ yang penting
bagi pelancong domestik dan juga antarabangsa yang dapat memberikan kepuasan. Implikasi teoretikal, pengurusan
dan juga pemasaran terhadap kepuasan pelancong juga dibincangkan.

INTRODUCTION number of international and domestic tourists provided

the catalyst for this market development. What heritage
In recent years, tourism has become one of the major tourists expect from a heritage visit and their perception
service industries and in a steady growth trend in of the many features that compose a travel destination
worldwide. Many countries have engaged in developing with travel attributes and their relationship with tourists’
tourism in their countries (Lea 1998) and in order to reduce satisfaction are the key issues that are discussed.
the dependence on trade exports and diversify, the The location of research is the heritage site of Melaka
Malaysian government has expended much effort to in the southern region of Peninsular Malaysia. It is sited
increase tourism. As a result, tourism has become on the Straits of Malacca next to Negeri Sembilan and
Malaysia’s third largest source of income from foreign Johor and the capital is Melaka City. Figure 1 shows the
exchange (Munan & Heidi 2002). The ultimate goal is to location of Melaka in Peninsular Malaysia and Figure 2
increase the number of foreign tourists to Malaysia, extend shows the location of Melaka City as the main heritage
the average length of their stay and so increase Malaysia’s destination area. The selection of this specific site was
tourism revenue. The marketing of heritage tourism is an made as it meets certain criteria including that it is a
important tool for the tourist industry. The increasing historical city with a rich and colourful past, has many
62 Jurnal Pengurusan 33

historical buildings, and a cultural heritage derived from intriguing streets, delectable cuisine and unique cultural
its various ethnic groups and the variety of food and heritage. In the sixteenth-century, the maritime trading
commodities. This historical city centre has been listed as centre for the region was located in Melaka. Items traded
a UNESCO World Heritage Site since 7 July 2008. Over 600 included gold, silk, porcelain, and spices with merchants
years of Melaka history is reflected in its ancient buildings, from Europe, Arabia, China and India.

Melaka City

FIGURE 1. Map of Peninsular Malaysia (West Malaysia)

Source: MITC – Map Malaysia

Melaka City

FIGURE 2. Map of Melaka City

Source: http://www.melaka.org.my – Map of Melaka
An Investigation of International and Domestic Tourists’ Satisfaction in Heritage Context 63

To assess which travel attributes affect the with travel attributes and their relationship with tourists’
satisfaction level of international and domestic tourist satisfaction are the key issues that are assessed through
groups, how they perceive the destination’s offering this paper.
during their holiday experience, and whether tourists’ Heritage is a complex issue and borders on being
satisfaction will differ among both groups are essential in indefinable. Although it is hard to define, it can be
order for travel marketers to tailor the strategy according recognized within different categories of heritage. For
to each segment. Knowing what tourists expect is critical example, natural heritage concerns ecological issues, the
since by knowing exactly what tourists need, travel protection of flora and fauna, and the impact of human
marketers can devise and plan accordingly, thereby activities on the environment. The ‘natural heritage areas’
avoiding the expenditure of money and time in a manner have been defined as places that have a rich diversity of
that is ineffective in attracting tourists. The focus on uses and include places such as parts of mountains, sea-
service and product delivery will continue to serve as an cliffs or islands (Herbert et al. 1989). Another category of
important tool for tourist attraction (Hui et al. 2007). In heritage is vested in the built environment. This comprises
order to attract international tourists as well as domestic historic buildings and sites (Herbert et al. 1989). Melaka
tourists, Melaka has to demonstrate itself as an attractive may be considered as belonging to this category. The
destination by identifying tourists’ perception accurately. third category of heritage is ‘cultural’. A nation’s art
The tourists view point of the destination’s strengths could treasures, musical traditions, minority languages and
help destination marketing focus on tailoring the offering dialects, customs and ways of life, all of these belong to
accordingly to satisfy their needs (Augustyn & Ho 1998). this category. According to Herbert et al. (1989), this cultural
Since tourism plays an important role in Malaysia’s heritage can be found in buildings and places. For instance,
economy, an exploratory research is necessary to provide historic buildings are often linked with people and come
a more analytical insight into tourists’ needs and identify to life when that link is revealed. Some heritage sites have
which travel attributes, from the perspective of the tourists, no fabric or no visible remains of the buildings, but have
lead to their satisfaction. an association with people or activities (Herbert et al.,
There is limited research identifying how travel 1989). The growth of heritage centres such as the Melaka
attributes influence the satisfaction in heritage tourism Sultanate Place (Cultural Museum) and the Baba and
context and thus, the study is to fill the gap in the tourism Nyonya heritage museum have sought to broaden the
marketing literature. This paper has three objectives in range by recreating homes for workplaces and crafts. The
order to understand the satisfaction of domestic and International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS)
international travellers with Melaka’s heritage tourism. defined heritage in a broad concept that includes tangible
and intangible assets (McKercher & Du Cros 2002):
1. To evaluate which travel attributes affect the
satisfaction level in a conceptual framework that 1. Tangible assets: natural and cultural environments,
combines the Expectancy Disconfirmation Paradigm landscapes, historical places, sites and building
(EDP) and Perception-only models. environment.
2. To examine (domestic and international) tourists’ 2. Intangible assets: collection, past and continuing
expectations, perceptions and overall satisfaction cultural practices, knowledge and living experiences.
towards heritage destination offering.
UNESCO (1972) divided heritage tourism into types;
3. To identify and reduce gap differences between
first, Natural heritage covers natural sites with outstanding
expectations and performance for improving customer
universal value from aesthetic or science point of view
satisfaction level in heritage destination.
that need to be protected and second, Cultural heritage –
involves with monuments or buildings. It is also involves
with works or combined works of nature and man with
LITERATURE REVIEW
outstanding universal value from the point of view of
history, art, science or anthropological.
HERITAGE TOURISM
Different people’s perspectives of their heritage add
Many people travel to heritage destinations for the purpose to the complexity of understanding what heritage is. An
of experiencing something that is new to them. Moreover, individual understands, perceives and is aware of their
heritage destinations create a tourist image of many heritage and they claim it emotively as inspiration, comfort
countries worldwide (e.g., Egypt’s pyramids). Consistent or possession (Prentice 1993). In other words, the same
with the global trends in cultural tourism, heritage tourism heritage asset can have different kinds of meaning for
has emerged as one of the popular forms of tourism. The different cultures (i.e. individual). Furthermore, heritage
development of heritage tourism has created a need to assets have both intrinsic value to the community and
have a better study of heritage tourists and their behaviour. extrinsic value as tourism attractions (McKercher & Du
Similar to leisure and tourism activities, heritage tourism is Cros 2002). Therefore, the assessment of heritage becomes
viewed as an experiential consumption. What heritage complicated and involves knowledge from multiple
tourists expect about a heritage visit and their perception sciences such as archaeological, heritage management,
towards many features that compose a travel destination and history.
64 Jurnal Pengurusan 33

TRAVEL ATTRIBUTES AND TOURIST’S SATISFACTION defined as an outcome that based on the results from the
consumption experience and it relates to cognitive state
Travel attributes are a set of attributes which, when taken of reward, an emotional response to the experience, or a
as a whole, describe a place as a travel destination (Um comparison between rewards and cost to the anticipated
1987). Tourists have limited knowledge about a destination consequences. It is also can be based on a psychological
if they never been there before (Mok & Armstrong 1996). process, emphasizes the perceptual and evaluative (Vavra
Thus, they choose a destination based on the information 1997). Both academics and practitioners in the field of
from media or WOM communication. According to different marketing and psychology have expended considerable
cultural groups’ perspectives, the significance of travel effort in understanding the phenomenology of customer
attributes heritage may vary (Mayo & Jarvis 1981). satisfaction. The common theories underpinning the
Goodrich (1977) discovers four main factors that have concept of customer satisfaction are shown as:
impact on travel planning among American Express
international travellers, which consists of entertainment, 1. The expectation-disconfirmation model (Oliver 1980);
purchase opportunities, climate for comfort, and cost. The 2. Expectation-perception gap model (Parasuraman et
success of a tourist destination relies on the al. 1985);
interrelationship of crucial factors in every destination and 3. Perception-only model (Cronin & Taylor 1992);
the factors are destination’ attractions, amenities or 4. Performance-only model (Pizam & Milman 1993); and
facilities, and accessibility for tourists (Holloway 1986). 5. Pivotal-core-peripheral (PCP) model (Philip & Hazlett
Some important travel attributes are visitors’ safety, 1996).
reasonable prices, good accommodation, and relaxing Satisfaction in tourism services is based on the
vacations (Shih 1986). Heung and Qu (2000) claim that differences between expectation of pre-planning activities
there are eight travel dimensions that concentrate on the and travel experiences gained after tourists visited the
attributes of a travel destination including people, overall destination. If the comparison between experiences and
convenience, price, accommodation and food, expectations results in a feeling of pleasure, the tourist is
commodities, attraction, culture, and climate and image. satisfied; in contrast, the tourist experiences
Zeithaml et al. (2009) and Oliver (1997) contend that dissatisfaction if it results in feelings of displeasure
there is a challenge to define satisfaction, which is the (Reisinger & Turner 2003). Perceptions of service quality
most basic of customer concepts. According to Oliver affect satisfaction satisfactions, loyalty and post-
(1997: 13) Satisfaction is the consumer’s fulfilment behaviours (Anderson & Sullivan 1993; Bignie et al. 2001;
response. It is a judgement that a product or service Chen 2008; Chen & Tsai 2007; Choi & Chu 2001; Cronin &
feature, or the product or service itself, provides a Taylor 1992; De Rojas & Camarero 2008; Oliver 1980;
pleasurable level of consumption-related fulfilment. It is Petrick & Beckman 2002; Tam 2000). For example, satisfied
a psychological concept that involves the feeling of well- tourists may revisit a destination; engage in positive word-
being and pleasure, which are the outcome from what of-mouth communication including recommending it to
people hope for and expect from an appealing offering their friends, relatives and others; and express favourable
( WTO 1985). Many approaches are used to explain comments about the destination, such as commending
customer satisfaction and the most widely used is the the destination and the good quality experience of the
expectancy disconfirmation theory, which was proposed destination to their family, friends, relatives and others. In
by Richard Oliver (1980). Satisfaction is about the perceived contrast, dissatisfied tourists may not return to the same
discrepancy between prior expectation and perceived destination, may not recommend it to their family, friends,
performance after consumption, when performance falls relatives and others, and express unfavourable negative
below expectation, the dissatisfaction occurs (Oliver 1980). comments about a destination thereby damaging the
This theory has been tested and confirmed in several studies destination’s reputation (Reisinger & Turner 2003)
by Oliver, Tse and Wilton (1988). Generally, customers Past studies found that customer satisfaction is an
purchase goods and services with pre-purchase important theoretical as well as practical issue. For most
expectations about anticipated performance. When the marketers and consumer researchers, customer satisfaction
customer purchases and consumes the products or services, is regarded as an effective marketing tool to attract the
the outcomes are compared with their initial expectations. If most variable segments of the market. Satisfaction is
the outcome matches expectations, a confirmation will occur. important to successful destination marketing (Kozak &
If there are differences between expectations and outcomes, Rimmimgton 2000). One of the strategic routes used by
a disconfirmation will occur. When the product or service leisure firms in gaining a competitive edge is through an
performance is better than their initial expectation, a positive increase in customer satisfaction (Philip & Hazlett 1996).
disconfirmation will have occurred while a negative There appears to be a consensus that tourist satisfaction
disconfirmation will occur if the performance of the products influences the destination choice, product or service
or services is less than their initial expectation. consumptions and the revisiting intention. Therefore,
Bitner & Hubbert (1994) claim that customer satisfaction is increasingly becoming a Destination
satisfaction is a customer’s feeling towards a service after Marketing Organisation’s (DMOs) goal, as more and more
it has been consumed. Customer satisfaction can be DMOs strive for quality in their offering.
An Investigation of International and Domestic Tourists’ Satisfaction in Heritage Context 65

SERVICE QUALITY service quality measure. Customer responses to its

expectation and perception are obtained using a Likert
Most of the products available on the market are made up scale and compared to obtain (P-E) gap scores. Their
of a combination of tangible goods and intangible services. operationalisation of service quality is expressed in an
Zeithaml et al. (2009) describes that services are deeds, equation form, which is shown below:
processes and performances, which provided or co-
produced by organisations or people for other organisation
or people. Crosby (1984) and Eiglier and Langeard (1987)
defined quality as conformance to requirements in order
to satisfy customers’ needs and wants. The characteristics where: SQi = perceived service quality of individual ‘i’
of service are very different from goods, as they are k = number of service attributes/items
intangible, heterogeneous, and perishable. They are also P = perception of individual ‘i’ with respect to
subject to simultaneous production and consumption performance of a service firm on attribute ‘j’
(Parasuraman et al. 1985). In addition, there is a distinct E = service quality expectation for attribute ‘j’
framework for quality explication and measurement of that is the relevant norm for individual ‘i’
service (Jain & Gupta 2004). Consumers are able to evaluate
product quality in the goods sector through the existence The important factors of provide high quality service
of tangible cues, however, quality in the service context is and achieve customer satisfaction are widely recognized
explicated in terms of parameters that largely come under as the driving factors to the success of the tourism industry
the domain of ‘experience’ and ‘credence’ properties and (Stevens et al. 1995). Therefore, the SERVQUAL model has
are difficult to measure and evaluate (Parasuraman et al. been widely applied in the tourism literature (Parasuraman
1985; Zeithaml & Bitner 2001). Parasuraman et al. (1985, et al. 1985, 1988). As Cronin and Taylor (1992) argued the
1988) proposed a service quality measurement called conceptual basis of the SERVQUAL scale, they proposed
‘SERVQUAL’, which has been widely applied in different that the expectation (E) component of SERVQUAL should
service settings (Jain & Gupta 2004). Subsequently, other be eliminated and that only the performance (P) component
scales have been proposed for the measurement of service should be used that referred to as the ‘SERVPERF’ scale.
including the ‘SERVPERF’ proposed by Cronin and Taylor Based on the empirical evidence across four industries
(1992). Although many studies have been conducted to (banks, pest control, dry cleaning, and fast food), Cronin
assess which scale is better, the consensus continues to and Taylor urged that the ‘SERVPERF’ scale outperforms
be elusive. the SERVQUAL scale.
The SERVQUAL scale is the gap model, which was The SERVPERF scale contains 22 items as a service
developed by Parasuraman et al. (1985, 1988) that based quality measure. In equation form, it is expressed as:
on Oliver’s (1980) work on consumer satisfaction and
dissatisfaction. According to Oliver (1980) the perceived
service (PS) quality is the comparative results between
expected services (ES) and perceived service (PS). When
where: SQi = perceived service quality of individual ‘i’
ES > PS, thus it indicates that customer is not satisfied or
k = number of attributes/items
less satisfactory. If ES < PS, it shows that the perceived
P = perception of individual ‘i’ with respect to
quality is satisfactory and if discrepancy between ES and
performance of a service firm on attribute ‘j’
PS increase, this indicates that it leads to better quality.
Meanwhile, if ES = PS, it suggests that perceived quality is The SERVPERF scale has outperformed the SERVQUAL
just satisfactory (Hui et al. 2007). scale in the aspect of the number of items to be measured,
Based on the disconfirmation paradigm, this gap which have been reduced by 50%, it is also able to explain
model explains that satisfaction is related to the size and greater variance in the overall service quality measured
direction of disconfirmation of consumer’s initial through the use of a single-item scale (Jain & Gupta 2004).
expectations (Parasuraman et al. 1985; Smith & Houston When applied in conjunction with the SERVQUAL scale,
1982). Parasuraman et al. (1988) claim that when perceived the SERVPERF measure outperformed the SERVQUAL scale
service is less than the expected service (P < E), it implies (Babakus & Boller 1992; Cronin & Taylor 1992; Dabholkar
that the consumers are less than satisfied with the service et al. 2000).
quality and in contrast, when perceived service is more There are some criticisms concerning the adoption of
than expected service (P > E), indicates that consumers the SERVQUAL instrument as a service quality measurement
are agreeing with the service quality is more than since it needs to measure both expectation and perceptions.
satisfactory level. Parasuraman et al. (1988) stress on the Its use of a difference score has also been questioned
concept of dissatisfaction happens when there is a negative (e.g. Cronin & Taylor 1992; Brown et al. 1993). Although
discrepancy between perceptions and expectations the SERVQUAL scale has extensive applications, some
(performance gap); while a positive, discrepancy will lead criticisms on various conceptual and operational grounds
to consumer delight. They further developed a set of 22 have been voiced including the scale relating to the (P-E)
items for expectations and 22 items for perceptions as a gap scores, the length of the questionnaire, predictive
66 Jurnal Pengurusan 33

power of the instrument, and validity of the five-dimension in four stages. In the first stage, expectations on product
structure (e.g., Babakus & Boller 1992; Cronin & Taylor are developed by consumers where the expectations vary
1992; Dabholkar et al. 2000; Teas 1993, 1994). Various issues across consumers (Tse & Wilton 1988). The reason why
were identified using (P-E) gap scores, with most studies expectations vary across consumers is that they developed
having found a poor fit between service quality as the expectation based on their knowledge of a product,
measured through the SERVQUAL scale and the overall and that each consumer has a different knowledge level
service quality being measured directly through a single- about a product, which leads to a different estimation of
item scale (e.g., Babakus & Boller 1992; Babakus & Mangold the product performance (Boulding et al. 1993; Oliver
1989; Carman 1990). 1980). In the second stage, individual consumers develop
Peter et al. (1993) found that the difference scores certain attributions on the product performance. In the
were beset with psychometric problems and they third stage, the perceived product performance is
questioned the appropriateness of the use of (P-E) scores. compared with their initial expectations. For the final stage,
The psychometric problems are apparent when measurement of the perceived product performance,
respondents are asked to rate their desired and actual level individual consumers (Reisig & Chandek 2001) determine
on a specific attribute, as they tend to rate the desired whether it is up to their expectation.
level higher than their actual perceived level (Brown et al. Hui et al. (2007) add that if the actual product
1993). Although Cronin and Taylor (1992) questioned the performances or experiences are better than their initial
effectiveness of the SERVQUAL scale for the measure of expectations, positive disconfirmation (PD) will occur
service quality, Parasuraman et al. (1994) claimed that where the consumer is satisfied and willing to repurchase
diagnostic ability is the major practical benefit of using the product in the future. On the other hand, negative
the SERVQUAL scale as it can diagnose the service disconfirmation (ND) will occur if the actual product
shortfalls that need attention and action. Weber (1997) performance or experience is worse than their initial
stresses the need to examine the perceptions and expectation and leads to the consumer being dissatisfied
expectations in order to have better understanding of and unwilling to repurchase the product again. Inevitably,
service quality. The importance of the SERQUAL scale is the consumer will most probably look for alternatives in
evident by its application in a number of empirical studies the future. In other words, if the perceived performance is
across varied service settings (Brown & Swartz 1989; significantly worse than the comparison standard, the
Carman 1990; Kassim & Bojei 2002; Lewis 1987, 1991; Pitt customer will experience negative disconfirmation. Chon
et al. 1992; Witkowski & Wolfinbarger 2002). (1989) discusses that tourist satisfaction is based on
However, although the SERVQUAL questionnaire is tourists’ expectations of the destination and the perceived
widely used and the debated service quality-measuring evaluation of the experience outcome. This explains that
instrument has evolved over the past two decades, there the comparison between tourist’s previous images of the
is still no consensus as to which one is the better scale. destination and what he/she actually see, feel, and achieve
at the destination will result in tourist satisfaction or
THE EXPECTANCY DISCONFIRMATION MODEL dissatisfaction.
According to Reisig and Chandek (2001), although
Expectancy Disconfirmation Theory developed by Oliver expectancy disconfirmation is hypothesized as having the
(1980), is one the important frameworks that explain greatest effect on consumer satisfaction, other research
customer satisfaction by suggesting that satisfaction is found that it was not the only direct effect as expectations
the outcome from the discrepancy between expectations also have some direct influence on satisfaction. For
and perceived performance. It has become the most instance, a consumer with lower expectation often reports
popularly adopted method for assessing customer a higher level of satisfaction. Furthermore, perceived
satisfaction and dissatisfaction (Weber 1997). Hui et al. performance also influences satisfaction. In other words,
(2007) discuss that the Expectancy Disconfirmation the level of consumer satisfaction will increase as
Paradigm (EDP) that disconfirmation happens when there performance increases (Oliver 1981). The expectation and
is discrepancies between initial expectations and actual perceived performance have both direct and indirect
performance that lead to satisfaction or dissatisfaction influences on consumer satisfaction. Thus, the expectancy
among consumers. disconfirmation model explains service satisfaction as well
Since the perceived disconfirmation is about the as satisfaction with product performance (Oliver 1980,
comparison between perceived performance and the 1981; Oliver & DeSarbo 1988; Oliver & Swan 1989; Tse &
standard/ideal, expectation acts as a baseline for the Wilton 1988).
perceived performance comparison. From here, customers Based on the literature review, there are five
can determine if the perceived performance is better, worse hypotheses for each grouping;
or matches equally to their expectation. Satisfaction is
directly affected by the extent of how perceived H1: There is a difference in the tourists’ overall
performance over expectations commands the kind of expectations and perceptions based on the travel
disconfirmation in customer experience (Oliver 1980). The attributes to visit Melaka as a heritage destination
expectancy disconfirmation model can be conceptualized among local and international tourists.
An Investigation of International and Domestic Tourists’ Satisfaction in Heritage Context 67

H2: (a) International and (b) local tourists’ expectations H5: Perceived performance explains greater variance in
are significantly positively disconfirmed (Perceptions the overall tourists’ overall satisfaction.
> Expectation) based on travel attributes to visit
Melaka as a heritage destination.
H3: Several travel attributes in EDP model are significant CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
in influencing the overall satisfaction levels among
tourists. This study’s framework consolidates the Expectancy
H4: Several travel attributes in Perception model are Disconfirmation Model and the Service Quality Model as
significant in influencing overall satisfaction levels shown in Figure 3.
among tourists.

Expectation

Overall
Disconfirmation Satisfaction

Perceptions/
Experiences

FIGURE 3. A conceptual framework for the study of tourist satisfaction

Factors such as how tourists’ needs, past experience PERCEPTIONS/EXPERIENCES ¼ OVERALL

and information from external sources (e.g., social SATISFACTION
environment, general media, and commercial sources) affect
Cronin and Taylor (1992) stated that using perception
a person’s expectations are not incorporated in this
solely to measure service quality is good at predicting
framework. In addition, the impact of expectations on
overall satisfaction and it outperforms the EDP approach.
perceptions of performance is not examined.
By using perception indication, it already causes
respondents to mentally compare between perception and
PERCEPTIONS MINUS EXPECTATIONS ¼
DISCONFIRMATION ¼ OVERALL SATISFACTION
expectation, in other words, the estimation of perceptions/
experiences already include a perception minus
EDP model illustrate that satisfaction formation is a function expectation mental process (Llosa et al. 1998). Therefore,
of disconfirmation that reflects the consumers’ additional analysis of the direct effect of tourists’
expectations and perceptions or experiences. Thus, tourist perceptions/experiences on their overall satisfaction levels
satisfaction is the comparison between their experience is also included in the study.
gained after visited and expectation before they visited
the destination (Hui et al. 2007; Pizam et al. 1978). They
tested Oliver’s Expectancy Disconfirmation Theory across METHODOLOGY
various tourist market segments by hypothesizing that
consumer satisfaction/dissatisfaction with a destination MEASUREMENT
can be explained by the difference between tourists’
perceived outcome of a trip and their specific expectations This study has drawn representative items from a large
before it took place (disconfirmation). Satisfaction with base of past literature and a questionnaire is divided into
services is related to the size and direction of the five parts. Part A comprises 23 statements questions, which
confirmation or disconfirmation experience, which, in turn, were derived from constructs developed by Heung and
are affected by the consumer’s initial expectations Qu (2000). The items in each construct of the study have
(Churchill & Suprenant 1982). In terms of attracting undergone extensive evaluation and validation. Therefore,
travellers, customer satisfaction level can be improved the eight travel attributes (‘People’, ‘Overall
significantly by identifying and reducing gap differences Convenience’, ‘Price’, ‘Accommodation and Food’,
between expectations and perceived performance (Qu & ‘Commodities’, ‘Attractions’, ‘Culture’, and ‘Climate and
Ping 1999). Their findings included if performance exceeds Image’) not underwent exploratory factor analysis. These
expectations and emotional satisfaction occurs. In contrast, questions are designed to identify respondents’
emotional dissatisfaction occurs if expectation exceeds expectations on Melaka as a heritage travel destination
BEFORE they visit the destination and Part B comprises
performance.
an identical set of 23 questions that are intended to elicit
respondents’ perceptions on Melaka as a heritage travel
68 Jurnal Pengurusan 33

destination AFTER their holiday experience. Part C consists research were applied: (1) minimum eigenvalue of 1, (2)
of 6 questions, which were adapted from Žabkar et al. KMO measure of sampling adequacy greater than 0.5, (3)
(2010); and Seren (1986) to ascertain respondents’ overall minimum factor loading of 0.5 for each indicator variable,
satisfaction with their trip. Finally, Part D includes the (4) simplicity of factor structure, and (5) exclusion of single
socio-demographic variables, namely, ‘Age’, ‘Educational item factor structure. As the number of variables analysed
Level’, ‘Gender’, ‘Marital Status’, ‘Ethnicity’, and ‘Monthly is important in deciding which factor loadings are
Household Income’. The tourists’ country of origin, first significant, those items with factor loadings below 0.60
time or repeat visit, and what is the main source of were discarded (Hair et al., 1998). Two items from the visitor
information when respondents plan their visit to Melaka satisfaction construct and two items from the behavioural
are also included in this section for segmentation purposes. intentions construct were discarded after factor analysis,
Apart from Part D, all items of the first three parts are therefore, 4 items and 7 items, respectively, for each of the
measured by a 6-point Likert-type scale from ‘6’ for constructs were kept.
‘strongly agree’ to ‘1’ for ‘strongly disagree’. All data was collected over a period of one month.
For the purpose of scale development, the visitor Respondents were approached and informed about the
satisfaction construct, set of items underwent exploratory purpose of the survey in advance before they were given
factor analysis to identify which items do not belong to the questionnaire. Since the data was collected from a
the specified domain (Churchill 1979). In order to ascertain convenience sample of individuals, there was no control
whether the measures retained construct validity (i.e. on the sample size of each respondent group in terms of
measure what they are supposed to) an exploratory factor demographics and country of origin. A total of 322 usable
analysis using principal components and Varian rotation samples were obtained.
technique was conducted to examine the underlying
dimension of overall satisfaction. In determining the
factors, common decision rules employed in empirical

TABLE 1. Socio-demographic profile of respondents

Overall Domestic International

Variables
(n = 322) (n = 206) (n = 116)

Age Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

(%) (%) (%)
16 – 24 163 50.6 143 69.4 20 17.2
25 – 34 116 36 51 24.8 65 56.0
35 – 44 32 9.9 9 4.4 23 19.8
45 – 54 10 3.1 3 1.5 7 6.0
55 +1 0.3 0 0.0 1 0.9
Education Level
No College 19 5.9 14 6.8 5 4.3
High School Certificate 53 16.5 21 10.2 32 27.6
Diploma 31 9.6 11 5.3 20 17.2
Bachelors Degree 166 51.6 135 65.5 31 26.7
Master Degree 38 11.8 22 10.7 16 13.8
Professional 5 1.6 1 0.5 4 3.4
PhD (Doctorate) 10 3.1 2 1.0 8 6.9
Gender
Male 153 47.5 68 33.0 85 73.3
Female 169 52.5 138 67.0 31 26.7
Marital Status
Single 239 74.2 175 85.0 64 55.2
Married 82 25.5 31 15.0 51 44.0
Other 1 0.3 0 0.0 1 0.9
Ethnicity
Malay 146 45.3 142 68.9 4 3.2
Chinese 52 16.1 51 24.8 50 0.42
Indian 5 1.6 5 2.4 62 51.6
Other 119 37 8 3.9 4 3.2
Continued
An Investigation of International and Domestic Tourists’ Satisfaction in Heritage Context 69

TABLE 1. Continued

Variables Overall Domestic International

(n = 322) (n = 206) (n = 116)

Age Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

(%) (%) (%)
Monthly Household Income
Below RM1,500 167 51.9 119 57.8 48 41.4
RM1,500 – 3,000 66 20.5 52 25.2 14 12.1
RM3,001 – 4,500 40 12.4 26 12.6 14 12.1
RM4,501 – 6,000 13 4 5 2.4 8 6.9
RM6,001 – 7,500 7 2.2 2 1.0 5 4.3
RM7,501 – 9,000 5 1.6 0 0.0 5 4.3
RM9,001 - 10,500 6 1.9 0 0.0 6 5.2
Above RM10,500 18 5.6 2 1.0 16 13.8

TABLE 2. Main source of information

Domestic International
(n = 206) (n = 116)
Variables
Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
(%) (%)
Main source of information for travel plans
Friends/relatives 143 69.4 71 61.2
Broadcasting media (i.e. TV, radio) 15 7.3 3 2.6
Magazines/newspaper 5 2.4 5 4.3
Travel brochures/other printed 10 4.9 4 3.4
Promotion material 4 1.9 2 1.7
Internet 28 13.6 21 18.1
Guide book 1 0.5 4 3.4
Travel Agent 0 0.0 6 5.2
Information Centre whilst on holiday/trip 0 0.0 0 0.0

DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS these two items were discarded and the re-run of the factor
analysis result is shown in Table 3.
THE PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS FACTOR ANALYSIS ON The first factor is labelled as Overall Satisfaction and
SATISFACTION SCALE the factor explained 69.94% of the total variance. The
second factor has been discarded, as there was no strong
For the construct of visitor satisfaction, principal axis loading. Therefore, the cumulative percentage of variance
factoring analysis was conducted on the six items scale is 69.94%, which is considered high (Malhotra 2010). The
that produced two factors, which emerged following eight result of this analysis supports the use of overall
iterations. Since items 1 – ‘I am pleased to visit the heritage satisfaction as a single scale. The alpha value is greater
sites in Melaka’ and 3 – ‘Visiting to this destination than 0.7 as a minimum, although lower coefficients may be
exceeded my expectation’, had a factor loading below 0.6, acceptable depending on the research objectives (Hair
et al. 2007).

TABLE 3. Factor analysis on visitor satisfaction scale

Attribute Measurement/scale items F1

Overall I am delighted about this destination 0.755
Satisfaction It gives me sense of joy that I have decided to come to this 0.812
tourist/heritage destination in Melaka
I really enjoyed the visit to Melaka 0.884
Overall, I feel satisfied in visiting Melaka 0.886
Eigenvalue 3.075
Percentage of variance 69.94
Cronbach alpha 0.899
70 Jurnal Pengurusan 33

THE DIFFERENCES & DISCONFIRMATION OF expectations and perception factors for all groupings. The
TRAVEL ATTRIBUTES t-tests are used to identify specific attribute that will explain
whether tourists are delighted (Positive Disconfirmation/
Table 4 shows the means of tourists’ satisfaction PD) or disappointment (Negative Disconfirmation/ND)
(Expectation-Perception) and output for a series of paired
while visiting Melaka.
t-tests performed on each of the eight corresponding

TABLE 4. Paired samples t-tests for all groupings

Domestic P-E International P-E

Attributes
t-value Mean t-value Mean
1 People 11.00* -0.81 4.55* -0.43
2 Overall Convenience 7.58* -0.60 0.11 -0.01
3 Price 11.48* -0.93 2.13* -0.22
4 Accommodation and Food 11.01* -0.65 2.55* -0.24
5 Commodities 9.07* -0.62 0.45 0.05
6 Attractions 5.36* -0.35 1.56 -0.14
7 Culture 3.68* -0.25 0.88 -0.07
8 Climate and Image 11.28* -0.77 1.75 -0.18
Expectation and Perception scores are based on a six point scale * = p < 0.05

Table 4 shows the output of paired t-tests performed > Expectations) among international and domestic tourists
on each of the eight factors of expectation and perception towards Melaka as heritage destination.
for both groups. Generally, domestic tourists are
disappointed with all attributes, as illustrated by the THE INFLUENCE OF TRAVEL ATTRIBUTES ON
negative mean value (P-E) and all of them are significant at OVERALL TOURISTS’ SATISFACTION
the 5% level. ‘Price’ is the main element in terms of ND
(Negative Disconfirmation) among domestic tourists. This The stepwise multiple regression is employed to test
is followed by ‘Climate and Image’ and ‘Accommodation hypotheses 3 and 4. The interpretation of the regression
and Food’. A possible explanation for the ND for all of the analysis is based on the standardized coefficient beta and
attributes could be because they are local people and, R square is used to determine the fitness of the model. It is
thus, many of them do know a lot about Melaka. As such, found that ‘Attractions’, ‘Culture’ and ‘Climate & Image’
their initial expectations are generally very high compared have significant impact on the domestic group but not for
to their subsequent perceptions/experiences. The variety the international group. ‘Accommodation & Food’ and
of food and commodities available in Melaka can also be ‘Climate & Image’ have a significant influence on overall
widely found in other states. Domestic tourists probably satisfaction for the international group. With the largest
realize that other states can offer more in travel attributes absolute value of standardized beta coefficient,
(both natural and man-made). ‘Accommodation & Food’ emerged to be most influential
As for the international group, Table 4 reveals that predictor than ‘Climate & Image’ among the international
only three out of the eight attributes were found to be tourists.
significant at 0.05, namely, ‘People’, ‘Accommodation and Table 6 shows that there are two attributes,
Food’ and ‘Price’. International tourists are disappointed ‘Attractions’ and ‘Climate & Image’ influence the
with the efficiency and helpfulness of the people, price, satisfaction among international tourists. ‘Attractions’ are
and accommodation and food. International tourists more influential in explaining overall satisfaction among
probably realize that their home countries can offer more international tourist with beta value higher than ‘Climate
in terms of accommodation and food. One plausible reason & Image’. There are four travel attributes have direct
is they might use to the domestic food especially influence on overall satisfaction among domestic tourists.
Singaporean tourists and when they travel to Melaka. Only The main attribute is ‘Climate & Image ‘followed by
one item that is ‘commodities’ has a negative value of ‘Attractions’ and ‘Commodities’.
mean however the t-test result is not significant to explain In terms of multicollinearity among the independent
that international tourists are delighted with that attribute variables on overall satisfaction , Table 5 and 6 show that
while visiting Melaka. the VIF values do not exceed 10. This indicates that high
From the above results, H1 is not rejected and because multicollinearity does not exist to reduce the explanatory
there are significant differences in expectations and power of the predictor variables on overall satisfaction.
perceptions among both type of tourists. However, the As travel attributes are found to be significant in predicting
finding suggests that H2a and H2b are rejected because overall satisfaction levels for both EDP and perception-
there are no significant positive disconfirmed (Perceptions only models, thus, H3 and H4 are accepted. Lastly, the
An Investigation of International and Domestic Tourists’ Satisfaction in Heritage Context 71

TABLE 5. Comparison of stepwise regression analyses on overall satisfaction levels (EDP)

Domestic International
2
R 0.230 0.241
Adjusted R2 0.219 0.228
Std. β VIF Std. β VIF

1 People
2 Overall Convenience
3 Price
4 Accommodation and Food 0.312 1.799
5 Commodities
6 Attractions 0.163 1.519
7 Culture 0.158 1.339
8 Climate and Image 0.300 1.205 0.224 1.799

TABLE 6. Comparison of stepwise regression analyses on satisfaction levels (perceptions only)

Domestic International
2
R 0.593 0.448
Adjusted R2 0.585 0.438
Std. β VIF Std. β VIF

1 People
2 Overall Convenience
3 Price
4 Accommodation and Food
5 Commodities 0.174 2.088
6 Attractions 0.240 2.019 0.478 1.584
7 Culture 0.120 1.683
8 Climate and Image 0.392 1.944 0.260 1.584

findings validate and strengthen Cronin and Taylor’s (1992) who are disappointed with the lack of efficiency and
claim that SERVPERF model is better than the SERVQUAL helpfulness of the people, price, and accommodation and
model developed by Parasuraman et al. (1985) and EDP food. This suggests that Melaka should improve the quality
model developed by Oliver (1980) in determining overall of service in the hotels, restaurants and tourism related
satisfaction. It is a noteworthy point to emphasize in that staff, as well as the quality of food.
the R square value obtained in Table 6 (Perceptions-only
model) is higher than their corresponding value in Table 5 The Relationship Between Travel Attribute
(EDP model). Hence, H5 is accepted since the perceived and Overall Satisfaction
performance explains greater variance in the tourists’
overall satisfaction. In terms EDP model, ‘Attractions’, ‘Culture’ and ‘Climate
and Image’ have significant impact for the domestic
tourists. There is a single factor that appeals to both groups
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION from different geographic regions, which is the ‘Climate
and Image’ attribute.
THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS With reference to the perception-only model,
‘Commodities’, ‘Attractions’, ‘Culture’ and ‘Climate &
The Relationship Between Expectation and Image’ have significant impact on domestic tourists’
Perception (Disconfirmation) satisfaction. ‘Attractions’ and ‘Climate & Image’ have
significant impact towards international tourists. Thus,
In-depth analysis with the paired t-test analysis method there two items/factors that appeals to both groups that
was used to ascertain which specific travel attributes are ‘Attractions’ and ‘Climate & Image’ influence the
tourists’ expectations and perceptions were significantly satisfaction of both group. The empirical findings support
different. ‘People’, ‘Accommodation and Food’ and ‘Price’ the hypothesis that perceived performance explains greater
were found to be significant for the international tourists variance in the tourists’ overall satisfaction, as the result
72 Jurnal Pengurusan 33

of stepwise regression analysis revealed that the study findings found that, for successful marketing to
‘Attraction’ attribute has a significant impact on both result in improved tourists’ overall satisfaction and
domestic and international tourists. In addition, it has the behavioural intention, travel marketers need to consider
strongest influence on overall satisfaction for the how tourists experience/perceive and their expectation
international groups where the standardized beta towards a destination. Creating and managing effective
coefficient is β = 0.478. The ‘Attraction’ attribute also is experiences are essential management tasks for travel
the second strongest influence on overall satisfaction in marketers and board of Melaka tourism. A visitor’s
the domestic group where the standardized beta coefficient satisfaction results from numerous encounter experiences
is β = 0.24. involving a large number of individuals and organisations
This attribute could be packaged and manipulated by that jointly determine the visitor’s perception of the
way of strategy formulation to increase the level of destination’s attributes. Understanding the driver of visitor
satisfaction of tourists to Melaka. Primarily, destinations satisfaction is an important input for destination strategy
have to be positioned based on attributes that are development and management improvements.
meaningful to tourists, after that, by the destination’s Since quality in tourism is the result of a consumer’s
strength, and finally through ensuring that the positioning view of a bundle of service dimensions (Gronroos 1984),
strategy can be fulfilled and delivered by tourism operators the findings suggest that travel marketers have to pay
(Chandra & Menezes 2001). Travel marketers have to attention to a wide range of travel attributes when
understand those attributes that are most likely to managing destination offerings. The eight travel attributes
influence tourists’ choice. The study revealed that in the measured indicators show that four travel attributes,
eyes of both domestic and international tourisms, the namely, ‘Attraction’, ‘Culture’, ‘Climate and Image’, and
‘Attraction’ attribute is meaningful to them as one of the ‘Commodities’, do influence the perceived quality of a
reasons to travel to Melaka, in fact, this is Melaka’s destination’s offerings toward overall satisfaction for either
strength. Hence, travel marketers could devise the domestic or international groups (perceptions-only model).
positioning strategy accordingly. It must have systems, Kotler and Armstrong (2007) claimed that understanding,
processes, and tourism operators in place to ensure that creating, communicating and delivering value, and
what customer value actually matches the designs and satisfaction are at the core of modern marketing. Many
standards in place. cultural resources are transformed into experiences to be
In overall terms, the adjusted R2-values obtained in marketed, sold and bought (McManus 1997). Hence, the
Table 6 (perceptions-only model) are higher than their marketing activities of advertising, packaging and target
corresponding values in Table 5 ( EDP model). The marketing play an important role.
SERVPERF scale can explain a greater variance (58.5% for Concerning the enhancement of the perception for
domestic group and 43.8% for international group) in ‘Attraction’ attribute, traveller marketers must consider
overall satisfaction compared to SERVQUAL, which can and expose how ‘inspiring’ the overall appearance of core
only explain a relatively lower variance (21.9% for domestic objects – historical buildings. For instances, an
group and 22.8% for international group). This was arrangement of members of cavalry wearing of Baju Melayu
supported by the above literature review where as their full dress uniform standing at the entrance of
psychometric problems can occur when respondents are Melaka Sultanate Palace; and the members of cavalry
asked to rate their desired and actual level on a specific wearing of Portuguese costume in the Porta de Santiago
attribute, they have a tendency to rate the desired level (A’Famosa) and St Paul’s Church area who can provide
higher than their actual perceived level (Brown et al. 1993). assistant to tourists enquiry. In order to make heritage
In other words, when respondents are asked to rate their sites understandable and meaningful to tourists, heritage
desired and actual level at the same time, some interpretation which is a central component of modern
psychological constraints occur (Cronbach & Furby 1970). heritage tourism is required (Prentice et al. 1998). Tourists
Because of its psychometric soundness, travel marketers can learn more by using interactive exhibitions rather than
should employ the SERVPERF scale for assessing the overall traditional static exhibitions. According to Harrison (2000)
travel attribute dimension on overall satisfaction. interpretation involves presenting information in a form
that is accessible to visitors. Hence, the art of making
Managerial Implications appealing interpretation has a significant emotional impact
on tourists. Moscardo (1996) stated that the interpretation
The findings of the study suggest that travel marketers can be served as a tourist management tool to relieve
need to have a balanced approach to satisfy tourist pressure on a heritage site where the inappropriate
different needs and preferences especially in prevailing behaviour, such as touching fragile objects and littering
the image of Melaka as one of the main heritage destination can be reduced by effective interpretation that educates
in Malaysia. The globalisation of travel and the improved tourists.
accessibility of information increasing competitive With the reference to the ‘Culture’ attribute, travel
pressures for travel marketers. In terms of managerial marketers should focus on how tourists establish and
implications, the results are therefore primarily relevant perceive their connectedness with history and spiritual
for the management and marketing of heritage sites. The experiences. Heritage tourism is related with the sense of
An Investigation of International and Domestic Tourists’ Satisfaction in Heritage Context 73

belonging and link to the collective nature of the human for heritage attractions are satisfying visitors’ expectations
being. Therefore, cultural branding approach is needed to and managing their impacts without compromising the
addresses vast differences in society which it is relevant authenticity of the site.
for tourist destinations (Holt 2004). This approach relies For the purpose of performance measurement, a
heavily on identity myths which tourists experience via distinction between expected and perceived of the eight
ritual action. Successful heritage attractions should have travel dimension can be useful. Tourists’ expectations
a strong story and make the tourist involvement, while regarding the eight travel dimension could be influenced
providing a sense of authenticity (McKercher & du Cros by previous experiences with heritage sites as well as the
2002). A concept of staged authenticity – hosts put culture promotional activities. Promises made by a service
on sale with an appealing package, was introduced by company through its media advertising and other
MacCannell (1979). Following this approach, traveller communications may potentially raise customer
marketers should devise some innovative approaches, for expectations (Zeithaml et al. 2009). Tax et al. (1998)
instances, portray a true Melaka culture via a show and indicated that positively raised expectations could affect
theatre dance with the objective to represent the historical brand equity. This kind of effect is applicable in tourism
culture. The other approach is through storytelling present context. Hence, travel marketers should avoid the
in theatre manner that telling about a chronology of occurrence of broken promises due to over promising in
Melaka’s history since 1404. For instances, it could telling advertising or personal selling. Moreover, tourists
how the early beginnings of the Sultanate of Melaka, positively raised expectation could happen when
followed by the colonization of Melaka by Portuguese, inappropriate pricing happen such as high prices or prices
Dutch, Britain and Japan. It could also telling about a that are not tied to customer perceptions of value.
legend of Hang Tuah’s life – the famous Malay warrior Therefore, travel marketers or Melaka tourism board should
(Hang Tuah) who served as the admiral of Melaka’s naval carefully devise an appropriate pricing strategy with the
forces and defended successfully countless attacks against objective of providing tourists value and regulate the price
Melaka. of food and commodities in order to increase Melaka’s
The improvement of ‘Commodities’ attribute, the competitive power.As there are multiple contacts or service
travel marketers of Melaka as a shopping destination is encounters that tourists receive service quality when visit
also a driving factor that made domestic tourists come to a destination, the probability of negative experiences may
buy region specific products. The shopping markets that increase which each encounter could influence to tourists’
have evolved in the form of mini shopping districts around overall satisfaction. Therefore, all stakeholders play a
the site (i.e. Jonker Street) made the shopping experience critical role to make a destination’s success. According to
more relevant to the heritage promotion of Melaka where Zeithaml et al. (2009), the drama metaphor offers a useful
there are wide choice of antique items, quaint handicraft way to improve service performance where the selection
products, and art and deco pieces. Although the of personnel can be viewed as auditioning the actors and
‘Commodities’ attribute have insignificant impact for the an actor’s personal appearance, manner, facial expression,
international group, the plausible reasons are that they gestures, personality, and demographic profile can be
probably do not aware of the region specific products or determined in large part in the interview or audition.
they do not want to be bothered by local sellers. In term of Therefore, the travel related staffs need to perform their
creating awareness of the region specific products, roles according to the expectations of the tourist in order
promotional literature can be a useful tool. Travel marketers to satisfy them. Hence, the board of Melaka tourism should
should look into the feasibility of promoting region specific carefully select and train the employees in order to improve
product in collaboration with hotels where the hotels have the ‘People’ attribute by making tourists’ feeling of
exclusive galleries dedicated to the handicrafts made in confirmed expectation and satisfaction. Furthermore, the
this region such as batik. Here the international tourist board of Melaka tourism should looks at the challenges of
gets a glance at the Melaka culture. This is a good place successful management of interactions between local
for shopping for the tourist who does not want to be people and tourists. Adequate training should be carried
bothered by local vendors and sellers. out in both the public and private sectors in order to
In conjunction with the issues of preserving the improve the courtesy, helpfulness, and efficiency of the
heritage image and attractions, thus authority of Melaka workforce.
city needs to take initiative education program to place
their citizens under an obligation to preserve their culture LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
and surroundings. This requires travel related marketers
to develop awareness of the benefits of sustainable The discussion of the results and implications needs to
marketing. Therefore, to improve tourists’ perceptions of be accompanied by limitations of the study, which may
‘Climate and Image’ attribute, civil education program as indicate future improvements and directions. The first is
well as serious penalties on law-breakers should be carried about the timing of the expectation measurement where
out by the authority’s parties especially in preserving the Carman (1990) proposed that expectations should be
heritage of Melaka’s building, culture and its surroundings. assessed before the service experience. This could minimize
As suggested by Fullerton et al. (2009), the main issues expectations being affected by perceptions of the actual
74 Jurnal Pengurusan 33

service provided (Getty & Thomson 1994). Expectations Bitner, M.J. & Hubbert, A.K. 1994. Encounters satisfaction
might be overstated or understated when tourists have a versus overall satisfaction versus quality. In A. Rao (2005).
positive or negative experience. In order to resolve the Multi-attributes of confidence, convenience, price function
problem, a more reliable method is to measure tourists’ of customers of financial services firms: A GLS system
models. Journal of Financial Services Marketing pp.1-5.
expectations on their arrival and complete the post-trip
Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staeline, R. & Zeithaml, V. 1993. A
section after their holiday ends. However, more resources
dynamic process model of service quality: from expectations
would be needed to ensure that the same person completes to behavioural intentions. Journal of Marketing Research
the same questionnaire, which could be very hard to 30: 7-27.
control. Second, this research relied on a convenience Brady, M.K., Cronin, J. & Brand, R.R. 2002. Performance –
sample of tourists during a short period. The analysis and only measurement of service quality: a replication and
discussion based on the expectation and perceptions of extension. Journal of Business Research 55(1): 17-31.
the sample respondents may vary if the sample is collected Brown, S.W. & Swartz, T.A. 1989. A gap analysis of professional
at a different time of year. Third, different sampling methods service quality. Journal of Marketing 53(April): 92-98.
(e.g. personal interviews) may also add insight into the Brown, T.J., Churchill, G.A. & Peter, J.P. 1993. Improving the
expectations and perceptions of tourists. measurement of service quality. Journal of Marketing
Research 66: 127-139.
Fourth, It would be necessary for the researcher and
Carman, J.M. 1990. Consumer perceptions of service quality:
to find out what are the other important heritage site’s
An assessment of the SERVQUAL dimensions. Journal of
characteristics or factors that affect tourists’ expectations Retailing 66(1): 33-35.
and perceptions. For instance, Yu and Littrell (2003) and Chandra, S. & Menezes, D. 2001. Applications of multivariate
Wang (2000) found that there are various elements of analysis in international tourism research: the marketing
heritage sites such as streets, steps, terraces, crafts that strategy perspective of NTOs. Journal of Economic and
will influence tourists’ perceptions. Fifth, the respondents Social Research 3(1): 77-98.
were predominantly young people, aged between 16 and Chen, C.F. & Tsai, D. 2007. How destination image and evaluative
24 years old, in the domestic sample while the respondents factors affect behavioral intentions? Tourism Management
in the international sample were predominantly aged 28: 1115-1122.
between 25 and 34 years old. These demographic Chen, C.F. 2008. Investigating structural relationships between
service quality, perceived value, satisfaction, and
characteristics could limit the generalization of the results.
behavioural intentions for air passengers: evidence from
Future research could focus on the impact of culture and
Taiwan. Transportation Research 42(4): 709-717.
travel motivation characteristics on the expectations and Choi, T. Y. & Chu, R. 2001. Determinants of hotel guests’
perceptions of the heritage destination such as Melaka. satisfaction and repeat patronage in the Hong Kong hotel
As suggested by Gnoth (1997), motivation affects tourists’ industry. Hospitality Management 20: 277-297.
expectation. Thus, destination managers and researchers Chon, K. 1989. Understanding recreational travellers’ motivation,
need to further study various factors that affect the attitude and satisfaction. Tourist Review 44: 3-7.
tourists’ satisfaction and develop measurement scales that Churchill, G. & Surprenant, C. 1982. An investigation into the
can assess them in various context of heritage tourism. determinants of customer satisfaction. Journal of Marketing
Lastly, future studies require a combination of various Research 19: 491-504.
methodological approaches such as the use of structural Churchill, G.A. 1979. A paradigm for developing better measures
of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research
modelling (SEM) or multi-step approaches and research
16(1): 64-73.
tools that combine quantitative and qualitative methods.
Cronin, J.J. & Taylor, S.A. 1992. Measuring service quality: a re-
examination and extension. Journal of Marketing 56: 55-68.
REFERENCES Dabholkar, P.A., Shepherd, D.C. & Thorpe, D.I. 2000. A
comprehensive framework for service quality: An
Anderson, E.W. & Sullivan, M. 1993. The antecedents and
investigation of critical, conceptual and measurement issues
consequences of customer satisfaction for firms. Marketing
through a longitudinal study. Journal of Retailing 76(2):
Science 12: 125-143.
139-73.
Augustyn, M. & Ho, S.K. 1998. Service quality and tourism.
De Rojas, C. & Camarero, C. 2008. Visitors’ experience, mood
Journal of Travel Research 37: 71-75.
and satisfaction in a heritage context: evidence from an
Babakus, E. & Boller, G.W. 1992. An empirical assessment of
interpretation centre. Tourism Management 29: 525-537.
the SERVQUAL scale. Journal of Business Research 24(3):
Eiglier, P. & Langeard, E. 1987. Servuction, le marketing des
253-68.
services. Paris: McGraw-Hill.
Babakus, E. & Mangold, W.G. 1989. Adapting the SERVQUAL
Getty, M.J. & Thomson, N.K. 1994. The relationship between
scale to hospital services: an empirical investigation. Health
quality, satisfaction, and recommending behaviour in lodging
Service Research 26(6): 767-80.
decisions. Journal of Hospitality and Leisure Marketing 2:
Baker, D.A. & Crompton, J.L. 2000. Quality, satisfaction and
3-22.
behavioural intentions. Annals of Tourism Research 27(3):
Gnoth, J. 1997. Tourism motivation and expectation formation.
785-804.
Annals of Tourism Research 24(2): 283-304.
Bignie, J.E., Sanchez, M.I. & Sanchez, J. 2001. Tourism image,
Goodrich, J.N. 1977. Benefit bundle analysis: an empirical study
evaluation variables and after-purchase behaviour: Inter-
of international travellers. Journal of Travel Research 26(2):
relationships. Tourism Management 22(6): 607-616.
6-9.
An Investigation of International and Domestic Tourists’ Satisfaction in Heritage Context 75

Hair, J.F., Tatham, R.L., Anderson, R.E. & Black,W. 1998. Munan & Heidi. 2002. Malaysia. New York: Benchmark Books.
Multivariate Data Analysis (international edition). pp. 28-29.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Neter, J., Wasserman, W. & Kutner, M.H. 1985. Applied linear
Harrison, J. 2000. The process of interpretation. In The heritage statistical models. Homewood: Richard D. Irwin.
of Ireland, edited by N. Buttimer, C. Rynne & H. Guerin, Oliver, R.L. 1980. A cognitive model of the antecedents and
385-392 . Cork: The Collins Press. consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing
Herbert, D.T., Prentice, R.C. & Thomas, C.J. 1989. Heritage Research 17: 460-469.
sites: Strategies for marketing and development. Avebury, Oliver, R.L. 1981. Measurement and evaluation of satisfaction
England: Gower Publishing Group. processes in retail settings. Journal of Retailing 57: 25-48.
Heung, V.C.S. & Qu, H. 2000. Hong Kong as a travel destination: Oliver, R.L. 1997. Satisfaction: A behavioural perspective on
An analysis of Japanese tourists’ satisfaction levels, and the consumer. New York: McGraw-Hill.
the likelihood of them recommending Hong Kong to others. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. & Berry, L.L. 1985. A conceptual
Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing 9: 57-80. model of service quality and its implications for future
Holloway, J.C. 1986. The business of tourism. London: Longman research. Journal of Marketing 49 (Fall): 41-50.
Publishing Ltd. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. & Berry, L.L. 1988.
JTB. 1994. JTB report ’94-All about japanese oversea travellers. SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer
Japan Travel Bureau. perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing 64: 12-
Holt, D.B. 2004. How brands become icons: the principles of 40.
cultural branding. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Peter, J.P., Churchill, G.A. & Brown, T.J. 1993. Caution in the
Hui, T.K., Wan, D. & Ho, A. 2007. Tourists’ satisfaction, use of difference scores in consumer research. Journal of
recommendation and revisiting Singapore. Tourism Consumer Research 19 (March): 655-62.
Management 28: 965-975. Petrick, J.F. & Backman. 2002. An examination of the construct of
Jain, S.K. & Gupta, G. 2004. Measuring service quality: perceived value for the prediction of golf travellers’ intentions
SERVQUAL vs. SERVPERF scales. The Journal for to revisit. Journal of Travel Research 41(1): 38-45.
Decision Maker 29(2): 112-156. Philip, G. & Hazlett, S.A. 1996. The measurement of service
Juran, J.M. 1988. Juran on planning for quality. New York: The quality: A new P-C.P. attributes model. International Journal
Free Press. of Quality and Reliability Management 14(3): 260-288.
Kassim, N.M. & Bojei, J. 2002. Service quality: Gaps in the Pitt, L.F., Gosthuizen, P. & Morris, M.H. 1992. Service quality
telemarketing industry. Journal of Business Research in a high tech industrial market: An application of
55(11): 845-52. SERVQUAL. Chicago: American Management Association.
Kotler, P. & Armstrong, G. 2007. Principles of marketing. 12th Pizam, A. & Milman, A. 1993. Predicting satisfaction among
edition. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. first time visitors to a destination by using the expectancy
Kozak, M. & Rimmington, M. 2000. Tourist satisfaction with disconfirmation theory. International Journal of Hospitality
Mallorca, Spain, as an off-season holiday destination. Management 12: 197-209.
Journal of Travel Research 38: 260-269. Pizam, A., Neumann, Y. & Reichel, A. 1978. Dimensions of
Lea, J. 1988. Tourism and development in the third world. tourist satisfaction with a destination area. Annals of
London: Routledge. Tourism Research 5: 314-322.
Lewis, B. 1991. Service quality: an international comparison of Prentice, R. 1993. Tourism and heritage attraction. London:
bank customer’s expectations and perceptions. Journal of Routledge.
Marketing Management 7(1): 47-62. Prentice, R., Guerin, S. & McGugan, S. 1998. Visitor learning at
Llosa, S., Chandon, J. & Orsingher, C. 1998. An empirical study a heritage attraction: a case study of discovery as a media
of SERVQUAL’s dimensionality. Service Industries Journal product. Tourism Management 19(1): 5-23.
18: 16-44. Qu, H. & Ping, E.W.Y. 1999. A service performance model of
MacCannell, D. 1979. Staged authenticity: arrangements of social Hong Kong cruise travellers’ motivation factors and
space in visitor settings. American Journal of Sociology satisfaction. Tourism Management 20: 237-244.
79(3): 589-603. Reisig, M.D. & Chandek, M.S. 2001. The effects of expectancy
Malhotra, N.K. 2010. Marketing research: An applied disconfirmation on outcome satisfaction in police-citizen
orientation, 6th edition. New Jersey: Pearson. encounters. An International Journal of Police Strategies &
Mayo, E.J. & Jarvis, L.P. 1981. The psychology of leisure travel: Management 24(1): 88-99.
Effective of marketing and selling of travel services. Boston, Reisinger, Y. & Turner, L.W. 2003. Cross-cultural behaviour in
Massachusetts: CBI Publishing Co. tourism: Concepts and analysis. Oxford: Butterworth-
McKercher, B. & du Cros, H. 2002. Cultural tourism. The Heinemann.
partnership between tourism and cultural heritage Seren. 1986. Herbert, D.T., Prentice, R.C., Thomas, C.J.,
management. Binghamton: The Haworth Hospitality Press. Edwards, J.A., Humphrys, G. & Prentice, M.M.. Easter
McManus, R. 1997. Heritage and tourism in Ireland-an unholy 1986 visitor survey. Final report. Swansea: University
alliance. Irish Geography 30(2): 90-98. College of Swansea.
Misiura, S. 2006. Heritage marketing, Oxford: Butterworth- Shih, D. 1986. VALS as a tool of tourism market research: The
Heinemann. Pennsylvania experience. Journal of Travel Research 24(4):
Mok, C. & Armstrong, R.W. 1996. Sources of information used 2-11.
by Hong Kong and Taiwanese leisure travelers. Australian Smith, R.A. & Houston, M.J. 1982. Script-based evaluations of
Journal of hospitality Management 3(1): 31-35. satisfaction with services. In Emerging perspectives on
Moscardo, G. 1996. Mindful visitors heritage and tourism. Annals services marketing, edited by L. Berry, G. Shostack, & G.
of Tourism Research 23(2): 376-397. Upah, 59-62. Chicago: American Marketing Association.
76 Jurnal Pengurusan 33

Stevens, P., Knutson, B. & Patton, M. 1995. Dineserv: A tool Vavra, T.G. 1997. Improving your measurement of customer
for measuring service quality in restaurants. Cornell Hotel satisfaction: A guide to creating, conducting, analyzing, and
and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 36: 56-60. reporting customer satisfaction measurement programs.
Tabachnick, B.G. & Fidell, L.S. 2001. Using multivariate statistics. ASQ Quality Press.
Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Wang, N. 1999. Rethinking authenticity in tourism experience.
Tam, J.L.M. 2000. The effects of service quality, perceived value Annals of Tourism Research 26(2): 349-370.
and customer satisfaction on behavioral intentions. Journal Weber, K. 1997. The assessment of tourist satisfaction using the
of Hospitality and Leisure Marketing 6(4): 31-43. expectancy disconfirmation theory: a study of the German
Tax, S.S., Brown, S.W. & Chandrashekaran, M. 1998. Customer travel market in Australia. Pacific Tourism Review 1: 35-
evaluation of service complaint experiences: implications 45.
for relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing 62(2): 60- Witkowski, T.H. & Wolfinbarger, M.F. 2002. Comparative
76. service quality: German and American ratings across service
Teas, K.R. 1993. Expectations, performance evaluation, and settings. Journal of Business Research 55(11): 875-81.
consumer’s perceptions of quality. Journal of Marketing WTO. 1985. Identification and evaluation of those components
57(October): 18-34. of tourism services which have a bearing on tourist
Teas, K.R. 1994. Expectations as a comparison standard in satisfaction and which can be regulated and state measures
measuring service quality: An assessment of reassessment. to ensure adequate quality of tourism services. Madrid:
Journal of Marketing 58 (January): 132-39. World Tourism Organization.
Tse, D.K. & Wilton, P.C. 1988. Model of consumer satisfaction Yu, H. & Littrell, M.A. 2003. Product and process orientations
formation: An extension. Journal of Marketing Research to tourism shopping. Journal of Travel Research 42(2):
25: 204-12. 140-150.
Um, S. 1987. The role of perceived inhibitors and perceived Žabkar, V., BrenŽiŽ, M.M. & DmitroviŽ, T. 2010. Modelling
facilities in the pleasure travel destination choice process. perceived quality, visitor satisfaction and behavioural
Ph.D. Thesis, University of Texas A & M, USA. intentions at the destination level. Tourism Management
UNESCO. 1972. Convention concerning the protection of the 31: 537-546.
world cultural and natural heritage. http://whc.unesco.org/ Zeithaml, V.A., Bitner, M.J. & Gremler, D.D. 2009. Services
en/conventiontext [2 Dec 2007]. Marketing. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Norzalita A. Aziz
Graduate School of Business
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
Email: eita@ukm.my